Jet operations

As swerve stated it depends on the jets. Some additional informations:
It also depends on the safety margins and the weight.
Hermes was at its very limit. Even Phantoms cross decked with USS Ranger, but not fully loaden.
An angled deck of a little over 200m was the result of CdG test, so 4 m had to be added. Safe operation of the Hawkeye when catching the last wire was the reason for the addition of these 4m. A Rafale test-operated of Foch and there was consideration given to operate Hornets of her. The angled deck is 165m.
The arrestor wires of BSAC are further to the back than on CdG, so the pull out might be enough for a Hawkeye and surely for a Hornet (these seem to be the aircraft in the drawing – Spain operates Hornets). The safety margins over the stern would be more critical then on CdG because the point to touch down would be closer to the stern. If you don’t want to risk crashes into the stern more bolters would be the result.
The BSAC would not be a sledge hammer like the US-Carriers with 30% of the aircraft but it would have been a nice ship for Sea Control or limited Show of Force like 25 de Mayo was. This ship suffered from lots of technical problems which BSAC probably wouldn’t have.
25 de Mayo showed the limits of a too small carrier in it’s failed attack on Invincible. There wasn’t enough wind over deck so the Skyhawks could not be launched fully fueld and armed. With two 75m catapults as proposed for BSAC 220 the result of this attack and of the Falklands War probably would have been totally different – I think.
Perhaps bager 1968 could add some information?

Bremer Vulkan Carriers

Perhaps some members of this board like these designs?
A nice link:
http://s90.photobucket.com/albums/k279/shipbucket/?

Enjoy

Enlarged CdG designs

Perhaps you are looking for this?

These are proposals DCN made for an enlarged CdG if I am not mistaken.

I am looking forward to the small carrier designs. In the meantime we could watch pictures like these of the Thai 10.000ts carrier:

http://www.navy.mi.th/flynavy/document/hotissue/c801.php

Enjoy – it is a nice ship. I think this is a nice SCS. Such a ship with 8 JSF and two helicopters would be a nice successor of the Harrier Carrier we started with.

Hi bager!

Thanks, these were the pages were I found the pictures. I remember having seen the other designs on this page as well – do you know what RNEE means? Royal Navy …

Hi Ronoo and Tiddles!

The project of this mini Invincible probably is of the early 80ies. Invincibles were quite expensive ships for the few helicopters and Harriers they had although I think in the meantime they have shown their value and I really like them. I think after building the Invincibles – perhaps inspired by the Harrier Carrier the procedure was to have a ship with enough aircraft without the Seadart and with 2 instead of 4 Gasturbines. The radar Marconi 1022 and the skijump are further indications that it must be from the early 80ies.
I agree it is a really beautiful looking ship.

German Mini Carrier design

The foto of the model I posted yesterday shows a design by a british yard. I had to much confidence in my memory and didn’t take notes. So I don’t know more about it. Somehow I think it was a Yarrow design but I am far from sure.

Here is the smallest german mini carrier I have found.

It is named “Kleiner Flugzeugträger” which simply means small aircraft carrier.

Wilhelm Hadeler is the designer of the Graf Zeppelin and published some articles about design studies of the German Nazi Navy. There were ships of 6.000 ts like this one, up to 70.000 ts diesel powered monsters with 28cm guns. They are studies – not more – and probably have been made to keep the designers busy to protect them from beeing send into the war.
The design I present here is credited with the following dimensions: 140/161m lenght; 16m beam at waterline level, 5,5m draught. Engines are unknown. My guess 2*16.000 hp diesel engines. The hangar was to be 112 * 13m, the flight deck 155*28m Aircraft complement is unknown – perhaps a dozen Me 109.
Another design of 12.000 ts was probably never drawn.

The Hansa design was the one some of this board might have in mind.
It has 9.000 ts: 132/129m lenght. It should have had 3 Me 109 and 4 Ju 87. Flight deck: 143*28. The ship should have had two hangars. The plan was to rebuilt Freighters to escort carriers.
No conversion was started with.
The next designs are beyond 10.000 ts

Japanese aircraft carrying corvette of the 50ies

Here is a drawing I found somewhere in the net. I could kick myself in the “stern” that I did not take proper notes. It looks like late fifties origin.
This design could have been named aircraft carrying corvette – but it was a anti submarine carrier. It looks like around 8.000 ts to me.