PA-58 Verdun…

Badger 1968, by chance do you have any further details pertaining to your:
“Defence Staff considered a smaller design, derived from Clemenceau, in which the after guns would have been replaced by Masurca before the project was finally abandoned in 1961.”?

Regards
Pioneer

LOL, thx for pointing out, I hadn’t noticed the age of the thread. ROFL :highly_amused:

I had trouble opening the link provided earlier. Is this the Conway drawing?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251178[/ATTACH]
http://lefauteuildecolbert.blogspot.nl/2016_09_01_archive.html

Also found this image of a model.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251180[/ATTACH]
http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/66556-le-pa-verdun-un-paper-ship-des-annees-1960/

[ATTACH=CONFIG]251181[/ATTACH]
http://forummarine.forumactif.com/t6932-pan-et-pa58

Try http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/directory#.WJPA0PmLTIV

He’s not been here for about 5 years.

Badger 1968, by chance do you have any further details pertaining to your:
“Defence Staff considered a smaller design, derived from Clemenceau, in which the after guns would have been replaced by Masurca before the project was finally abandoned in 1961.”?

Regards
Pioneer

well back then they propaply wanted to save whit the cost of escort ships and helicopters werent that common in Marine Nationale….perhaps they would have come tot he same conclusion as USN whit terriers and moved the masacuras away after some time on service, but who knows…

Folks,

Off topic, but the drawing of the PA-58 shows a twin surface area (eg similar to the Terrier or Sea Dart) launcher and large AA cannons. The USN had a few carriers also fitted with area defense weapons — ie they were dismounted later.

Question: Why is this done. A carrier is a floating armored airbase. The only weapons it should have are last ditch close-in. Also I think that carriers escort should have the helicopters — ie a ship like the Italians helicopter carriers with big decks on the back. Carriers are VERY expensive. And every ton and foot should be used for one purpose. Launching fixed wing aircraft. Heck I even think they ought to have all the radars taken off. Use the escort ships for radar, helicopters and area defense.

Jack E. Hammond

NOTE> I have a feeling I am going to get my brains blown out electronically on this opinion. But for the record some retired admirals who don’t have to toe the party line have stated the same.

I’m also planning a Mirage-G in Aeronavale markings 🙂
Thanks for your comments and explanations!!

Very nice! The sad thing is that, had the CVA-01 project been combined with PA-58 earlier, the Chief of the Defence Staff at the time, Mountbatten (a strong RN supporter), would probably have approved construction. The other advantage is that there would have been less messing around with trying to bolt on a huge air defence system (CVA-01 had Sea Dart mountings aft) which took up a lot of space. If the UK had adopted a similar system to the French Masurca, preferably using the American launch rail system, then Sea Dart could have been designed very differently, with possibly better export potential. Obviously, the RN would probably not have fitted the 100mm guns, but could have fitted a mix of 40mm Bofors and Sea Cat missiles in their place, and later the SeaWolf.

Sorry! Here it is…
http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index.php?showtopic=8955&st=0

URL?

Well I made models of the Breguet 1120 Sirocco and Mirage IVC (land based version of the IVM). You can see the photos on the whatif modelers forum

Archibaald,

There was a naval fighter variant in the Mirage III family. It was the Mirage V (designation first use). You’ll find it in Les Avions de Combat Françaises 1945-60 from Docavia.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=30.0

EdLaw,

Br 1120 info also in Les Avions de Combat Françaises 1945-60 from Docavia.
But also here:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=142.0

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=30.0

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=163.0

Regards,

Antonio

There was a proposal to ‘Spey’ the Mirage III if memory serves, no pun intended, so a spey engined French fighter might not be out of the question. Any info on the Br.1120? Personally, I just wish they had managed to persuade the RAF to go for the Phantom (as a fighter) and the supersonic Buccaneer as the striker. It would have avoided some on the unpleasantness that developed between the RAF and RN (including a wonderful demonstration by the RAF, showing that land based TSR2s could strike anywhere a carrier could – only acheived by relocating Australia a few hundred miles!).

