Fedaykin asked about the reloads, so here are the informations I have about this design (source Brown Moore: Rebuilding the Royal Navy):
28 Sea Slug Missiles, 12 ready for use 16 broken down. Displacement 6400 tons twin shaft turbine maschinery. Waterline lenght 485 feet. The reloads were under the bridge in a magazine. The extension of this magazine should end somewhere in front of the funnel.

Note: Nobody seems to have noticed the christmas greetings:
Note the visitor in front of the Seaking, the flag signal showing limited maneuverability and the christmas tree on the front radar mast.

So – Merry christmas to all ;-))))

By the way Jeanne de Arc for me seems to be a very good answer (30 years erlier) to the discussion of a “global cruiser” which was planned for the Royal Navy. some time ago.

BSAC 220 two or three catapults?

HI

I think Ja Worsley is wrong with three catapults. I have always read that BSAC 200 and 220 should have had two catapults. Three catapults for two dozens aircraft on less then 30.000 tons does not seem probable.
Here is a source for the two catapults:
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/2776/noticias_i.htm
I think that the second catapult is on the far starbord side. The line of the “middle catapult” could be a safety line for the landing strip.
Somewere I have seen a piture of a Yak 130 trainer mock up with foldable wings – I am sorry I could not find it.
Perhaps this could be an alternative for Brazil?

Well, I think lots of these drawings are fanart of those guys (like us) that would like to know how these ships might have looked or how developments of this design might look one day (those who would kill for plans of this ship ;-)) The problem really is to sea what is fanart and what is artists impression by the yard.
Spain has chosen the VTOL alternative, so the only possible customer would be Brasil – as far as I know Argentinia has by no means the money (even less than brazil). Does anybody know if the spanish Hornets are carrier capable? If so perhaps Bazan had the hope in the 90ies that there might be a chance to built a CTOL carrier for the existing Hornets.
I am very curious what would be the next brazilian carrier and what would be the planes flying from it.
My bet: Something like a modernised BSAC 220 with second hand Hornets built on a brazilian yard in cooperation with Navantia/Izar/Bazan.
Does anybody know if it is really possible to convert Trackers or Tracers into suitable AEWs? These are drawings I found on some brazilian page.
What do you think?

Hi tiddles!

In post 48 are the pictures I have.
The pictures are of very different designs.
The smallest was the 5000 ts carrier HC500. The link was in my last mail and is the drawing showing the design from 4 sides. The design is really heavily armed but it is also a really fat ship.
The next was the 6000ts carrier HC 600. This is the design I have changed to Theodor Heuss. The above view of this design is in post 48 the second (top right) This design has only one 76mm gun and some light guns. This design has 7 VTOL. The foto of the model shows the same design more heavily armed. 2 guns which probably were 2 40mm twins and one Seasparrow and some guns which I believe were a 30mm gun type which was never or seldom built. I made Theodor Heuss buy changing this design.
The next design was of 8000ts I think it has strong resemblence to the much earlier Harrier Carrier. The drawing on the right of the model foto shows the drawing I have from a Bremer Vulkan publication.
The design top left is (probably) a modification of this design with ski jump added.
The last picture shows the 11.000ts design.

All right?

I very much hope that CVF will one day enter Portsmouth Harbour and I hope that I will still live and have time to sit in the pub at the harbour entrance. Well I hope it will be overcrowded by members of this and other boards 😉

shiplover

BSAC and CVV

I don’t think so.
The principle idea might be simillar. A CTOL carrier as small as possible. But with US carrier doctrine small as possible is something different to spanish or Latin American ideas. CVV had more then dubble the size. I would compare CVV and CVA of the sixties.
SCS and PdA are very similar. PdA is a “pimped up” SCS with better electronics and Command and Control.
I sometimes wonder if BSAC was inspired by the VSS. The VSS (Vertical Support Ship) was a larger Sea Control Ship of which even CTOL versions were studied. Does anybody have reasonable drawings? Perhaps one of these CTOL studies inspired BSAC 220.

BTW in a different source I found out that 240m was length over all (not waterlinie as I guessed earlier).

Any thoughts?

Oh! shame on me I confused the two because I put the photo in my south korean archive!
I thought that this is a hook for carrier landings. I heard of this hook / and have seen it on an F 104 Starfighter which of course is not carrier capable but I thought that this was an exception and that normally a hook means carrier capable – well so I learnt something.

I would like to add technical data I found of BSAC 220
I think ther ship would have dimensions very close to Foch.
Displacement: 27.000 ts – I believe empty
Dimensions 240*29,5 – I believe waterlinie
Planes 21
Speed 24
Range 7.500 (15 knots)
Complement 1.000

I guess that the propulsion would have been 2 LM 2500.

The same data of BSAC 200
23.000
221,8*28
21 planes
26 knots
7500(15)
1.000
Both should have 2 75m catapults and 2 elevators.

Any thougts or additional infos?

Hi Merlock and X 07!

This drawing is not BSAC 220. It has no catults and no arrestor wires.
This ship should have cost 400 million dollars but that is 10 years ago. Today probably double the price.
It should have had 2 75m catapults – that is what CdG has.
It should have been able to launch and recover Rafale, Hornets, MIGs, Super Etendards, Skyhawks, navalised trainers and the Hawkeye. I have doubts about Hawkeye – remember the trubble CdG had.
I think this design could be an alternative if F35B fails or becomes unafordable. I found a picture on an korean page which shows an A50 with hook.

I would have liked to add pictures but the link “Manage attachments” tells me that I have more than 6 MB of attachments which is definitly wrong – perhaps I try later – is there an acount which I might have filled with my posts regarding the “8000 ts Harrier Carrier”?

Well I hope this information helps in the discussion