Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The aircraft carrier that never was
BBC News ^ | July 2, 2014 | By Nick Childs

Posted on 07/03/2014 5:47:27 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki

The Queen is about to name the first of the UK's controversial new-generation aircraft carriers in a ceremony at Rosyth. But a plan for a super-carrier five decades ago ended in acrimony.

HMS Queen Elizabeth is a major milestone for the Royal Navy and for British defence.

It also provides a strong echo with the past, and the Royal Navy's last - failed - bid for a new-generation of full-size aircraft carriers half a century ago. The first of those ships was designated CVA-01. Like the new ship, she would have been called HMS Queen Elizabeth. But she was the carrier that never was.

Pretty much all that remains of her - apart from a few architect drawings and artist impressions - is a model in a storeroom at the Fleet Air Arm museum at Yeovilton. But her saga has huge resonance for today.

Like the new HMS Queen Elizabeth, she would have been the largest warship ever built for the Royal Navy. About the same size, at 55,000 tons compared with 65,000 tons for today's ship, 963ft long compared with 930ft, and capable of carrying about 40 aircraft.

Meant to replace the navy's then ageing carrier fleet, she would have been a radical new design for her day, with a new 3D radar, a novel flight deck arrangement, and other innovations. Like the new carriers, she was also hugely controversial and the subject of bitter inter-service rivalry, with arguments over whether she was too large and too ambitious.

But, unlike the new ships, she was cancelled in 1966 before an order was ever placed.

(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: aerospace; aircraftcarrier; navair; royalnavy; uk

1 posted on 07/03/2014 5:47:27 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

What’s with the 2 “Islands” on the new carrier? Most carriers I’ve seen only have 1.

CC


2 posted on 07/03/2014 5:52:24 AM PDT by Celtic Conservative (tease not the dragon for thou art crunchy when roasted and taste good with ketchup)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Conservative

The HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales will have increased survivability as a result of the separation and distribution of power generation machinery throughout each ship. The class has been designed with twin islands, which separates the running of the ship from the flying operations resulting in greater visibility of flying operations.

http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.co.uk/the-ships/the-queen-elizabeth-class.aspx


3 posted on 07/03/2014 6:02:14 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Why the launch catapult in the landing strip? The whole point of the angled deck was to keep launches and landings physically separated wasn’t it???


4 posted on 07/03/2014 6:02:55 AM PDT by null and void (If Bill Clinton was the first black president, why isn't Barack Obama the first woman president?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Conservative

One is for flight operations, the other is ship command and control.


5 posted on 07/03/2014 6:02:55 AM PDT by Darksheare (Try my coffee, first one's free..... Even robots will kill for it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Conservative; All
No steam catapults, twin towers (big radar sign.),
only one flight deck, not angled? I know jumpjets are used.

6 posted on 07/03/2014 6:04:21 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (The end move in politics is always to pick up a weapon...0'Jihadist/"Rustler" Reid? d8-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Conservative

The finest ideas brit technology and engineering have to offer.

In other words, the best they could come up with.


7 posted on 07/03/2014 6:15:37 AM PDT by Sequoyah101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

With your obvious knowledge of military equipment, I wish you would post a piece about the SU-25 Frogfoot that’s been delivered to Iraq. The sense I’ve developed of it is that the airplane is sort of the Russian version of the US A-10 Warthog?


8 posted on 07/03/2014 6:25:49 AM PDT by Rich21IE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rich21IE
The sense I’ve developed of it is that the airplane is sort of the Russian version of the US A-10 Warthog?

Yes.
9 posted on 07/03/2014 6:31:38 AM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Rich21IE

Actually, the Su-25 is closer to being the Russian version of the A-9, which was the Northrop design that lost to the A-10.


10 posted on 07/03/2014 6:38:23 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: null and void
The angled deck directs landing aircraft away from parked aircraft, and allows simultaneous launch and recovery. that said, aircraft can launch from 2 catapults located at the bow, and from 2 catapults located on the angle.

See below:

Pardon the huge image, but it shows some interesting things:


11 posted on 07/03/2014 6:43:13 AM PDT by NorthMountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: null and void

The bow area is too small to support two catapults for effective cyclic operations, plus running the risk that combat damage would take out both catapults, rendering the ship incapable of launching any aircraft.

Both catapults would only be used during large launch operations (Alpha Strike-type ops), otherwise the waist cat is mostly a spare or supplemental launch option.


12 posted on 07/03/2014 6:45:13 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter; NorthMountain

Thanks!


13 posted on 07/03/2014 6:51:06 AM PDT by null and void (If Bill Clinton was the first black president, why isn't Barack Obama the first woman president?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

Thanks, that second pic really illustrates my point about cyclic ops than words can.

The CVA-01 design, like the French CV designs, allows launcing aircraft to be spotted on the bow and pulled back for launch, while landing aircraft are moved off to the right of the landing area and parked or struck into the hangar.

Note how, in that pic, aircraft are spotted on the carriers’ bow over the starboard catapult. Rendering it unusable until they are moved.


14 posted on 07/03/2014 6:51:34 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain
You can make the huge image automagically size itself to the screen with:

<img src="http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/stennis-lincoln-01-2012.jpg" width="100%">

Really, positions/distance should be expressed in percent or em's. End Hobby Horse.

Freedom ≠ Free Stuff☭
I, for one, welcome our new Cybernetic Overlords /.
Mash Dobbshead® for HTML, bop Hello_Cthlhu for XAMPP

15 posted on 07/03/2014 7:00:13 AM PDT by Mycroft Holmes (The fool is always greater than the proof.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Rich21IE

Great minds think alike!

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3175514/posts


16 posted on 07/03/2014 7:08:15 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

Well, anybody’s fine ideas are the best they could come up with. The Brits do understand aircraft carriers—during WWII their carriers had steel decks while ours had wood, and I believe the steam catapult is their idea as well. That said, the RN is a pale shadow of what it was and no doubt they have to ‘make do’ with less than what they want.


17 posted on 07/03/2014 8:03:41 AM PDT by hanamizu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

It also separates (potentially) duplicated functions for greater survivability.


18 posted on 07/03/2014 8:51:46 AM PDT by Pecos (Kakocracy - killing the Constitution, one step at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: null and void

The catapult is aligned with the bow ramp, which helps a heavily loaded VTOL-capable aircraft (Harrier, F-35) take off without using as much fuel.


19 posted on 07/03/2014 8:53:37 AM PDT by Pecos (Kakocracy - killing the Constitution, one step at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: hanamizu

The Brit carriers having armored flightdecks mitigated a lot of combat damage, but it also resulted in a smaller airwing. And, actually, it was the other way around: the RN rec’d very small allotments of aircraft predictable war. So they built ships where the precious aircraft could be better protected since they alone wouldn’t be enough to defend the ship if it were attacked.

The USN didn’t have a dedicated Air Force (like the RAF) restricting the number of aircraft it could buy. So went for the larger airwing which, in theory, would limit the risk of the ship getting hit by taking out any attacker first.

And, while the Brits did come up with the steam catapult, angled deck and fresnel landing system, they also had some real stinkers. Like rubber inflatable decks that allowed wheel-less belly landings.


20 posted on 07/03/2014 9:45:56 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter

Pre War. Not predictable war. I hate autocorrect ...


21 posted on 07/03/2014 9:47:29 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: hanamizu
Do NOT underestimate the Brits when it comes to the world of carrier aviation. They were the first in carrier aviation. The Royal Navy converted the battle cruiser HMS Furious to carry and launch aircraft (1917); the RN commissioned the world's first dedicated aircraft carrier, HMS Argus, in 1918; the RN installed flight deck armor (1936), but it did not appear in the US Navy until the USS Midway (CV-41) of 1945. The RN developed major aids to naval aviation safety including the mirror landing system on HMS Illustrious and HMS Indomitable in 1954; steam catapult on HMS Perseus in 1950; and angled (or canted) flight deck aboard HMS Centaur in 1954. The RN innovations of the MLS, angled deck, and steam catapult were aided in development in conjunction with the US Navy.

