Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Obi Wan you knowledge of the RN is simply outstanding.

If the CVA 01 program had gone forth perhaps today the RN would be operating CV's.

I've mentioned this before. In September 1972 when I was on board CVA-67 we operated with the Ark Royal during the NATO excersise Strong Express.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

From 14-28 September 1972, John F. Kennedy participated in NATO Exercise Strong Express. During that time, on 17 September, she crossed the Arctic Circle for the first time and received a visit, on 19 September, by Secretary of the Navy John Warner and General Robert E. Cushman, Jr., USMC, the Commandant of the Marine Corps. Another notable event that occurred during those operations was the cross-decking of an F-4K Phantom II and a Hawker-Siddeley Buccaneer IIB from HMS Ark Royal to John F. Kennedy and an F-4B and an A-6 to the British carrier, an evolution that “increased the flexibility of air operations in allied efforts and opened the door to increased efficiency in combat conditions and strategic concepts.” Flight deck crews having been exchanged prior to the evolution ensured that those involved encountered “no major difficulties.” During the same period, John F. Kennedy, operating in the North Sea, cross-decked four A-7s to Franklin D. Roosevelt (CVA-42) operating in the Mediterranean at the time, and received a like number of Corsairs from Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Click to expand...

Personally I only remember RN F-4K's being on the JFK. I ,however, worked night check crew. So they were on board while I slept away.

If the RN only had the CVA 01 class excersises like this could still happen..

their have been much speculation on what happen when the CVF arive and what would happen to invinsables.
i have a idea why not give invnisable to the RFA and move the other to Anfib command.
this is simlar to other ideas exept that you would get futher use out of invinsable as traning carrier and it could be used for other things and it would still keep the old carriers and allow a fleet of 6 flat decks [ocean,ark royal,illustious,queen elizbeth,prines of wales] and being in the anfib command for the other mean that their manning would not be as high and the RFA option would keep a carrier on the cheap.

Maybe you could convert an Invincible into a commando carrier by removing the skyjump?
However, I don't think there will be enough aircraft to maintain 5 flat decks once the JSFs are in service. The Harriers are running out of service life.
Then again making the Invincibles into real LHAs or LHDs would be costly because you may have to built a new well deck into them.
So, two Is in the light sea-controll role or as commando carriers might have a future.

Obin Wan, do you think when the PA2 will be succesfull in the FN MoD/RN might decide to build the second CVF with cats?
This would however have an impact on the aircraft procurement. To, justify a cat CVF they probably need F-35Cs.

Oh, by the way, I took a line art of the PA2 from the I-Net and draw the PA3 from it. To be built between 2020 and 2025.
It's a CVN. Merged the two islands and moved it further back, as well as the two elevators. Added a third one at the aftport side. A third cat in the center and a fourth small one four UAVs.

Scratch said:

Maybe you could convert an Invincible into a commando carrier by removing the skyjump?
However, I don't think there will be enough aircraft to maintain 5 flat decks once the JSFs are in service. The Harriers are running out of service life.
Then again making the Invincibles into real LHAs or LHDs would be costly because you may have to built a new well deck into them.
So, two Is in the light sea-controll role or as commando carriers might have a future.

Obin Wan, do you think when the PA2 will be succesfull in the FN MoD/RN might decide to build the second CVF with cats?
This would however have an impact on the aircraft procurement. To, justify a cat CVF they probably need F-35Cs.

