Hood said:Here is a drawing I've done of CVA-01
named after the monarch, as traditional for the first capital ship in a monarch's reign.Queen Elizabeth was the offical name
Strictly and logically speaking, I suppose you are right. But:
Hood said:i never understood the reason for the Sea Dart when the escorts are armed with them.
smurf said:Triton askedStrictly and logically speaking, I suppose you are right. But:
1. traditionally the first ship of the line in a monarch's reign was Royal George, or Royal Edward etc, taking no account of the number of kings of that name. But King Edward VII broke with tradition, preferring ... HMS King Edward VII, a title he had chosen himself, in spite of being known for decades as Prince Albert before he became king.
The second HMS King George V was so named at the insistence of King George VI, (with his brother, the uncrowned and abdicated King Edward VIII commemorated by his former title (HMS Prince of Wales) and King George VI himself by his former title (HMS Duke of York)
2. HMS Queen Elizabeth is a (so far) unique name in the Royal Navy, but a very famous one, giving (good?) reason to revive it, and
3. they are Her Majesty's ships, and she approves the names, as did the monarchs before her.
Tradition is a funny thing, sometimes reviving things buried in the past (like this thread!)
Which is why until quite late in the design process CVA-01 also had an Ikara launcher.TomS said:Hood said:i never understood the reason for the Sea Dart when the escorts are armed with them.
Same logic that put Terrier on US carriers of the same era. Dispersed formations for nuclear warfighting (i.e., wide spacing to ensure that a tactical nuclear warhead would only destroy one ship) meant that there was some value in fitting long-range SAMs on high-value targets to engage missiles that leaked past the screen at the maximum possible range. The steadily increasing performance of long-range SAMs, and thus the ability of the escorts to extend their engagement envelopes over the HVU without getting the ships too close together made it less appropriate by the 1980s.
Dispersed formations also caused serious consideration of high-performance hull sonars on carriers in the same era, to deal with subs that slipped past the screen. In the post-war USN, only USS America was so equipped, but the British Invincibles have the same sonar as many of their ASW escorts.
http://frn.beedall.com/cva01.htmNotice the much shorter cats and reduced width Alaskan taxiway compared with the plan above. The bridle catchers at the end of the catapults are prominent.
I don't know about that, but the design continued over about 3 years, and though "the basic layout was unchanged" (D K Brown), there were various problems - radar fit especially - affecting the size of the island.is the "Alaskan Highway" on the artist's
impression really much wider, than on the line drawing ?
Jemiba said:Is it just a case for my ophtalmologist, or is the "Alaskan Highway" on the artist's
impression really much wider, than on the line drawing ?
The wind tunnel model has been restored to show the unusual flight deck layout, which was intended to support concurrent aircraft launching and landing operations. The landing area is angled at just 3.5 degrees off the fore-and-aft axis (much less than on United States Navy carriers) and considerably off-set to port on a massive over-hang. The large island is placed inboard to allow a track way outboard for taxiing aircraft. The aft starboard deck edge elevator (lift in UK parlance) so as not to interrupt landing operations, while another inboard lift forward of the island and slightly to starboard of the center line is located so as to be useable in severe seas. (On smaller carriers, deck edge elevators are often swamped by waves.) The "Pri-Fly" (Flyco to the Royal Navy) is prominently located out over the flight deck for a good view.
However, the unusual flight deck design appears to result in significant loss of area, and may not have proved optimal in service.
TsrJoe said:the final design for CVA.01 did indeed have a 'bulb bow' as shown in drawings held at The National Archives, Kew, ill see if i can dig out my copies and post them up
zen said:They where discussing the merits of a bulbous bow during the 1952 CV effort. So its no surprise to see it on CVA-01.
That is why many short and/or slow merchant ships have bulbs which confer no advantages at any condition of draft or speed.
uk 75 said:The Fighter/Attacker design in 1962 was supposed to take over from the Buccaneer in the 70s.
uk 75 said:Such big ships would have been able to operate the US F111B/TFX.
uk 75 said:Makes me wonder if the US ever planned to fit ASROC on its sonar equipped carriers.
The first significant change to the design occurred in December 1962 with the adoption of an innovative new flight deck design that aimed to increase the aircraft complement without adding to displacement. Up to this point all the detailed design studies had envisaged conventional angled decks, the landing area of the flight deck being offset at anything up to 8 degrees to port of the centre line of the ship; this innovation, invented by the Royal Navy in the early 1950s and fitted to existing carriers, took the flight path of landing aircraft away from any aircraft parked in the forward deck park. However the new design, produced following a Fleet Work Study, recommended reducing the angle of the flight deck to 2 ½ degrees by extending the width of the flight deck aft, thus moving the landing area 50 ft to port and forward. This radical change had the effect of increasing the total flight deck area by 2.8 per cent (some 3,500 square feet) but increased the parking area, clear of landing and launching aircraft, by 32 per cent (10,000 square feet), allowing an extra five aircraft to be parked clear of the landing area, increasing the total complement of OR346 aircraft by two to 32. The new design, by widening the flight deck, also allowed a more flexible movement of aircraft on what was likely to be a crowded flight deck by introducing a two-way traffic stream using an ‘Alaskan Highway’ outboard of the island and the extra deck space created inboard of the island. Moreover, the new design created space for an engine running-up area, regarded as desirable by the air departments from the beginning, from the hangar deck onto the now open quarterdeck.