avatar_Hobbes

Submarine aircraft carrier

Started by Hobbes, November 05, 2016, 12:04:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Hobbes


sandiego89

Well that is different!  I love aircraft carrying submarines.  Not too practical, but perfect WHIF stuff.
Dave "Sandiego89"
Chesapeake, Virginia, USA


Tophe

[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Captain Canada

That's different ! Very cool tho. Nice find  :thumbsup:
CANADA KICKS arse !!!!

Long Live the Commonwealth !!!
Vive les Canadiens !
Where's my beer ?

McColm

Wow! Makes that old joke about being deckcrew on a submarine plausible.

sandiego89

#6
Quote from: Flyer on November 06, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: sandiego89 on November 05, 2016, 01:04:08 PM
Not too practical, but perfect WHIF stuff.

Not so sure it's not too practical. Emerge, launch, submerge and similar for recovery. Inconvenient maybe in a emergency but it's not non practical IMHO.

I'll offer the following:
-Very odd hull shape, likely slow and poor handling underwater. Noisier than a normal SSBN with the notch at the rear of the flight deck etc.
-Hull shape poor for surface/flight ops.  Would likely take green water over the flight deck. Would be difficult to get enough wind over deck with limited surface speed. 
-Dry part look perhaps a bit high out of the water.  A more realistic waterline would put the flight deck even closer to the water, and make taking green water over the bulbous bow and up onto the flight deck even more of a concern.   
-Huge through hull opening to/from hangar.  Very difficult to maintain watertight integrity, and likely impossible to make it work at deeper levels.  Not sure if the massive open hatch is intended to be the watertight part.
-Looks like the model has a catapult, but looks like a short cat stroke.  Difficult to keep the catapult water tight.  With steam catapults there is always steam escaping when they are live.   If no catapult there is no ski jump making it impossible or difficult to get airborne with a meaningful payload.
-Arresting gear.  Require massive under deck braking engines.  Huge engineering challenge to design how to keep this watertight.
-Limited aircraft complement. Would likely only be able to generate a few aircraft per cycle, so limited to counter MPA patrols, limited strike etc.  Not the capability to maintain constant air defense CAP for example.   
-Lauch and recovery would obviously make the submarine vulnerable, and it would take some time to open the hangar, winch the aircraft out, power them up, taxi/tow, unseal the catapult, hook up and launch.  With only one hangar and winch? it would take some time to get the aircraft on deck and recover.  Limited deck parking during recovery. 

Sure the idea of submarine aircraft carriers sounds neat to launch a few quick aircraft, but the challenges are numerous.  I hate to throw a wet blanket of realism over a neat model that I do like, but I still think it lacks practicality.   

Dave "Sandiego89"
Chesapeake, Virginia, USA

Madoc

Renaud - of Sharkit fame - sketched up, and did some basic modeling, of a submarine aircraft carrier which used C.450 Coléoptère type jets for its aircraft compliment.  They were housed and launched like missiles with each in their own silo.  For recovery the planes would come down to a hover near a crane system that'd pluck them out of the air to bring them aboard.  This, much like the Skyhook system Hawker proposed for the Harrier.

The sub woulda been huge, nuclear powered - of course, and since it operated nothing but VTOL machines, have no need for a landing deck nor worries of green water coming over it.  The shape of the hull could remain hydrodynamically efficient and it was a far simpler thing to safely seal each aircraft in its individual silo as far as water tightness goes as well.  A pretty slick set up, all in all.
Wherever you go, there you are!

Captain Canada

Good points for sure, and many of them pertain to this model in particular, but that shouldn't stop us whiffers from dreaming !

:thumbsup:
CANADA KICKS arse !!!!

Long Live the Commonwealth !!!
Vive les Canadiens !
Where's my beer ?

zenrat

Quote from: sandiego89 on November 07, 2016, 03:43:34 AM
Quote from: Flyer on November 06, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: sandiego89 on November 05, 2016, 01:04:08 PM
Not too practical, but perfect WHIF stuff.

Not so sure it's not too practical. Emerge, launch, submerge and similar for recovery. Inconvenient maybe in a emergency but it's not non practical IMHO.

I'll offer the following:
-Very odd hull shape, likely slow and poor handling underwater. Noisier than a normal SSBN with the notch at the rear of the flight deck etc.
-Hull shape poor for surface/flight ops.  Would likely take green water over the flight deck. Would be difficult to get enough wind over deck with limited surface speed. 
-Dry part look perhaps a bit high out of the water.  A more realistic waterline would put the flight deck even closer to the water, and make taking green water over the bulbous bow and up onto the flight deck even more of a concern.   
-Huge through hull opening to/from hangar.  Very difficult to maintain watertight integrity, and likely impossible to make it work at deeper levels.  Not sure if the massive open hatch is intended to be the watertight part.
-Looks like the model has a catapult, but looks like a short cat stroke.  Difficult to keep the catapult water tight.  With steam catapults there is always steam escaping when they are live.   If no catapult there is no ski jump making it impossible or difficult to get airborne with a meaningful payload.
-Arresting gear.  Require massive under deck braking engines.  Huge engineering challenge to design how to keep this watertight.
-Limited aircraft complement. Would likely only be able to generate a few aircraft per cycle, so limited to counter MPA patrols, limited strike etc.  Not the capability to maintain constant air defense CAP for example.   
-Lauch and recovery would obviously make the submarine vulnerable, and it would take some time to open the hangar, winch the aircraft out, power them up, taxi/tow, unseal the catapult, hook up and launch.  With only one hangar and winch? it would take some time to get the aircraft on deck and recover.  Limited deck parking during recovery. 

Sure the idea of submarine aircraft carriers sounds neat to launch a few quick aircraft, but the challenges are numerous.  I hate to throw a wet blanket of realism over a neat model that I do like, but I still think it lacks practicality.   



All can be solved by making the entire submarine fly... ;D
Fred

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..

Old Wombat

This is my favorite submarine aircraft carrier!

Has a life outside of What-If & wishes it would stop interfering!

"The purpose of all War is Peace" - St. Augustine

veritas ad mortus veritas est

Captain Canada

That is defo a cool rendition of a submarine a/c carrier ! Great painting as well.

:thumbsup:
CANADA KICKS arse !!!!

Long Live the Commonwealth !!!
Vive les Canadiens !
Where's my beer ?