Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Status
Not open for further replies.

franco-russe

Senior Member
Well, we know the French have built two and are almost finished with the third for themselves.

Om another matter, here's a new Carrier Comparison pic I made...of all the carriers. Enjoy!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The contract for two MISTRAL class for the Russian Navy was signed in St. Petersburg 17 June. They will be delivered by the St-Nazaire Shipyard in 2014 and 2015. The French shipyard is also to assist with the construction of a new shipyard at Kronshtadt where two sisterships are to be built.

The third MISTRAL for the Marine Nationale, the DIXMUDE L9015, was commissioned 23 June at St-Nazaire and sailed yesterday for Toulon, where weapons trials will take place. Afther that, there will a long shake-down cruise before “admission au service actif” is declared.
 
Last edited:

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
The third MISTRAL for the Marine Nationale, the DIXMUDE L9015, was commissioned 23 June at St-Nazaire and sailed yesterday for Toulon, where weapons trials will take place. Afther that, there will a long shake-down cruise before “admission au service actif” is declared.

Thank you franco-russe for that information. So now France has three Mistral class. Those are very versatile ships. I'm sure the French have worked the bugs out of them much like the USN with the San Antonio class LPDs.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Thank you franco-russe for that information. So now France has three Mistral class. Those are very versatile ships. I'm sure the French have worked the bugs out of them much like the USN with the San Antonio class LPDs.
Speaking of the US and future plans for the US Navy and large Sea Control or Amphibious assault ships. Popeye, are you aware that theUS has been looking at converting commercial container ships into Sea Control ships seriously for the last several years. The Maersk S-Conversion has been specifically discussed. (Google it)

Here's what has been considered as a much cheaper, but almost as capable (in terms of operations) a vessel, though not built to fll mil-spec for the main hull:

Maersk-SClass-Conversion.gif


I would personnaly take a little further and do this:

Maersk-SClass-FullConversion.gif


In fact, I have to say it...10 years ago I postulated the PLAN doing just that with large container ships and rapidly building 6-8 of them while they built two larger convetnional carriers that caught the west's attention and had them watching those, while they more secretly built the following class of converted container ships:

PLAN-CV-DFS-XDeck.jpg


That story was of course a part of my:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Series of books.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
I was unaware of this sort of proposal.

Honestly Jeff I don't see any value in converting ships like is suggested. I feel the ships should be build from the keel up as a sea control or LHD. Warships are built to different standards than merchant vessels.
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Thank you

Popeye did you ever serve on the Nimitz and if so were you around at this time of the incident?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I also came across a interesting doco on the Nimitz refit?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I also saw in a photo of a aircraft carrier superstructure about ten black blobs what do they represent . Alongside painted in white looked like some emblems of some navy insignia depicting their ranking and occupation. Whats the purpose of that?
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
No I was not aboard. I was aboard the Nimitz in '91. Accidents happen on carriers. They just do. It's a dangerous environment. Simple.

I also saw in a photo of a aircraft carrier superstructure about ten black blobs what do they represent . Alongside painted in white looked like some emblems of some navy insignia depicting their ranking and occupation. Whats the purpose of that?

Don't know what the black blobs are. the symbols you saw are awards given to the ship for excellence in specfic areas. Such as Engineering, medical, communications etc..
 
Last edited:

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
I was unaware of this sort of proposal.

Honestly Jeff I don't see any value in converting ships like is suggested. I feel the ships should be build from the keel up as a sea control or LHD. Warships are built to different standards than merchant vessels.
You know, popeye, politicians (both outside, and inside the military services) look for ways to cut costs and appeal to those who may be able to influence their careers and futures.

So, if they can take a vessel, or, if while building a new vessel, they can utilize a "kit" to convert it to this purpose, they figure they would save a lot of money and still have a vessel capable of accomplishing the mission. In the one photo of the LHD version, you see what looks like a long block with the deck sitting on top of it? That, IMHO, is the "kit". It consists of the berthing spaces, hangar spaces, C&C spaces, and the deck and they fit that on top of the hull of the vessel and its machinery.

The proposal in the US is for these vessels to be utilized in the AFSB (Afloat Forward Staging Base) role in support of the actual initial combat...and then move them into the forward areas of operation once combat in those areas is complete to comtinue to provide support from just behind the lines.

Another proposal is to take an exisiting USNS MIlitary Sealift Command (MSC) vessel and convert it, or build a new one of those vessels to this design. In fact, I believe that the USNS Gunnery Sgt F W Stockham (T-AK 3017) (which was originally built as a Maersk RO/RO container vessel) had a partial conversion done to her adding a 54-foot flight deck capable of handling two MH-60 helicopters, an aviation fueling system, a medical module, some comm upgrades and the capability to embark watercraft. That's another possibility.

The MSC and its fleet of Maritime Prepositioning Ships (MPS) is pretty awesome. They operate 48 large vessels that range everwhere from aviation repair, to cargo, to military equipment tankers, lgoistics, etc. The idea is to base needs at sea and avoid the need for a local port to support troops going into hostile shores or environs.

Here's a pic of the converted T-AK 3017:

USNS-TAK3017-Stockham.jpg


You can clearly see the new flight deck behind the superstructure. Behind the yellow line is the addition I believe. Big vessel, 54,000 tons full load. I have not seen any pics of a conversion of the already existing T-AK vessels, so I made one of the Stockhom:

USNS-TAK3017-Stockham-con.jpg


I do not believe they US will do a full up commercial conversion, but they might do a MSC conversion of a military grade vessle or new buildto the military grade.

I do believe it would represent a cheaper, faster path to the capability for nations with less economic strength. It's my understanding that the Juan Carlos and perhpas the Italian Cavour have utilized some of these principles. IE utilizing a lot of stock, non-military grade components in producing the vessels they have produced.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Air forces have and continue too use a similar principal of using transports and commersal liners for aewc, tankers, command, and other support missions, the newest gunships being built via kits utilizing door and ramp mounted arms. Around the world navys the MEKO class of german made ships starts with a base frigate hull and pulls dutys as distoyers, corvetts and LCS. Although I still prefer a full propper super carrior or LHA such ships as Jeff envisions could be the succsesor to the escourt carrier.
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Didnt the UK use converted ships for escort carriers successfully during WW2? IMO the concept could still work if utilised correctly.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
It's my understanding that the Juan Carlos and perhaps the Italian Cavour have utilized some of these principles.

True, both ships are not built to military standards.

When the bullets start flying I'd rather be aboard an USN CVN any day. Civilian ships are "wide open". They do not have the compartmentation of a naval vessel. That equals less water tight integrity. That equals greater sink-ablity.

Now if the converted MV is a stand off weapon , far out of harms way, then it may be feasible for the ship to be a combatant.

Another thing most of those ships have one screw..one main propulsion plant. Not good for hi-tempo operations.

Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top