• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

US LHA(R) designs.

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,389
Reaction score
1,431
I apologize for not knowing exactly which programs these are associated with ( I can't vouch for the filenames though LHA-R seems pretty obvious though the final design doesn't resemble any of these much).
 

Attachments

  • jhl-image42.jpg
    jhl-image42.jpg
    104 KB · Views: 3,395
  • LHA-R.jpg
    LHA-R.jpg
    43 KB · Views: 3,552
  • LHP-concepts.jpg
    LHP-concepts.jpg
    91.9 KB · Views: 3,271

elmayerle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,348
Reaction score
118
Then there was the concept, illustrated in Friedman's US Battleships book, from the 1950s of converting an Iowa class to a heavy amphipious assault ship by replacing the aft turret with the necessary living and support areas, a helicopter deck, and a well deck to support a "hot" amphibious landing.
 

Charles Gray

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Among the designs for the US LHA(R) was a very large, high capability design, which included a center island, permitting helicopter and V/STOL operations to go on at the same time, as well as a well deck and extensive troop and aviation facilities. I believe it was supposed to be 60,000+ tons, and was the most impressive design proposed, although in the end a more incremental design was chosen.
Does anyone know where I could get information and/or images of that design?
Thanks!
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,389
Reaction score
1,431
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,691.0.html
 

Charles Gray

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Yep, that top one looks like it, although the bottem designs are interesting as well. Anyone have any more writteninfo on them, or did they never make it past the "pretty pictures drawn for congress critters" stage?
 

Antonio

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,465
Reaction score
196
I haven't found written info about that beast so I think it never progressed from early concepts. I think it was pretty fitted for the Cold War Age but oversized and extremely expensive for the Early XXI Century days.
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,387
Reaction score
536
Recent US Defense Science Board (July 2007) Report indicates that development of "Sea Base" capable ships for the purpose of providing more vertical maneuver of men and material does not fit into the USN budget. They do however promote the investigation of the concept of taking commercial container ships and putting large flight decks on them. This idea is not cost prohibitive.

Frankly having been involved in the development of part of this concept, while it is a wonderful idea for the cost, all I could think about was the Atlantic Conveyor. Without a lot of "gray hulls" around it, the concept is high risk.
 

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,889
Reaction score
1,192
More info on the Iowa converion idea.

In 1961 Rear Admiral John S McCain, chairman of the Amphibious Warfare Evaluation Board, proposed converting the Iowas into 'Commando Ships' by adding a flight deck aft replacing the aft 16in turret and reducing the 5in guns for landing craft davits. This led to a detailed study in 1962 with a hangar for 20 helicopters and space for 1800 troops. 14 LCM-6 landing craft would be carried on the side decks and the armament would be two triple 16in turrets and two twin 5in mounts. Added foreward was an ASROC launcher (which was the only launcher that could withstand the 16in gun blast) with associated sonar. Total cost of conversion was estimated at $65 million. Such ideas came back in 1972 and 1979 (with V/STOL) aircraft for ampbious roles before the 1980s hybrid schemes aimed at increasing firepower over amphibious support.

For more details see 'The Hybrid Warship: The Amalgamation of Big Guns and Aircraft' by R. D. Layman and Stephen McLaughlin, Conway Press.
 

Remko

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
34
Reaction score
4
I think you would like this design:

This is the line-art drawing (side view and top view) of the big ship in the first picture in the opening post (the "#1" ship with the Osprey's QTR's and other helo's). It's designated as the "Dual Tram Lane" (DTM) variant.



In Norman Polemar's The Naval Institute Guide To The Ships And Aircraft Of The U.S. Fleet - 18th edition (2004) there's a very nice and pretty big CGI drawing of this ship (starboard / front view) and a top view schematic. It's stated as being around 69,000 displacement and is pictured with a very diverse air-wing, consisting of nine F-35B Lightning II; eleven V-22 Ospreys; three CH-53 Super Stallions; two H-60 Seahawks; four AH-1 Super Cobra's and three UH-1 Huey's.

The specs of the ship (based on the line-art) are as follows:

Length:
-Over all 282 meters (925 ft);
-Flightdeck: 274.8 meters (901.6 ft);
-Waterline: 265.2 meters (870 ft)
Beam: 66.6 meters (218.5 ft) flightdeck / 72 meters (236.2 ft) over aircraft elevators.
Draught: appr. 9.6 meters (31.5 ft)

JSF Runway length: appr. 140 meters (459.3 ft)
Dockingwell length: 92.4 meters (303 ft)
Hangar length: 92.4 meters (303 ft)
Hangar height: 7.2 meters (23.6 ft)
Hangar width: 36 meters (118 ft)
Elevator size: 14.4 meters x 15.6 meters (47.3 ft x 51.2 ft)

Nice big beautiful ship. Although unlikely to be a serious contender for the LHA(R) program. Which begins with deleting the docking well.

