Ark Royal/Eagle (Audacious-class CVs)

[scooter]

Random question, and I don't know if it was answered previously, but I'm curious if the Audacious-class CVs could handle Hawkeyes, Super Bugs, and Vikings.

I know we're in Whiff-World, but there are times when I do *try* to be accurate

[pyro-manic]

I know USN Phantoms regularly cross-decked with Ark Royal in the 70s, but I've never seen a picture of a Hawkeye on the Ark's deck. Space would be very tight if it was done. Viking is rather late (in-service from the mid 70s), but it might have been possible. Again, deck space would be under pressure, and the size of the lifts would have been an issue.

Remember that Ark/Eagle were much smaller than the USN's supercarriers, and they were pushed to the very limit through refits and upgrades to get the Phantom capability. Anything bigger/heavier would have been extremely difficult to support.

A useful comparison:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HMS_Ark_Royal_USS_Nimitz_Norfolk1_1978.jpeg

[scooter]

I know USN Phantoms regularly cross-decked with Ark Royal in the 70s, but I've never seen a picture of a Hawkeye on the Ark's deck. Space would be very tight if it was done. Viking is rather late (in-service from the mid 70s), but it might have been possible. Again, deck space would be under pressure, and the size of the lifts would have been an issue.

Remember that Ark/Eagle were much smaller than the USN's supercarriers, and they were pushed to the very limit through refits and upgrades to get the Phantom capability. Anything bigger/heavier would have been extremely difficult to support.

So Bugs probably, and Tracers/Traders/Trackers for AWACs, COD, ASW then...or keep the Gannets in service longer.

[PR19_Kit]

The F-18 should be OK from the weight and wingspan point of view, being less of a beast than the F-4, either the USN or the FAA versions.

AFAIK the Gannets were the largest aircraft in terms of wingspan to operate off the Ark and they were 54 ft wide. The S-3 is 69 ft, but the E-2 is a whopping 80 ft! I can see an S-3 flying off and onto the Ark's deck but it would be impossible to get one down the lifts and the E-2's wing would smack the island I reckon.

[rickshaw]

Perhaps Turbo-Trackers and Turbo-Tracers?  At 72ft they may be stretching things quite a bit though.   Surprising really as they have such short fuselages...

[Thorvic]

C J Gibsons 'Admiralty & AEW' book does mention th Hawkeye for Eagle & Ark Royal as a Gannet Replacement once the CVA-01 was cancelled and the P139. Not sure about the Hornet it probably could operate from the British Carrier as long as it has a decent approach profile as the Phantom was a bit of turkey as Fleet Carrier Aircraft as its wing shape meant it was more suited for the larger Super Carriers instead. I suspect the Viking too would be viable too as long as it can fit the hangers.

Don't know about the Super Hornet as thats a bigger and heavier beast and designed for the Super Carriers plus the Audacious would be long in the tooth by the time the Super Bug came into service

[crudebuteffective]

hi

dont forget that the ark and eagle were although both "audacious class" very different ships having been finished to different specs

i remember an ex navy friend of my fathers in the 70s talking about them and pointing out the things the ark could handle that the "E" couldnt and vice

versa EG phantomisation whish also included being able to handle crusaders or corsairs i forget which

CBE

[Thorvic]

Eagle was actually the better the ship having had a full refit between 58 and 64, she already had the cats but needed the water cooled jet blast deflectors fitting for Phantom operations in place of her uncooled versions along with upgrades to the arrestor gear and catapluts to the latest version. However her Phantomisation refit was cancelled and her FG1 aircraft were nicked by the RAF to form 43 sqdn as the F-4K was ready before the F-4M, which is a shame as i suspect Ark would have probably been retired mid 70's to keep Eagle ticking into the 80's !

[DarrenP]

The next class up the Malta class would have been interesting.

[Captain Canada]

Malta ? Have to go check that out.

As for wingsapns, didn't the CDN Trackers have a shorter wing ? Or was it just a stubbier nacelle ?

[Martin H]

Malta ? Have to go check that out.

As for wingsapns, didn't the CDN Trackers have a shorter wing ? Or was it just a stubbier nacelle ?

Yeap the UK equivalent of the Midway's.

The plan was for three of em, Malta, Gibraltar and New Zealand. 

[Thorvic]

Malta ? Have to go check that out.

As for wingsapns, didn't the CDN Trackers have a shorter wing ? Or was it just a stubbier nacelle ?

Yeap the UK equivalent of the Midway's.

The plan was for three of em, Malta, Gibraltar and New Zealand. 

Looks like this :-

http://ihphobby.tripod.com/shippages/malta.html

[pyro-manic]

IIRC there was to be a fourth ship, HMS Africa, as well...

I expect upgrades and refits would have followed the same (or at least a similar) pattern that was applied to the Ark and Eagle. Rebuilds with angled decks etc. for Buccaneers and Sea Vixens, followed by refits to operate Phantoms (or whatever might have been procured instead - Hawker P.1154 or Vickers 583 perhaps) at the end of the 60s.

[Devilfish]

IIRC the Ark hosted USN A-6s in the 70's.  Altho I doubt they were taken below deck.

[Thorvic]

Malta ? Have to go check that out.

As for wingsapns, didn't the CDN Trackers have a shorter wing ? Or was it just a stubbier nacelle ?

Yeap the UK equivalent of the Midway's.

The plan was for three of em, Malta, Gibraltar and New Zealand. 

David Hobbs in his 'Century of Carrier Aviation' has a rather nice speculative drawing he did of the Malta class with an Eagle style modernisation, which looks rather tasty. Looks a bit between an Eagle with the layout of an Angled deck Essex with deck edge lifts rather than internal ones. That would certainly suit the timeline and be capable of operating US types as it was a steel flightdeck on a tall hanger