Shipbucket

After the Improved Ark Royal type, the Illustrious Class of three ships, the war broke out while those ships were still building. In 1940 a larger class of aircraft carrier was ordered. This was the Indefatigable class. Two ships were laid down in 1940 (Implacable and Indefatigable) and completed in 1944, while two more were ordered in 1941 (originally as Malta and Gibraltar, but the names were changed to Ark Royal and Eagle to commemorate lost ships) with completion due for 1945, this date went out to 1946 after the steel shortage of 1941. The last pair were delayed again to take advantage of the new angled deck technology and the necessary upgrades to handle the early jets of the Meteor and Vampire types.

These were the ultimate of British carrier designs. For many years these four ships would be the largest ships built for the Royal Navy. At 45,000 tons, 900 x 114 feet they were huge ships. The design included the novel feature of split bridge structures with the after bridge being for the aircraft commander and his staff. A heavy defensive armament was carried with eight twin 4.5" of the new Mk.V mountings, and 16 of the latest 40mm twin STAAG mountings. No lesser weapons of 20mm or smaller were fitted. The aircraft also were the very latest of the piston engine aircraft available to the RN, with 3 squadrons of Fairey Spearfish, 3 squadrons of Hawker Sea Fury, and 1 1/2 squadrons of De Havilland Sea Hornet aircraft.

The first two ships finished their trials and were accepted for service just in time to be transferred to the Pacific Theatre for action against the Japanese. It was there that the new weapons and aircraft more than proved their worth against the Kamikaze menace and in being able to launch many valuable sorties against Japanese targets. Both ships remained undamaged through to the end of the war. On completion of the second pair in 1948, these two ships were taken in hand to receive the same modifications as the later pair. While these ships were under refit, the second pair fought in the Korean War.




1950 is about the limit of my knowledge of ship fittings. I would like to see these ships have a thirty-five year service life for the early pair and 40 year service life for the later pair. If some of you great guys and girls who have more knowledge of this later era could give me some pointers as to when the major updates to the ships should be drawn for e.g. rebuild required to handle Phantoms, mirror landing sights and other innovative equipment and introduction of major RADAR advances. Both pairs would go through a continual cycle of refits for updated systems which once finished the other pair might then be required to go through another refit with the then even newer systems. This would give the UK four ships through to about 1980, then two ships to 1990.


RN Aircraft Aboard HMS Implacable 1945.



While there is a link in the FD aircraft index for Sea Fury, there is no drawing for it at the other end. If someone has a Hawker Sea Fury drawing I would like to include it to the above roster.

I don't really understand the split bridge ?

(ie Why split it if its not split sufficiently to make any difference ? Looks like the one on HMS Malt so there must be a reason but cant guess it ?)

JSB: It was found with the Illustrious types during the war that having the Air Wings ready rooms, briefing rooms, squadron offices etc in the main bridge structure put a lot of strain on space once the updated radar and electronic equipment was added. The solution was to split off Air Wings needs into a separate structure. Much the same as is done with the new Queen Elizabeth class ships. The idea has been around since the original design for the Malta class which the Indefatigable class above is based on.


If anyone wonders about the 'M' for the identification letter. There were too many carriers starting with the letter 'I' so the second letter was used instead. 'L' = Illustrious, 'M' = Implacable, 'N' = Indefatigable etc.

Yes I see a reason for a big structure, but I just don't get the wasted space between the islands on the QEs its used for an elevator (and splits the funnels) so it is sensible but here (and on OTL Malta) ? You cant even use it to park a plane (is it something as silly as using the old design for the to small island and then just adding a block to save designers during WW2 ?)

one minor comment: you still have malta written on the stern
btw, do I see it correctly and are there 2 different size of elevators?
and please, don't post bagera stuff out here xD

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Howdy Ace,
Damn, I missed that, I will fix the name shortly.
The elevators on the port side of the Malta drawing were those sizes, I copied them to the opposite side and deleted the centreline elevators.
Sorry I was not aware Bagera was a naughty word on SB. (deleted)

JSB: The only thing I can think of with the overhead shapes, is that the gap is somehow an airflow design. Otherwise your guess is as good as mine. Maybe Hood or Bombhead may be able to enlighten us all as to why it was done that way.

I think it was an aerodynamic feature to cut turbulence aft. On Malta its clear the after island is streamlined as is the after part of the main island, almost as if its shaped to funnel the slipstream to starboard.
I assume this was the result of wind tunnel testing, perhaps its was feared a large block island 3-4 decks high would have created problems with landing aircraft and side-drag problems from wind when trying to dock etc.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

what did bagera do?

_________________
MIKE50

being a know it all who couldn't take criticism, first of all. second, he broke forum rules (although I do not remember which ones) and now he hates shipbucket and all people on it he is very good in tracing lineart though but there is I think not a single drawing of his in the same scale as the others. that of course clashed with our strict drawing rules

now I've said that, let's lay that to rest

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

@Krakatoa
Regarding Hawker Sea Fury...
There is a drawing at the end of the link. Just that links named "ARCHIVE" at the master list don't lead to an individual drawing but to the temporary archive, and it's up to You to seek for the relevant drawing in that archive.
On a side note, the "Hawker Sea Fury" in the archive is actually downgraded Fury for Iraqi Air Force, and "Sea" in the name was added so it wouldn't potentially be confused in 1930s Hawker Fury and in case there were naval Sea Furies added (so they would be linked in the same line).