Aircraft Carriers

[Old Paul]

   Mmmmmmmmmmmm!

Guess I was thinking partly of kit availability, the fact that the T-45 is in widespread use already (as is the Hawk). And plenty of weapons fits have already been trialed by various users. A little searching turned up this previous thread - http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,19547.0.html

And does anyone have any opinions on the anti-ship version of Maverick? Seems like a viable fire-and-forget weapon for the possible customers, assuming it has enough power, range and a low enough price?

[dy031101]

I do think that a small budget navy might have to settle with a high degree of commonality with the air force, so it'll probably come down to the air force's trainers of choice.

Unless there is a dedicated type that can be acquired on the cheap.

Does being off-the-shelf matter for a catapult?  Or is making catapults according to the carrier's specific sizes (for example, those too small to use the C13 series) really no big deal?

[Hobbes]

I'd imagine there's very little series production going on for catapults anyway. Making one longer or shorter shouldn't be a big deal.

[GTX]

Could always go STOBAR option instead.

Regards,

Greg

[GTX]

A Follow-On To Kuznetsov?

Maxim Pyadushkin writes:

The Russian Navy is making plans for a new aircraft carrier fleet. Navy commander Adm Vladimir Vysotsky announced on Friday, February 26, that the technical design of Russia's new aircraft carrier will be completed by the end of 2010. "I think that under a favorable set of circumstances the first [new] Russian aircraft carrier can be launched by 2020" he said. Vysotsky also mentioned that the aircraft carrier program will require additional funding, as the current defense procurement budget does not include resources for it.

So far, the Russian Navy has only one aircraft carrier in service. The Project 1143.5-class Admiral Kuznetzov, with a displacement of 55,000 tons, was commissioned in 1991 and is attached to the Northern Fleet. Its air wing includes Sukhoi Su-33 fighters and Su-25UTG trainers as well as Kamov Ka-27 antisubmarine helicopters.


The Russian military is not talking about details of the future aircraft carrier, but it is likely to be slightly larger than Kuznetzov. The new ship is expected to carry MiG-29K fighters, as Sukhoi no longer produces the Su-33. MiG is already building MiG-29Ks for the Indian Navy and is reportedly negotiating with the Russian Navy for a first batch of fighters. Our colleagues at Air Power Australia, meanwhile, have assessed the new T-50 as being capable of carrier operations with minimal change.

Source

Regards,

Greg

[PR19_Kit]

When I was working my previous employers were main contenders to supply the electo-magnetic cats for the new RN carriers.

I believe the ships are being built so these can be retro-fitted if they want to remove the ski-jumps and go the CTOL route. It's pretty important for an EM cat that they get the length/aircraft weight factor right as the longer the cat is the faster it can pull. Short cats require very high coil currents (not that the 'normal' one's currents are small by any normal standards....) and can cause lots of temperature problems.

I'd imagine, but don't know for sure, that steam cats would have similar performance issues.

[tigercat]

What about a Drone Carrier

Give it a few years and remotely operated drones could be more widespread . Given their smaller size and the possibility of VTOL operation the carrier could be smaller or could even be a merchant Conversion akin to the MAC  carriers

2030 the Royal Navy  converts 2 Tankers into the Worlds first Pilotless Aircraft Carrier

[Caveman]

blue peter moment

[pyro-manic]

That's the BAE UXV isn't it? Bad, bad design. That superstructure is going to cause all kinds of nasty turbulence problems. A straight through-deck would be much more sensible.

[GTX]

What about a Drone Carrier

Look here for the TSSE SEA ARCHER UAV/UCAV Carrier proposal.



Regards,

Greg

[Caveman]

pyro yeah it is the BAE design. Ive got to agree with you on the flight deck configuration being bad. I think that the superstructure looks like it may have been sculpted with an eye to reducing turbulence though. I think they went with that design so that the front half of the ship can be an air defence destroyer (similar to the Type 45s). I guess the problem here is Jack of all trades master of none.
My main issue is that there appears to be a helicopter and two smaller uavs parked right by where I would want to be landing aircraft...

[rickshaw]

pyro yeah it is the BAE design. Ive got to agree with you on the flight deck configuration being bad. I think that the superstructure looks like it may have been sculpted with an eye to reducing turbulence though. I think they went with that design so that the front half of the ship can be an air defence destroyer (similar to the Type 45s). I guess the problem here is Jack of all trades master of none.
My main issue is that there appears to be a helicopter and two smaller uavs parked right by where I would want to be landing aircraft...

I don't think they expect to be operating all simulteanously.

I wonder though, why they feel the need for such a design when the KIEV class showed that a normal carrier design (ie through deck) could be done with.

[Joe C-P]

What about a Drone Carrier

Look here for the TSSE SEA ARCHER UAV/UCAV Carrier proposal.



Regards,

Greg

Unfortunately I can't get the model document to download. 

[rickshaw]

Does anybody know when the following designs were first begun (by that I mean the design process/proposal, not when they were first laid down)?

Italian aircraft carrier Giuseppe Garibaldi
Italian aircraft carrier Cavour
French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle

Does also anyone know if Charles de Gaulle was ever proposed with conventional power plants?

[rickshaw]

Just noticed this nice magazine cover with a picture of the new QUEEN ELIZABETH on it: