Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 2 of 18  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page « 1 2 3 4 518 »
Author Message
Blackbuck
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 15th, 2013, 9:09 am
Offline
Posts: 2743
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 9:15 am
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom
3-5 years if there aren't any cockups which our procurements are renowned for plus a year to 18 months sea trials? 1989 or early 1990 for a ballpark commissioning date seams reasonable to me.

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
shippy2013
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 15th, 2013, 10:38 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 658
Joined: March 26th, 2013, 7:44 pm
Location: Nottingham. United Kingdom
Lets say Centaur 1990, Albion and Bulwark 1992 and Hermes 1994. Centaur and Hermes at Rosyth, Albion at Swan Hunter on the Tyne and Bulwark in Belfast.... based on little project delays. So Hermes (original) would be sold in 1985. Invincible and Illustrious the RN interim carriers would be sold in 1991. With Ark Royal scrapped or sold in 1984.....


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Shipright
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 15th, 2013, 4:47 pm
Offline
Posts: 397
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 2:16 pm
shippy2013 wrote:
Typical Airwings of the 2010's onwards

...

Commamndo Carrier

10 Merlin ( Mix of HM2 and HC.3)
4 Chinook HC.3
6 Apache AH 64D
6 F35B
2 V-22 Osprey (HC.1 and KC.1? Tanker)
2 Lynx HMA.8.
That is a pretty big footprint, the Chinooks and Ospreys occupy a lot of hanger space even when collapsed and I believe the British calculate carrying capacity using hanger space only for design purpose correct?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
shippy2013
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 15th, 2013, 7:57 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 658
Joined: March 26th, 2013, 7:44 pm
Location: Nottingham. United Kingdom
I was just trying to show what could be deployed not all could be carried at the same time....


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 15th, 2013, 10:43 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Typical Western submarine reactors of the period are credited in the open literature with 20-30kshp each. You are unlikely to find the performance of a 40-60kshp light carrier to be terribly exciting.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
shippy2013
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 16th, 2013, 4:45 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 658
Joined: March 26th, 2013, 7:44 pm
Location: Nottingham. United Kingdom
The original Centaur only had 78Kshp (with 4 oil fired steam boilers). The Rolls Royce PWR1 with Core 3 as fitted to the Swiftsure and Trafalgar class had an out put of 22Kshp (reduceed to 15Kshp under normal operation), the reactors arn't large by most standards so i suppose we could up that the 4 giving 88Kshp.

Add to this, I think that an advanced Centaur design built in the mid to late 80's would be several hundred if not a few thousands tonns lighter. The original Centaur was of WW2 design, armoured flight decks etc, by the 1980's advances in material science ship design and the fact most threats to a carrier task group would now be sea skimming anti ship missiles, air launched cruise missiles and submarines, with advances in CIWS, SAMS, ASW helicopters and escorts, I think we could do away with a lot of the armour. Not all but a lot, i think the threat of bombs landing on deck would be small if not a thing of the past... The main problem in the Faulkland war was the RN poor or lack of CIWS.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Shipright
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 16th, 2013, 4:05 pm
Offline
Posts: 397
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 2:16 pm
I think your assumption of a lighter carrier is not justified. When outfitting older hulls with modern gear you might lose some weight removing obsolete equipment but for the most part what you replace it with will be heavier and you will have to add gear that was not even factored in during the ships original design like electronics and weapons.

I honestly can't think of a single hull that has lost weight through refit over the years unless it had a complete mission change that equaled less capabilites. Two examples:

USS Arleigh Burke = 9000 tons
USS Michael Murphy = 9200 tons

And more relevantly a carrier:

USS Nimitz = 110,250 short tons
USS George HW Bush = 114,000 short tons

This class has had its final weight vary hull to hull but all are heavier than the first.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
shippy2013
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 16th, 2013, 4:09 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 658
Joined: March 26th, 2013, 7:44 pm
Location: Nottingham. United Kingdom
This is not a refit. It is new build but the design is an evolution of the centaur. I am working on a heavily modified drawing but I used bombhead's Herme's drawing as my basis for size and to get some basics of a carrier.
At no point have I said this is a refit of HMS Hermes. My plan is that the RN saw that the Invincible class could not offer a good enough capability so the RN went back to the drawing board.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 16th, 2013, 4:31 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7510
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
uhm..... making a carrier lighter will result in an different ship. why? because your hull is designed with an specified depth and volume. the volume of an hull is the weight of the ship/the density of the fluid. so, if you make the ship lighter, your hull will displace less water and so will be higher in the water. if you do not change your hull for that, the weight will be too high in the ship and the ship will topple over because of the lack of stability.
so, if you design a ship on top of an existing hull design, it will be the same weight.

also, the resistance of an ship is mostly build on wet surface and wave resistance. weight has very little to do with it. weight only really comes in when you calculate things like acceleration.

and @ your last post: I believe Shipright did not say anything about a refit.

_________________
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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
shippy2013
Post subject: Re: Altrenate Carrier for the 80's RNPosted: July 16th, 2013, 7:36 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 658
Joined: March 26th, 2013, 7:44 pm
Location: Nottingham. United Kingdom
heres my work so far the carrier is now Nuclear here her background has been refined.

During the Faulkands war it became apparent to the admiralty how important fixed wing carriers were, the new invincible class carriers entering service were fine for North Atlantic ASW duty's but proved lacking when it came to bigger operations, the older larger Centaur class carrier Hermes however proved more viable, holding greater numbers of aircraft.
The admiralty following the Faulklands war drew up plans to resolve the matter HMS Hermes was now 30+ years old and her design was from the WW2. working on the design of the Modified Centaur Hermes a new ship was designed the Centaur II, Nuclear powered and although a STOVL carrier was designed to be coverted at relativly low cost to CATOBAR, hence she was designed with an Angled deck (albeit with a peice missing to allow for her landing craft as she was to be not only a strike carrier but a Commando carrier and and ASW carrier) and provision under her ski jump for 2 CATS.
Lessons from the Faulklands would also see a new level of protection with Phalanx CIWS, Sea wolf and 20mm guns, together with escorts she would be well protected, the armour design of the WW2 error Centaur was reduced to save weight which allowed other systems to be fitted without disturbing the designs good sea keeping.
She would be capable of operating upto 28 Harriers and upto 10 Seaking Helecopters. with a length of 236m, draught of 8.5m, Beam of 45.1m and a maximum displacement of 28,000tonns and a top speed of 28knots. her compliment would be 1,700 with berthing for upto 850 troops. Powered bt 4 Rolls Royce PWR1 Reactors delivering 88Kshp through 4 GEC Steam Turbines two per shaft and 4 WH Allen Turbo Generators of 3.2MW each.
Designed in 1983 the first steel was cut in 1985 and HMS Centaur was lanched in 1990 entering commision in 1991, followed a year latter by Albion and Bulwark in 1992 with Hermes the fourth and final in 1994. this allowed the RN to sell the Original HMS Hermes in 1985 when HMS Illustrious the second Invincilbe class carrier was commisioned as an interim Carrier along side HMS Invicible both would be sold to Austrailia when Albion and Bulwark were Launched, HMS Ark Royal the third Invincible was sold to Canada in 1984 partially complete.
Heres Hermes the fourth ship in 2012....
[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 2 of 18  [ 173 posts ]  Return to “Personal Designs” | Go to page « 1 2 3 4 518 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]