The caption says 325-ft SWATH ship, but this looks like a larger monohull design.This 325-ft SWATH ship was proposed by the David W Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center in 1980 to operate short takeoff, vertical landing (STOVL) fighters.
Sounds like the description doesn't belong with the art work, so take this artist's concept with a grain of salt. The article states "...the craft would be capable of handling VSTOL aircraft or helicopters, which require no arresting gear. It would be armed with surface-to-air missiles and its aircraft equipped with sub detection and killing gear." "Sea-control ship" Popular Mechanics January 1972 page 73.TomS said:If you look closely, you'll see a jet blast deflector and catapult track on the flight deck. I think this was meant to be a CTOL ship, so F-111B would have been the "new sexy" aircraft at the time.
It doesn't. It just looks that way because there is a deck house along the full length of the starboard side. Since the top of this is higher than the flight deck it looks like it extends forward.JohnR said:What is strange about the illustration to me is that the non flight deck area, protrudes a considerable distance further forward than the marked flight deck. I've never known of a catamaran with one hull longer than the other?
You doubt the accuracy of Popular Mechanics magazine?blackstar said:That's pretty confusing. That's a big ship, operating FB-111 aircraft. You could eyeball it and figure out the length, but it's more of a conventional aircraft carrier than the SCS.
Yes and no, it's big, with a long runway. But it has a smallish hangar forward which could only handle a handful of planes, versus the expansive below-decks hangar of a conventional carrier. Nor elevators, no catapults or possibly just 1, small crew, no big radars, more "airstrip" and less "airbase."It's a kissing cousin to the giant mobile floating airbase concepts which fall in and out of fashion over time, in fact at least a couple of those big concepts used several ships of that sort joined together.blackstar said:That's pretty confusing. That's a big ship, operating FB-111 aircraft. You could eyeball it and figure out the length, but it's more of a conventional aircraft carrier than the SCS.
The Popular Mechanics article was from 1972, so I presumed that the United States Navy had no interest in the General Dynamics-Grumman F-111B around this time. So maybe this artist's impression was painted before May 1968 when Congress decided to defund the F-111B?Sea Skimmer said:Ryan found that thing in actual US archives, its nothing Popular mechanics made up or exaggerated. A couple F-111Bs of the mythical 60,000lb sort would be pretty useful for wide area Bear eradication fitting with the role of a Sea Control Ship.
Sea Skimmer said:Ryan found that thing in actual US archives, its nothing Popular mechanics made up or exaggerated. A couple F-111Bs of the mythical 60,000lb sort would be pretty useful for wide area Bear eradication fitting with the role of a Sea Control Ship.
That plane may be actually the USN's 'mini-TFX' proposal, originally from 1963. It's mentioned on page 29 of the June 1977 edition of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Apparently the proposal was for a close support aircraft nearly as capable as the F-111B was (planned to be) but more compact. It was also intended as an escape route for the Navy from the F-111B program, but McNamara and co. weren't having any of it and killed the formal project, although it may have lived on in studies and the like for quite some time afterwards.blackstar said:I did a rough calculation of the length of that ship in the image. Figuring the F-111B is about 73 feet long, the ship is about seven aircraft-lengths, or about 511 feet. So it's not a supercarrier. Still, I don't know of any SCS proposals to carry such a large aircraft. The SCS was really intended for area control at sea, not power projection ashore. A smaller fighter would make sense. Considering that the A-4 and the F-8 were both on their way out, that wouldn't leave many options ca 1970.
I just haven't found any good, detailed articles on the SCS proposal.
overscan said:Observations - it is small, essentially a scaled down TFX. Single seat. The top mounted intakes are F-111 style, putting them on top of the wing appears to have been done to free up the belly for a significant bombload. Clearly primary mission is attack.circle-5 said:Here's a Grumman concept model with no reference on the base. I'm guessing VAX or more likely VFAX, though it's a single-seater. Any documentation would be appreciated.
These features make me think 1962 VAX (supersonic A-4 replacement) not VFAX. Just my thoughts.
Stargazer2006 said:I have the G-273 and the G-310 both as "TFX projects". I figure your source is reliable enough (!) and so G-273 it must be. Besides, the G-310 is posterior to the F-14 Tomcat (G-303) which indicates it was probably a spin-off of the F-111 but not the original program.
thank you for sharing..ford_tempo said:Related to SCS and VSS here is a proposal studied DTNSRDC.
Source "swath - the vstol aircraft carrier for the post 1990's" Childers, Gloeckler and Stevens, USNEJ February 1977
I think F-111B was long cancelled, and F-14 already flown, by 1972 date of the article.TomS said:If you look closely, you'll see a jet blast deflector and catapult track on the flight deck. I think this was meant to be a CTOL ship, so F-111B might have seemed plausible.
Nice artist impression Triton - thanks!Artist's conception of V/STOL Support Ship (VSS) circa 1976.
Many thanks to Robert for the idea! Note: Robert provided the below images with an intriguing idea. He contends that the F-35/MV-22 are ...www.snafu-solomon.com