This is a real world forum? Ahh, I missed that… :diablo:

Thank you very much Bager and Pometablava!! Nice pictures…there was two Mirage IVA at the shop the other day… must change one into a Mirage IVM!!
Edlaw, I thought about merging CVA-01 and Verdun carriers (exactly as the CVF today!) I’m a member of the whatif modeler forum, and i made a thread on the subject recently if you are interested…
Collaboration between France and GB could have gone even farther:
When the SR-177 was cancelled in 1958, the FAA had no longer Seavixen replacement. France had the same problem, because the Mirage III couldn’t be navalised (because of its delta wing). As we all know, the two navies ended with Crusaders and Phantoms…
Before buying crusaders, the Aeronavale asked Breguet to study an indigenous naval fighter, the Br.1120 Sirocco…
So we can imagine a cooperative program between Breguet and BAC (in 1960) exactly like the Jaguar five years later…
but I stop here, these is a REAL WORLD forum, not a whatif one!!

It might have been interesting to see this project combined with the British CVA-01, which was around the same timeframe (it stretched on, being enlarged, shrunk and finally cancelled). If they had been able to build three or four (one to act as a deterrent carrier for France, and probably two or three for the UK, since they would not want to operate fewer carriers than France), it might have gone ahead, with the economies of scale. If you modified the design a little, it would have made a potent carrier, though if you wanted to use Phantoms, it would probably need to be enlarged to 50,000 tons or more.

Here is the text of the Conway’s article.
Note that they do state that the PA-58 would have 75m catapults… I guess the artist didn’t read the text!

In 1958, while Clemenceau and Foch were still under construction, a third carrier was approved. The PA 58 design was larger and heavier, and although it bore a superficial resemblance to PA 54, was clearly influenced by the new ‘super carriers’ built by the US Navy. The shape of the flight deck, which was given considerable overhang on either side amidships, enabled the island to be positioned farther outboard. Parking space amidships was thereby increased, and the 200m hangar was positioned centrally. Two deck-edge lifts, each 17m x 14m, were sited forward and aft of the island to starboard. The length of the catapults was increased to about 75m so that larger aircraft could be handled. They were, however, positioned in the same way as those on Clemenceau so that there was a clear separation between flying operations, which were confined to the port side of the ship, and parking and handling operations. The angled deck measured 192m and was angled at 8° as on Clemenceau.
The significant increase in power needed to sustain fleet speed led to a corresponding increase in the number of shafts from two to four. Protection of flight deck and machinery was on a similar pattern to Clemenceau, but the thickness of the armour was slightly increased.
The eight single 100mm of Clemenceau were to be retained but, in addition, it was planned to fit a twin launcher for the new Masurca SAMs on either side of the flight deck aft (as in the US Navy’s Kitty Hawk).
In addition to Alize ASW aircraft and Etendard fighter-bombers, PA 58 was to operate Mirage IVM heavy strike aircraft. The latter, under development for the Navy since 1956, had a length of 19m, a wing-span of 12m, and a take-off weight of 20t.
PA 58, possibly to be named Verdun, was delayed by financial problems, and the Defence Staff considered a smaller design, derived from Clemenceau, in which the after guns would have been replaced by Masurca before the project was finally abandoned in 1961.

Dear Archibaald,

Info about Mirage IVM is here:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=30.0

And its rival design is here:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=35.msg120#msg120

Regards,

Antonio

Thanks a lot…!!!

Very nice to you, guys!!! I wait impatiently the drawings and pictures of the ship… and thanks for the link! Such a carrier could have been very useful to complement the foch and clemenceau which were very busy all their lives…
Can someone find infos of the Mirage IVM ? I really want to make a model of it starting from Heller Mirage IVA…

I have scanned the drawing fron Conway’s here:
http://s22.photobucket.com/albums/b336/Bager1968/misc%20ships/?action=view&current=PA-58Verdun.gif

The Conway’s drawing is wrong about some details. For instance, the artist substituted the short 50m catapults from the Clemenceau class.