Conversion of V/STOL aircraft-carriers for CAT/STOBAR operations ?

helmutkohl said:
I still hope one day that an AEW Osprey gets developed at some point.
the Osprey is already starting to replace the C-2 for cargo
Click to expand...
Wedgetail Osprey!

Yes, I know that the Wedgetail radar is probably way too heavy to stick into an Osprey. What other options are out there for a surveillance radar type fit in, say, 8klbs?

And while we're at it, someone fund the SV-22 MPA Osprey, please!


Arjen said:
Size comparison of E-1 and E-2 here:
Click to expand...
Thank you!


H_K said:
The difference in wingspan is 8ft (2.5m), but since only the right wing matters from a clearance perspective, the Hawkeye’s impact on the foul deck line is only 4ft (1.25m)… really not that significant.

That’s not the real issue preventing simultaneous launch & recovery, which has more to do with positioning the bow catapult in a way that maximizes flight deck parking. And also as aircraft get heavier this requires longer catapults and longer landing areas (75m cats and 200m angle deck on CdG for example), making it almost impossible to keep the 2 from overlapping on a small/medium carrier with a max flight deck length of ~250m.
Click to expand...
So shifting the bow cat half the width of the JBD may leave the Hawkeye and COD/tankers clear of the foul line, then. Depends on what the required clearances are of the line, I guess.



Arjen said:
When was that proposed? Did it reach production? How would that stack up against an E-2C as it entered French service in 2000?
Click to expand...
Looking at how small an antenna it is compared to Tracer and Hawkeye, I'm suspicious of the range.

Edit: entered service in the 1990s according to Wiki.
 
Last edited:
Archibald said:
France thought of buying E-1B Tracer at both ends of the Clemenceau carriers lives: 1963 and 1988. Interestingly enough the book mentions "they would have needed turboprops ". And the 1989-92 magazines says "Just like the Sécurité Civile TurboTrackers."

So - it could have happened.
Click to expand...
If they would have bought the Tracers in 1963 it would have been better.

First order of business would be new engines, to avoid a mixed AvGas/Jet A supply onboard ship. Turbines won't complain too much about AvGas, but pistons won't run on Jet A. Garrett TPE331s or Lycoming T55s are the likely options in the 1960s from the US market, not sure what engines were available in Europe in the 1500hp power range then.

Later on you can install a better radar, maybe even that of the Hawkeye if the radome is big enough.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Wedgetail Osprey!

Yes, I know that the Wedgetail radar is probably way too heavy to stick into an Osprey. What other options are out there for a surveillance radar type fit in, say, 8klbs?
Click to expand...
Per wiki, the Wedgetail radar antenna alone is 3.5 tons, and I'd bet good money that the computers and displays to run the radar weigh more than 1000lbs, and 8x crew at 250lbs each is 2000lbs. But Ospreys can carry 20,000lbs internally not 10klbs, so there's enough weight capacity for a Wedgetail radar in an Osprey, I think.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Garrett TPE331s or Lycoming T55s are the likely options in the 1960s from the US market, not sure what engines were available in Europe in the 1500hp power range then.
Click to expand...
RR Dart or AS Mamba would both work very nicely.

Both were used for DC-3 turboprop conversions and the Dart (RDA.6) was also used for the Grumman/Conway Turbo Albatross which is related to the Tracker and used the same piston engine. As a bonus they were also both navalized (Dart on Breguet Alizé and Mamba on Short Seamew and Fairey Gannet).
 
Turbomeca also had turboprops, derived from the Puma turbines. But Dart indeed would be attractive, for commonality with the Alizé.
 
Arjen said:
When was that proposed? Did it reach production? How would that stack up against an E-2C as it entered French service in 2000?
Click to expand...
www.naval.com.br

Marinha adquire 8 aeronaves C-1A Trader - Poder Naval

DIRETORIA DE AERONÁUTICA DA MARINHA EXTRATO DE CONTRATO Nº 1 Carta de Oferta e Aceite...
www.naval.com.br

www.naval.com.br

Atualização na Aviação Naval - Poder Naval

A Marinha do Brasil deve mesmo adquirir 5 células de aeronaves S-2 Tracker dos EUA....
www.naval.com.br
C-1A-Trader-termo-aditivo-contrato-moderniza%C3%A7%C3%A3o-1-960x636.jpg

Marinha assina termo aditivo ao contrato de modernização dos aviões C-1A Trader - Poder Naval

No dia 07 de novembro de 2014, no Rio de Janeiro, o Diretor de Aeronáutica...
www.naval.com.br
 
Last edited:
The Tracker AEW idea was dropped early on and the Brazilian program continued with only 6 Traders (4 for COD and 2 for refueling).

After numerous delays and spending money for 10 years the program was eventually put out of its misery with nothing to show for… not a single aircraft flew. A complete waste of resources (especially since recovery tanking could have been done by A-4 Skyhawk buddy tankers).
 
H_K said:
The Tracker AEW idea was dropped early on and the Brazilian program continued with only 6 Traders (4 for COD and 2 for refueling).

