Ambivalent
Junior Member
Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread
I know the USN has done at least some preliminary studies on tri hull carriers. I have been an advocate of these myself, with one big reservation. I think the tri hull layout allows for a very big flight deck and hangar spaces for a given displacement, and flying airplanes is the reason such ships exist. The stability in heavy seas is especially attractive. They do not heel when the helm is thrown over hard. Now the reservations; I do not know how much hull volume such a design will leave for ammunition and fuel, nor how well the normal number of ammunition magazines could be protected adequately. They are very well protected from ordinance on a US style CVN. If nuclear propulsion is to be used, is there adequate space for reactors and their shielding. What does this do to the space available for ammo? Not enough information to make a good decision, but I would not dismiss a tri hull carrier out of hand.
Hey Popeye, you forgot to mention how many people are living and working in the spaces between the hangar and flight decks. This was a feature introduced with the Essex class to help absorb bomb hits. The armor on those ships was on the hangar decks, 4 inches of it. The two decks above were supposed to absorb the majority of the damage, protecting the hull and machinery from damage.
I know the USN has done at least some preliminary studies on tri hull carriers. I have been an advocate of these myself, with one big reservation. I think the tri hull layout allows for a very big flight deck and hangar spaces for a given displacement, and flying airplanes is the reason such ships exist. The stability in heavy seas is especially attractive. They do not heel when the helm is thrown over hard. Now the reservations; I do not know how much hull volume such a design will leave for ammunition and fuel, nor how well the normal number of ammunition magazines could be protected adequately. They are very well protected from ordinance on a US style CVN. If nuclear propulsion is to be used, is there adequate space for reactors and their shielding. What does this do to the space available for ammo? Not enough information to make a good decision, but I would not dismiss a tri hull carrier out of hand.
Hey Popeye, you forgot to mention how many people are living and working in the spaces between the hangar and flight decks. This was a feature introduced with the Essex class to help absorb bomb hits. The armor on those ships was on the hangar decks, 4 inches of it. The two decks above were supposed to absorb the majority of the damage, protecting the hull and machinery from damage.
