The original reason the Sea Wolf class was cut short was because it was a multi-billion dollar sub and they wanted cheaper. The Virginia is now a multibillion dollar sub and they are- AGAIN- talking about cutting the class short and going for a cheaper sub. Wouldn’t they have been better off to stick with the Sea Wolf and bring the cost down through serial production?

By the same token, it would have been far cheaper to have cancelled the Sea Wolf and maintained the Los Angeles class in production.

I’ve heard that during the cold war Warspite got torpedoed by an American sub who mistook her for a hostile Soviet, and fired back sinking the American sub! Warspite lost her conning tower but survived. Seems far fetched, though the story came from a former RN submariner.

The only operational American submarine that was lost during the cold war was the USS Scorpion. The Scorpion was lost in 1968, the Warspite was commisioned in 1971.

(Incidentally, the Thresher was lost during acceptance trials.)

The Yak-141 was a good aircraft in every sense although they lacked armament carrying capability. Think its was the first supersonic VTOL A/C

The Yak-141 was conceptually superior to the 1960s Balzac/Mirage IIIV. Still, the development of any STOVL aircraft is problematic and time consuming. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the Yak-141 program ran out of time and money.

The Yak-141 wasn’t the first supersonic STOVL fighter, even though it was the most practical concept – until the X-35B, that it.

Would FGR2 wings fit – I doubt it…

This begs the question, “Do you actually have FGR.2 wings?”

If the answer is “yes” I’d probably continue to ask stupid questions like “Why do you have FGR.2 wings?”

Being a practical minded chap, I’d never consider looking for something as impractical as a derelict fighter plane.

Nope, I’m on the look out for something with plenty of space and loading ramp like the derelict fuselage of transport aircraft like a C-130 – or even something as small as CH-46. I don’t want anything with intact wings or even a vertical tail, though.

The PGM-500/2000 program was originally known as “Al Hakim.” A turbojet powered version named “Centaur” was proposed for the UK, but the requirement was fulfilled by the APACHE/SCALP-based Storm Shadow.

(Incidentally, the United Arab Emirates version of Storm Shadow/SCALP EG was marketed as “Black Shaheen.”)

Can anyone offer any more information on PGM-500, PGM-2000, Hakim or Centaur?

I’ve been looking for a profile drawing of PGM-500/2000 for ages – and I haven’t had any luck.

That picture appears to show a Regulus (?) type cruise missile launcher instead of the 5in guns actually fitted. Regulus was replaced by submarine launched ballistic missiles and probably retired before Long Beach was in service. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/cgn-9.htm

The missile depicted on the amidships laucher is the Regulus 2 cruise missile – a project that was cancelled at about the same time Long Beach was building.

The Regulus 2 was a Vought project. You can find schematics of both the subsonic Regulus 1 and the supersonic Regulus 2 on the Vought historical website.

The British considered a COD role for the AVRO 748

Before the RN’s last big carrier project was cancelled in the mid-1960s, Hawker Siddeley made an attempt to promote the H.S.748 as a candidate for a COD aircraft. They proposed a strengthened landing gear and adopted a folding wing for the design.

Even with the wings folded, it still would have been far too large to fit on the elevators of CVA-01. This 748 would have been a rare “deck park only” carrier aircraft.

Compared to the 748 the Sukhoi S-80 is a bit more compact…..

In any event, the Soviets considered far more conventional carier based fixed wing COD/ASW/Tanker proposals. I recently started a thread in the Modern Military Aviation section about the “Taifun” turbofan proposal and the “P-42” turboprop.

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=48718