Shipbucket
http://67.205.157.234/forums/

Carrier design research
http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4495		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Blackbuck [ August 25th, 2013, 12:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Carrier design research
Something for Avalon. Seeing as A: compared to the OTL Madagascar didn't get the technological setbacks and would have gained / kept independence much earlier and B: the fact that I have a lot of airspace to cover over a lot of ocean I decided that I would need some sort of carrier force.

A quick history of the envisaged force...

1929 - 2x Converted battle cruiser of WW1 vintage that was still unfinished at the end of hostilities
One sunk in the Indian Ocean by Japanese aircraft. The other decommissioned in 1949 after spending 3 years in reserve

1945sh - CV-46 "Iwo Jima" is completed for service in Avalonian navy as a replacement for the sunken vessel. Would serve until replacement by Midway class carriers in the sixties. Refit to SCB-125 standard between 1957 and 1959.

1945ish CVB-44, CVB-56 and 57 all remain ordered, are laid down and constructed between 1943 and 1959 in much the same haphazard way the British carriers of the period ended up being built. Upon completion they were delivered straight to reserve for lack of work for them. With the gathering Storm in Vietnam the US were seeking allies who could possibly commit to stemming the tide of communism there. In 1961 Talks were under way with the Avalonian government for the purchase of CVB-56 and 57 to replace or supplant Iwo Jima, negotiations were still under way when JFK was assassinated. With Johnson's more hard line approach to Vietnam he offered a somewhat lucrative sounding proposal to Avalon. The transferral of CVB-44, 56 and 57 to Avalon for a nominal charge in return for a pledge from the Avalonian government to assist in Vietnam. The carriers were prepared for transfer to Avalon including loading the three of them with the various other supplies and equipment negotiated in the deal.
The three sailed into Glastonbury Sound on the third of March 1964. CVB-44 was immediately prepared for an evaluational cruise with the air group from Iwo Jima embarked and by October was declared ready for deployment. CVB-56 and 57 were worked up between 1966 and 67 as manpower and aircraft became available. Iwo Jima remained in service until 1977 as an amphibious warfare carrier seeing extensive service in Vietnam before her withdrawal. She remained in reserve until 1985 before being scrapped in Singapore.

The Midway class carriers in Avalonian service would all be outfitted to SCB-110 standard with some local modifications. They have served from 1964 until now with CVB-44 being retired in 1999 and scrapped in 2003. The two remaining vessels are expected to remain until the first two replacements are in service.
Their replacement in the eyes of the Admiralty can't come soon enough as although they have given many years sterling service they are incredibly labour intensive and expensive to operate.

Their replacements will come into service between 2014 and 2019.

---Class Details---

Class Members:

R62 Defender 14/06/1943 | 06/08/1943 | 12/10/1955 | 21/06/1963 | 01/12/2003
R63 Defiance 07/07/1943 | 13/08/1945 | 15/10/1959 | 23/06/1964 | Q1 2018
R64 Discovery 07/07/1943 | 12/08/1945 | 09/09/1959 | 23/06/1966 | Q1 2018

Class Differences:

R62 received during her life less in the way of attention being somewhat older than the other two vessels, other than her service in Vietnam she was routinely used as a training carrier and a commando carrier to supplement the Iwo Jima. As such she lost her waist catapult and part of her steam plant limiting her top speed to some 27 knots.

R63 retained her gun armament long after her sister, until 1983 in fact though the original 5 inch guns were long gone by this date, replaced by Italian 76mm mounts. These too would succumb in 1983 with the fitting of Phalanx in their former positions as well as atop the island. In lieu of IPDMS R63 was fitted with the Italian development, Aspide on her forward, starboard and aft, port sponsons.

R64 unlike her sister ship lost her original gun armament early on after a serious fire during the course of one of her Vietnam deployments. As a stop-gap measure she was fitted with OtoBreda twin-forty mounts throughout, replacing the remaining 5 inch guns as well as the damaged ones. Eventually she would land two of these mounts and receive two Aspide launchers, she retains the same layout of armament to the present day.



