Search results for query: Implacable

...kamikaze) are so damaged they cannot be rebuilt post WWII. This leaves Victorious as an orphan, so emphasis shift to the mostly intact Implacables that came late in WWII.] The Implacables were the most capable carriers outside the Audacious. So go all out and rebuilt them (with all the OTL...

You're right. An "Implacable" search in the thread brings this. https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/search/1917503/?q=implacable&t=post&c[thread]=50960&o=relevance Page 3 https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/alternate-post-war-royal-navy-carrier-rebuilds.50960/page-3 Narrowing the debate and...

Illustrious / Implacables had two big flaws - some were crippled / worn-out in WWII - even the ones in good shape had terrible hangars too low a ceiling... and raising the hangar led to that Victorious monstrosity. Basically the Illustrious / Implacables were red herrings and money pits. Better...

The F-4 is ~16ft high, so you have to change the hangar height (or add a phin-phold to the Phantom). Lifts too. Internal volume of the Implacables - somewhat better than Hermes, but a good deal lower than Audacious? The need for workshops etc made Ark Royal's hangar shrink, probably worse on...

What a fantastic post. Brilliant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implacable-class_aircraft_carrier It makes one very important point: the Implacables in raw potential were much closer from Audacious - than their Illustrious ancestors. Definitively just capable enough, with the right rebuilt they...

Ironically the FJ4 Fury, F11F Tiger and F4D Skyray would have all fit in the Implacables hangars. This means if the RN or an alternative operator had gone for available US aircraft and far less complex upgrade could have sufficed. On the Maltas, something i noticed several years ago, a 1/600...

So from all this... Best scenario 1 - 3 Audacious plus rebuild Implacable and Indefatigable. Screw their 4 sisterships including Victorious. 4 Centaurs a) foreign navies b) commando carriers No Hermes rebuild either. Best scenario 2 - 2 Audacious plus rebuild Implacable and...

Something I noticed a while ago is that both the F11F Tiger and the FJ-4 Fury have a low enough folded height to fit in the standard Implacable Class 14' high hanger. Both types could potentially have operated from a minimally modernised Implacable class, i.e. interim angled decks and steam cats.

I haven't the foggiest. Or have I? Hermes was sort of Centaur with a deck edge lift and hopefully a rebuilt Implacable is the rebuilt Victorious with a deck edge lift. Therefore, divide the air group of Hermes by the air group of Centaur. Then multiply the answer by the air group of...

Modifications were made to the Avengers supplied to Britain so that they were able to fit into the 14ft high hangars of the Implacables and upper hangar of Indomitable. I believe the radio mast was made to fold. See below on Implacable in 1945. Note the position of the prop.

I would say they would either convert it to a commando carrier or try to sell it another nation like Australia or India. How many Commando Carriers does the RN need? Also if you upgraded the Implacables will be able to operate F4s?

I'm not sure that the F-4Ks would be able to operate off an Implacable... Small landing area, short catapults.

They were originally intended to operate from Hermes and Victorious, but this didn't happen; whether viable or not, it would have been more likely from modernised Implacables than the smaller ships. These ships were of a size and similar in performance to the Essex.

...were mostly correct about that). Illustrious and Indomitable were already dropped early in the program; the problem with upgrading just Implacable and Indefatigable is that they would've required the most work at the time. This was, in fact, what motivated the Brits to not modernize the two...

The mastery of war is to 'change the mind' of the other. Turning them from implacable opponent to accommodating ally.

...the hangar deck of an Illustrious class. It was the upper deck on which Indomitable's lower hangar was constructed, just as it was in the Implacables. So, just like the Implacables the lower hangar ran into machinery compartments at the forward end meaning it could only be half length...

So i watched Dr Alex Clarke video on the implacable class where he states that they would have been a much better option to rebuild than HMS Victorious. If i remember correctly he stated that Victorious was meant proof of concept before rebuilding the other war time carriers, of course we know...

Didn't someone uncover that DNC re-estimated that Implacable and Indomitable had over deep beams for the Flighdeck by 6 inches?

It is perhaps worth noting that Implacable was 20 feet longer than Victorious at the waterline and overall. So, it is perhaps worth noting that there was about 10ft of extra length between the forward lift on an Implacable and the bow plus about 10ft of extra length between the aft lift and the...

...was moved forwards by ~25ft, along with the lifts. The fore end of the lift on Illustrious is around 115ft from the forward deck edge, on Implacable its 100ft. Likewise the deck between the aft end and the aft lift is 70ft on Illustrious and 100ft on Implacable. This is low-rezs but you get...