After numerous delays and spending money for 10 years the program was eventually put out of its misery with nothing to show for… not a single aircraft flew. A complete waste of resources (especially since recovery tanking could have been done by A-4 Skyhawk buddy tankers).
Click to expand...
Yes....
 
So we return to the notion that the S-2 Tracker was not an AEW aircraft.
Which systems were the Brazilian AEW Trackers to be equipped with?
 
H_K said:
@F.L. That angle deck is too big… would not be manageable from a seakeeping / stability perspective.

Back in the day I drew up a Principe de Asturias-sized CATOBAR carrier based on Bazan’s SAC 200/220 designs, but shrunk to 185 meters. It was as small as I dared make it! But that would have been a new build, not a conversion.

BSAC-185
22,000t CTOL carrier with 20 Sea Gripen, 3 Alize AEW & 4-5 helos
BSAC_185.jpg


BSAC_185_&_220.jpg
Click to expand...
I really like the 185 concept, but personally i wouldn't see such a small island on a non-nuclear carrier, an alternative would be to make a twin island design like the QE, with the structure ahead of the forward elevator.
Another thing that puzzles me is with the elevators seem to end up a little too inward, preventing the hangar doors from being closed.
Lastly the hull shape seems to be longer than the flight deck, so maybe it should be reworked a little.
Only some (hopefully) constructive criticism, let me know if you have any questions.
Also what program did you use for your drawings? I'd really like to try my hand at it.
Thank you.
 
unclefester84 said:
what program did you use for your drawings? I'd really like to try my hand at it.
Click to expand...
Paint.net on PC is a great drawing tool - it’s free, easy to use, and allows simple layers. Unfortunately now I use a Mac and have never found a great replacement.

That was a rough drawing and certainly not perfect. I would probably do it slightly differently today, with more knowledge and experience. The island size was based on some SCS/VSS sketch drawings I believe… the simple propulsion arrangement with 2 LM2500 gas turbines allowed the island to be very compact.
 
A game changing technology would be Internal Combustion Catapults - like the C-14 that was canned out of CVN-65 Enterprise 60 years ago.
 
H_K said:
Paint.net on PC is a great drawing tool - it’s free, easy to use, and allows simple layers. Unfortunately now I use a Mac and have never found a great replacement.

That was a rough drawing and certainly not perfect. I would probably do it slightly differently today, with more knowledge and experience. The island size was based on some SCS/VSS sketch drawings I believe… the simple propulsion arrangement with 2 LM2500 gas turbines allowed the island to be very compact.
Click to expand...
I loved the Bazan Small Aircraft Carrier designs and I drew the designs auf BSAC 220 following an artists impression from Bazan which showed the island which look to me an Island of Principe de Asturias. I am scanning the internet since these years for the BSAC220 and 240 but always find the same drawings - one day I would love to find cutaways or deck plans but I am afraid they don't exist ;-)
 
H_K said:
Paint.net on PC is a great drawing tool - it’s free, easy to use, and allows simple layers. Unfortunately now I use a Mac and have never found a great replacement.

That was a rough drawing and certainly not perfect. I would probably do it slightly differently today, with more knowledge and experience. The island size was based on some SCS/VSS sketch drawings I believe… the simple propulsion arrangement with 2 LM2500 gas turbines allowed the island to be very compact.
Click to expand...
You know i'd really like to see a catobar Cavor, something similar to this
 

Attachments

  • cavour catobar.jpg
    cavour catobar.jpg
    23.3 KB · Views: 20
Scott Kenny said:
Hrm. Looks like it'd be possible to fit the E2 radar onto an E1 (or S2) airframe, there's enough space between the wing folds that the radome should clear the wings when folded.
Click to expand...

The electronics of the E-2 are so much larger than the E-1 airframe could hold. Otherwise they wouldn't have made a new airframe.

Scott Kenny said:
What other options are out there for a surveillance radar type fit in, say, 8klbs?
Click to expand...

Erieye, probably. The arrays are just under a ton and the whole system fits in a Saab 340B (payload around 8500lbs) The geometry is not kind, though; if you try to top-mount the array, it has to counter-rotate while the wing stows and you have to run a lolt of stuff though the pivot (wiring, cooling, etc). And there's no clearance to put the array under an Osprey. Best bet is to split the array lengthwise and scab it onto the sides of the sponsons.

Erieye also has the drawback of having no endfire arrays, so it only sees 120-150 degrees either side of the midline (sources vary). There are >30-degree dead zones fore and aft, which is fine if you are flying racetracks behind a reasonably straight border but sucks for war-at-sea scenarios where 360-degree coverage is needed.

Osprey itself has another problem. It's not pressurized, so the crew is on oxygen for any sustained flight over 10k feet. AEW wants more altitude than that; the E-2D mission is typically flown above 25k feet.
 
TomS said:
Osprey itself has another problem. It's not pressurized, so the crew is on oxygen for any sustained flight over 10k feet. AEW wants more altitude than that; the E-2D mission is typically flown above 25k feet.
Click to expand...
Bugger. That throws a large wrench in the plans.

Unless the AW809 can play?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom