Aircraft Carriers

[dy031101]

The aircraft makes me think that this looks like an Axis version of the Habakkuk......

[nev]

er, its a Lancaster, isn't it? ?

[dy031101]

er, its a Lancaster, isn't it? ?

Oh, I mistook it for a Ju-290.  Of course that's before I just found out that the engine nacelles don't match...... 

[Mossie]

The aircraft makes me think that this looks like an Axis version of the Habakkuk......

The pic is pretty much along the lines of the proposal that became HMS Habakkuk.  Firstly, the idea was to take an iceberg & tow it to a theater to act as marshalling platform.  Then the idea was that if you stuck engines on it you might get an aircraft carrier cheaply & easily, which is what the pic seems to be about.  Realising it would be impractical to use an iceberg like this, the idea further evolved into the Pykrete monster that would have been HMS Habakkuk, itself very impractical!

[Spey_Phantom]

Is Pykrete acually strong enough to make an aircraft carrier out of it,
lets let the Mythbusters (or in this case "Whiffbusters"  ) do the test.

cant wait to see the full episode on TV 

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/wood-pulp-power.html

[Thorvic]

Interesting bit on the CVA-01 article in the D K Brown book. CVA-01 HMS Qeen Elizabeth was to be ordered in late 1966 as was a 2nd of the class, however CVA-02 HMS Duke of Edinburgh wasn't to be ordered till about 1969. The second 1966 ship was hoped to be for the Royal Australian Navy to replace Melbourne in the mid 70's !!!!

Some interesting potential there for RAN aircraft in 70's & 80's. Vikings replacing Tracker, Buccs replacing Skyhawks or possibly Corsairs, AFVG, Phantoms, Spey Phantoms, with Hornet then appearing in the 80's for the RAN as well as the RAF.....

[GTX]

Interesting bit on the CVA-01 article in the D K Brown book. CVA-01 HMS Qeen Elizabeth was to be ordered in late 1966 as was a 2nd of the class, however CVA-02 HMS Duke of Edinburgh wasn't to be ordered till about 1969. The second 1966 ship was hoped to be for the Royal Australian Navy to replace Melbourne in the mid 70's !!!!

Some interesting potential there for RAN aircraft in 70's & 80's. Vikings replacing Tracker, Buccs replacing Skyhawks or possibly Corsairs, AFVG, Phantoms, Spey Phantoms, with Hornet then appearing in the 80's for the RAN as well as the RAF.....

Interesting indeed - watch this space for more soon...

Regards,

Greg

[Wyrmshadow]

heres something I'm currently selling. It's the Prometheus from Macross/Robotech

[roughneck06]

Any thoughts to a replacement for the HMCS Melbourne circa 1960s-1970s?? CTOL or STOVL. I know that an EX USN Essex CV9, USN SCS, USN Iwo Jima Modified LPH, and HMS Invincible was looked at.

Ideally something that could have a useful number of F/A 18s, however- Sea Harriers would be good too.

Perhaps HMS Centaur ? A-7s at 1st with F/A 18s as they come on line?

Also- USN CVV- mix of F-4s/A-7s with F/A 18s later??

Convert Sydney or Melbourne as an LPH later- Sea Harrier capable??

Thanks in advance for ideas/opinions!

[Thorvic]

CVA-01 (well actually it would be CVA-02) was considered at one point, although the RAN appeared to prefer the cheaper option of updating an Essex class along the lines of the Oriskany CV-34.

Also recently appeared on Secret Projects:=
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,8449.0.html

The irony is that whilst Melbourne was being refitted, Victorious was being laid up, which would have been a much more viable carrier for the RAN to use in the 70's and into the 80's.

G

[Silver Fox]

During that timeframe the most likely replacement for HMAS Melbourne would be some variant of the USN's Sea Control Ship or the Invincible class. Airwing probably SHars and Helos.  

[John1964]

Wasn't there a proposal based on the Iwo Jima class LPH, stretched and with two shafts?

[DarrenP]

The Problem with victorious would have been she was much older then Melbourne and her full complement was 2400 for ?12 aircraft. She was cast by the RN as they were scaling back east of Suez and she wasn't suitable for Phantom conversion. IMHO Eagle should also have been converted and Ark Sold

[Thorvic]

What ?....

Firstly Victorious was laid down and launched pre-war so her hull would be of better and stronger constuction than the Majestic class that were built to lower late wartime standards. Victorious was built to full naval standards where as the Majestic class were bassed on adapted merchant hull design with a more basic steam plant. Melbourne was also laid up from the end of the war till her purchase by the RAN and the subsequent final fitting out in the mid 50's. Victorious after having an eventful wartime career was re-built between 1950-1957, where they stripped her down to the hanger deck, inserted a plug, widenend her and fitted a new boilers, before fitting a new hanger and flight deck, with full angeled deck, steam cats, new Island with the latest radar and comms systems.

Her Airgroup was 36 consisting of Sea Vixens, Buccaneers, Gannet, and Wessex rather than the 12 you imply.

She was certainly a more capable ship at the time of her premature disposal then Melbourne ever could hope to be as she was a Fleet carrier as opposed to Light Fleet Carrier.

G

[DarrenP]

Reference Conways All the worlds Fighting ships 1947-1995
"When she recomissioned in 1958, Victorious was the most modern British Carrier, But Although it had originally been hoped that she would operate fifty four aircraft, the rapid growth in size of the later meant thet she never carried more than twenty eight (plus eight Helecopters) and finally carried only twenty three (8 Buccaneers, 8 Sea Vixen, 2 Gannets and 5 wessex)."

Given the size of the S-2 and the Sea Kings the RAN were operating I would sugest that the Fixed wing air group would be around 12. Also given the manning requirement I would sugest the RAN would have struggled to provide her with a crew.