The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:21 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 8:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 12:12 pm
Posts: 392
thanks,
Love the design very simple and compact. I have one question on the platform below the three domes their is an object that is square in shape. I am guessing that is one of the of SLQ-32 Regardless this is a very interesting design not sure how they can add to it as the ship goes through overhauls and electronics are added. I think I am going to use the Wasp Kit and make this island as part of new upgrade to give more deck space.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 11269
Location: Calgary, AB/Surrey, B.C., Canada
Yes, it's the SEWIP Block 2 antenna upgrade for the SLQ-32 (aka SLQ-32(v)6) - here's LockMart's brochure on it: http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/d ... ochure.pdf

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 12:12 pm
Posts: 392
I thought maybe we should re-think this project to a LAS (Landing Air Support) Ship.
The U.S. Navy really does not consider this an important factor to consider in the design of replacement ships/Classes. If you really break down the America she is designed for OSPREY and other Prime Movers not for Air Support of Operations. She was billed to support the Joint Strike A/C and AV-8B's because of the deleted well deck and Vehicle storage/support areas. So let's change the forward part of the ship with the ski ramp. I know the US Navy loves to have the additional spots for Parking and Prepping but with a simple configuration change we can omit adding systems that are not needed and we can add the additional hangar space to replace the lost deck spots.
Your thoughts?
:thumbs_up_1:


Attachments:
LAS-2.jpg
LAS-2.jpg [ 87.56 KiB | Viewed 1765 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:57 pm
Posts: 484
"Among one of the largest departures for the SASC, their bill sets aside $30 million for the Navy for a preliminary design effort to create a light carrier for the service."


https://news.usni.org/2017/06/28/senate ... ump-budget


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 03, 2017 9:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:38 pm
Posts: 3101
SumGui wrote:
"Among one of the largest departures for the SASC, their bill sets aside $30 million for the Navy for a preliminary design effort to create a light carrier for the service."


https://news.usni.org/2017/06/28/senate ... ump-budget

Oh yeah! I see an America + 100' and an angled deck with 2 catapults forward. It just makes me wonder if they would be steam or EM. #goddamnsteam! :heh:

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 7:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 12:12 pm
Posts: 392
Question has any one looked at the JMSDF New class of DDH. I have the 1/700 model coming full Hull.
I was going to see if I can modify the stern of my wasp to reflect the stern of this class and add that new reduce space island.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Wed Feb 28, 2018 3:12 pm 
Hi guys, Long time no post.
At the risk of jumping straight into the fire, it sees that what everybody is leaning toward amounts to a RN Queen Elizabeth. Or am I missing something?
George, Tampa (where its NOT snowing.)


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2019 7:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:54 am
Posts: 48
Hi everyone. Thought I might try and revive this thread. Below is my interpretation of the America class LHA modified for CATOBAR. Catapult sizing is based on the C-13-2 model as employed on the later model Nimitz class carriers. I've mirrored the locations of the elevators to allow for the angled flight deck and employed limited deck widening with an offset island counterbalanced by the angled deck projection. I envisage that power generation would be provided by GE LM6000 Plus units rather than the LM2500's. This and potentially a dedicated steam boiler coupled with waste heat recover from the LM's should provide enough steam power for the two C-13-2 catapults. Potentially an LM2500 could be utilised for EMALS power generation if we wish to move away from steam (it's soooo last century!). With the removal of well deck there should be more than enough room to accommodate all of this as well as what will be displaced by the reduced island design. You may note that the title of the image is HMAS Nuship. This is because the design came about from my investigations and deliberations into what a potential future Australian carrier could look like. I hope you like.


Attachments:
HMAS Nuship - America LHA Rev H (CATOBAR).PNG
HMAS Nuship - America LHA Rev H (CATOBAR).PNG [ 116.1 KiB | Viewed 514 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:38 pm
Posts: 3101
Interesting arrangement!

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:54 am
Posts: 48
That sounds ominous :big_grin:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2020 4:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:38 pm
Posts: 3101
Bonobo_Atho wrote:
That sounds ominous :big_grin:

Eh, no real reason for that. My observations are for your helo landing markings and/or the catapult arrangements.

I would arrange the deck like that of the 1980s Midway-class, ie two cats on the bow with the angled deck for landing only. I would add an elevator a head of the island. As we know from the proposals, the ship would be 100' longer, so it would have a correspondingly longer flight deck.

Overall, I imagine the best way to arrange this ship would be that it has all the possible Midway flight deck modifications incorporated into the LHA. One could even add a GHWB island or maybe even a Ford island.
Attachment:
Midway model Kostas 1.jpg
Midway model Kostas 1.jpg [ 137.96 KiB | Viewed 441 times ]

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:54 am
Posts: 48
Ah, yes I remember there was mention of a hull plug somewhere earlier in the thread. My layout was based on the hull as currently is. Trying to keep the displacement in the 45kT zone. I was thinking in terms of what Australia's requirements would be if we where to ever go back to carrier based fixed wing ops which I don't believe would include the same hi tempo sortie rate the US requires so keeping the cats out of the landing path wouldn't be as critical, and keeping the cats to the port side freed up the starboard side for parking. That said you could swing one cat to the starboard side of the bow and it will be clear of the landing path and then the second cat could brought up to the port side of the bow but still in the landing path. That way at least you maintain ops tempo but at a reduced rate.

Oh and the idea behind the helo pads is that our naval doctrine would probably require that the ship be able to be used as a LHD in times of natural disaster.


Attachments:
HMAS Nuship - America LHA Rev H2 (CATOBAR).PNG
HMAS Nuship - America LHA Rev H2 (CATOBAR).PNG [ 93.63 KiB | Viewed 430 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2020 8:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 7:14 pm
Posts: 29
Location: Nu Joisey
I happen to have models of a Tarawa LHA, Nimitz, Midway, and Essex in nearly the same scale, 1/720 or so. At this time they are all packed away for moving. Once I'm moved I'll line them up for an overhead shot to show the relative sizes. That would help with any ideas of converting the more recent LHA ship type into a CVM.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: CVM?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 9:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:54 am
Posts: 48
Hi JoeP, that'd be awesome. I recently bought the Trumpeter 1/350 Iwo Jima LHD-7. I was tempted to do a conversion on it to make the CATOBAR version but am a bit reticent due to the cost of the model. I am now toying with the idea of using it as a reference and scratch building the CATOBAR version but I think I'll save that decision for when I've finished my HMAS Melbourne build.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group