The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I readily admit this is a guess on my part, but I would think that the hatch pointed out with the red arrow, the one which has the message about a hoist, might very well be an access hatch and hoist to reload the magazine for the gun. It would be interesting to see if vessels in service with other navies have similarly looking hatches in approximately the same location behind the main gun. Or perhaps one of the DT members who actually work with ship designs or in construction might be able to chime in.
Having worked on T23 / T45 & visited with T22 / T42 on occasion, the RED arrow is indeed pointing at the hoist for taking the 4.5" inch shells (in their containers), down into the deep magazine.


In your discussion you also mention the 'Escutcheon' plate. That is quite literally the 'cover' that can be secured in place, to 'block up' the hole where the key goes into the locking arrangement for the door on the top of the hatch. It is there purely to seal the hatch trunk, & prevent any sea water getting into the trunk under heavy seas.
 

t68

Well-Known Member
Ah a nostalgic look at what could have been for the RN and nearly the RAN, pity we don’t have alternative history on what they may have put on them in RN/RAN & RCN?

Obviously Phantom’s and Buccaneers for the RN

If they had a 50 year service plan the last of them would have only been retiring about now

 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Ah a nostalgic look at what could have been for the RN and nearly the RAN, pity we don’t have alternative history on what they may have put on them in RN/RAN & RCN?

Obviously Phantom’s and Buccaneers for the RN

If they had a 50 year service plan the last of them would have only been retiring about now

For the RN, would have needed to replace the Jets by the early 90s and the only real options then would have been either Hornet C/Ds or develop a Strike Fighter from scratch. Hawkeye’s to replace the Gannets by the early 90s at the latest. The big question of course is how do they effect the Falklands War, would have been a major game changer.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
For the RN, would have needed to replace the Jets by the early 90s and the only real options then would have been either Hornet C/Ds or develop a Strike Fighter from scratch. Hawkeye’s to replace the Gannets by the early 90s at the latest. The big question of course is how do they effect the Falklands War, would have been a major game changer.

The follow on fighter question is an interesting one as it's possible it would have changed the course of Eurofighter- Germany and the UK both wanted a large aircraft for fuel and stores but the French wanted something that would have fit on their carrier - and that differing requirement did drive some of the reasons for France pulling out.

Could we have seen an Anglo-French jet on the decks I wonder?
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Would Italy have bought into a Anglo-French naval jet? Possibly both Italy and Spain might have then considered CATOBAR carriers. Had this all occurred, would the US still have built a B version of the JSF? Interesting what if scenarios.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Would Italy have bought into a Anglo-French naval jet? Possibly both Italy and Spain might have then considered CATOBAR carriers. Had this all occurred, would the US still have built a B version of the JSF? Interesting what if scenarios.
It's probable that the other reasons France abandoned the Eurofighter program would still come into play - workshare and program lead.

From a practical point of view, buying F18 as a stop gap and sticking with the F35C for carrier ops would have made much more sense.


The B model was always safe as houses as it was the USMC's bird and they have a looooot of pull on the hill.
 

t68

Well-Known Member
It's probable that the other reasons France abandoned the Eurofighter program would still come into play - workshare and program lead.

From a practical point of view, buying F18 as a stop gap and sticking with the F35C for carrier ops would have made much more sense.


The B model was always safe as houses as it was the USMC's bird and they have a looooot of pull on the hill.
I’m not so sure, if CVA-01 came to fruition what would have happened to the Harrier, would the STOVL programme continue?
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Harrier was originally for the RAF, a close support aircraft for fighting the Warsaw Pact in Germany, where it was thought that runways might not last long. Sea Harrier came later, & there were always far more RAF ground attack than RN Sea Harriers.
 
Last edited:

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
I’m not so sure, if CVA-01 came to fruition what would have happened to the Harrier, would the STOVL programme continue?

Harrier was always intended for tactical nuclear delivery. Literally, pop up, dump the weapon, die, The FAA seized on it in desperation as it sort of worked for the RN- I've spent a bit of time with the home of the Harrier (RAF Wittering) and actually had the pleasure of sitting in a T4 on a tie down engine test and I can confidently say the entire Harrier program did not depend on the RN ordering some jets,
 
Last edited:

Stampede

Active Member
For the RN, would have needed to replace the Jets by the early 90s and the only real options then would have been either Hornet C/Ds or develop a Strike Fighter from scratch. Hawkeye’s to replace the Gannets by the early 90s at the latest. The big question of course is how do they effect the Falklands War, would have been a major game changer.
Big fleet carriers have a place, but I have heard mentioned that in the big seas of the South Atlantic the old VTOL Harrier was better suited than that of a CATOBAR Aircraft.

That said I'd still prefer to be on something larger than the Invincible Class for such operations in those waters.


Regards S
 

76mmGuns

Member
Um this is the RN thread, I think you want the RAN. Having said that, The Arafuras don’t need to containerise that sort of capability. They have a perfectly competent sickbay, and have bunks for up to an additional 20 personnel in addition to the ship’s company.
My apologies. I mean to post in the RAN thread. :)
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Big fleet carriers have a place, but I have heard mentioned that in the big seas of the South Atlantic the old VTOL Harrier was better suited than that of a CATOBAR Aircraft.

That said I'd still prefer to be on something larger than the Invincible Class for such operations in those waters.


Regards S

Anecdotally I've heard it said that the limit to flying were the deck crew - if you could keep them on the desk, the Harrier would get on and off.

A larger ship would likely have saved lives however - on the last day of hostilities, a crated Sea King engine broke free of it's lashings and crushed a sailor between the island and it as the ship rolled. Something nearer the size of CVA would likely have not behaved that way.
 
Just a theory question but if we had of kept both big carriers from the 60's . Do you think we would have participated in the navalized variant of the jaguar.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Just a theory question but if we had of kept both big carriers from the 60's . Do you think we would have participated in the navalized variant of the jaguar.

I really wouldn't want to fly a Jaguar around a carrier - they only took off due to the curvature of the earth as was. They didn't have a lot of thrust so doing a bolter might have been a bit too exciting to stand very often.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Yeah, it'd have needed rather more thrust. Didn't they have to pull Jags out of Afghanistan in summer? Too hot, too high?
 

pussertas

Active Member
Unmanned Underwater Quasi Submarine

This may be of interest to some. it's the first time I have head of it!

 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Anecdotally I've heard it said that the limit to flying were the deck crew - if you could keep them on the desk, the Harrier would get on and off.

A larger ship would likely have saved lives however - on the last day of hostilities, a crated Sea King engine broke free of it's lashings and crushed a sailor between the island and it as the ship rolled. Something nearer the size of CVA would likely have not behaved that way.
As an aside if the RN had 2 CVA down at the Falklands in 1982, the war would've taken a different path. You would've had Phantoms and Buccaneers flying from the decks and probably Hawkeyes or UK equivalent as AEW. The air war would've been far different.
 

OldNavy63

Member
Further development of the LMM on the Wildcat helo, article from Save the Royal Navy:


Of note, the development of the missile has been 10 years from its Starburst/Starstreak heritage.
 
Top