Clemenceau/Foch: 2 UK-designed BS5; length-151ft; capacity-50,000lb@91kt, 33,000lb@150kt

Colossus/Majestic class: 1 MacTaggert-Scott (or BS4); length-103ft; capacity-40,000lb@78kt

Some of the modified Essex class that were in the disposal yards in the bay. They obvoiusly had been de-mothballed, as their white coating and other sealing material had been removed.

I don’t know which ones, but if you can find out when (month & year) the movie was filmed, then more might be learned.

An addition to my post above: SCB-27A also included re-building the Island and funnel structure to increase the internal control spaces and angle the aft end of the funnel.

The real problem is that she is in such bad shape that the USN has de-certified her for aircraft operations, and they estimate it will take over $5oo,ooo,ooo US to restore her to even marginal service (yes, 500 MILLION US dollars!!).

It is estimated to require ~$1.5 billion to get her into full service condition.

That is the reason they are agreeing to decomission her and drop to 11 carriers… that much money (and her air wing) can really improve the operational state of the rest of the fleet, when applied to the general repair budget (and the $1 billion per year to the general operational funds).

The original plan for USN/USMC medium attack was to “go slow” with the A-12, allowing time for the design and technologies to be fully developed before they tried to build actual aircraft. This would have seen them enter service starting around 2000-2005, and finishing by 2010.

This would have necessitated something to “fill in” for the A-6Es, which were experiencing problems with airframe and wing structure fatigue.

The A-6F was to be this temporary “replacement”, and details were released in early 1984. They would have had 3 of the same computer as went into the F-14D upgrade (one for flight & A-A combat, one for radar & bombing, and one as a “spare”), as well as a variant of its radar. There were to be two (one per wing) new “light-weight” stores pylons added outboard of the existing ones, specifically to carry Harm missiles for radar supression or AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles for “self-defense”.

The wing was to be a new part-composite one, and the fuselage would be redesigned for transsonic (but not supersonic) flight, as well as to accept the larger diameter F404 engines.

Congress objected that this would cost so much that it would endanger the A-12, so the cheaper A-6G program was proposed. This would have all of the new avionics, but would use existing airframes (and a limited number of new-build to the existing design), with new wings of the same design as those just starting to be built as replacement for cracked ones on the -Es.

With the expected “wisdom” of “money solves everything”, Congress decided to forgo any “stop-gap” program, on the grounds that all that money would, if transferred to the A-12, speed it up to a 1995 production date, thus negating the need for upgrades to the Intruder.

Of course, we all know how that turned out, don’t we!!

There is nothing “test” about this one (being a much-worked-over 1940 design)… she is simply being scuttled to provide an artificial reef for sea-life, and a wreck for recreational divers to dive on.

She is being scuttled in shallow water, and will become the property of the state of Florida when she reaches the (shallow, near-shore) bottom.

I don’t know… I have only seen it mentioned in the 1988-98 Jane’s Aircraft engine section, where it is said to be capable of being fitted to both the -8 and -408 engines “in the field”. I do believe it was also to be for the proposed “A-6G” upgrade of the Intruder… which was turned down in ~1985/6. (The proposed new-build “A-6F” would have had non-afterburning F404s).

When I completed my time in the USMC in June 1989, none of the A-6E Intruders in VMA (AW)-121 or VMA (AW)-242 (based in El Toro Ca.) had had their -8 engines refitted, nor was there any talk of doing so to any of the Marine birds, so I really doubt that the Intruders did … I have no idea on the Prowlers (-408).

As all the USMC A-4Ms (-408) & OA-4Ms (-8) were being replaced with AV-Bs and F-18Ds at that time, they wouldn’t have either… and the TA4Fs (-8) of the USN had no need for that extra power, so no there also.

“Next came AV-8B II+ — AV-8B with radar (APG-65) allowing firing of radar guided air-to-air missiles; should be designated AV-8C.”

No, there is already an AV-8C… it is the USMC AV-8A with control system improvements and other upgrades. This was done in the late 1970s to keep them in service until the AV-8B came into service (the upgrade was developed after the Harrier II was designated, thus the strange sequence).

The “AV-8B+” should have been designated AV-8D… especially since the entire fuselage was replaced with a newly-built redesigned one during the “upgrade”.

Of course, as with the “Super Hornet” F/A-18E/F, the “Harrier II” AV-8B should have been designated as a completely different aircraft, as it really is one… then we would have the AV-12A (no radar) & B (APG-65) Harrier II [being designed after the Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II and its competitor the Fairchild A-11], and the F/A-24 A/B Super Hornet & EF-24C Growler [being designed after the F-22 & F-23 were already in development, but before the out-of-sequence X-32/F-32 & X-35/F-35]!

The A-12 would have then been the A-13, which would have been very fitting considering its fate!

Of course, this is all more hair-splitting babbling… feel free to ignore, laugh, or take my ramblings as the basis of a new religion… whichever strikes your fancy!

The Midway (CV-41) rolled because she had been rebuilt and modified to the point that she had NO reserve stability left!
design displacement: 45,000 t. (60,000 t. full); beam 113″; flight deck 136′
1980 displacement: 52,500 t. (65,241 t. full); beam 121′; flight deck 258′
final displacement: 69,873 t. full; beam 146′; flight deck 264′
[after 1986 “bulging” (to restore freeboard and improve seakeeping, but actually made it worse by making her hull float too “shallow” to maintain stability)].

I was on CV-61 Ranger in 1986. Passing through a Typhoon north of Japan, and operating around the Aleutian islands in November is not exactly “calm seas”, but there was no excess rolling, and we were able to operate our aircraft anytime the wind allowed (once we had cleared the ice from the deck with steam hoses).

A large overhang is no problem on a ship designed with it… the problem Midway had was that she was not designed for it, and it was added in a series of 3 modifications (aft elevator moved to starboard deck-edge, enclosed bow, and basic angle deck 7/1955-9/1957);(flight deck widened, elevators enlarged, bow elevator moved to starboard deck-edge, port deck-edge elevator moved from front of angle to near stern 2/66-1/71);(larger bulges added 1986).