Cold War VSTOL Crusier US Navy desgin

[ex-navy]

Good day
In mid 70's the U S Navy became fixated  with a cruiser design to match the Soviet Kiev class. I found the article with several design. But  I am having difficulty  upload them. These design became a carrier which was sold to the Spanish navy. I have box of parts and would like  to get some  ideas of what a ship would look like today if placed in service. Would it fixed or rotary  wing aircraft..etc
Thanks

[Thorvic]

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,7635.0.html
Sea Control Ship

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,7818.msg139165.html#msg139165
Modified Spruance as a DDH

Our sister site Secret Projects Forum is a good place for reference material.

It the US Navy had adopted the Sea Control ships then they would have likely operated Harrier IIs and Sea Kings giving way later to Seahawks maybe even Osprey. Radar and systems would likely be updated, Phalanx and RAM fitted. They would probably be being replaced by now with something more like the Japanese DDH Izumo, where they could operate F-35B but with an Radar either like a Burke or as fitted to Ford.

http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php/topic,27442.msg410819.html#msg410819

This is the Sea Control ship I built based on the original design before the Spanish added the integrated Ski-jump

Cheers

Geoff

[scooter]

Courtesy of Shipbucket.com:

Sea Control Ship

1971


1972 (v1)


1972 (v2)


1974 (Final Design)

[scooter]

More from Shipbucket.com

Vertical Support Ship

v1


v2


v3

[scooter]

One last from Shipbucket.com

CGSN Mk2 (based on the Ticonderoga CG hull)

[scooter]

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,7818.msg139165.html#msg139165
Modified Spruance as a DDH

Spruance variations, courtesy Shipbucket.com:



Spruance based thru-deck cruiser:

[PR19_Kit]

I find it odd that the USN didn't use the ski-jump idea on the SCS proposals, or was it a time-line issue, the ski-jump not having been invented by the time the USN SCS was cancelled?

[Thorvic]

I find it odd that the USN didn't use the ski-jump idea on the SCS proposals, or was it a time-line issue, the ski-jump not having been invented by the time the USN SCS was cancelled?

Yes the SCS was an 70s concept, with the SCS, the trouble was they were trying to develop the next generation of VTOL aircraft as well (which ended with the rather poor VFX-12 rather than a Harrier derivative or the Convair 200 (which would have been like the YAK-141). The USN also wanted its big Super Carriers too and after the oil crisis put its lobbying into the Supercarrier pot droping VTOL for fleet use and leaving it with the US Marine Corps. the Daft part is if they had kept with ships and then adopted Harrier, Sea Harrier or even AV-16/Harrier II and settled on using Sea Kings they could have had a viable fleet of small Harrier Carriers doing the mundane work on protecting the sea lanes and escorting the ARGs leaving the Supercarriers to focus on being the flexible big stick.

When the design was sold to Spain they then adapted it to include the integrated Ski-Jump

[PR19_Kit]

Thanks for that Geoff, I had no idea what the timing of the SCS was before now.

[ex-navy]

Thanks for the links and photo. Still trying to figure out how to upload photos. The reason as stated why no ski jump. Is the US has it Harrier  fly with exhaust done like any other aircraft being shot off a carrier. Thus the ski ramp is wasted space.  I also have a photo of the new compact bridge/island that is purposed for the LHA-8.  I still plan on doing  three of these. One Crusier.  One sea control and one as update design

[PR19_Kit]

The reason as stated why no ski jump. Is the US has it Harrier  fly with exhaust done like any other aircraft being shot off a carrier.

Sorry, but that's wrong thinking.

The Harrier can lift a much higher warload using a ski-jump than without it. The Fleet Air Arm and RAF Harriers used the deflected thrust nozzles of their Harriers at exactly the right moment during the take-off run to optimise their launches.
And it's PRECISELY why the ski jump was invented, and why every UK carrier built since its invention has had one fitted.

Just because the USN and USMC choose to ignore such advantages doesn't mean it's wrong.

[nönöbär]

Well, I made a Spruance based version of it a while ago, the 'Spruance-Class Carrier "Francis Underwood", CVL-72:




More can be found here:
http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php/topic,42912.0.html

Not exactly like the drawing from shipbucket, but something not too different.

[scooter]

Thanks for the links and photo. Still trying to figure out how to upload photos.

Use a third party image hosting site for images, like Photobucket or Imgur.   Then follow the instructions in the image below (both should be identical or close enough):

[Thorvic]

The reason as stated why no ski jump. Is the US has it Harrier  fly with exhaust done like any other aircraft being shot off a carrier.

Sorry, but that's wrong thinking.

The Harrier can lift a much higher warload using a ski-jump than without it. The Fleet Air Arm and RAF Harriers used the deflected thrust nozzles of their Harriers at exactly the right moment during the take-off run to optimise their launches.
And it's PRECISELY why the ski jump was invented, and why every UK carrier built since its invention has had one fitted.

Just because the USN and USMC choose to ignore such advantages doesn't mean it's wrong.

They don't ignore it as such the US Marines have flown ours and their own Harriers off our various Harrier Carriers and appreciated the benefits. The Problem is the USMC Harrier force is basically onboard to provide local Air Support and Defence to the Marines on the ground. The ships they fly from are Amphibious assault ships carrying Marines and means to get the and their kit to shore via, landing craft, Hovercraft or Helicopter. Thus the fixed wing air wing are just a secondary force multiplier element to the ships so no ski-jump as they prefer to use the deck space as another helo spot instead. Even the two America class without the landing docks are really focused onto operating the V-22 Osprey and new King Stallion helicopters rather than as mini Carriers with the F-35B. That's why the Marine Corp aviators are looking forward to deploying on the HMS Queen Elizabeth class as they are optimised for F-35B operations 

[nighthunter]

Thanks for the links and photo. Still trying to figure out how to upload photos.

Use a third party image hosting site for images, like Photobucket or Imgur.   Then follow the instructions in the image below (both should be identical or close enough):

I know this art style! Hey old friend!