USS Antietam (CV-36) tested a rudimentary sponson for angled deck operations in 1952 and those tests were shared by both navies before HMS Triumph's conversion. Angled deck conversions of USS Essex (CV-9) and USS Midway (CV-41) were approved in 1955. USS Forrestal (CV-59) was the first carrier built with an angled flight deck in 1955.

The Mirror Landing Systems and steam catapults began installation aboard USS Oriskany (CV-34), Midway-class carriers, USS Forrestal (CV-59) and USS Saratoga (CV-60) beginning in 1955.

22 posted on 07/03/2014 9:48:20 AM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Rich21IE

Or, depending on your point of view, the great-grandson of the Il-2 Sturmovik.


23 posted on 07/03/2014 3:40:58 PM PDT by Tony in Hawaii (Freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MasterGunner01

Brits are also responsible for the enclosed bow under the forward flight deck.


24 posted on 07/04/2014 5:27:39 AM PDT by X Fretensis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: X Fretensis
You are absolutely correct. The Brits introduced the “hurricane bow” to their carriers beginning with HMS Hermes in 1924. US Navy battle cruiser-to-aircraft carrier conversion USS Lexington (CV-2) and USS Saratoga (CV-3) were delivered with hurricane bows in 1927.

The WW2 Royal Navy fleet carriers — the HMS Ark Royal, HMS Eagle class, HMS Indomitable class, and HMS Illustrious class employed hurricane bows. But, all USN carriers of WW2 — CV, CVB, CVL, and CVE — did not use them. Instead, the open areas of the bow and stern underneath the flight deck overhangs were given over to anti-aircraft guns.

Hurricane bows were not fitted to US Navy carriers until the SCB-125 modernization program if the mid-1950s that were applied to the Essex (CV-9) and Midway (CV-41) classes. The first Forrestal class super carriers, USS Forrestal (CV-59) and USS Saratoga (CV-60) were built with hurricane bows.

25 posted on 07/04/2014 6:15:14 AM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MasterGunner01
The WW2 Royal Navy fleet carriers — the HMS Ark Royal, HMS Eagle class, HMS Indomitable class, and HMS Illustrious class employed hurricane bows. But, all USN carriers of WW2 — CV, CVB, CVL, and CVE — did not use them. Instead, the open areas of the bow and stern underneath the flight deck overhangs were given over to anti-aircraft guns.

The driving reason for this is that in the Brit carriers the armored deck was the strength deck. For the Americans the strength deck was the hangar deck, with the flight deck built on top of it.

The hurricane bow was backfitted into the Essex and Midway classes as a matter of convenience, following experience operating carriers in both the Pacific during the War and the North Atlantic afterwards. At least one US open-bow carrier (Hornet, I think), had its forward flight deck collapse while steaming through a Typhoon.

The hurricane bow became a necessity with the Forrestal class, which followed Brit practice and had the flight deck as the strength deck. Interesting enough, there's an engineering design trick (allegedly still classified) that allows US supercarriers to have the flight deck as the strength deck while also having four(with the Ford Class, three) large holes cut in the sides of the hull to accommodate the deck-edge elevators.
26 posted on 07/04/2014 9:27:29 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter
Another reason for going to the hurricane bow on the Essex and Midway class carriers was the removal of all of their 3”/50 RF AA guns and most of their 5-inch guns. With the exception of USS Boxer and USS Princeton that stayed straight deck helicopter assault carriers, the conversion of the Essex and Midway class carriers under SCB-125 and SCB-110 resulted in major changes.

Essex (SCB-125): reconfiguration of island; fitting hurricane bow; removal of all 3”/50 RF guns and four twin 5”/38 guns [8 5”/38 single open mount guns remain]; mirror landing system fitted; steam cats fitted.

Midway (SCB-110): reconfiguration of island; fitting hurricane bow; removal of six 5”/54 Mk 39 guns [8 5”/54 guns remain]; mirror landing system fitted; steam cats fitted.

27 posted on 07/04/2014 12:39:12 PM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MasterGunner01

Add to Midway (SCB-110): removal of all 3”/50 RF guns.


28 posted on 07/04/2014 12:42:48 PM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

If I’m a great mind...we got serious problems!


29 posted on 07/05/2014 4:32:21 AM PDT by Rich21IE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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