According to the crude line-art as well as the CGI, the ship would be modestly armed, with only two 21-cell RAM launchers Mk. 49 (one on the forward island, and one on a sponsoon just below the rear end of the flightdeck.

Personally, I always liked the 5 inch guns on the Tarawa's, and the design of the DTM's forward flightdeck might be modified to include similar guns. Lengthening the Islands, and merging them into one big Island would also provide space for VLS.
 

Remko

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
34
Reaction score
4
Just call me Ray said:
Remko said:
consisting of nine F-35B Lightning II

You mean Boeing F-32s, judging by the silhouettes.

Hehe, I love presumption on the part of concept artists :)

Nope, F-35B Lightning II's. The line-art showes the Boeing X/F-32's, but the CGI in Norman Polemar's book is an updated and far more detailed design with the F-35B.

I just did a flightdeck drawing in scale 1/720th last night, and came to realize that the hull is very wide. Taken that it's of similar layout as the Wasp and Tarawa class (the oblique view of the CGI supports this), and the outer hull ends where the elevators start, this would give an app. usable beam of 36 meters (118 ft). Wide enough to allow for a very large welldeck. Assuming things will go according to plan, and the hugely expensive (and aging) LCAC's will be replaced by Textron's design for a LCU Planing Landing Craft (if anybody could explain how to upload a PDF file, I'll post it here, as it's no longer featured on Textrons website), this would improve capability as well. According to the brochure, the LCU (planing) basic characteristics are as follows:

Overall length: 40.72 meters (133.6 ft)
Overall beam (including fenders): 13.11 meters (43.0 ft)
Overall height (mast and radar stowed): 6.30 meters (20.7 ft)
Full load displacement (basic assault + 3 M1A2 tanks): 490 metric tonnes (483 long tons)

Here's a crude drawing from the original Patent:



Given this baby is far more easier to handle and manoeuvre than a Hovercraft (it uses a bowthruster for example) it's not unthinkable to have two LCU's side by side in the docking well. Giving the ship capability to hold four of these, instead of 'only' three LCAC's (which are far less capable).

The huge flightdeck offers several more advantages. Let's see what it could accommodate...

Bell-Boeing "V-44" Quad Tilt Rotor:



An old design for a "Heli-Cruiser", more or less a pimped Chinook... But way cool!!



Sikorsky's design for the JHL (love this baby!)



And even the Karem OSTR...







It can even be folded for Carrier use. This gives huge advantages for Marine over the horizon assault.



Off course STOL aircraft would be wise as well. And since the Tarawa's operated OV-10 Bronco's, similar aircraft could be deployed on this ship. This design is still one of my favourites (even though I actually prefer the Russian variant) and is called a "helicopter killer".





Now, let's stray from the pad of actual designs, and let's consider something more radical...

This is Kemp Remillard's design for the Northrop Grumman MV-35 a supersonic STOVL / VTOL transport. I haven't worked out the specs yet, but I assume the wingspan can't be greater than the turning rotors of the V-22 Osprey (i.e. 25.8 meters or 84.7 ft) to fit on a Wasp class carrier.



Landing vertically on a LHD or LHA...



While were atsrayed from the path, why not give it some more thought. Instead of LCAC or LCU, the ship could also house Manta or Marauder WIG designs (images from "Warplanes of the Future"):







So, what do you guys think of it. ;)
 

Just call me Ray

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
676
Reaction score
10
Remko said:
Nope, F-35B Lightning II's. The line-art showes the Boeing X/F-32's, but the CGI in Norman Polemar's book is an updated and far more detailed design with the F-35B.

I know, I was just obviously poking fun at the artist :p
 

Remko

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
34
Reaction score
4
Rosdivan said:

Yep it was! Lucikly I had it saved to my harddrive when it firs appeared. Really cool design.

I did some measurements BTW... The helo tram line of the DTM concept is large enough to accommodate the QTR, but the Keram OSTR is too large. To correct this the ship could be made larger, the islands smaller (narrower), or replaced to the right rear (as is the case with normal carriers / assault ships). Third option would be to have the Keram aircraft only using the rear flightdeck. But without a rolling take-off, this would severely limit the payload capability.

In my opinion, the center islands are a very distinctive feature of the design, and should be kept. Making them smaller is also not an option, because that would limit the room for sensors and weapons systems. So, the ship needs to get larger. I like that. An Amphibious Assault ship the size of a Nimitz class. Interesting! I'll see if I can work on a design for it tonight or tomorrow.
 

fightingirish

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,379
Reaction score
687
This is Kemp Remillard's design for the Northrop Grumman MV-35 a supersonic STOVL / VTOL transport. I haven't worked out the specs yet, but I assume the wingspan can't be greater than the turning rotors of the V-22 Osprey (i.e. 25.8 meters or 84.7 ft) to fit on a Wasp class carrier.
I like that fan-art concept. Do you have the source like a book or a website?
Thanks in advance!
 

Remko

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
34
Reaction score
4
fightingirish said:
This is Kemp Remillard's design for the Northrop Grumman MV-35 a supersonic STOVL / VTOL transport. I haven't worked out the specs yet, but I assume the wingspan can't be greater than the turning rotors of the V-22 Osprey (i.e. 25.8 meters or 84.7 ft) to fit on a Wasp class carrier.
I like that fan-art concept. Do you have the source like a book or a website?
Thanks in advance!

Here ya go: http://www.kempart.com/

He also has another design, same goal (VTOL/STOVL supersonic tactical/special ops airlift) but more like a Raptor, with a huge delta wing.

EDIT: Here's the scan of the Dual Tram Line/Lane design from Norman Polmar's Naval Institute Guide to the Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet (18th Edition)

 

Lauge

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
435
Reaction score
7
Remko said:
This is Kemp Remillard's design for the Northrop Grumman MV-35 a supersonic STOVL / VTOL transport. I haven't worked out the specs yet, but I assume the wingspan can't be greater than the turning rotors of the V-22 Osprey (i.e. 25.8 meters or 84.7 ft) to fit on a Wasp class carrier.



So, what do you guys think of it. ;)

Can I have one, daddy ? Please ? (Note to Santa: Start tooling up the elfs! This one will be on my 2009 list).

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Denmark

PS: Anyone know if mr. Remillard has more designs like this and, if yes, where to find them ?
 

Remko

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
34
Reaction score
4
Lauge said:
PS: Anyone know if mr. Remillard has more designs like this and, if yes, where to find them ?

Here ya go: http://www.kempart.com/
 

Remko

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
34
Reaction score
4
One of the most interesting developments in Amphibious Warfare is te Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future) @ GlobalSecurity.org. The design which looks especially promising is the following:



Yup, two welldecks!!



The specs of the ship are as follows:

Length between perpendiculars (LBP): 289.6 meters (950 ft)
Length overall: 304.8 meters (1,000 ft)
Beam: 42.67 meters (140 ft) @ waterline / 67.06 meters (220 ft) @ flightdeck
Depth: 32.31 meters (106 ft)
Displacement: 48,920 metric tonnes (48,152 long tons) light load / 87,670 metric tonnes (86,291 long tons) full load
Maximum draft: 10.67 meters (35 ft)
Maximum speed: 27.5 kts
Sustained speed: 25 kts
Endurance: 20,000 nautical miles @ 20 kts
Lead ship acquisition: $ 816 million

If anyone's interested, I have a nice PDF file (1.35 mb) specifically about this design, including full (basic) deckplans. Which is too large to add to this post. So just send me a PM and I'll e-mail it.
 

funkychinaman

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Does the MV-35 remind anyone of the Pelican from Halo, or is it just me? They would server the same purpose.
 

Lauge

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
435
Reaction score
7
funkychinaman said:
Does the MV-35 remind anyone of the Pelican from Halo....
Yes (my thoughts exactly!)

funkychinaman said:
.....or is it just me?
No. It's not just you ;)

funkychinaman said:
They would server the same purpose.
Except, of course, that the MV-35 won't hit orbit :-\

Also: Am I the only one to look at the images of the MV-35 and see the ducts for the lift fans going vertically down straight through the main engine inlet ducting ???

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Denmark
 

Demon Lord Razgriz

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
189
Reaction score
2
Lauge said:
Also: Am I the only one to look at the images of the MV-35 and see the ducts for the lift fans going vertically down straight through the main engine inlet ducting ???

Looking at it closely, I'd say it would look like it does go through the main ducts, but due to it being a stealth aircraft, the main ducts would use the S-intakes(I believe that's what they're called) that is used on the F-22. So the ducts for the lift fans would fit perfectly there.
 

Lauge

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
435
Reaction score
7
Demon Lord Razgriz said:
Lauge said:
Also: Am I the only one to look at the images of the MV-35 and see the ducts for the lift fans going vertically down straight through the main engine inlet ducting ???

Looking at it closely, I'd say it would look like it does go through the main ducts, but due to it being a stealth aircraft, the main ducts would use the S-intakes(I believe that's what they're called) that is used on the F-22. So the ducts for the lift fans would fit perfectly there.

