Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Polybius
Interesting ship but I noticed a few things that don't make sense to me.

The Brits developed the cat system, so why is that it looks like the trust defelctor and starting point for launch is at or past the middle of the deck? And why a ramp if they could use a cat and it looks like they could only launch one plane at a time.

I know they had ramps for the Harrier jump jets, but were they not going to go with someother design, like the carrier variant of the F35 (pictured)?


60 posted on 05/16/2006 3:23:08 PM PDT by AFreeBird (your mileage may vary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: AFreeBird
Sea Harriers cannot make a vertical takeoff when fully loaded and fueled. They're too heavy. So instead the Harrier makes a forward rolling short takeoff instead. Then the Brits got the idea to place a ski jump at the end of the flight deck to further aid the short takeoff performance. There are no catapults onboard the British carriers.

The Sea Harriers, or "Shars" as they were sometimes called, were slated for operations off the three "command cruisers" (as the "through-deck cruisers" had been renamed) HMS INVINCIBLE, ILLUSTRIOUS, and ARK ROYAL, the last of which was in planning at the time, with a normal complement of six Sea Harriers along with helicopters. Carrier operation of the Sea Harrier was greatly enhanced by an elegantly simple idea, devised by Royal Navy Lieutenant Commander Douglas Taylor: the ski-jump takeoff ramp.

Taylor calculated that simply modifying the deck so that it curved up at the end would throw the fighter up into the air, allowing it to carry more warload with a shorter takeoff run, as well as give a Royal Navy pilot more time to eject if it became apparent his aircraft was going to splash. Taylor proposed the idea in early 1970s, but it wasn't until 1976 that Hawker received funding to perform land-based tests of the ski jump takeoff. The tests clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of the idea.

Resistance to the ski jump concept was so stubborn in some quarters that advocates of the idea collectively referred to the critics as the "Flat Deck Preservation Society". The advocates prevailed, and the ski jump was adopted for carrier operations. Ski jump takeoffs are apparently very spectacular to watch, though pilots describe them as "cake".

The HMS INVINCIBLE and ILLUSTRIOUS were both originally fitted with a 7-degree ski jump, while the ARK ROYAL featured a 12-degree ski jump when it was commissioned in 1985. Both the INVINCIBLE and ILLUSTRIOUS were later refitted with a 13-degree ramp. The Spanish light carrier DEDALO was not fitted with a ski jump, but the modern Spanish PRINCIPE DE ASTURIAS and Thai CHAKRI NARUEBET both have 12-degree ski jumps.


78 posted on 05/16/2006 3:34:03 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: AFreeBird

Nor does it look as if they can safely launch and recover at the same time.


91 posted on 05/16/2006 3:46:37 PM PDT by LSUfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: AFreeBird
Interesting ship but I noticed a few things that don't make sense to me. The Brits developed the cat system, so why is that it looks like the trust defelctor and starting point for launch is at or past the middle of the deck? And why a ramp if they could use a cat and it looks like they could only launch one plane at a time. I know they had ramps for the Harrier jump jets, but were they not going to go with someother design, like the carrier variant of the F35 (pictured)?

Here is a diagram comparing the CVF to a Nimitz-class CVN and to the Charles de Gaulle:

Although larger than the Charles de Gaulle, the CVF is only 65,000 tons as compared to 90,000 tons for a Nimitz-class CVN.

It seems that the Brits are designing the CVF Queen Elizabeth Class so that it can be adapted to carry either short take off and vertical landing aircraft (thus the ramp) or conventional carrier aircraft (at which point catapults and arrestor gear can then be installed).

What the conventional aircraft will be is still up in the air: ITAR Fallout: Britain to Pull Out of F-35 JSF Program?

The artist's drawing you posted appears to be the configuration for non-catapult short take off and vertical landing aircraft (so the thrust deflectors are far aft).

The drawing I posted above appears to be the configuration for catapult launched conventional carrier aircraft (so the thrust deflectors are in a forward position....see green lines).

IMHO, the Brits should have learned from the Falkland's fiasco that taking anything less than the best air superiority fighters you can acquire into a modern naval air war is a false economy that will be paid for in sunken ships and lost lives.

At the very least, I hope they will opt for Hawkeye AEW capabilities rather than the less capable Merlin helo-platform AEW.

181 posted on 05/16/2006 7:05:40 PM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: AFreeBird
And why a ramp if they could use a cat and it looks like they could only launch one plane at a time.

They can't use a catapault. Cats are steam powered and the British carriers are gas turbine driven.

204 posted on 05/17/2006 5:40:57 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson