HOME | DD
Evilonavich β Escobar Class
Published: 2006-04-20 23:42:55 +0000 UTC; Views: 3778; Favourites: 40; Downloads: 206
Redirect to original
Description
A submergable carrier. For ns.Related content
Comments: 10
The ski jump at the bow isn't a very good idea. Β It disrupts the hydrodynamics of the submarine, not only causing drag but also creating a lot of noise, vastly increasing the chances of the sub being detected. Β My suggestion, go for a retractable ski jump
π: 0 β©: 1
"This is not a "submarine" its submergeable which means at most a dive depth of around 10 to 20 meters and not necessarily any real ability for real head way at that depth given she will be ever so noisy on the move.Β "
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, ok. Β Just was mislead a bit cause I saw the word "submergable" so I thought that meant it was a sub. Β My bad, lol
π: 0 β©: 0
I know I might be thinking this out a bit hard, but how thick is that glass? Subs don't usually have glass windows. Tends to become an issue of pressure-integrity.
Even if it's not meant to go deep, I'd advise a fiber-optic system to prevent leakage caused by any damage that could be caused by, say, a near-miss torpedo or something.
It also looks to sit a bit high in the water, especially if it's nuclear powered, (which might require the reactor in the middle; nuclear powered ships tend to be aft-heavy and sit lower in the back than front, which'd be a problem for your flight-deck).
Submersible carrier has always been a plot of mine. One big problem is the flight-deck. You'd have to be able to dry it quickly for emergency aircraft recovery if you've just surfaced. I'm liable to believe that wouldn't be good for a landing aircraft, that much water. The typical submarine no-skid surface would eat up landing gear, and the typical carrier flight-deck would be complicated.
I'd believe it necessary for a FOD-search every time you surfaced.
Love the idea, but find it...
... challenging...
π: 0 β©: 1
"Glass" or transparent aluminium with a graphene backing grid.. we could go as far as grown diamond plate cells in a titanium boron alloy matrix but that would reaally blow the cost out of the water.
This is not a "submarine" its submergeable which means at most a dive depth of around 10 to 20 meters and not necessarily any real ability for real head way at that depth given she will be ever so noisy on the move. Now even this requires radical structural differences to a conventional vessel loosing both the light assembly and for an escort carrier the cheap nature of the hull and some aircraft compliment but then what do you gain?
True radar invisibility, a loiter capacity that makes one reasonably hard to spot and the ability to crash dive to avoid incoming conventional ship to ship missiles. Given her counter fire is mostly counter missile tube based and one can just deploy a bouy link to spotting UAVs instead of maintaining a CAP (which given the limited nature of any escort carriers compliment is a bugger anyway).
Nuclear power in an escort carrier ..well no I just do not think it wise or overly cost effective but even without the massive extra megawattage we can still run a fairly simple section of steam blast nozzles on the flight deck and if theres one thing the submergable system will allow me to have its ample available high pressure storage and piping.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hmm. Good points, but you'd want to make it more like 40 to 50 meters; powerful enough RADAR could even theoretically see below the surface at a close enough range, and in good conditions, particularly tropical areas, 20 to 30 meters might not be enough to prevent aerial surveillance. Good thing is you don't have to change much, the difference between 20 and 50 meters wouldn't be considerable, just saying for safety's sake.
Yeah, nuclear power wouldn't be cost effective - regular diesel/battery would be good. You could even do a snorkel at that depth.
Steam blast nozzles; creative. Wouldn't be too hard to do actually. Nice. Kind of like an air-ejector/evaporator.
π: 0 β©: 0
isn't that like the Atlantis carrier in supreme commander
π: 0 β©: 0
