No Colossus, Majestic or Hermes class CVL

may be a question of cost… French didn’t fit Arromanches with a steam cat for this reason…. longer BS4 cat was may be more expensive… and not useful for Indian Navy Sea Hawks
X07

I said I was guessing, ok. What I had seen on KD said she got the same catapults as the Majestics that were modified for Australia, Canada, & India.

So, why did KD get a longer catapult than Melbourne, Bonaventure, or Vikrant?

I have seen their photos and drawings, and theirs are definitely shorter than that on KD/25deMayo.

Yes, Melbourne & Bonaventure were nearly finished with their modernizations when KD began hers, so maybe the extended-length version wasn’t available yet, but Vikrant was done afterwards… did the UK just not want India to have it?

Minas Gerais and Karel Doorman were modernized and fitted with steam catapults in Holland… the others were all done in Britain.

Perhaps the Dutch were willing to look outside the “normal supplier” and consider another option.

The fact that Karel Doorman was fitted with a new, longer BS catapult during her second modernization (becoming 25deMayo), indicates that the Argentines felt the MS cat was underpowered for future aircraft?

I am guessing that KD was fitted with an MS cat also… but since she was modernized before MG, maybe not?

The ‘longer BS catapult’ fitted to Karel Doorman was installed at her first modernisation, in 1955-58. It was most likely refurbished in 68-69 prior to transfer but certainly did not ‘grow’ in length. I have a number of photos of the ship in Dutch service to prove this.

Minas Gerais and Karel Doorman were modernized and fitted with steam catapults in Holland… the others were all done in Britain.

Perhaps the Dutch were willing to look outside the “normal supplier” and consider another option.

The fact that Karel Doorman was fitted with a new, longer BS catapult during her second modernization (becoming 25deMayo), indicates that the Argentines felt the MS cat was underpowered for future aircraft?

I am guessing that KD was fitted with an MS cat also… but since she was modernized before MG, maybe not?

Probably correct, apart from Albion and Bulwark never had Steam catapults (BH3 Hydraulics only, also fitted to Centaur from completion in 54 until her 57-58 refit when BS4s fitted).

absolutly true for Albion and Bulwark… never fitted with steam cats!

for the Minas Gerais, she should be the sole carrier in the world ever fitted with a Mc Taggart Scott steam catapult????
All the other Majestic/Colossus modified carriers were fitted with BS4… (Karel Doorman/25 de Mayo, Melbourne, Vikrant, Bonaventure)
Surprising?
X07:confused:

True… the list X07 has is an old one, my current info shows Albion & Bulwark retained their BH5 (not BH3) catapults until their conversion to Commando Carriers.

I’ll edit my earlier post on this.

Actually, it appears that info is from a totally different thread, from a while back. So I can’t edit it… oops.

Hydraulic catapults
RN
(BH=Mitchell-Brown)
Type Run Length Capacity Classes
BH-3 20,000lb Colossus
BH-5 28,000lb@60kt Majestic, Albion, Bulwark, Centaur

Steam Catapults
RN
(BS=Mitchell-Brown), (MS=MacTaggart-Scott)
Type Run Length Capacity Classes
MS C-3 ? ft ? ft 30,000lb@? kt Minas Gerais
BS4 103ft 160ft 40,000lb@78kt/30,000lb@110kt Mod Colossus, Mod Majestic, Centaur 1958, Hermes
BS4A 145ft 200ft 50,000lb@97kt Mod Hermes (port)*
BS4 151-175ft 50,000lb@94kt Ark Royal(1960) Victorious [this is possibly the same as the BS4A]
BS5 151ft 220ft 50,000lb@91kt/33,000lb@150kt Eagle 1964, Ark Royal 1970
BS5A 199ft 268ft 50,000lb@105kt Eagle 1964, Ark Royal 1970
BS6 250ft 320ft 70,000lb@100kt CVA01

*some sources claim a 199’ length for 25 de Mayo (Mod Colossus)

Probably correct, apart from Albion and Bulwark never had Steam catapults (BH3 Hydraulics only, also fitted to Centaur from completion in 54 until her 57-58 refit when BS4s fitted).

as i can read in this post: according badger:

Considering the difference in power from 25 de Mayo’s cat and Vicky’s:
BS4; shuttle run 103ft; length 160ft; 40,000lb@78kt; Mod. Colossus & Majestics, Centaur, Albion, Bulwark, Hermes
BS4; shuttle run 145ft; length 200ft; 50,000lb@97kt; Mod Hermes, Ark Royal (1960), Victorious
then they might not need much speed at that!

I think that shuttle run of 25 de Mayo ‘s cat was 145 ft, with a total lenght of 199 ft, same as the ones fitted in Hermes after mod, ark and Victorious… that ‘s why they ‘re saying 199 ft long in Wiki’s article …. possible?
X07:confused:

Having just read a translation of the wiki article, it claims that Veinticinco de Mayo’s catapult was sold to Brazil in the 90s for the Minas Gerais to allow her to operate A-4 Skyhawks. As the latter’s catapult remained the same length to the end of her days the Argentines could only have sold 3/4s of it if at all! more likely they sold more mundane parts from below decks and not the catapult itself. Also parts from her engines and boilers would have been useful in keeping the Brazillian ship in service so long, and this may have been part of a deal to allow Argentine naval aircraft (Super etendards and Turbo Trackers) to carry out deck landing practice from the Brazillian carrier. The Super Etendards were limited to touch and goes due to catapult limitations on the Minas Gerais, though this is not a problem with the Sao Paolo which in her previous life operated etendards regularly, from her two 151ft BS5 catapults. Veinticinco de Mayo most likely had either a 145ft BS4 or a 151ft BS5, given the period when it was fitted (1955-58) I would lean toward the former.

Every source I have seen for Minas Gerais mentions a MacTaggart-Scott C3 steam catapult.

thanks for your answer!
I wasn’t sure if HMS Warrior kept her BH3 or was fitted with BS4… so BH3
for the Karel Doorman, my question is about the lenght of this catapult: it’s said in the link following that the lenght is 199 ft, but I believe it’s shorter…
HMS Eagle was fitted with two steam catapults during her refit in the beginning of the 60′, they were of BS5 type, and the port side forward catapult was 151 ft long and the waist catapult was 199 ft long! Neil Mc Cart says in his book that it’s the largest catapult to be fitted to any aircraft carrier in a European Navy… so does anybody know the lenght of the catapult of Karel Doorman/ 25 de Mayo?

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_Veinticinco_de_Mayo

What about Minas gerais? does a C3 catapult exist? Could it be a Mc taggart, or is it a Mitchell Brown BS4?
Thanks
X:confused:

HMS Warrior/ARA Independencia never recieved a steam catapult of any type, retaining her BH3 to the end. It was uprated to launch heavier aircraft than the other light fleets in her 55-56 refit and this was intended to be the prototype refit (partial angled deck, lattice mast, new radars, uprated hydraulic catapult) for the remaining members of the class in RN service, ie Ocean, Glory, Theseus, Triumph and Vengeance, to allow them to remain viable as second line carriers operating Sea Hawks, Sea Venoms and Gannets (ASW variants) of the RNVR. Cutbacks (even before Sandystorm 57) meant that Warrior had lost her intended role before the refit was complete and her only RN service after that was as HQ ship for H-Bomb tests in the Pacific. Her return voyage was via Argentina and it would seem the Admiralty was already offering her to that country after paying off. The other ships refits were cancelled and they drifted into the reserve fleet from 1957 onwards, with Vengeance being sold to Brazil in 56 and Triumph being converted to a heavy repair ship. Venerable/Karel Doorman/25 de Mayo had the longest catapult of the entire class, installed by the Dutch between 55-58.