First point of discussion for the replacement design. Propulsion...
For a design measuring 300m x 43m (75FD) x 11m displacing some 75,000 tonnes. My logic is a 3 shaft arrangement with a central cruising shaft for 20kts and two boost shafts for maintaining 29kts for air ops. The WR-21s can go either to the cruise or boost shafts depending on power requirements. The MT30s should produce enough power to the cruise shaft and ship systems during air ops as far as I can tell. Can anyone more well versed in the dark arts provide some insight as to whether the setup is feasible?

[ img ]

ETA:



Basic design scheme thus far.

Specifications:

[ img ]

'Goddess' class aircraft carrier
[list][*]Produced:2013 Onwards
[*]In Commission: 2017 Onwards
[*]Displacement: ~75,000 Tonnes
[*]Length: 300m
[*]Beam: 43m (75m flight deck)
[*]Draught: 11m nominal
[*]Propulsion: [IFEP / COGLAG]
[list][*]2x Rolls Royce Marine MT30 gas turbines rated at 36MW ea.
[*]2x Rolls Royce Marine WR-21 recuperating gas turbines rated at 25MW ea.
[*]MagPower MAFC fuel cell auxiliary power system for a total of 800kW
[*]2x retractable auxiliary propulsors rated at 3.2MW each[/list]
[*]Speed: Cruise:20 knots Sustainable Max.: 29 knots
[*]Complement and Accommodation: Crew: 1550 (900 crew, 650 air wing) Permanent Accommodation: 250 Surge Accommodation: 100 (hangar space)
[*]Endurance: 72 days before resupply
[*]Range: 20,000km @ 15 knots
[*]Armament:
[list][*]4x 25mm Phalanx derivatives
[*]SYLVER A50 (48 cells) for ASTER 15 and 30 as well as Sea Ceptor
[*]4x BAE Bofors Mk4 40mm/70
[*]4x Mk38 mounts (25mm)
[*]4x 12.7mm remote mounts (Kongsberg Protector)[/list]
[*] Aviation: Dependent on a variety of factors, standard air group is slated to be:
[list][*]24x F/A-19 Sea Wolf (Vought 1600/01/02)
[*]6x S-3 Vikings (sea control mainly with secondary ASW role)
[*]6x AW101 Merlins (ASW warfare)
[*]4x AW70 Pave Hawks (HH-60H, licence built by AW a la WS70, for CSAR, plane guard and ASuW duties)
[*]2x E-2D Advanced Hawkeye (AE2100 over T56)[/list]
[*] Boats and landing craft: 4 motor life boats (80 and 136 person) in addition to 3 RHIBs (1x 7m and 2x 11m)
[*]Noteworthy Sensors:[list][*]BAE Sampson
[*]BAE S1850M
[*]Chemring Centurion countermeasures dispenser (4x)
[*]Rheinmetall MASS countermeasure dispenser (2x)[/list][/list]
Author:  Blackbuck [ August 31st, 2013, 2:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Carrier design research
C'est fini! I don't think I can do much more to it in terms of completeness. Check the spoiler for the image and specifications.
Author:  eswube [ August 31st, 2013, 5:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Carrier design research
Impressive work!
Author:  Blackbuck [ July 6th, 2014, 11:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Stuff...
What started off as a thought exercise in coming up with a workable carrier has started to finally provide me with fruit

The designs that follow are related to the one in the first post in various ways so please bear with.

These have really been a long time coming when you look at all the previous attempts at carriers that I've done... I foresee there's still probably some way to go with them... (I'm probably going to rework the underwater hull at some point as right now I don't really like it that much)

First off there are the Alaisiagae or 'A' class CVGs. Designed around much the same requirements and CVF and PA2 they are a class of four vessels commissioned between 2008 and 2014.

Abstract:
The A class aircraft carriers are the largest surface combatants in use in Galenic navy. They are replacements for the preceding 'Z' Class of carriers (Improved Kitty Hawk / Kennedy) built between 1960 and1965) - (TGL Zealous, Zephyr, Zodiac and Zulu).
Compared to their predecessors they have much reduced manning requirements but as would be expected from the disparity in size they also however embark fewer aircraft than them. They do however fulfil a whole gamut of roles other than the traditional carrier role. They have extensive command and medical facilities allowing them to as needed serve as amphibious flagships. They can if the need arises also be converted into commando carriers as the preceding 'Y' class were.
They are expected to be in service until around 2050 if not longer.

