Stealth Trimaran Aircraft Carrier (STAC)

[Triton]

The 40,000 ton Stealth Trimaran Aircraft Carrier (STAC) could operate an air wing of up to 55 aircraft using both ski-jump for STOVL aircraft and 450ft (140m) long diagonal deck for launching CTOL aircraft.

Anyone have additional concept art or better scans of the concept art attached for the STAC?

 

[cluttonfred]

I don't think I've ever seen a carrier flight deck angled so far off the centerline before. Seems a bit much....

 

[dragon72]

Just got around to converting the PDFs on My Avpro CDs to jpeg so here's the pics in the original size.

And that cross wind is going to a b$#$^

 

[Triton]

Cheers dragon72. ;D ;D You wouldn't have anymore images you would be willing to share from the Avpro CDs?

 

[Charles Gray]

I was told that this AVPRO apparently was a company that never actually produced anything other than CD's and brochures (as opposed to the other AVPRO), so i'm rather dubious about the feasiblity of their design.

 

[Triton]

I was told that this AVPRO apparently was a company that never actually produced anything other than CD's and brochures (as opposed to the other AVPRO), so i'm rather dubious about the feasiblity of their design.

They claim that the Stealth Trimaran Aircraft Carrier (STAC) concept came about during the CVF project but they don't attribute the concept to BAE Systems, Vosper Thornycroft, or Thales in the book Warplanes of the Future by Mike Ryan and David M Oliver published by Salamander Books (2003). Further they claim that the US Navy was interested as a post CVX21 aircraft carrier. Has this been corraborated by any other source?

 

[Charles Gray]

I've seen pictures that might be a post CVX carrier that were trimaran, but never that design.

And to be honest, "Interest" often seems to mean "someone somewhere came up with an artist conception of what it might look like." I'm not aware of any sign that the navy ever seriously considered a trimaran design for a post CVX carrier.

 

[Merv_P]

Thanks for the images, dragon72, these are by some way the clearest AVPRO scans I've seen.

Triton mentioned "Warplanes of the Future", and "X-Planes" by the same authors is in my local library; does the CD offer much more in the way of images?

 

[TomS]

I was told that this AVPRO apparently was a company that never actually produced anything other than CD's and brochures (as opposed to the other AVPRO), so i'm rather dubious about the feasiblity of their design.

This was the same company that designed that people carrier pod for Harrier and Apache, right? That at least made it to the mock-up stage.

 

[Triton]

The Avpro company web site courtesy of the Internet Archive Wayback Machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20020124035159/http://www.avpro.co.uk/

According to the company's web site:

Avpro is a conceptual design and research
company committed to design excellence,
and the advancement of aerospace and
defence technology.

The company works closely with the UK
aerospace and defence industry, and has
an excellent working relationship with the
UK Defence Evaluations and Research
Agency (DERA). These links enable Avpro
to offer a custom design service for air, sea
and land platforms to customer's requirements
and specifications.

The company's conceptual design portfolio ranges from the EXINT Pod rescue system, conceived for the recovery of downed aircrew using the Harrier vertical take off and landing aircraft and Apache helicopter, to the radical stealth trimaran aircraft carrier (STAC) designed to outperform all current aircraft carriers in such parameters as speed, stability, safety and survivability.

Avpro is justifiably proud of its association with the UK armed forces and can offer other governments impartial and professional advice in respect of equipment and military capabilities. The company can also provide direct support to military commanders in developing concepts of operation and tactics for existing and planned forces.

In today's uncertain world Avpro is committed to providing highly innovative concepts which keep defence capabilities ahead of any adversary.

So it sounds like a defense think tank coming up with concepts.

 

[GTX]

They were around in the late '90s. They also set up a USA based arm if I remember correctly. They vanished though around 2001. Apart from the EXINT pod I don't believe anything else came close to the hardware stage. They did however have some very interesting concepts - my favourites were the Proteus Modular UCAV/Cruise Missile; the Titan large Stopped rotor transport, and some of their UCAV designs.

One interesting aspect of the STAC was the proposed launch system - instead of a steam catapult, it was proposed to use a cartridge based launch system - see pic:

Regards,

Greg

 

[Triton]

They were around in the late '90s. They also set up a USA based arm if I remember correctly. They vanished though around 2001. Apart from the EXINT pod I don't believe anything else came close to the hardware stage. They did however have some very interesting concepts - my favourites were the Proteus Modular UCAV/Cruise Missile; the Titan large Stopped rotor transport, and some of their UCAV designs.

One interesting aspect of the STAC was the proposed launch system - instead of a steam catapult, it was proposed to use a cartridge based launch system - see pic:

Regards,

Greg

The web site that I found mentions that they were establishing a USA arm. It also mentions that they were doing production design for an undisclosed science fiction movie in Hollywood.

