Aircraft Carriers

Status
Not open for further replies.

isthvan

Tailgunner
VIP Professional
IIRC Russians tested YAK-36 on “Moskva” class? Does somebody have picture whit YAK on board during those tests?
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Found a few more images of the original SCS design plus some contemporary alternatives:
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!
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!
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!
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!
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!

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!
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!
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!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Air capable Spruance was nearly built after Congress ordered the 31st ship of the class constructed with increased aviation facilities, the Navy made sure she (USS Hayler DD-997) was built as a standard Spruance instead. The Vosper Thorneycroft 'Harrier Carrier' at 6'000tons was a very promising design that surprisingly didn't attract any orders either, but then these ships were offered before the Falklands War and so the Harrier was still an unproven aircraft.
 
Last edited:

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Apart from the Air capable Spruance and the VT Harrier Carrier I have little or no info. Those images were found after trawling the net extensively (you'd be surprised what turns up when you're looking for something else). The '260 aircraft was probably a MDD proposal for a Harrier follow on to operate from the Spruance and most likely died with it. The 'Halsey is a scale model of the Spruance design but I have no idea who built it.

The designs do show there are more ways of taking aircraft to sea than one would think, and the Spruance reminds me a little of a scaled down Kiev! at 9,000tons ahe would have been the smallest carrier at sea today (so the US would hold the records for both smallest and largest! Greedy or what...) although the Germans did design an even smaller carrier (the offshore helicopter patrol carrier) for Thailand in the late eighties (rejected in favour of the Spanish built ChakriNaruebet):
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!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I think it's high time the German Navy built a few of these ships for themselves, so they would be able to form ASW task forces to better meet their NATO comitments.
 
Last edited:

isthvan

Tailgunner
VIP Professional
Thanks Obi.

Actually I think that Spruance based carrier looks like quite ideal design for smaller navy like Argentinean or Brazilian navy. It could be used in peacekeeping missions, disaster relief missions, ASW missions, provide CAS for troops in peacekeeping missions etc.

Also regarding German navy IMHO we will not wait to long to see something similar in operational service. German army is contributing more troops in peacekeeping operations and they are starting to realize that they lack means to support them…

So IMHO they will probably go for helicopter flat deck in near future but remains to be seen what kind of flat deck they will choose.
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Here's a scenario to pop in your mental toaster and see how crunchy it emerges...

In the 70s when the original 30 USN Spruances were ordered, pre-revolutionary Iran ordered six air defence variant Spruances for service in the Gulf of Persia and the Indian ocean. Two were cancelled shortly afterwards due to financial pressures and the other four were still under construction when the Shah was deposed and were bought for the USN as the Kidd class DDGs. Suppose for a moment the revoltion had been delayed a few years and the Shahs' finances were in better shape, so the order for six ships was completed. The reason for ordering such powerful ships (enlarging the Iranian Navy quite considerably in the process) was to make Iran the dominant Naval power in the region. With that in mind, suppose the Iranian Navy was far sighted enough to order the last two ships as Air Capable Variants and purchase about 34 AV-8As (and a handful of two seaters) to operate from their decks, along with a supply of Harpoon missiles. All six ships enter service successfully. THEN the revolution happens, and Islamic fundamentalists now have a Navy with four modern DDGs plus two 'Harrier Carriers' at their disposal...

Sleep tight!
 

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
If that had happened then when the USN moved into the Gulf to secure the oil routes during the Iran Iraq war, there would have been trouble. It's quite possible that the USN would have sustained a lot more losses, and that little skirmish in which we destroyed most of the Iranian navy would probably have a name of its own, like the Persian Gulf War (and the 1991 conflict would have a different name.)
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
If that had happened then when the USN moved into the Gulf to secure the oil routes during the Iran Iraq war, there would have been trouble. It's quite possible that the USN would have sustained a lot more losses, and that little skirmish in which we destroyed most of the Iranian navy would probably have a name of its own, like the Persian Gulf War (and the 1991 conflict would have a different name.)

Quite so, though I think if the Iranian Navy possessed assets such as these they might have made an effort to preserve them as a 'Fleet in Being', a potential threat which would cause the USN a lot more headaches than if they actually put to sea. The other ships of the Iranian Navy were old, worn out and expendable whereas the six Spruances would have been a different proposition. They could peacefully sail into the Indian ocean, around to the red sea, up to Suez, and into the Med, remain in international waters whilst still posing a threat to Isreal (or provoking a pre-emptive strike from Isreal). Indeed they could sail anywhere in the world and as long as they didn't break any laws this task group could turn up on anyones doorstep. That is after all the essence of sea power...

My point is, imagine if a modern well equipped Naval Task force had been inherited by a fundamentalist regime, and those in charge were smart enough not to throw it away too soon in a futile gesture.
 
Last edited:

isthvan

Tailgunner
VIP Professional
My point is, imagine if a modern well equipped Naval Task force had been inherited by a fundamentalist regime, and those in charge were smart enough not to throw it away too soon in a futile gesture.