[ img ]
[ img ]

Specifications:

'A' Class Guided Missile Aircraft Carrier
  • Produced:2005-2014
  • In Commission: 2008 Onwards
  • Displacement: <85,000 Tonnes Full Load
  • Length: 272m WL
  • Beam: 45.3m (WL) - 75m (FD) (6.00:1)
  • Draught: 9.75m nominal
  • Propulsion: (~107MW to full speed ~36MW to 20kt Cruise ~12MW per EMCAT at full power)
    • 2x WR21(25MW Ea.) and 2x MT30 turbines (36MW ea.) as IEP
    • 4x MT7 based ship service generators (5MW ea.)
    • 6x MTU 12V4000 distributed generator sets for emergency power
  • Speed: Cruise:20 knots Sustained: ±28 knots
  • Complement and Accommodation: Crew: 700 + Aircrew Permanent Accommodation: 1750 Sealift 300 Troops + equipment
  • Endurance: 60 days before resupply
  • Range: 20,000km @ 20 knots
  • Armament:
    • 1x 64 cell strike length Mk41 [ESSM > CAMM - SM-2MR - SM-2ER/IV > SM-6 - RGM-129 - ASALM] (Hence the CVG designator)
    • 4x Mk49 launchers for RIM-116
    • 4x Mk38 mounts retrofitted with Mk44 (30mm x173) cannon
    • 4x Mini-Typhoon mounts for M3M (12.7mm) HMGs
    • 2x Centurion dispensers for soft and hard kill countermeasures as well as short range SSMs as required
    • 2x Typhoon MLS-NLOS launchers for Spike-NLOS
    Flight Deck Arrangement:
    Catapult Set-up: 2x 90m EMCATs (One in the waist position and one on the bow on the starboard side) (~12MW Requirements each at full power)
    Deck Parking: Parking spaces for 16x F/A-18E/F sized aircraft whilst allowing flight ops to continue
    Elevators: 2x lifts capable of elevating two F/A-18E/F sized aircraft at a time and 3x weapon / stores lifts
    Arresting gear: 3-wire arrangement with net barricade

    ~7,808m^2 Hangar Area

    Aviation:
    [Currently]
  • 24x F/A-18C+ (FGR)
  • 12x F/A-18D+ (FRS)
  • 4x Merlin (ASW + ASuW)
  • 4x Lynx (ASuW + SAR)
  • 3x E-1T (AEW)
  • 2x KC-2T (COD + IFR)
  • 2x EC-1T (ELINT)
    [2020 SDR]
  • 8x F/A-18E (FGR)
  • 16x F/A-18F+ (FRS)
  • 12x F-35C (GR)
  • 7x Merlin (ASW + ASuW)
  • 3x E-1T (AEW)
  • 2x KC-2T (COD + IFR)
  • 2x EC-1T (ELINT)
  • Secret Squirrel UCAVs


    Boats and Landing Craft:
    • 4x 9m RHIBs for harbour launch duties, search and rescue as well as boarding work
    • 2x 7n RHIBs for boarding and landing work
    Provisional sensor set-up as follows...
    • Thales APAR derived ICWI illuminators (4x)
    • BAE S1850M VSR
    • BAE Sampson MFR
    • SPN-753 + 730 LPI/Nav + Nav sets
    • Selex SASS EO/IR surveillance mounts (2x)
    • Various patch antennas covering various parts of the HF/VHF/UHF spectrum
    • Various SATCOM domes for secure voice, LINK-16/22 etc in the UHF/SHF/EHF spectrum
    • Selex ILS system
    Other points of interest...
    • Several RHIBs of varying sizes for SAR and utility work, majority starboard.
    • Reduced manning through heightened automation this includes weapons handling and other previously manpower intensive operations
    • IFEP!