The web site also reports that they have a good relationship with UK's DERA(Defence Evaluation and Research Agency).

I wonder if this consultancy sold anything besides concept art and books to civilian enthusiasts. I guess we could call these concepts science fiction unless someone has invested money to develop some of them.

They don't specify who in the US Navy was interested in the SCAT concept. It looks like yet another light carrier concept.

Looks like the hook is lost during each launch of an aircraft using the cartridge system and I wonder how much below deck storage space would be devoted to storing cartridges.

 

[GTX]

If you look at the STAC drawings you will see that it was far from being "yet another light carrier concept."

Regards,

Greg

 

[dragon72]

Thanks for the images, dragon72, these are by some way the clearest AVPRO scans I've seen.

Triton mentioned "Warplanes of the Future", and "X-Planes" by the same authors is in my local library; does the CD offer much more in the way of images?

There's about 90 images between the 2 CDs. Since the company is defunct I suppose there's no issue with putting them up. I'll try to get around to it tomorrow.

 

[OM]

One interesting aspect of the STAC was the proposed launch system - instead of a steam catapult, it was proposed to use a cartridge based launch system

...Oh, *that's* what that is! Damn thing looks like one of the deck apes got caught in the catapult ;D ;D ;D

 

[Demon Lord Razgriz]

Is there any stats on this carrier? Like the measurements of it.

 

[Jemiba]

Using the planview, which shows several V-22 Ospreys, too, I would
think, length is around 330m, maximum width about 122m ... ???

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

"Deck apes"! I hadn't heard that term in a while.

 

[Triton]

I presume that because the ship doesn't have a funnel it is nuclear powered?

 

[hole in the ground]

possibly the funnels vent into the space between hulls? reducing IR signiture?

 

[Demon Lord Razgriz]

Is there anymore pics of this carrier, perferably high quaility & large. I'm trying to draw it Shipbucket style and those patches on the side of the main hull is really driving me crazy trying to figure out what the heck they are.

Oh, and on that last pic Dragon posted, does anybody have any good pics of those fighters?

 

[Jemiba]

Don't know, if this is, what you're looking for and I not even know, if I didn't post it
before. If so, sorry !
Well, I once was fascinated enough by this Avpro stuff, to put some effort into
drawings of those aircraft. Now I'm not quite convinced anymore, that the artist
didn't make the paintings without any proper pattern at all ! ;D
And for those, annoyed by my persevering doubting in many german projects :
Yes, if there would have been drawings or pictures of flying saucers with french or
british roundels, I surely would have defended them against any sceptics !

 

[sferrin]

Shouldn't that AvPro stuff go in the Fantasy section?

 

[Jemiba]

"Shouldn't that AvPro stuff go in the Fantasy section?"

Well, some of them are quite near to those from the movie "Stealth", I think !
But as was pointed out in another thread, judging this company seems to be
a little bit difficult. At least, they had one or two concepts, that looked quite
real (exint pod and this modular cruise missile).

 

[sferrin]

"Shouldn't that AvPro stuff go in the Fantasy section?"

Well, some of them are quite near to those from the movie "Stealth", I think !
But as was pointed out in another thread, judging this company seems to be
a little bit difficult. At least, they had one or two concepts, that looked quite
real (exint pod and this modular cruise missile).

Right but if it's just some made up design it's still a made up design.

 

[Demon Lord Razgriz]

Oh, thank you Jemiba. Those pics are exactly what I wanted, now all I need is more pics & details on the carrier. ;D

 

[Triton]

Shouldn't that AvPro stuff go in the Fantasy section?

I believe that some allowance should be made for AvPro. They came up with these concepts intending to sell them to create real defense systems. Their website stated that they had a close relationship with the UK's Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). Perhaps they lost credibility because they decided to sell their concept artwok on CD-ROM to enthusiasts and wrote a book published by Salamander Press to popularize their concepts.

 

[RP1]

Right but if it's just some made up design it's still a made up design.

Are they made up designs? Even if they only had a light level of analysis they are certainly as worthy as some of the "napkin+" studies covered in the BSP series, for instance.

RP1

 

[TomS]

Avpro had a distinctly fly by night feel to me. Their "Investor's Club" fundraising scheme from 2000/01 was quite possibly an illegal stock offering, which doesn't make me feel good about the credibility of their technical proposals. They were a step above the Stavattii (sp?) Aerospace folks, in that they apparently did produce some hardware on one project, but otherwise they looked very sketchy.

 

[Lampshade111]

An interesting concept regardless of their credibility. Such a ship looks possible although it's layout would probably be a bit different.

 

[TomS]

I just picked up a copy of Warplanes of the Future (about $7 used). The section on the "Stealth Trimaran Aircraft Carrier" gives a few more details.

