CVE Class Aircraft Carriers

dy031101 · February 12, 2008, 10:36:04 PM

Quote from: roughneck06 on February 12, 2008, 08:45:44 PM
S-2 AEW or Blimp AEW supported by CVE 55 or CVE 105s.

Can escort carriers handle Skyraiders (more specifically the AEW version) just in case E-1 Tracer (S-2 AEW) wasn't compact enough? Or add some DDR or DER into the convoy mix as a stand-in?

roughneck06 · February 20, 2008, 08:51:56 PM

I believe a Skyraider AEW could operate from CVE-105s. Until a Helo AEW was available, I'd say a Blimp AEW or DERs would be sufficient for convoys.

AS for CVE 55s as a CHG.... would 3 twin missle launchers with Talos, Tartar, Terrier be feasible on say the 1st 250-300 ft of the flight deck?

Associated hangar space for reload equipment and magazines? estimated loadedouts?

My thought is the remaining flight deck and hangar would be sufficient for 6-8 Sea King sized ASW Helos. Thoughts/comments?

Joe C-P · February 21, 2008, 09:08:30 AM

Quote from: roughneck06 on February 20, 2008, 08:51:56 PM
I believe a Skyraider AEW could operate from CVE-105s. Until a Helo AEW was available, I'd say a Blimp AEW or DERs would be sufficient for convoys.

AS for CVE 55s as a CHG.... would 3 twin missle launchers with Talos, Tartar, Terrier be feasible on say the 1st 250-300 ft of the flight deck? Associated hangar space for reload equipment and magazines? estimated loadedouts? My thought is the remaining flight deck and hangar would be sufficient for 6-8 Sea King sized ASW Helos. Thoughts/comments?

You'll also have to fit director radars for each launcher, for a total of six. I'm not certain how much interference there might be between the directors. Long Beach had four forward for two twin Terrier launchers.

JoeP

Hobbes · February 21, 2008, 09:17:59 AM

I don't think director interference is too much of a problem, it's easy enough to find 6 different frequencies. What might be awkward is finding positions so they all get good coverage. Long Beach solved this by stacking them, but with 6 directors you'll end up with a lot of weight high up.

Joe C-P · February 22, 2008, 01:31:01 PM

How about two facing forward, stacked, two aft, stacked, and one to either beam.

..:..

roughneck06 · February 24, 2008, 02:10:51 PM

Joe P.... maybe it might work, but in doing so You'd lose any ASW helo capability. Additionally, if it gets sunk or damaged, you're going to lose a great deal of AAW capability. I think my idea of 2- 3 twin T AAW launchers and ASW helos is the way to go.... perhaps 2 of these assigned to a convoy and maybe a CVE-105 w/ Northrup NN-156 and ASW helos is the way to go to protect large convoy back then.

But, perhaps 2 or 3 configured as suggested would be useful for various scenarios/missions!

dy031101 · February 24, 2008, 02:19:40 PM

Quote from: roughneck06 on February 24, 2008, 02:10:51 PM
Joe P.... maybe it might work, but in doing so You'd lose any ASW helo capability.

I think he meant fire control illuminators/directors for the SAM launchers, not the launchers themselves. Having multiple directors can be a good idea if the launchers are capable of putting multiple missiles in the air in a short notice.

roughneck06 · February 24, 2008, 02:27:25 PM

My apologies. I stand corrected. I'm just an Army guy who has always been interested in Naval Matters- especially naval aviation!