Oh, by the way, I took a line art of the PA2 from the I-Net and draw the PA3 from it. To be built between 2020 and 2025.
It's a CVN. Merged the two islands and moved it further back, as well as the two elevators. Added a third one at the aftport side. A third cat in the center and a fourth small one four UAVs.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

The two bow cats need to be separated a little, to avoid the wingtips of aircraft being hooked up for launch interfering with one another, otherwise a very good effort. The only RN CV with parallell track cats was Victorious post 1958, all other steam cat installations being angled inwards towards the bow. If the CVF project was to go CTOL (my preference, and it's not too late) then it would have to be both vessels. The logistical requirements of operating two different models with differing training requirements would be prohibitive in the current climate. This would mean switching the RN JSF order to the F-35C, bringing commonality with the USN and the FN, also allowing the possibility of a joint training sqn for E-2 Hawkeyes between the RN and FN. The RAF may well go with the F-35C as well as it could be bought in large numbers as a Tornado replacement, thus bringing savings all round to offset the extra cost of the cats and wires for the CVFs. The RAF would be down to two combat types (Typhoon and Lightning) with the attendant savings over several combat types and the FAA would have a frontline strike force second only to the USN, restoring the position it occupied up until the 70s.

I would like to see the Invincibles retained until suitable replacement LPHs are built, as they are not just 'flat tops', but highly capable command and control vessels too. I don't see a need to fit well decks as the RN already has six ships available with that capability (the Albions and the Bays) and it is cheaper to build new ships than refit 25 year old hulls. That said they are a long way from being worn out and have many years of hull life left in them. Transfering any of them to the RFA (to be operated as RFA Argus is currently) is unlikely as they need too large a crew by RFA standards, and the RFA doesn't operate GT ships at present so trained crew would be a problem.

Scratch, Those catapults are too close together. All those cats eat up valuable spce below decks for machinery to operate them and the JBD's. Unless the RN is operating with an air wing of 60+ aircraft I see no need for four catapults. 2 or 3 will be fine.

Did you know in my experience on the ships I served on with 4 cats we seldom used 4 cats during a launch. Usally we used both bow cats and one waist cat.

Ther is no need for a smaller cat for UAV's. Catapults pressure(strenght) is easily adjusted as the aircraft launched have varing weights.

bd popeye said:

Scratch, Those catapults are too close together. All those cats eat up valuable spce below decks for machinery to operate them and the JBD's. Unless the RN is operating with an air wing of 60+ aircraft I see no need for four catapults. 2 or 3 will be fine.

Did you know in my experience on the ships I served on with 4 cats we seldom used 4 cats during a launch. Usally we used both bow cats and one waist cat.

Click to expand...

Never hurts to have spares though. With a large number of aircraft spotted on deck at any given time either the bows or the angle will be crowded so it helps to have at least two cats available. I imagine deck routines on the Midways and the Essexs must have been a little more awkward due to the need to clear the bows for launching as they only had the two cats forward. Coral Sea was better off in this respect with three cats and the RN was moving away from both cats forward to one forward and one in the waist for this very reason. CVA-01 when originally concieved was proposed to be a 60,000ton ship with four cats, inspired by the success of the Forrestals and their follow ons. the Pollies stuck their noses in and demanded cuts in the size of the ship, confusing size with cost. The number of cats dropped to two (with space left for a third in the portside bow position) and when told the ship was the minimum size needed to support 200ft cats the pollies asked if the length of the cats could be reduced!

Clearly, defence is too important to be left in the hands of politicians...

Never hurts to have spares though. With a large number of aircraft spotted on deck at any given time either the bows or the angle will be crowded so it helps to have at least two cats available. I imagine deck routines on the Midways and the Essexs must have been a little more awkward due to the need to clear the bows for launching as they only had the two cats forward.

Click to expand...

This all seems possible on paper but it just does not work that way. I was on CVA-19 and CVA-41. Also CVA-67 & 66. And the mighty Nimitz.. A person would think that "well our ship has four cats and that little old Hancock has only two ergo we can out launch them". Nope. Does not work that way. In my experience CVA-19 & 41 could launch aircraft faster than any of those other ships with 4 cats. Why? Superior flight deck crew in the case of the Hancock and a simple case of the A-4's being so reliable. If an A-4 was on the cat it was going off the bow. Period. And A-4's being smaller were easier to handle.