The diagonal flight deck is said to be 450 ft (130m) long, which makes the overall length about 920 ft (280m). Displacement was reported as approximately 40,000 tonnes, with a capacity of 55 aircraft.

As speculated, exhaust would vent between the center and sidehulls. Speed was to exceed 40 knots, but no other details of power levels or prime movers was mentioned.

Launch arrangements are confused. In one place, it mentions an electromagnetic catapult on the port sidehull for launching aircraft like Typhoon, Rafale, and F/A-18E. However, measuring off the drawing shows this catapult track to be about 130 feet long, which is only half as much as a C-13-1 steam catapult. It's hard to imagine that an electromagnetic catapult could do the job in half the length, even with the smoother acceleration profile it offers over steam. Elsewhere, it mentions the projectile-based catapult, with drawings suggesting it would work along the angled ski-jump.

The various dark spots along the hull seem to be phased array emitters of various unspecified sorts.

 

[Demon Lord Razgriz]

I just picked up a copy of Warplanes of the Future (about $7 used). The section on the "Stealth Trimaran Aircraft Carrier" gives a few more details.

The diagonal flight deck is said to be 450 ft (130m) long, which makes the overall length about 920 ft (280m). Displacement was reported as approximately 40,000 tonnes, with a capacity of 55 aircraft.

As speculated, exhaust would vent between the center and sidehulls. Speed was to exceed 40 knots, but no other details of power levels or prime movers was mentioned.

Launch arrangements are confused. In one place, it mentions an electromagnetic catapult on the port sidehull for launching aircraft like Typhoon, Rafale, and F/A-18E. However, measuring off the drawing shows this catapult track to be about 130 feet long, which is only half as much as a C-13-1 steam catapult. It's hard to imagine that an electromagnetic catapult could do the job in half the length, even with the smoother acceleration profile it offers over steam. Elsewhere, it mentions the projectile-based catapult, with drawings suggesting it would work along the angled ski-jump.

The various dark spots along the hull seem to be phased array emitters of various unspecified sorts.

Thanks for the info, looks like I have to start over with my drawing, I only have it at 250m.

As for the projectile-based catapult, wouldn't it have been easier to just use an electromagnetic catapult? Cause the one on the Superman ride curves IIRC.

So those dark spots are PESA/AESA radars? Weird place to put them...

 

[TomS]

As for the projectile-based catapult, wouldn't it have been easier to just use an electromagnetic catapult? Cause the one on the Superman ride curves IIRC.

So those dark spots are PESA/AESA radars? Weird place to put them...

Yes, I'm very confused at the mix of electromagnetic and "projectile" catapults. One of the oft-mentioned advantages of electromagnetic cats is that they can be curved to follow a ramp, giving the best of both CTO and STO worlds.

I can somewhat understand putting some radars on the hull sides like that -- it gives them the spacing needed to reduce interference. This is is a perpetual problem in aircraft carrier islands -- too many emitters on similar frequencies trying to share too little space. The same basic concept appeared on the CVX "stealth" carrier (study 3C).

A similar idea even appeared before the advent of phased arrays to provide all-around radar coverage on flush-deck designs like United States -- a radar set with three separate scanning antennas feeding a single integrated display.

 

[Triton]

Model of AvPro Stealth Trimaran Aircraft Carrier (STAC) on display at Model Boat Convention 09 (unofficial).

Source:
http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=44613

 

[royabulgaf]

Is there nothing Avpro cannot do?

Avpro designed Chuck Norris

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Model of AvPro Stealth Trimaran Aircraft Carrier (STAC) on display at Model Boat Convention 09 (unofficial).

Great looking model but impossible to land an aircraft on.

 

[Triton]

Great looking model but impossible to land an aircraft on.

Please elaborate, Abraham.

 

[Jemiba]

Great looking model but impossible to land an aircraft on.

Please elaborate, Abraham.

The answer may be here : http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=6441.0

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Please elaborate, Abraham.

The flight deck is far too angled (around 45 degrees) to enable an aircraft to approach from the rear and land on-board as is the case with normal carriers with <10 degree deck. Because the ship is moving and so is the aircraft by far the easiest way to get on board is to chase it down from the rear. With an axial flight deck or a slightly angled deck a stern chase is relatively easy approach.

With this STAC art project the flight deck is far to angled to allow a stern chase. Rather you would have to precisely predict the point in space where the deck would be and fly a collision course towards it. Even with a rapid last minute turn you would have no margin of error otherwise you would entirely miss the flight deck and if you over shoot fly into the island.

The STAC like most of Avpro’s work is just art school design stuff with no relevance to engineering and military capability.

 

[Triton]

Thank you for the explanation, Abraham.