Hello!

As this post talks about Colossus/Majestic Light carriers, I would have a few questions:

Was the HMS Warrior (next ARA Independencia) fitted with steam catapult (BS4) or not?
Was HMNLS Karel Doorman (next ARA 25 de Mayo) fitted with a Mitchell Brown BS4 199ft long or another type?
Was the Minas Gerais fitted with a BS4 Mitchell Brown cat, or as I read, a Mc Taggart C3 cat (I thought Mc Taggart was specialized in landing systems and not cat?)

Thanks for your answers
X07:)

Not disputing the importance of the RN’s role now. But we are talking about developments that increasingly outlast the political backing they started with. I doubt CVF would be cancelled, btu whether in 2014 we are looking at the ship we thought we’d be looking at now, remains to be seen.

Which makes UK/NATO policy at the time largely irrelevant. If the nukes had already flown (even on a limited scale), the RN is baseless, thus on a short life, chasing SSBNs that may have already served their purpose. Even the role of transporting to Norway and Denmark is presumably moot. But they felt it neccessary to prepare for a war, which might not have gone nuclear immediately, so why assume that nothing else would need to be considered?

Again, the creation of the perception of will, deterrence is about the mind, by giving the impression that there is a genuine will/ desire to fight. Operationally irrelevant maybe but politically not.

Despite the protestations of the army and the RAF, the RN is the most powerful power projection asset the UK has and there is nothing on the horizon that will change that.

Not disputing the importance of the RN’s role now. But we are talking about developments that increasingly outlast the political backing they started with. I doubt CVF would be cancelled, btu whether in 2014 we are looking at the ship we thought we’d be looking at now, remains to be seen.

The point is that any Soviet operation in Europe would have gone nuclear within hours at best, that is the point. Research their doctrine and you will see. The armored divisions were cycological, they represented a kind of vague intention to resist.

Which makes UK/NATO policy at the time largely irrelevant. If the nukes had already flown (even on a limited scale), the RN is baseless, thus on a short life, chasing SSBNs that may have already served their purpose. Even the role of transporting to Norway and Denmark is presumably moot. But they felt it neccessary to prepare for a war, which might not have gone nuclear immediately, so why assume that nothing else would need to be considered?

The Memoirs of Adm.H.Leach and Minister J.Nott. make it hard to recognise they are discussing same time, same events.

By 1981 surface RN had one Task – ASW [helo/SHar, B57/WE177A(NDB), deep] and Air Defence [SHar/AIM-9L] to insert the Rapid Deployment Force and cover USMC, assisting Norge Forces. Anti-Sov surface vessel was by (subs, and) SHar [Harpoon, Sea Eagle, WE.177A(NDB), shallow] and RAF/Bucco [Sea Eagle, WE.177A/N]. All to impose a very brief pause-for-thought, against a Sov.conventional foray, testing our resolve. (You are allowed to query how long it would remain conventional if we were first to sling nuke depth bombs about, or if we lost Lusty to a nuke ASM). To wander off to Indian Ocean, projecting Force in distant waters, or to Protect Trade against, um, not sure, was incidental. Nott, under instruction, tried to match Force to Task. After FI, the Task changed.

Thread has wandered from a v specific Q, to the behavourial science of deterrence.

Whcih makes me wonder why they bothered with all those army formations in Eastern Europe, or was it only Britain that was going to nuked?

As to Afghanistan, not sure the significance. Unless i missed something, they didn’t use them there?

Which is back to the narrow mindedness of the politicians, but I see your point about the importance of the deterant role in that context.

Indeed, it has – and will have – great potential, IF it is developed properly and maintained. There are potentially too many high-value assets (amphib, CV) without the adequate support, or too few platforms to provide the scope and response (TLAM carrying SSN).

Despite the protestations of the army and the RAF, the RN is the most powerful power projection asset the UK has and there is nothing on the horizon that will change that.