Next there are the Avalonian derivatives. Aether, Erinys, Nix and Thalassa. They take over from Defender, Defiance and Discovery of which only one is currently operational (they are after all Midways!)
Aether is expected to be commissioned in Q1 2017 with Erinys following in Q2. Nix should arrive in Q1 2018 and Thalassa Q3 2018. The quick successive commissions are due to the requirement to project power out to the far enclaves that Avalon manages where infrastructure isn't really there for permanent land based fighters and such like.
Being used by the Avalonian navy they're routinely going to operate in the roaring forties as well as further up the Indian Ocean towards Mayotte. Habitability between such different locations is quite a priority as a result.
The stabiliser arrangement differs on the Avalonian vessels to the Galenic ones in being a four fin arrangement with much larger bilge keel. Landing ops and ice watches are performed from the glass houses at either end of the ship. Formerly it was proposed to integrate a watchtower into the Samson mast but this was later abandoned.

[ img ]

The Avalonian vessels are roughly the same or at least will be as the Galenic ones with the exceptions of the embarked air group and weapon systems that they employ.

The air group for Aether when she is complete will consist of the following.
  • 16x V-1601 (Single Seater)
  • 8x V-1601 (Two Seater)
  • 4x Merlin (ASW + ASuW)
  • 4x H-60 (ASuW + SAR)
  • 3x E-2C (AEW)
  • 4x US-3 (COD + IFR)
  • 2x ES-3 (ELINT)
Unlike Tol Galen, Avalon has not been able to get RGM-129s so has to make do with the ubiquitous TLAM nor have they yet committed to buying SM-6 though that might well change over the coming decade.

I'm sure there's plenty more I could do to these and at some point I'll probably get around to doing those things.

~Mark.
Author:  eswube [ July 7th, 2014, 7:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Carrier design research
Stunning!
Author:  Novice [ July 7th, 2014, 7:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Carrier design research
Stunning is the right word, although IMHO the two islands are too far from one to the other, especially when they are also used for the engines' uptakes.
Author:  erik_t [ July 7th, 2014, 7:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Carrier design research
I like the idea of ice watching from a cute little bow bubble, but the angle of view over the bow is going to be absolutely atrocious. You'd be lucky to see anything within 5nmi.

I echo the feeling that the islands are badly positioned for use as engine uptakes.
Author:  Blackbuck [ July 7th, 2014, 7:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Carrier design research
I didn't say they were a great idea did I :P

RE: Islands. They're no worse than the actual CVFs are, that's not to say that QE is perfect either.
Author:  heuhen [ July 7th, 2014, 8:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Carrier design research
erik_t wrote:
I like the idea of ice watching from a cute little bow bubble, but the angle of view over the bow is going to be absolutely atrocious. You'd be lucky to see anything within 5nmi.

I echo the feeling that the islands are badly positioned for use as engine uptakes.
I don't see any problem with those uptakes, here we are talking about jet-engine, and they can literally b placed anywhere.

I have seen ships whit them placed in the bow, ships that have them placed on the upper-deck/roof. Hell I even have seen a ship that had engine problem, received an generator container, that was placed on a cargo deck, then all the power from that generator was sendt down to electric motors. It's not like the good old days with heavy diesel engines or steam power plant, that was bound to one place in the ship.
Author:  Novice [ July 7th, 2014, 9:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Carrier design research
heuhen wrote:

I don't see any problem with those uptakes, here we are talking about jet-engine, and they can literally b placed anywhere.

I have seen ships whit them placed in the bow, ships that have them placed on the upper-deck/roof. Hell I even have seen a ship that had engine problem, received an generator container, that was placed on a cargo deck, then all the power from that generator was sendt down to electric motors. It's not like the good old days with heavy diesel engines or steam power plant, that was bound to one place in the ship.
If the engines, as you say can be placed anywhere, than consider, the length of the shafts of propellers from the engines, or the uptakes tubes inside the ships, not to mention the intakes tubing, these use a lot of space.
You also need a clear space above the engines to take them out and replace them, as you don't repair gas turbines (jet engines) in the ship. They are being replaced, thanks to their comparatively small size.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/