[Post Reply] [*]  Page 5 of 7  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page « 13 4 5 6 7 »
Author Message
acelanceloet
Post subject: CVGVPosted: October 1st, 2019, 12:18 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7225
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
The CVGV is an development started by the DGV (for more information, check the project DX thread). The DGV was designed as a part of an integrated combat system with Grumman 698 VTOL's. These aircraft would serve as misseleers, ASW birds and as long range radar systems. The ship itself could thus fire weapons guided by the aircraft and be more capable then a destroyer on the same hull.

This ship had some downsides as well though. The DGV was relatively small for an aircraft carrying ship, and the big midships hangar limited use in emergencies and the flexibility of the airwing.
So, I decided to draw a ship with an larger hull and more flexibility: the CVGV.
[ img ]

The ship normally carries 4 AV-8B, 3 Grumman 698 ASW, 5 Grumman 698 MR and 4 SH-2 helicopters. The Harriers serve as fighters, fulfilling the missions where visual identification is required or the use of 'dumb' bombs, such as taking out small ships or shore targets. The SH-2 helicopters are there for 'short' range ASW and are on board for cooperation with other assets of the fleet (refueling and maintenance on another ships deck is possible, while this is quite a bit harder to do with the Grummans)

The ship has 3* 64 cell VLS, of which about half is loaded with SM-2MR, 64 with Tomahawks and the rest with ASROC or a longer ranged ASROC-type weapon. The ship itself uses an Mk 92 FCS and SPS-49 radar for self defence and short range air defence. In addition, she is armed with 2 EX-83 mountings.
The ship has the same powerplant as a Spruance class and 90% the same combat system as a Perry class. The hull was based on that developed for the sea control ship.

All in all, the ship offers an highly flexible and capable ASW and AAW ability for a cost roughly comparable with an ticonderoga class. If needed, the ship can also be used as an strike platform for the USMC, in which case the Grummans are offloaded and replaced by more Harriers. In this situation, the Harriers (or some Grummans) can be used to guide tomahawks in, while the ship then still serves as an AAW and ASW escort for the amphibious fleet.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: "Harrier Carrier" challenge (Sept 2019)Posted: October 1st, 2019, 1:10 pm
Offline
Posts: 2767
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
A marvelous concept and drawing. You've really outdone yourself; this might be my favorite production out of all of the design challenges.

The frigate-class sonar is a curious decision to me, justifiable on the basis of using a Perry combat system, but IIRC either the loss of ASROC justified the removal of SQQ-23 on that class, or vice versa. ASROC with the SQS-56 is odd (although perhaps she has a towed array). Certainly she could fit SQS-53!

Locating the aft EX-83 on a small deckhouse would seem to improve the field of fire from a rolling ship against sea skimmers, since the fantail is quite broad. It would still be well clear of the flight deck.

It may be my American sensibilities showing, but it's strikingly more handsome than the somewhat comparable Invincible.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Calis
Post subject: Re: "Harrier Carrier" challenge (Sept 2019)Posted: October 1st, 2019, 1:14 pm
Offline
Posts: 177
Joined: March 29th, 2013, 6:10 pm
fastest way to lose your invasion force is by putting all your eggs in one big basket so to speak, as someone who spent 14 yrs in the Marine Corps and 70% of that time on Gator Freighters as we called amphibious ships, this concept is a disaster in the making.

Just the loading and unloading of this monstrosity would take several months on both ends, not to mention that because of its width not very many docks would be able to support it. It took us 5 days to embark the USS Denver and 4 days to disembark it. I read the two PDF's and I came to the conclusion that the group that thought this design up has no idea what the difference between a Amphibious Ready Group and a Maritime Per-positioning Fleet is.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Miklania
Post subject: Re: "Harrier Carrier" challenge (Sept 2019)Posted: October 1st, 2019, 3:02 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 69
Joined: February 11th, 2017, 12:45 am
Location: Baltimore, MD
Calis wrote: *
fastest way to lose your invasion force is by putting all your eggs in one big basket so to speak, as someone who spent 14 yrs in the Marine Corps and 70% of that time on Gator Freighters as we called amphibious ships, this concept is a disaster in the making.

Just the loading and unloading of this monstrosity would take several months on both ends, not to mention that because of its width not very many docks would be able to support it. It took us 5 days to embark the USS Denver and 4 days to disembark it. I read the two PDF's and I came to the conclusion that the group that thought this design up has no idea what the difference between a Amphibious Ready Group and a Maritime Per-positioning Fleet is.
It's not a great idea at all. For me it's like a train wreck, God-awful, but you just can't look away. Fortunately the powers that be never took this idea any more seriously than they had to. Even aside from the concept, there are significant problems with the design. The biggest of course being the author's admission that it is not stable enough, and would require more work. The other issues include the total lack of provision for the uptakes, which are totally my own invention, and the massive overhanging flight deck areas at the bow, which would probably take a beating in rough weather. I changed the shape to be slightly more hurricane bow like, but there's only so much that can be done.