On the Midway the case was a superior flight deck crew as on the Hancock. . The Midway's flight deck was unique. It was as large as a CVA-59 class but had only two cats. When you respot with only two bow cats on a deck that big no need to worry about blocking the angle. The respot is much faster. Just leave room for the helo.

There are all sorts of factors that occur when you have 4 cats. Say an aircraft breaks down on the port bow cat. You have to re-spot it somewhere. And believe you me when you do you will disrupt those waist cats. If that happens with two bow cats you just turn the aircraft around and spot it on the angle or elsewhere without mucch disruption of the launch.

During "Desert Storm" in 1991 the Midway , with only two cats, launched more stories than the other 5 USN CV(N) on station. I.E. Kennedy, America ,Ranger, Roosevelt & Saratoga.

I wish I could meet all of you in San Diego and take you aboard the Midway. It is now a musuem. And demonstrate what I am posting about.

bd popeye said:

This all seems possible on paper but it just does not work that way. I was on CVA-19 and CVA-41. Also CVA-67 & 66. And the mighty Nimitz.. A person would think that "well our ship has four cats and that little old Hancock has only two ergowe can out launch them". Nope. Does not work that way. In my experience CVA-19 & 41 could launch aircraft faster than any of those other ships with 4 cats. Why? Superior flight deck crew in the case of the Hancock and a simple case of the A-4's being so reliable. If an A-4 was on the cat it was going off the bow. Period. And A-4's being smaller were easier to handle.

On the Midway the case was a superior flight deck crew as on the Hancock. . The Midway's flight deck was unique. It was as large as a CVA-59 class but had only two cats. When you respot with only two bow cats on a deck that big no need to worry about blocking the angle. The respot is much faster. Just leave room for the helo.

There are all sorts of factors that occur when you have 4 cats. Say an aircraft breaks down on the port bow cat. You have to re-spot it somewhere. And believe you me when you do you will disrupt those waist cats. If that happens with two bow cats you just turn the aircraft around and spot it on the angle or elsewhere without mucch disruption of the launch.

During "Desert Storm" in 1991 the Midway , with only two cats, launched more stories than the other 5 USN CV(N) on station. I.E. Kennedy, America ,Ranger, Roosevelt & Saratoga.

I wish I could meet all of you in San Diego and take you aboard the Midway. It is now a musuem. And demonstrate what I am posting about.

Click to expand...

I've always had a soft spot for Midway as it exercised with the RAN's Melbourne on a number of occasions (I guess because it was homeported in Japan!). Photos always show it absolutely dwarfing the Oz carrier. After its reconstruction it seemed to have a huge flightdeck overhang and I often wondered how this affected its stability.

You've inspired me to go to San Diego and visit it the next time I get to the USA on holiday Popeye!

Cheers

Ok, so I probably will drop the two starbord cats and replace it with one slightly angled inwards.
One thing I forgot: If the cats are EMALS, could I use them as anchors for additional arrestor cables? I thought of laying two cables on the deck wichs ends are tied to the bow cats, I could then use them to deccelerate lighter UACVs wich need less way to stop.
Therefore I could increase recovery rate. Unless popeye steps in again and tells me that movement on the deck during spotting of landing aircraft prevents this.

You've inspired me to go to San Diego and visit it the next time I get to the USA on holiday Popeye!

Click to expand...

Thanks!

Here's a link to the Midway musuem. Over 1,000,000 persons a year vist the Midway. It is the #2 maritime musuem in the US. Second only to the USS Arizona in Pearl Harbor HI.



Scratch, I'm trying to picture in my itty bitty brain what you are refering to here;

One thing I forgot: If the cats are EMALS, could I use them as anchors for additional arrestor cables? I thought of laying two cables on the deck wichs ends are tied to the bow cats, I could then use them to deccelerate lighter UACVs wich need less way to stop.
Therefore I could increase recovery rate.

Click to expand...

A picture would be nice. That way I could really picture what you are refering to.

In the case of the lighter UAV's those probally could be recovered without arresting cables.

Scratch, I'm just putting my experience into your ideas and drawings.