The point is that any Soviet operation in Europe would have gone nuclear within hours at best, that is the point. Research their doctrine and you will see. The armored divisions were cycological, they represented a kind of vague intention to resist.

Whcih makes me wonder why they bothered with all those army formations in Eastern Europe, or was it only Britain that was going to nuked?

As to Afghanistan, not sure the significance. Unless i missed something, they didn’t use them there?

Which is back to the narrow mindedness of the politicians, but I see your point about the importance of the deterant role in that context.

Indeed, it has – and will have – great potential, IF it is developed properly and maintained. There are potentially too many high-value assets (amphib, CV) without the adequate support, or too few platforms to provide the scope and response (TLAM carrying SSN).

the USSR response would be two fold a massive nuke attack while simultaneously flooding the Fulda Gap with the tank armies which meant that the war wouldn’t have lasted for long enough for rationing and made Nuke delivery very important. Their would have been i high possibility of Chemical strikes as well

Vanguard to Trident. Trans-atlantic shipping was not going to be important becouse there was going to be nothing to ship too, all the ports would have been vaporised. The RN abandoned the Broken backed warfare idea quite quickly.

The soviets would have gone nuclear straight a way. Every piece of Soviet Doctrine stipulated the use of nukes to the extent that when they went to Afghanistan they took them with them.

Whcih makes me wonder why they bothered with all those army formations in Eastern Europe, or was it only Britain that was going to nuked?

As to Afghanistan, not sure the significance. Unless i missed something, they didn’t use them there?

Prior to the Falklands the sole role of the UK’s armed forces was fighting the cold war, in that sense getting the Nuclear detterent made the RN very important.

Which is back to the narrow mindedness of the politicians, but I see your point about the importance of the deterant role in that context.

Even now the RN is doing extroardinarily well and is rapidly developing into the UK’s primary power projection force, with a very powerful amphib fleet, Tomahawk armed SSN’s and now the CVF as well.

Indeed, it has – and will have – great potential, IF it is developed properly and maintained. There are potentially too many high-value assets (amphib, CV) without the adequate support, or too few platforms to provide the scope and response (TLAM carrying SSN).

The RAF lost out because they couldn’t deliver through either the TSR-2 or the F111. Of course, even if these aircraft had made it to the RAF, would the “string of island bases” been intact to base them?

As to the nukes, what does this give the RN? One rather narrow role, which given current potential conflicts is unlikely to be used.

Oh, I wasn’t disputing that, thus the follies was in quotes. Ironically, the fact that a Stalin naval force didn’t appear, made the castration of the RN easier to do. A more viable surface threat might have concentrated the minds….

The fact that the navy’s “near sole role” was to fight the SU was a political descision, which *hoped* (or was arrogant enough) to assume that no one would trouble us else where. Even in performing that sole role, it was too narrow, concentrating as you say on the SSBN/SSN battle. If war has broken out without an opening exchange of nukes, then of course transatlantic shipping was going to be important, and so to its protection. You’re going to look foolish if you wake up the next day to find you haven’t been nuked, but by-the-way, Soviets are in Paris/Scotland/whereever, oh and we’re out of ammo.

Its not like the possibility of invasion was so completely unheard of. Rumours of earlier build-ups (78?) had existed and been acted on.

Vanguard to Trident. Trans-atlantic shipping was not going to be important becouse there was going to be nothing to ship too, all the ports would have been vaporised. The RN abandoned the Broken backed warfare idea quite quickly.

Prior to the Falklands the sole role of the UK’s armed forces was fighting the cold war, in that sense getting the Nuclear detterent made the RN very important. Even now the RN is doing extroardinarily well and is rapidly developing into the UK’s primary power projection force, with a very powerful amphib fleet, Tomahawk armed SSN’s and now the CVF as well.

The soviets would have gone nuclear straight a way. Every piece of Soviet Doctrine stipulated the use of nukes to the extent that when they went to Afghanistan they took them with them.