Well, yes, that did cross my mind initially, but I kind of decided that the "S"-shape of the inlet duct would have to be too "sharp", leading to (unacceptably) high pressure losses. However:
1) This might be considered acceptable in a stealth-optimized aircraft, and
2) Why the he** are we trying to make sense of a cartoon aircraft anyway ??? What's next ? Looking for the heat radiators or fuel tanks on the Millennium Falcon ??! ::) ;D

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Denmark
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,045
Reaction score
871
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,170.msg26501.html#msg26501
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,045
Reaction score
871
Triton, I hardly advise you to use such useful thing as Google. No offense, but you really asking for info that available on a click of a mouse (not talking of using forum search engine).
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1987/1987%20-%202646.html?search=saba
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1987/1987%20-%202587.html?search=saba
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
501
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
flateric said:
Triton, I hardly advise you to use such useful thing as Google. No offense, but you really asking for info that available on a click of a mouse (not talking of using forum search engine).
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1987/1987%20-%202646.html?search=saba
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1987/1987%20-%202587.html?search=saba

Thanks for pointing me to the Flight International Archive. It seems like an excellent research tool and I've added it to my Favorites. "British Aerospace Saba" queries pointed me to this forum and queries for "Saba" pointed me to the island in the Netherlands Antilles. I appreciate your response to this question and others.

Contrary to your presumption, I do use this forum's search engine.

Just keep in mind that I am a neophyte and try not to get pissed off when I ask a question that you can answer with your copies of Aviation Week or Jane's or US Naval Institute Publications for the past forty years in your home libraries.
 

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
162
Triton said:
Contrary to your presumption, I do use this forum's search engine.

He referred you to Google not the Secret projects search engine. Perhaps this link will make it very clear to you:

What aircraft is this? The file name is saba so I presume it is a Small Agile Battlefield Aircraft?

You answer is at:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+the+Small+Agile+Battlefield+Aircraft
 

Firefly 2

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
461
Reaction score
8
Abraham Gubler said:
Triton said:
Contrary to your presumption, I do use this forum's search engine.

He referred you to Google not the Secret projects search engine. Perhaps this link will make it very clear to you:

What aircraft is this? The file name is saba so I presume it is a Small Agile Battlefield Aircraft?

You answer is at:

http://tinyurl.com/ccut9g

Uhm, Abraham, I'm afraid the link is not working FYI.
 

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
162
Firefly said:
Uhm, Abraham, I'm afraid the link is not working FYI.

Fixed the link;

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+the+Small+Agile+Battlefield+Aircraft
 

Remko

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
34
Reaction score
4
I think I shouldn't have put so many aircraft designs in this topic after all... Oh well. ;)

Anyway, while searching for more information I came across this file: http://proceedings.ndia.org/5860/5860_Warner.pdf
Check page 32... It also features interesting information about the new Mobile Landing Platform. Just a converted Ultra-Heavy Load ship used to off load supply ships and load LCAC/LCU faster than by welldeck.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
501
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Remko said:
I think I shouldn't have put so many aircraft designs in this topic after all... Oh well. ;)

Well, in my ignorance I presumed that the concept aircraft designs had some association to the amphibious warfare ship concepts. Which prompted my questions. Further research revealed that there was no association or I discovered that some of the concept art work was ficticious.
 

kremz

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Hi guys, It's great to see a discussion about the s-intakes on my MV-35 cartoon ship. And glad to see it show up on Secret Projects!

Here's a thread with more info on the two birds if you're interested.
http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=85328

cheers, -Kemp
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
501
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Straighter scans of the LHA[R] concept from Naval Institute Guide to the Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet, 18th Edition by Norman Polmar.
 

Attachments

  • LHA(R).JPG
    LHA(R).JPG
    33.9 KB · Views: 1,086
  • LHA[R]2.JPG
    LHA[R]2.JPG
    28 KB · Views: 1,039

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
501
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Can someone point me in the direction of additional information about this amphibious warfare ship concept?
 

Attachments

  • QTR-NAVY-2.jpg
    QTR-NAVY-2.jpg
    77 KB · Views: 1,647

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,290
Reaction score
1,246
At a guess, the SSG here might refer to the Navy's Strategic Studies Group.
 

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
162
USN/USMC spent some time thinking about the 'dual tram' LHD concept and I guess this is a reduced RCS version of the concept.
 

JAZZ

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Mar 12, 2006
Messages
295
Reaction score
75
I think this may be a scify game thing...having the bridge that far forward would be to uncomfortable in heavy weather - you just would not go their when you have to operate in times of conflict you may not always have the luxury of having good weather and you will need to perform at 100% so why build in a handicap.


VSTOL only - any conventional landing scenario due to battle damage and things could get a little problematic if touch-down is much before any super structure.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,777
Reaction score
1,913
A couple of images of a scratchbuilt model of the 1979 Heavy Assault Ship proposal. Originally found here.
 

Attachments

  • tinian-01.jpg
    tinian-01.jpg
    67.1 KB · Views: 1,329
  • tinian-02.jpg
    tinian-02.jpg
    77.5 KB · Views: 1,301

Similar threads

Top