Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Naval Air Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: CATOBAR carriers
EssexBoy    3/1/2007 2:23:56 PM
This thread was prompted by FS's "small carrier concept". Can anyone answer the following questions for me: 1 - What's the smallest practicable CATOBAR carrier for using (say) F18F (assuming use of deck edge lifts). What size airgroup could it support. 2 - How large do CATOBAR carriers have to be to perform simultaneous launch and recovery operations? Ta Essex
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
Herald1234    With electromagnetic catapults and a nuclear powerplant.   3/6/2007 12:13:29 AM
About 60, 000 tonnes using an angled deck and two catapults. You can operate about forty-five to fifty-five Super Hornets.

Herald
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       3/6/2007 7:51:15 AM
I fact CDG weight 41000 tons and can use F18F
Former Foch class was around 35 000 tons but was not able to land planes at sea state 6 (launching is not a problem , it is recovery and movements of track).
You have 3 dimensionning charateristics:
1 Stability: ability to use planes in rough seas until 6 sea state
2 Ability to land planes which means a 210 m track 30 meter wide
3 Abiltiy to lauch planes which means 75 catapults electric or steam:
   Now you have two possibilities:
-3a Launching plane and landing simultaneously which mean AT LEAST onecatapult foot print do not cross track.
-3b Launching plane and NOT landing simultaneously but still keep ability to switch easily from landing to catapulting.
For exemple side catapults on carrier allow fast use of landing track.
No to get a signifiant number of planes you would need to park as much on the bridge (and in the hangar).
 
Condition 1 is the most dimensiong for beam.
Sea state 6 mean a beam (sea level)  of 30 meters with a stabilization system like Cdg (Vikrant of Foch class go to state 5 which should be the minimum).
Sea state 5 would mean a beam of 25 meters with a stabilization system like Cdg
Condition 2 mean 210 m long minimum (no angled track - all menth of carrier would be used for landing which mean condition 3 b.
But in a no angle track , you could park only plane on 1 side on deck  so  maybe up to 16/20 plane on right side
So it would be a displacement of 24 000 tons at minimum for State 5 and 30 000 of state 6 (both with stabilization).
It would likely handle 20 planes plus few helos.
 
Now if you want to have a better safety and parking ability on deck you have CDG architecture with angle track So you can park more and use 2 catapult simulaneoulsy (but not simulaneously recovery).
Then you could go to a 240 meter long carrier which translate to 28 000 to 35 000 tons carriers (sea state 5 or sea state 6).
It would likely handle 25/30 planes plus few helos.
Considering cost of catapults, arrested recovery  and stabilisation system (all cost 400 m$ for these 3 items), I would consider that a carrier below 35 000 tons would be uneconomical.
If you want simultaneously landing and catapulting with 2 catapults you need a 300 meters carrier (210 m landing track plus a little less than 100 m for forward left catapult) so more than 60 000 tons.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       3/6/2007 7:52:25 AM
read : NOW, to get a signifiant number of planes you would need to park as much on the bridge (and in the hangar).
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    The CdG is too small to be truly effective for a blue water navy..   3/6/2007 9:45:06 AM
When the Russians designed their first full sized carrier, they went for a 70,000 tonne design.[though they never were able to build it]. They knew what they were doing.

Herald
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       3/6/2007 11:46:40 AM
Herald1234    The CdG is too small to be truly effective for a blue water navy..   3/6/2007 9:45:06 AM
When the Russians designed their first full sized carrier, they went for a 70,000 tonne design.[though they never were able to build it]. They knew what they were doing.

A: the russian were willing to spend money at this time
B: they did not rely on stabilization systems but brut displacement
C: they use STOBAR concept
D: they have BTW no experience of naval aviation
 
CdG works as it is able to handle operation in rough sea 6 as US carrier while 40 000 tons, and sustain up to 100/110 sorties perday.
 
 
Quote    Reply

EssexBoy    Thanks   3/6/2007 1:06:20 PM
Thanks everyone.
 
One thing confuses me though - I'm sure that the 245m long Ark Royal (50,000 Tons) could do simultaneous launch and recovery (phantoms & buccs). Was this due to the type of aircraft used or a weird deck arrangement?
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    Minimum # of Fighters   3/6/2007 1:37:49 PM

About 60, 000 tonnes using an angled deck and two catapults. You can operate about forty-five to fifty-five Super Hornets.

Herald

Herald,
You feel that a lighter carrier that deploys say 12-18 Harriers or F-35s is essentially too little to make a difference? W-out a force of 45+ birds don't bother?
 
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       3/6/2007 1:40:52 PM












Herald1234    The CdG is too small to be truly effective for a blue water navy..   3/6/2007 9:45:06 AM

When the Russians designed their first full sized carrier, they went for a 70,000 tonne design.[though they never were able to build it]. They knew what they were doing.



A: the russian were willing to spend money at this time

B: they did not rely on stabilization systems but brut displacement

C: they use STOBAR concept

D: they have BTW no experience of naval aviation

 

CdG works as it is able to handle operation in rough sea 6 as US carrier while 40 000 tons, and sustain up to 100/110 sorties perday.

 



1. The CdG can only mount an offensive strike package of maybe a dozen aircraft.
 
2. It cannot operate in sea state six at all.
 

World Meteorological Organization sea state code

  • 0 Calm (glassy) 0 m
  • 1 Calm (rippled) 0 - 0.1 m
  • 2 Smooth (wavelets) 0.1 to 0.5 m
  • 3 Slight 0.5 to 1.25 m
  • 4 Moderate 1.25 to 2.5 m
  • 5 Rough 2.5 to 4 m
  • 6 Very rough 4 to 6 m
  • 7 High 6 to 9 m
  • 8 Very high 9 to 14 m
  • 9 Phenomenal Over 14 m
Character of the sea swell
0. None
Low 1. Short or average
2. Long
Moderate 3. Short
4. Average
5. Long
Heavy 6. Short
7. Average
8. Long
9. Confused
Direction from which swell is coming should be recorded.
Confused swell should be recorded as "confused northeast," if coming from the direction of northeast.
________________________________________________________________________________
3. Whether the Russians used STOBAR;
 
http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/5248/rukremlinlinehc4.gif" width=697 border=0> 
 
Kuznetsov[actual]
 
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/9012/ulyanovskline1042d39hb9.png" width=716 border=0>
 
Kreml[as planned]
 
Maximum planned aircraft capacitry was 70 aircraft.
 
 
 
is not as relevant as some might consider.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       3/6/2007 5:05:54 PM
Herald you are wrong:
1. The CdG can only mount an offensive strike package of maybe a dozen aircraft.
Cdg can get strike package of 24 aircraft.It can catapult a plane each 30 seconds so 24 in 12 minutes without a problem
2. It cannot operate in sea state six at all.
Wrong again as it was a requirement of french navy:
The Satrap stabilization system system offers exceptional performance. At 20 knots with the rudder at 30°, heel is just 1°. Reduced platform motion means the flight deck can handle 25-ton aircraft up to sea state 6.
I don't mean I favor small carrier since I think 50/60 000 tons is optimal.
But it depends on budget.
 
One thing confuses me though - I'm sure that the 245m long Ark Royal (50,000 Tons) could do simultaneous launch and recovery (phantoms & buccs). Was this due to the type of aircraft used or a weird deck arrangement?
Ark Royal had initially 2 BS4 catapults then 2 BS5 catapults which were 50 m long catapult instead of those of 75 m long on CDG..With BS5 its length was extended to 257 m.
So front catapults were not crossing the landing track.
However were do you park the planes?Behind the catapults in fact.So if you have 2 front catapults working and landing track free, number of planes was reduced on deck.
It is why French prefer to let right side of bow free of catapult to park planes.The two catapults are on left side.
Indeed sequence to catapult take a minute and you have time to free landing track if necessary while increasing parking area..
 
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       3/6/2007 5:12:50 PM
A mistake
Ark Royal was not able to catapult and recover in the same time as its late arangement was similar to Cdg
Look the two left side catapults.
http://www.maritimequest.com/warship_directory/great_britain/photos/aircraft_carriers/ark_royal_r09/03_ark_royal_r09.jpg" width=744>
 
http://www.maritimequest.com/warship_directory/great_britain/photos/aircraft_carriers/ark_royal_r09/04_ark_royal_r09.jpg" width=744>
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics