Author Topic: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise  (Read 203035 times)

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3535
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #180 on: 20 December 2018, 04:13:39 »
Why Harrier when you can F35B?

16 one-shot missiles. One ripple salvo.

Maaaaaybe one sunk IS CV.
They were pretty scary in 1985. Consider the antimissile defences available then.

And coming in along with a swarm of Backfires and Badgers launching Kitchens and Kelts.

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 24875
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #181 on: 20 December 2018, 06:33:11 »
Why Harrier when you can F35B?
They were pretty scary in 1985. Consider the antimissile defences available then.

And coming in along with a swarm of Backfires and Badgers launching Kitchens and Kelts.
Cost less for one thing. Less extensive modifications u need to the ship's flightdeck is another.

Example the old USS Tripoli LPH-10. She was first of her class use Harriers in 1974.

EDIT: Sorry for the typos, using phone at the time.

 
« Last Edit: 20 December 2018, 10:21:14 by Wrangler »
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #182 on: 20 December 2018, 06:33:53 »
Why Harrier when you can F35B?
They were pretty scary in 1985. Consider the antimissile defences available then.

And coming in along with a swarm of Backfires and Badgers launching Kitchens and Kelts.

Pretty sure you mean Backfires and Blinders, Badger couldn't carry As 4 Kitchen or AS 6 Kingfish.

Its too bad that the Canberra couldn't be supplied newly made Harrier aircraft.  Its was crime they were discontinued. They would work on Canberra fine, provide support for Amphib assaults and give the fleet a degree of protection from enemy aircraft, but alot.

I wish they were able to make more if it were practical.

Carrying fighters wasn't what the Canberra class were bought for. They were bought as an LHD, amphibious assault in war time, recovery crews in HADR tasking. We certainly could fit them with FW facilities, but we don't want to.

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3535
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #183 on: 20 December 2018, 07:33:17 »
Pretty sure you mean Backfires and Blinders, Badger couldn't carry As 4 Kitchen or AS 6 Kingfish.
I think the upgraded ones could. And there's AS-5 Kelts. Doesn't matter if they're high-supersonic or not, just sling a whole crowd of whatever AShMs, and saturate that mid-80s missile defence.

Quote
We certainly could fit them with FW facilities, but we don't want to.
What would that entail?

Charlie 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2089
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #184 on: 20 December 2018, 08:49:36 »

What would that entail?
Back in '98 - '99 when I was either working up to deploy or already deployed to the Med, a team from NAVAIR came out to the NASSAU (LHA 4) to check the aviation spaces for MV-22 compatibility; as I recall, "high-hat" space (aka a tall hanger) was the first issue.  Fuel capacity was another and test aboard WASP high lighted the flight deck coating problem.  Throw in a different set aviation calibration requirements and potential magazine storage issues (i.e., small arms for side mounted machine guns versus 500 to 2000lb bombs) … sure can get pricey. 

JadeHellbringer

  • Easily Bribed Forum Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 21696
  • Third time this week!
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #185 on: 20 December 2018, 09:36:52 »
Pretty sure you mean Backfires and Blinders, Badger couldn't carry As 4 Kitchen or AS 6 Kingfish.

There was an upgrade package tested for AS-4 at least for Badger that would have allowed it to carry one semi-recessed similar to the Tu-22M, but it wasn't followed through on due to the Tu-22M becoming fairly prolific around the time Badger was put out to pasture. In the event of wartime, it didn't sound like an overly difficult upgrade to the aircraft, but definitely wasn't worth it at a time when defense spending was tight for the Soviets as it was.
"There's a difference between the soldier and his fight,
But the warrior knows the true meaning of his life."
+Larry and his Flask, 'Blood Drunk'+

"You know, basically war is just, like, a bunch of people playing pranks on each other, but at the end they all die."
+Crow T. Robot+

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #186 on: 20 December 2018, 09:50:23 »
Back in '98 - '99 when I was either working up to deploy or already deployed to the Med, a team from NAVAIR came out to the NASSAU (LHA 4) to check the aviation spaces for MV-22 compatibility; as I recall, "high-hat" space (aka a tall hanger) was the first issue.  Fuel capacity was another and test aboard WASP high lighted the flight deck coating problem.  Throw in a different set aviation calibration requirements and potential magazine storage issues (i.e., small arms for side mounted machine guns versus 500 to 2000lb bombs) … sure can get pricey.

IIRC, the hangar is tall enough, and most of the magazine space requirements can be satisfied by insertion of blast doors and reassigning space.

There are two major issues with the ship itself, leaving the pilot and deck crew training aside. One issue is the deck, this is not complicated to remedy, but is costly to acquire, and also costly to maintain due to the ablative nature of the coating. The fittings for emergency recovery and arrest are mandatory, I'm afraid, you need those because you want to be able to recover damaged fighters.

The second issue is bunk space allocation. Every naval ship has a watch and station bill, or scheme of complement, and these positions are ferociously argued over with organisations virtually coming to blows regarding the number of bunks and positions on board. Since the majority of the bunks on the Canberra class are army, guess how likely it is that Navy would be able to resume any of them? That means we'd need to wear it out of hide, and we have an unfortunate nature of minimising bunks on Navy ships. So not only would we have a massive fight on our hands should we attempt to take any Army bunks, the knives would come out should we seek to reallocate whatever bunks we have in Navy hands. Not a fun thing, and this isn't even going into some of the incredibly complex and expensive whole of Navy issues like training requirements, Navy mission, Navy personnel requirements, and the pesky Defence Act that states unequivocally that FW are the domain of Air Force!

And let me tell you, Air Force members do not like staying anywhere other than resorts!

Charlie 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2089
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #187 on: 20 December 2018, 11:25:53 »
IIRC, the hangar is tall enough, and most of the magazine space requirements can be satisfied by insertion of blast doors and reassigning space.

There are two major issues with the ship itself, leaving the pilot and deck crew training aside. One issue is the deck, this is not complicated to remedy, but is costly to acquire, and also costly to maintain due to the ablative nature of the coating. The fittings for emergency recovery and arrest are mandatory, I'm afraid, you need those because you want to be able to recover damaged fighters.

The second issue is bunk space allocation. Every naval ship has a watch and station bill, or scheme of complement, and these positions are ferociously argued over with organisations virtually coming to blows regarding the number of bunks and positions on board. Since the majority of the bunks on the Canberra class are army, guess how likely it is that Navy would be able to resume any of them? That means we'd need to wear it out of hide, and we have an unfortunate nature of minimising bunks on Navy ships. So not only would we have a massive fight on our hands should we attempt to take any Army bunks, the knives would come out should we seek to reallocate whatever bunks we have in Navy hands. Not a fun thing, and this isn't even going into some of the incredibly complex and expensive whole of Navy issues like training requirements, Navy mission, Navy personnel requirements, and the pesky Defence Act that states unequivocally that FW are the domain of Air Force!

And let me tell you, Air Force members do not like staying anywhere other than resorts!
My experience is on US amphibs, twenty-two months of it and I've worked with a number of Australian liaison officers to the USMC.  I know there has been a bit of "copying" and learning in both directions over the past decade.

STOVL aircraft and helicopters don't need arresting gear if you are talking trap wires and nets.  If there were, I never saw the equipment nor do I remember doing any drills on either NASSAU or WASP.  I've asked friend, a former Harrier squadron CO, if I'm misremembering.  But a quick literature review online garnered me the sentiment that it is easier to "stop and land" via STOVL than to "land and stop" a conventional aircraft.

Here's a video:  https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/harrier-has-stuck-nose-gear-lands-jet-on-a-stool-pilo-1596517824

Basically, the solution for the nose gear not working is a stool.  UPDATE:  The reply I got was basically the stool, ditch or divert.

So a common misperception about US amphibs is that belong to the USMC.  While it is true Marines deploy most often aboard them the spaces are designated for either Embarked Troops (green spaces) or Ship's Company (blue spaces) rather than a specific Service.  If the "flavor" of the embarked force changes they have to figure out space use within the constraints of remaining in the Embarked Troops areas.  For example, below are pics of LHD-3 and LHD-5.  KEARSARGE embarked CH-53s and CH-46s while BATAAN was carrying an AV-8B squadron and some CH-53s.  Cargo that doesn't fit in those designated spaces ends up being Cargo Left on Pier (CLOP) and personnel end up being People Left on Pier (PLOP).  Those who end up surprised by this status are PO-PLOP...or Pissed Off People Left on Pier.
« Last Edit: 20 December 2018, 14:15:28 by Charlie 6 »

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37046
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #188 on: 20 December 2018, 17:08:51 »
Of course, when the embarked personnel are the Fleet Commander and his staff, reorganization of spaces starts with the XO's stateroom and rolls down from there... :)

DoctorMonkey

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2583
  • user briefly known as Khan of Clan Sex Panther
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #189 on: 20 December 2018, 17:19:53 »
My thought about posting some F-35Bs aboard a Canberra class ship was not that I thought the RAAF or RAN would provide the planes and crews etc but that it might be an expedient move by either the RN/RAF or USMC if they needed another flat top to deploy from


Anyway, enough chat, here is a photo of HMS Queen Elizabeth with HMS Sutherland and HMS Iron Duke as escorts