Recent developments in the Corps suggest that they are actually going to be taking the exact opposite approach in the future.

_________________
"Common sense is an uncommon virtue." "Says the guy that wanted to make a Nimitz hull into a battleship." "I never said I was one of the people with common sense."

Real drawings signed (M.Morris)
AU drawings signed (Miklania)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: "Harrier Carrier" challenge (Sept 2019)Posted: October 1st, 2019, 3:16 pm
Offline
Posts: 2767
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Exploring a concept to see why it is good or bad is an important teaching tool. I wouldn't read much more into it than that.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Gollevainen
Post subject: Re: "Harrier Carrier" challenge (Sept 2019)Posted: October 1st, 2019, 3:16 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 4382
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:10 am
Location: Finland
Contact: Website
please remember, no offtopic discussions in the challenge thread. If you like to continue discussion of general shipconcepts or workability of reallife ships, continue it in the offtopic section

_________________
Coming next: L/M Moskva, some research ships, pr.26bis, Pr.1144 remakes and Project 1143 complete redux.



Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
Submit your drawings to the archive here
Novgorod AU wiki


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Ro-Po Max
Post subject: Re: "Harrier Carrier" challenge (Sept 2019)Posted: October 1st, 2019, 3:18 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 655
Joined: May 1st, 2017, 8:35 am
Contact: Website
MMSS A560 (Multi Mission Support Ship)
Tasks:
Training crews aircraft carriers and landing ships.
Training Naval Aviation Pilot (F-35B, SH-160M, NH-90M, SH-53K, SV-22M).
Humanitarian missions.
Hospital.
Headquarters.
Special Operations Management Center.
Flagship.
Ship support.
Support for landing operations.

[ img ]
[ img ]
[ img ]

_________________
[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Rhade
Post subject: Re: "Harrier Carrier" challenge (Sept 2019)Posted: October 1st, 2019, 3:37 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2689
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 12:45 pm
Location: Poland
Top quality.

_________________
[ img ]
Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
wb21
Post subject: Re: "Harrier Carrier" challenge (Sept 2019)Posted: October 1st, 2019, 6:55 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 331
Joined: July 14th, 2014, 6:29 pm
Location: PH
Here we go—this has been a tough (and pretty stressful) one to draw, with all the design dead ends I've encountered that ate up most of time making this for over a month and throwing in some pretty much last-ditch compromises along the way. So, at least during the challenge timeframe, no top views (I only had an outline mainly for evaluating the layout of the ship), a fully shaded underwater hull or later refits, unfortunately.

Based off the Italian light carrier Giuseppe Garibaldi, and taking heavy inspiration from Golly's Novgorod AU carriers.



[ img ]

The Varda-class aircraft carrier is a class of two such vessels built and operated by the Illedaric Navy since 1980, then part of Terragrandia's equivalent of the Warsaw Pact, the Socialist Defense Union (itself being led by Galdioslavia and under the auspices of the Soviet Union). The type, being the intended replacement of the 230-meter, 22,000-ton Komodor Rubes-class aircraft carriers, is the first of its kind in the country built from the outset to operate V/STOL combat aircraft, with a view to the AIK-14 (NATO reporting name "Flicker") fighter/attack jet (based off the Hawker Siddeley HS.1179), jointly developed by Illedar and fellow SDU ally Kelmast (an elven-inspired country).

The Varda-class carriers are tasked with the principal combat roles of fleet air defense, maritime and land attack, and anti-submarine warfare, with a very flexible carrier air group complement; the ships themselves are equipped with substantial ASW electronics and armaments. An AEW variant of the Mil Mi-8 "Hip" is provided (2–4 aboard as standard), as the ship cannot operate fixed-wing aircraft more adept for the role. The vessels' electronics are a mix of Soviet, Galdioslav and Kelmish designs. A third unnamed vessel was planned, but apparently not pursued to free up funds for other naval projects; the plan was brought up in the late 1990s, but never materialized as well.

After the end of communist rule in the spring of 1991 (around the time the "warp hole" between Earth and Terragrandia was disconnected for at least 10 years—I'm still trying to figure out the proper "cross-world" mechanics of the AU), followed by more than a year of transition to a capitalist economy and the reinstatement of the monarchy that had been in exile during the Cold War communist period, Illedar became part of the Collective Security Initiative Force, the principal neutralist defense pact organization in Terragrandia, in 1993. Avaltharka (literally, the "City of Struggle," being the center of Marxist revolutions in the country in the 1940s), was renamed with the city's original name, Dolond. During the decade the class underwent some relatively minor modifications, such as new sensors, deck markings made to CSIF standards, and removal of the torpedo tubes (unsurprisingly deemed superfluous for an aircraft carrier); Illedar still independently produced AIK-14s and select components in quantity, allowing the sustainment of operations of the jump jet in the interim.

At the turn of millenium, the Royal Illedaric Navy laid out its plans in giving the class their much-needed mid-life upgrade, which were finally carried out in 2002–05. Notable features in the extensive refits of Varda and Dolond were: support for—among other new air assets later on—the F.43 Skyblade supersonic V/STOL fighter (based off the BAe P.1214, the intended replacement of the fighter versions of the AIK-14 in RIN service, which were retired in 2006; later versions of the AIK-14's attack variant soldiered on until 2012) made in CSIF member nation Velkonia a continent away; replacement of legacy sensors (with the addition of a phased-array search radar); a modified ski-ramp; and new armaments. In the early 2010s (after successful trials on Dolond) the carriers were given support for a STOL medium-altitude, long-endurance UAV for surveillance and reconnaisance duties, recovered with a catch net on the deck.

The class is currently being gradually replaced by the smaller 180-meter, 12,000-ton Vinond-class light carriers starting in 2010 (with 4 in service as of 2019), as well as the single 230-meter, 20,000-ton aircraft carrier Karsha, which is scheduled to enter service in the early 2020s. Varda was decommissioned on October 2018, while Dolond is expected to serve until 2020, although it could be extended until 2021–22 in the event of delays with the Karsha program.

Vessels:
Varda (first tactical number 211, permanently redesignated R-101 in 1994) – laid down 1975/10, launched 1978/03, commissioned 1980/05, decommissioned 2018/10
Avaltharka (renamed Dolond in 1991; first tactical number 427, permanently redesignated R-102 in 1994) – laid down 1977/08, launched 1980/07, commissioned 1982/09, active 2019

Specifications (as built):

Length: 218 m overall
Beam: 33.5 m overall
Draft: 9.45 m standard
Displacement: ca. 18,000 tons standard
Propulsion: 2-shaft combined steam and gas, 2× 50,000 hp steam turbines and 2× 30,000 hp gas turbines
Top speed: 28 kts
Range:
· 9,000 nmi at 15 kts
Endurance: 30 days
Complement: ca. 1,000 crewmembers, excluding carrier air wing personnel
Armament:
· 1×2 ZiF-122 launcher for 9M33 Osa-M (SA-N-4 Gecko) short-range SAM
· 8× 30 mm/63 AK-630 close-in weapon systems
· 2×2 DTA-533 533 mm torpedo tubes
· 2× RBU-1000 anti-submarine rocket launchers
Key sensors:
· 1× MR-600 ("Top Sail") air search radar
· 1× MR-700 ("Top Steer") air search radar
· 3× MR-212 Vaygach ("Palm Frond") surface search/navigation radar
· 1× 4R33 "Pop Group" fire control radar for 9M33 Osa-M (SA-N-4 Gecko) short-range SAM
· 4× MR-123 Vympel ("Bass Tilt") fire control radar for AK-630 CIWS
· 4× name TBD ECM modules
· 4× name TBD ESM modules
· 8× name TBD ESM modules
· 2× name TBD IFF sets
· 1× name TBD satcom set
· 1× Privod-SV ("Top Knot") aircraft navigation system
· 1× SGA-22 bow-mounted and towed-array sonar suite
· 1× SGA-24A hull-mounted sonar
Aircraft (default configuration as built):
· 12× AIK-14R V/STOL fighter aircraft
· 8× AIK-14A V/STOL strike aircraft
· 8× Ka-25PL ASW helicopters
· 4× Ka-25PS SAR helicopters
· 4× Mi-8KRO AEW helicopters

cheers – wb21

_________________
>"Emotions are prohibited." —YoRHa No. 2, Type B ("2B"), NieR: Automata
>"Wow, if I wasn't a hardened killing machine, that mightta hurt..." —SSgt. John Lugo (1st SFOD-D), Spec Ops: The Line
—~~—
On the pipeline (on hold/slow pace): US Navy WWII DEs | Petlyakov Pe-8, Yermolayev Yer-2


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Charguizard
Post subject: Kaapstad-class APVPosted: October 1st, 2019, 8:01 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 278
Joined: January 28th, 2017, 1:17 am
Location: Santiago Basin
I had been toying with ideas on amphibious assault for a while, and this challenge gave me the oportunity to solidify them. Unfortunately, it took me until 5 days before the challenge was due to determine the exact size and composition of the landing force, which determined how big the ship is, but hey ho, it's about finished now.

Kaapstad-class

The Kaapstadt-class amphibious assault ships are the result of the Batavian Navy’s airborne assault doctrine, originating in the 1950s, in which helicopter carrying ships played a key role. It was envisioned that any future amphibious assaults would be executed by helicopters flying from beyond the horizon, landing the first wave within 90 minutes of the H hour, even in poor weather. Two thirds of the combat force would be delivered this way, irrespective of whether the force was battalion, regiment or division sized, one third remaining as reserve and landed by surface craft.

Initial experiments during peacetime involved converted aircraft carriers, and showed that infantry could be effectively deployed by helicopter in large numbers. This research resulted in the Utrecht-class APV, which were first commissioned in 1960. However, the Marinejagerkorps was more ambitious than this.

The Pantserverkennervoertuig (Rups) family of amphibious vehicles was developed by the Batavian Army to give enhanced mobility to mechanized and expeditionary forces. These light steel built vehicles ranged from 10.2 tonnes for the basic APC version to 11.85 tonnes for the light tank version. The PVV(R ) family was gleefully adopted by the Marinejagerkorps, and their light weight prompted the naval staff to request a heavy lift helicopter, able to lift a payload of 12 tonnes. De Schelde won the tender on account of having the only working prototype and the VL2D-1 Goliat entered service in 1965.

These huge helicopters could only be spotted on the deck and operated two at a time on the Utrecht-class, so its successor was required to be able to operate at least three Goliats at the same time, and hangar height to acomodate them. Other requirements included space and facilities to load ground vehicles, the ability to carry and support a complete Battalion Landing Team (958 personnel), and support equipment to operate Kiekendief fighters, which the Utrechts initially lacked. Theory predicted that two Jager companies could be landed in the first wave, one of them with all of their vehicles. The third company, HQ and support would be brought in gradually after, or landed by surface craft, depending on conditions.

[ img ]

To these exacting requirements the newest class of amphibious ships was designed. The Kaapstad-class was provided with a tall hangar, about half the length of the ship, and with two decks worth of vehicle storage. Eleven landing spots for medium helicopters were provided, of which six were given up when operating three Goliats in unison. Accomodations for over a thousand Marinejager personnel were provided, and the gallery deck where the CIC and the pilot ready rooms were situated, was air conditioned. The ship was provided with light defensive and bombardment armament, consisting of three liquid cooled 113mm m/66 autoguns, two Karambit twin arm launchers, three 49.3mm M/53 autocannon and two 13.2mm machine guns.

First of class Rep. Sch. Kaapstad was commissioned in April 1971, clocking 27.39 knots during trials. In practice, the Marines’ ambitions of having a single LPH carry a self sufficient force proved rather impractical, and the five Kaapstads that were eventually built commonly sailed with an Amphibious Platform Dock and either an Amphibious Landing Dock or two fast Landing Ship Tank as part of a Legionnary Amphibious Group. Helicopter airlift still proved to be the only way to effect an OTH landing within an acceptable timeframe, however, and the Amphibious Dock served as an extra pad for Goliats to sling load vehicles.

Displacement: 37,475 t normal
Length: 230 m (754 ft) o/a
Beam: 32,6 m (107 ft)
Draught: 7,7 m (25 ft) normal
Propulsion: 2 shafts, 4 Admiralty-pattern boilers, 2 Heemaf geared turbines, 95,000 hp = 27 kn, 1 bow thruster
Range: 10,000 nm @ 20 kn
Armament: 3x 113mm, 3x49.3mm, 2x 13.2mm, 2x Karambit
Compliment: 48 officers, 891 sailors, 1020 troops (max),
Boats carried: 3x LCVP, 1 launch, 1 whaler.
Air wing: 9x VL2D Goliat, 15x VL1K Gladiator, 7x VN1W Gnoom, 6x JR9V Kiekendief
Vehicles: 75x PVV(R), 6x Tristan APC, 4x 1-ton trucks, 8x 5-ton lorry, 14x AVRP

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The top view was actually done before the side view, and determined the size and shape of the ship to a great degree, but I have no intentions right now of detailing it further, take it as a diagram showing the deck arrangement more than anything.


Also check out my thread about the Marinejagerkorps in other scales!
http://shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=9700

Totally not doing it to catch more attention to my entry.

_________________
w o r k l i s t :
Hatsuyuki-class Escort Ships . . . <3


Last edited by Charguizard on October 5th, 2019, 3:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 5 of 7  [ 64 posts ]  Return to “Personal Designs” | Go to page « 13 4 5 6 7 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]