Heck that would make 1980s quite interesting… Even today such fleet would pose serious threat to smaller navies and would still be one of strongest naval task groups around…

Ps. Popeye’s post about CVA59 Forestall reminded me on one of most interesting landings she has seen: KC 130F on 30 October 1963!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


When one reviews the encyclopedic range of accomplishments by the C-130 Hercules and its valiant aircrews over the years, surely one of the most astounding took place in October 1963 when the U.S. Navy decided to try to land a Hercules on an aircraft carrier. Was it possible? Who would believe that the big, four-engine C-130 with its bulky fuselage and 132-foot wing span could land on the deck of a carrier?

Not only was it possible, it was done in moderately rough seas 500 miles out in the North Atlantic off the coast of Boston. In so doing, the airplane became the largest and heaviest aircraft to ever land on an aircraft carrier, a record that stands to this day.

When Lt. James H. Flatley III was told about his new assignment, he thought somebody was pulling his leg. "Operate a C-130 off an aircraft carrier?

Somebody's got to be kidding," he said. But they weren't kidding. In fact, the Chief of Naval Operations himself had ordered a feasibility study on operating the big propjet aboard the Norfolk-based U.S.S. Forrestal (CVA-59). The Navy was trying to find out whether they could use the Hercules as a "Super COD" - a "Carrier Onboard Delivery" aircraft. The airplane then used for such tasks was the Grumman C-1 Trader, a twin piston-engine bird with a limited payload capacity and 300-mile range. If an aircraft carrier is operating in mid-ocean, it has no "onboard delivery" system to fall back on and must come nearer land before taking aboard even urgently needed items. The Hercules was stable and reliable, with a long cruising range and capable of carrying large payloads.

The aircraft, a KC-130F refueler transport (BuNo 149798), on loan from the U.S. Marines, was delivered on 8 October. Lockheed's only modifications to the original plane included installing a smaller nose-landing gear orifice, an improved anti-skid braking system, and removal of the underwing refueling pods. "The big worry was whether we could meet the maximum sink rate of nine feet per second," Flatley said. As it turned out, the Navy was amazed to find they were able to better this mark by a substantial margin.

In addition to Flatley, the crew consisted of Lt.Cmdr. W.W. Stovall, copilot; ADR-1 E.F. Brennan, flight engineer; and Lockheed engineering flight test pilot Ted H. Limmer, Jr. The initial sea-born landings on 30 October 1963 were made into a 40-knot wind. Altogether, the crew successfully negotiated 29 touch-and-go landings, 21 unarrested full-stop landings, and 21 unassisted takeoffs at gross weights of 85,000 pounds up to 121,000 pounds. At 85,000 pounds, the KC-130F came to a complete stop within 267 feet, about twice the aircraft's wing span! The Navy was delighted to discover that even with a maximum payload, the plane used only 745 feet for takeoff and 460 feet for landing roll. The short landing roll resulted from close coordination between Flatley and Jerry Daugherty, the carrier's landing signal officer. Daugherty, later to become a captain and assigned to the Naval Air Systems Command, gave Flatley an engine "chop" while still three or four feet off the deck.

Lockheed's Ted Limmer, who checked out fighter pilot Flatley in the C-130, stayed on for some of the initial touch-and-go and full-stop landings. "The last landing I participated in, we touched down about 150 feet from the end, stopped in 270 feet more and launched from that position, using what was left of the deck. We still had a couple hundred feet left when we lifted off. Admiral Brown was flabbergasted."

The plane's wingspan cleared the Forrestal's flight deck "island" control tower by just under 15 feet as the plane roared down the deck on a specially painted line. Lockheed's chief engineer, Art E. Flock was aboard to observe the testing. "The sea was pretty big that day. I was up on the captain's bridge. I watched a man on the ship's bow as that bow must have gone up and down 30 feet." The speed of the shop was increased 10 knots to reduce yaw motion and to reduce wind direction. Thus, when the plane landed, it had a 40 to 50 knot wind on the nose. "That airplane stopped right opposite the captain's bridge," recalled Flock. "There was cheering and laughing. There on the side of the fuselage, a big sign had been painted on that said, "LOOK MA, NO HOOK."

From the accumulated test data, the Navy concluded that with the C-130 Hercules, it would be possible to lift 25,000 pounds of cargo 2,500 miles and land it on a carrier. Even so, the idea was considered a bit too risky for the C-130 and the Navy elected to use a smaller COD aircraft. For his effort, the Navy awarded Flatley the Distinguished Flying Cross.

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!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
If you search goole or yahoo you can find a video of that C-130 on the Forrestal. For some reason my server is not letteing me into yahoo:mad:

As for the Iranians have some sort of mutant mini-Kidd CV..well It never happened. And they would have been dealt a serious blow during operation "Preying Mantis" in 1987. I'm sure the USN would have suffered some losses and it would have lasted a couple of days.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top