By Fleet Air Arm aircrew - UK Ministry of Defence photo 45162784, OGL, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=61611877
Avatar stollen from spacebattles.com motivational posters thread

ChanMan: "Capellan Ingenuity: The ability to lose battles to Davion forces in new and implausible ways"

Charlie 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2089
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #190 on: 20 December 2018, 19:48:11 »
Of course, when the embarked personnel are the Fleet Commander and his staff, reorganization of spaces starts with the XO's stateroom and rolls down from there... :)
Shhh, don't scare them.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37046
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #191 on: 20 December 2018, 19:52:44 »
Heh... having been on said Fleet Commander's staff, I was stuffed into a six-man bunkroom.  The boss was well taken care of, though...  ^-^

Charlie 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2089
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #192 on: 20 December 2018, 19:55:52 »
Heh... having been on said Fleet Commander's staff, I was stuffed into a six-man bunkroom.  The boss was well taken care of, though...  ^-^
As all Staff Officers should be.  Somehow, my last two stints embarked I ended up in a stateroom by myself.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37046
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #193 on: 20 December 2018, 19:58:03 »
Lucky you!  My previous staff tour, I only had one room mate, but our stateroom was right underneath one of the jet blast deflectors...  xp

Charlie 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2089
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #194 on: 20 December 2018, 20:10:30 »
Lucky you!  My previous staff tour, I only had one room mate, but our stateroom was right underneath one of the jet blast deflectors...  xp
My last MEU deployment, back in '00, I was just aft of the gym and far enough forward to wonder aloud if we were still at flight quarters just about the time the Harriers went screaming overhead.  My first big deck float, I spent six months directly below the forward portion of spot six...so I got to listen to the drag and drop of chains to gripe the aircraft down. Every night.  At 2200.  While underway.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37046
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #195 on: 20 December 2018, 20:15:29 »
Chains are a constant on anything with aircraft.  I resorted to earplugs and headphones to get any sleep at all.

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #196 on: 21 December 2018, 05:16:37 »
My experience is on US amphibs, twenty-two months of it and I've worked with a number of Australian liaison officers to the USMC.  I know there has been a bit of "copying" and learning in both directions over the past decade.

STOVL aircraft and helicopters don't need arresting gear if you are talking trap wires and nets.  If there were, I never saw the equipment nor do I remember doing any drills on either NASSAU or WASP.  I've asked friend, a former Harrier squadron CO, if I'm misremembering.  But a quick literature review online garnered me the sentiment that it is easier to "stop and land" via STOVL than to "land and stop" a conventional aircraft.

Here's a video:  https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/harrier-has-stuck-nose-gear-lands-jet-on-a-stool-pilo-1596517824

Basically, the solution for the nose gear not working is a stool.  UPDATE:  The reply I got was basically the stool, ditch or divert.

So a common misperception about US amphibs is that belong to the USMC.  While it is true Marines deploy most often aboard them the spaces are designated for either Embarked Troops (green spaces) or Ship's Company (blue spaces) rather than a specific Service.  If the "flavor" of the embarked force changes they have to figure out space use within the constraints of remaining in the Embarked Troops areas.  For example, below are pics of LHD-3 and LHD-5.  KEARSARGE embarked CH-53s and CH-46s while BATAAN was carrying an AV-8B squadron and some CH-53s.  Cargo that doesn't fit in those designated spaces ends up being Cargo Left on Pier (CLOP) and personnel end up being People Left on Pier (PLOP).  Those who end up surprised by this status are PO-PLOP...or Pissed Off People Left on Pier.

Ahh fair enough, I was told that emergency arrestors were required for damaged aircraft that didn't have fine enough controls to come into a hover over the deck. Happy to be wrong, but the project certainly thought this was the case.

While I understand what you are saying with regards to the Marines, please be aware that this is not the case in the RAN. While the Navy owns the ships, government doesn't view them as a single service asset, and that's the only difference that counts. Should the ARA complain to government about some of their members being left on the wharf so that Navy members could be on board, government would frown upon this heavily. Not that Army want to be there either, but the bureaucratic turf war has already turned nasty, with a Colonel inviting CN to inspect Canberra, CN had a go at the Colonel (rightly), but CA sent a formal complaint to CN regarding this.

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 24875
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #197 on: 21 December 2018, 09:07:10 »
What is typical Royal Navy taskforce now, with Queen Elizabeth now cruising around.  I know she not formally doing patrols, she needs her air compliment but i was curious.

Does Australia deploy her LHDs in task force as well, or this just used when needed situation?
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3535
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #198 on: 21 December 2018, 09:27:16 »
What is typical Royal Navy taskforce now
Now - nothing. QE won't be operational for some time yet

Future - MOD has guided that an indicative QE carrier group in the future would have 1 QE-class carrier, 1 Type 45 AAW destroyer, 1-2 Type 23/26 ASW frigates, 1 Type 31e GP frigate, and probably 1 Tide-class fleet tanker


Dragon Cat

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7827
  • Not Dead Until I Say So
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #199 on: 21 December 2018, 11:44:15 »
I'd probably add another fleet auxiliary to that for non wartime patrols would add to transport and give further options with humaitarian relief
My three main Alternate Timeline with Thanks fan-fiction threads are in the links below. I'm always open to suggestions or additions to be incorporated so if you feel you wish to add something feel free. There's non-canon units, equipment, people, events, erm... Solar Systems spread throughout so please enjoy

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,20515.0.html - Part 1

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,52013.0.html - Part 2

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,79196.0.html - Part 3

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 24875
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #200 on: 21 December 2018, 11:53:11 »
Speaking of auxiliaries.  One of the few actually commissioned ones, USS Lewis B. Puller ESB-3, the Expeditionary Sea Base.  With compliment of helios out for show.



I'm curious way she only commissioned if she forward deploy. Makes me wonder if what will happen when she to going back? Will she become a USNS again and some other ship becomes commissioned?
« Last Edit: 21 December 2018, 13:25:24 by Wrangler »
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25565
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #201 on: 21 December 2018, 12:50:13 »
I do like the look of the Tide class. But this ...



Does remind me of this ...

* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch
* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma
* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword
* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan
* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky
* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3535
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #202 on: 21 December 2018, 13:01:22 »

Does remind me of this ...


Then so will this, another fleet auxiliary, this one on a part time basis - the Point class ro/ro


David CGB

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 800
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #203 on: 21 December 2018, 17:48:16 »
Then so will this, another fleet auxiliary, this one on a part time basis - the Point class ro/ro


nice looking vessel
Federated Suns fan forever, Ghost Bear Fan since 1992, and as a Ghost Bear David Bekker star captain (in an Alt TL Loremaster)

I am Belch II

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10105
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #204 on: 22 December 2018, 03:43:02 »
Is that a small attempt for a ship to be more aerodynamic and be a little more efficient?
Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #205 on: 22 December 2018, 06:42:06 »
Is that a small attempt for a ship to be more aerodynamic and be a little more efficient?

Probably not, but it would limit the stress on the hull in rough weather. Most ships with the open bow end up scooping up a lot of water when they dig into the wave in front, puts a lot of stress on the frame.

On a warship it's for RCS reduction, can't see a tanker or cargo vessel needing that.

ANS Kamas P81

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13208
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #206 on: 22 December 2018, 07:37:29 »
Most ships with the open bow end up scooping up a lot of water when they dig into the wave in front, puts a lot of stress on the frame.
Northern Atlantic Ocean is a mean one especially.

That said, I wonder if there's any plans to refit the deck of Atlantic Conveyor to operate F-35Bs...
Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen,
Tod und Verzweiflung flammet um mich her!
Fühlt nicht durch dich Jadefalke Todesschmerzen,
So bist du meine Tochter nimmermehr!

Sharpnel

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13414
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #207 on: 22 December 2018, 07:45:20 »
Northern Atlantic Ocean is a mean one especially.

That said, I wonder if there's any plans to refit the deck of Atlantic Conveyor to operate F-35Bs...
That may be difficult as the only vessel I know of by that name is at the bottom of the ocean somewhere near the Falklands
Consigliere Trygg Bender, CRD-3BL Crusader, The Blazer Mafia
Takehiro 'Taco' Uchimiya, SHD-2H Shadow Hawk 'Taco', Crimson Oasis Trading Company

"Of what use is a dream, if not a blueprint for courageous action" -Adam West
As I get older, I realize that I'm not as good as I once was.
"Life is too short to be living someone else's dream" - Hugh Hefner

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37046
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #208 on: 22 December 2018, 07:46:02 »
Blue water is ALL mean.  Worst I've personally experienced was the days after we rounded Cape Horn.  Master and Commander gave a good feel for it.

ANS Kamas P81

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13208
Re: Naval Pictures VI: A New Enterprise
« Reply #209 on: 22 December 2018, 07:57:43 »
That may be difficult as the only vessel I know of by that name is at the bottom of the ocean somewhere near the Falklands
They made a new one in 1985, apparently.  Atlantic Container Line still operates it as a container/RORO and added five more in the last couple years about twice the displacement. 
Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen,
Tod und Verzweiflung flammet um mich her!
Fühlt nicht durch dich Jadefalke Todesschmerzen,
So bist du meine Tochter nimmermehr!