Search this Topic:
Jun 22 17 8:46 PM
Jun 22 17 9:27 PM
Jun 22 17 10:42 PM
Jun 22 17 11:02 PM
Jun 23 17 12:22 AM
Jun 23 17 12:31 AM
Jun 23 17 1:06 AM
Jun 23 17 10:39 AM
Jun 23 17 11:41 AM
Jun 23 17 12:47 PM
Jun 23 17 1:05 PM
Jun 23 17 1:12 PM
Jun 23 17 7:41 PM
Phil Gollin wrote:.
IF I remember correctly (80% certain) the reason they occasionally based Walruses on carriers was that they went with the strike (obviously more slowly) and went as far as they could and then came back, again behind the returning aircraft. They didn't get close to the target, but were "on the right track".
The RN tested autogyros on Escort Carriers, MACs and specifically a merchantman with a flying off platform. The report is frustratingly uninformative - but the autogyros were never adopted. I asked Eric Brown about the trials and he said that he had heard that the payload was dreadful and operating restrictions too restrictive.
There were trials with the Sikorsky R-4 on a merchantman's platform which were seen as a partial success (again payload too small, but much more suited to being on board ship).
Jun 23 17 8:22 PM
Jun 23 17 8:50 PM
Boemher wrote:It would be better because it would save time getting them in to the water, all of the planning that went in to saving weight by reducing belt thicknesses over section X and deck thickness over area Y and so forth.
What gains could be made to increase speed ? One radical gain , if the RN are hell bent on 10 guns and reducing weight by 500/1000 tons they could have stuck twin turret in A position instead of B and narrowed the lines forward.
Jun 23 17 8:56 PM
Jun 23 17 11:16 PM
Phil Gollin wrote:.
This would not, in the mid-30s, be something that the RN would consider. Radar was little more than a glint in Watson-Watt's eye. The RN needed "organic" (modern term) aircraft for search and spotting. As an anytime, anywhere, any weather navy they could not accept the exposed aircraft facilities that the USN did.
In my list of KGV changes from the KGV Ships Cover there is a note about the savings if the aircraft facilities were dispensed with (someone can find it) - it would shorten the superstructure and increase A-Arcs. (It would also PRESUMABLY save some topweight from the catapults and hangars.) The weight difference between the 5 x twin 4.5-inch per side versus the 4 x twin 5.25-inch per side was very small (again see my list), but that excludes the "casement armour".
The hull form of the KGVs wouldn't be suitable for a rear hangar. At the very least it would need a transom stern but possibly other arrangements such as a twin rudder arrangements. RN hull forms were very different from USN ones and fined from quite a way forward which might make things difficult. The mods to the Lion form to enable Vanguard to mount two turrets aft were time consuming (not for form, but for fitting in the strengthening - which was done but were specially tested to ensure the strength).
A reminder that USN non-carrier aviation-capable ships (less
seaplane tenders) were actually quite well equipped to protect embarked
Increase your grasp of the subject by reviewing Jane's in
the '30s and look at the USN aviation facilities.....
Larkins, William (1996). “Battleship and Cruiser Aircraft of the United
States Navy 1910-1949” Atglen, PA:
Schiffer Military Aviation History.
Old BBs: No hangars, three seaplanes two catapults. That
atop Turret III housed two of these. The third, normally riding the quarter
deck catapult would, in heavy weather would be placed on a wheeled cart and
moved forward to be placed in the lee of the superstructure.
WNT CAs: Four aircraft, two riding the two catapults, the
other two in enclosed hangars. Two cranes served this arrangement.
WNT CLs: Up to 8 SOCs
in a stern hangar extending from the stern to the barbette for turret 5. For later classes, to turret four. Also
served by two cats beside the hangar hatch, and an aircraft crane.
[note; Once the SOCs disappeared, to be replaced by the OS2U,
hangaring was no longer an option until
the folding-wing SC-1 replaced both and saw out the end of the seaplane
USN catapult aircraft (less the SC-1) were crewed by a pilot
and radioman gunner. The pilot was trained to navigate over water, assisted by
YE-ZB. He was also trained to spot gunfire.
FAA battleship/cruiser aircraft by contrast had mostly
devolved to the Walrus and float Swordfish, mostly the former. Good planes, but hangaring them took large
hangars and catapults. Both, particularly the Walrus, suffered from the ‘canonization
of the observer’ disease common in other FAA machines such as the Barracuda.
Jun 23 17 11:42 PM
Phil Gollin wrote:.
It was at a lecture on CVA-01. He was rather frail, but stayed behind for a long time afterwards answering question after question after question.
He was a junior naval representative during CVA-01 discussions - his views on the navy's lack of political nous was scathing.
Jun 23 17 11:44 PM
Jun 24 17 5:16 AM
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.