Harrier Carriers

It would seem small carriers like this would be ideal platforms for UAV's & drones. They could have the additional equipment for control of various unmanned platforms. (Something like Turkey is doing with one of its amphibious ships)
 
F.L. said:
I was wondering, have there ever been considered operating Harriers or F-35Bs on the San Giorgio class LHD on emergency case ?
As an very light aircraft carrier.
In the style of Iwo Jima LHDs or project of Spruance Harrier carriers.
View attachment 725047
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to have an elevator big enough to get an F35 belowdecks (and maybe not enough vertical clearance in the hangar even if the elevator was 16.5x12m), but you could probably stow 6 on the deck and still have space at the bow and stern to operate helicopters.
 
Scott Kenny said:
That doesn't seem to have an elevator big enough to get an F35 belowdecks (and maybe not enough vertical clearance in the hangar even if the elevator was 16.5x12m), but you could probably stow 6 on the deck and still have space at the bow and stern to operate helicopters.
Click to expand...
As Scott pointed out, even if they look like small carriers the Santi Class is not suited for fixed wing aircraft operations.
Probably they could be used only as emergency spot for Harriers or to transport them (like the Atlantic Conveyor during the Falklands War).

The only Italian LHD designed to be fully operational with both AV-8B+ and F-35B is the upcoming Trieste.
 
archipeppe said:
As Scott pointed out, even if they look like small carriers the Santi Class is not suited for fixed wing aircraft operations.
Probably they could be used only as emergency spot for Harriers or to transport them (like the Atlantic Conveyor during the Falklands War).

The only Italian LHD designed to be fully operational with both AV-8B+ and F-35B is the upcoming Trieste.
Click to expand...
And the Cavour. That is not a LHD, but have a limited capability of transport of landing forces.
 
Scott Kenny said:
That doesn't seem to have an elevator big enough to get an F35 belowdecks (and maybe not enough vertical clearance in the hangar even if the elevator was 16.5x12m), but you could probably stow 6 on the deck and still have space at the bow and stern to operate helicopters.
Click to expand...
Thera are no elevators for Helicopters in Santi Ships. The deck is only for the landing forces, and the helicopters could not be recovered, but stay always on the bridge.
 
mirco1961 said:
Thera are no elevators for Helicopters in Santi Ships. The deck is only for the landing forces, and the helicopters could not be recovered, but stay always on the bridge.
Click to expand...
I assumed that the narrow rectangle with rounded corners amidships on the flight deck and other deck image was some kind of elevator.
 
mirco1961 said:
Yes, is an elevator, but only for terrain vehicles, that will be carried on the bridge.
Click to expand...
Of course.

When appeared for the first time in 1988 everyone in Italy was thinking about such ships as "small carriers" a smart way for Italian Navy to increase the number of harrier carriers after the Garibaldi (considering that Garibaldi was left alone without a sister ship).
The flat deck and the island look misleaded all about such point.

In reality, giving a close look to the project, the Santi Class were intended by since as pure helicopter assault ships.
The Santi Class hull was derived by the civilian Poeta Class shuttles (Boccaccio, Carducci, Pascoli, Leopardi, Petrarca, Manzoni, Deledda and Verga) launched in 1969-78 timeframe.

1712826524870.png
The Santi Class were Poeta modified with flight deck, island, and armament but they essentially remained modified shuttles so unsuitable to be real aircraft carriers, like the Garibaldi and the later Cavour, designed by since to be real aircraft carriers.

1712826741954.png

The Santi Class represented an high value asset for the Italian Navy giving, for the first time, an entire fleet of LHD with rapid deployment force of San Marco batallion and the possibility to operate as helicopter carriers.
Last but not least the look of small carriers like American counterpart helped to solve some thorny situations over the years.
But all the initial limitation given by their civilian ascendence remained in place.

That's why the new Trieste is so important: like the Garibaldi such ship represent the very first one conceived to operate as LHD (with large floodable basin inside) AND to operate as a real aircraft carrier with its complement of F-35B.
 
What is interesting is the Spanish have done the exact same (smart) move with their Juan Carlos. Instead of a miniature carrier, they went big, but amphibious: and multirole.
And say what you want about the F-35B, but that plane brings together into just one airframe
-supersonic flight
-AMRAAM missiles
-stealth
-VSTOL

Quite a powerful package for navies not wanting to go the full CATOBAR 100 000 tons way. Just ask USMC and their plan to provide additional decks to the USN carrier force, through their large amphibious. USMC really showed the way with AV-8B+ .
 
Archibald said:
What is interesting is the Spanish have done the exact same (smart) move with their Juan Carlos. Instead of a miniature carrier, they went big, but amphibious: and multirole.
And say what you want about the F-35B, but that plane brings together into just one airframe
-supersonic flight
-AMRAAM missiles
-stealth
-VSTOL

Quite a powerful package for navies not wanting to go the full CATOBAR 100 000 tons way. Just ask USMC and their plan to provide additional decks to the USN carrier force, through their large amphibious. USMC really showed the way with AV-8B+ .
Click to expand...
You could do pretty well with a 60,000 ton CATOBAR: USS Coral Sea, for example.
 
Archibald said:
Sure, but too expensive and manpower hungry for medium power navies.
Click to expand...
Coral Sea herself, sure. That's old WW2 manning, though.

Something roughly that size with gas turbine IEP and either a donkey boiler or EMALs wouldn't take anywhere near as much crew as something with steam turbines.

Using a submarine nuclear plant as my example, there are no joke at least 9 bodies on watch back aft 24/7, at least 32 nuclear-trained enlisted and usually closer to 40 between the noobs and the old timers, plus all the various junior officers (usually another 8). Turbines need 1 per watch and maybe 8 total in the Engineering Department.

Liz Herself has a crew of 680 plus air wing bodies, so I am pretty sure you could stay under 800 even with EMALS and AAG.

If your Navy cannot find ~2400 sailors for 3 carrier crews (not counting air wing), you have no business trying to have ONE carrier.
 
The Poeta Claass was conceived to connect both Sicily and Sardinia with mainland, all the ships had a back ramp and tiltable nose to imbark/disemark cars and trucks. Such feature appealed Navy officers and designers since was perfect to host all the military vehicles.
The main modifications were the rear basin for the 3 landing ships, and the flight deck with island instead of the shuttle's upper bridges.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom