Shipbucket
http://shipbucket.com/forums/

Light Attack Carrier
http://shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=5347
Page 2 of 3

Author:  Rowdy36 [ June 10th, 2014, 10:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

Looks good with the Hawks :)

Regarding the radars, it would most likely depend on when it was commissioned and what kind of budget the navy has for upgrades. I'm no expert myself but I'd imagine any carrier or large surface combatant built after 1980 or so (especially after 1982) would have Type 1022 rather than Type 965M (the bedstead looking one) and from the late 80's perhaps Type 996 rather than Type 992 (the long white one on the aft mast). This would give a similar setup to the Invincible class. Having said that though, what you have fitted is by no means outside the realm of possibility so no need to change if you don't want to :)

Author:  Bombhead [ June 10th, 2014, 10:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

Superb stuff Monty, a real treat to my old mince pies. 8-)

Author:  BCRenown [ June 10th, 2014, 11:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

Thanks for all your help guys. Drawing this 'modern stuff' has been a real learning experience.

Light Attack Carrier with updated radar:

(Click image for for size)
[ img ]

Author:  Obsydian Shade [ June 19th, 2014, 12:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

I've long considered the Hawk 200 series as the basis for an light carrier based platform, and alternative to the Harrier, but the hobgoblin of the series has always been range, though the Hawk 208 does have a refueling probe. (Of course, you'd need some sort of platform to actually carry the fuel.) Otherwise, you have a very short ranged attack platform, and point defense fighter.

Author:  shippy2013 [ June 19th, 2014, 5:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

A naval version of the hawk 200 series I see no reason why you couldn't come up with some form of conformal tanks to address the range issues. Payload might be more of a concern but it depends on what you intend doing as a hawk can carry upto 5 500lb Dumb and guided bombs/missiles, gun pods, and even aa weapons.

Author:  Thiel [ June 19th, 2014, 7:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

Personally I'm still leaning towards the A-4. From what I've been able to read the A-4, especially the later Super Skyhawk and Fighting Hawk, in the attack role compared to the Hawk.

Author:  Cybermax [ June 19th, 2014, 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

There was a Supersonic Hawk proposal for the South Korean AF. I guess it is not out of the realm of what-ifs for a Naval version.
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... 727.0.html

Author:  Obsydian Shade [ June 20th, 2014, 9:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

A modernized A-4 would be superior to the Hawk in about every regard, by virtue of the A-4 being designed as a carrier based strike aircraft from the start. No matter what capabilities are added to it, the Hawk can never escape its origins as a trainer. I love the aircraft--it's cute and sexy as hell, but it's still just a trainer that's had extra capability shoehorned in.

I once considered a fighter version of the A-4 for an AU, for a country only capable of operating small aircraft off a carrier, (I think it was going to an Essex) but never got that far on developing the idea. While a fighter A-4 would be limited, it could still with the right radar give some air coverage to the fleet. In range, it's certainly superior to the Hawk.

Author:  shippy2013 [ June 20th, 2014, 10:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

Just an idea but what about a navalised F5 or F16. The F16 was considered for carrier ops at one piont not sure as to.the reason it wasnt pursued probably to do with the US wanting the larger more capable F14 and F18. Not to sure about the F5. Both are small, fairly agile and can carry reasonable pay loads.

Author:  acelanceloet [ June 20th, 2014, 10:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Light Attack Carrier

IIRC, in it's original concept, the F-5 was meant as carrier aircraft as well. (and of course, YF-17....... was not that far from an F-5 in size and shape)

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/