NationStates Jolt Archive

*gasp* Yes, due to international pressure, Raysian Military Technologies has decided to get more into this navy stuff... of course, since all out tech is air-based, most of this will be air-oriented.

Projects currently in research:

Low Profile Aircraft Carrier
Submersible Landing Ships
Submersible Aircraft Carriers
Cargo-Aircraft capable carriers.
High Speed Wing-In-Ground Transports (counts as navy tech)


Among the even more far-fetched ideas that RMT seeks to complete, or at least pursue are:

Some sort of a mobile Sea-Faring military base, capable of housing multiple runways that can land many LARGE Jumbo jets et cetera.

Or even better yet, since the completion of the RT-3307 Sky Base, RMT wishes to kick it up about 5 notches and attempt to make a FLOATING CITY.... [Is this even possible with <2020 tech? Someone start throwing out ideas ;)]

Please suggest any other <2020 tech level product you wish to see from Raysian Military Technologies on this thread.

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/rsig1.jpg (http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/rmtdex.htm)

good night everyone, please, if you have any suggestions on the above topics, or if you have somnething you want us to research because you don't think the best in the world is frikkin good enough, then just ask ;)

Projects currently in research:

Low Profile Aircraft Carrier

By "low profile," do you mean stealth?

Submersible Landing Ships

The Federation Navy is actually finishing up development of a submersible landing craft for our Galapagos-class submarine amphibious assault ships.
We can discuss details over telegram.

Submersible Aircraft Carriers

The Tiamat-class submersible aircraft carrier is the vanguard of the FN fleet. Again, we can discuss details over telegram.

Cargo-Aircraft capable carriers.

A C-130 can (very carefully) land on a Nimitz-class carrier with the deck clear.

High Speed Wing-In-Ground Transports (counts as navy tech)

You'll want to do research on craft like the "Caspian Sea Monster" ekranoplan and other Russian designs... they've got the principles behind this down pat.

Among the even more far-fetched ideas that RMT seeks to complete, or at least pursue are:

Some sort of a mobile Sea-Faring military base, capable of housing multiple runways that can land many LARGE Jumbo jets et cetera.

Look at the Mobile Offshore Base concept the US military is developing right now. That's exactly what they are doing.

Or even better yet, since the completion of the RT-3307 Sky Base, RMT wishes to kick it up about 5 notches and attempt to make a FLOATING CITY.... [Is this even possible with <2020 tech? Someone start throwing out ideas ;)]

With advanced principles developed for offshore oil platforms, absolutely. In fact, the "City at Sea" Freedom supership is designed more like an oil platform than a cruise liner.

OOC:
I think he meant FLOATING CITY as in a gigantic airship, not an offshore platform. The RT-3307 Sky Base is a carrier airship.

Yeah, I know... my mind made a connection between that line and the previous one about the mobile offshore base.

As far as "sky cities" are concerned, I think that's a bit beyond the realm of the technology we're using here. I guess you could use dirigible technology to make some sort of semi-permanent airborne station... but why would you?

The need to use "Ground based" Immobile, Airfields make giant Targets. a good surprise attack can bomb all your major airfields, Thus leaving you to spend time repairing the air fields, Relying on Naval aviation, and VTOL or STOL Aircraft (if all your Aircraft are not blown up in the first wave of attack) a Sky base as Raysia has developed, Is a More mobile Aircraft carrier not limited to major Lakes and Oceans. Though Costly, and Still one Big target it is Mobile which gives it an advantage over Conventional airstrips.

Costly... not capable of fielding as many aircraft... one could argue that it would be easier to strike an airborne carrier than airbases within a nation or even a naval aircraft carrier. Also, unless you just haven't invested in a halfway-decent air defense system, it would be hard to launch any sort of continental surprise attack.

i was thinking of a huge raft, towed by cruisers, destroyers, and battleships that has a few airplane catapults, some helipads, and a few huge shore-bombardment guns.

but it probably wouldn't work...

What happens to the "raft" if its tow lines are severed in battle? Or worse yet, if the towing ships are hit and sink rapidly? It strikes me as being very inefficient.

What happens to the "raft" if its tow lines are severed in battle? Or worse yet, if the towing ships are hit and sink rapidly? It strikes me as being very inefficient.yup. that's Why the AMS got rid of the idea.

In WW2, the Japanese built one or two submarines designed to launch planes. They were built to destory the locks on the Panama Canal. Fortunately, they didn't succeed. That's all I know, other than the plane was a seaplane, lifted by crane out of some compartment on the carrier, and the wings folded. They probably folded backwards, like a swing wing plane. They were unfolded, the plane took off, dropped a bomb, and returned, and was lifted back into the sub. Might have been a unique plane and sub - not based off of any existing, contemporary design.

In WW2, the Japanese built one or two submarines designed to launch planes. They were built to destory the locks on the Panama Canal. Fortunately, they didn't succeed. That's all I know, other than the plane was a seaplane, lifted by crane out of some compartment on the carrier, and the wings folded. They probably folded backwards, like a swing wing plane. They were unfolded, the plane took off, dropped a bomb, and returned, and was lifted back into the sub. Might have been a unique plane and sub - not based off of any existing, contemporary design.it was, as a matter of fact, a modified I-class submarine. the attack failed miserably. none of the pilots escaped. (i think) and the subs were forced to leave without them. it was, essentially, a waste of subs that could have participated in the pacific.

edit: this was not the attack on the canal :oops:

I saw a book in Borders once about practical submarine carrier design. It talked about modifying an SSBN to carry a few Harriers.

OOC-Take a scaled up Typhoon, rip out the Launch tubes and systems, you've got room for a good amount of VTOLs.

We have just that, it's a really huge sub, but instead of aircraft, it carries SubFighters (Think Mantas, but much better). I'm sure you could do the same with Aircraft carriers. We have a Submersible aircraft carrier on the drawing board, along with a ton of other stuff we want to work on (Portable Microwave weapons, multileg UGVs, EMS guided weapons)

Our Tiamat-class carrier is capable of deploying both aerial and submarine fighters.

when you guys say sub fighters do you mean ASW jets or what?

OOC:
I think they mean smaller submarines that is the tactical equivalent of a fighter on air.

Or even better yet, since the completion of the RT-3307 Sky Base, RMT wishes to kick it up about 5 notches and attempt to make a FLOATING CITY

I've already done this... I'm sure it's fine with 2020 tech.

Kelanis's new Phantasm-class carrier is fully equipped to employ the newly researched Plasma warhead technology. This new system renders armor completely irrelevant, since it is disintegrated along with a sizable portion of the target ship.

The carrier is also being equipped with a scaled-down version of the Project X visual cloaking device. When installed, the carrier will be the first ship in Kelanis' navy that will have the ability to render itself invisible to visual and electronic location (at the expense of movement, as the reactors must feed the device instead of the shafts, reducing movement speed significantly).

As of yet, however, we have no plans for a submersible aircraft carrier, but we will be bringing a modified version of our Emissary-class suborbital bombers into service, which we plan on equipping with aircraft deployment systems.

OOC:
I think they mean smaller submarines that is the tactical equivalent of a fighter on air.
OOC-Bingo. We're talking little guys zipping around at 60-120 knots using MHD and Hydrogen breathing rockets, and in the case of the expensive ones, supercavitation.

con i order two "Aerospace RT-3307 "Sky Base""??

con i order two "Aerospace RT-3307 "Sky Base""??
This isn't a storefront...

oh, excuse me...

Low Profile Aircraft Carrier

:roll:
OOC: Hopefully you mean low profile as in close to the surface of the water so I can crash a giant man-made tsunami (bombs on the water) into it and wipe out all the planes on the flight deck and anyone else who happens to be standing outside. And if by low profile, you meant stealth, there's a small problem; the massive FLAT flight deck. Radar reflects off of flat surfaces like no other, so while it might be invisible to radar waves that strike it broadside, it would still be VERY visible to aircraft, making your "stealth carrier" useless and still a bomb magnet.

According to Ben Rich's autobiography of his career at the Skunk Works, they did do concept designs and RCS testing on a stealth aircraft carrier design... so, it is doable.

According to Ben Rich's autobiography of his career at the Skunk Works, they did do concept designs and RCS testing on a stealth aircraft carrier design... so, it is doable.
Infact, it is already in the researching. The in-the-shipyard George H.W. Bush (CVN-77), which is still based on the Nimitz, actually do incorporate various low-RCS features (not necessarily stealth, just harder to spot). The CVX-78, which is still in the developing phase, will incorporate even more of the "stealth features" plus a complete redesign.

So yes, it is entirely possible in modern tech (although I wouldn't say "full stealth" on carriers is a bit [edit]IMpossible at least in modern tech).

Rich said their design was based on the principles they perfected with the Sea Shadow trials and was entirely buildable with current technology. What did the Navy think of it? "We don't build ships that look like that." & "There is no room for career advancement on ships that only require a tenth of the crew to run."

OK, so scrap the Stealth carrier idea, and scrap the low-profile (close to waterline) carrier idea...

Submersible Landing ship: Doable
Submersible Aircraft carrier: doable
Mobile Off-shore city: Doable, but dangerous.
Wing-In-Ground Hovercraft: very doable

Jumbo-Jet capable aircraft carriers... working on that.

Here's pics for each so far:

Large Subersible Landing Ship:
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/sublander.jpg

Submersible Aircraft Carrier:
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/subcar.jpg

Wing-In Ground Aircraft:
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/wigs.jpg

Floating City:
[No pic available]

Jumbo Jet Capable Carrier?
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/bigcar.jpg

So, question:

With every manner of slowing devices and aids (name them please), what is the absolute minimum stopping distance for a 2 million pound (1000 ton) Jumbo jet?

Or should I forget trying to land one of those on a deck and attempt a water-landing and take-off with one of them, as discussed in another thread...

OK, How about a 500 ton Antonov An-225 Mriya?

Ehh... Your SubCarrier is a wee bit unsublike. The antennae and crud on the tower seem kinda undesirable. (That is actually a normal carrier from some anime series.)
The one we're working on has been proposed to look like this-
http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Rifts/Rifts-Earth-Vehicles/United_States/US_CVN-87_Ticonderoga_Carrier-2-small.gif
Perhaps we could pool our efforts?

hmm...

On second thought, a submersible aircraft carrier no longer seems appealing ;) I would rather attempt to land one of my jumbo jets.

hmm...

On second thought, a submersible aircraft carrier no longer seems appealing ;) I would rather attempt to land one of my jumbo jets.
Well, the reason they've made it to the drawing board with us is they can basically operate any Naval fighter we have, and they can work with Subcraft much better than our New Empire class can. But that's if it gets enough funding.

Well, get a scaled down MOB Airstrip section and slap a control tower on it.

Currently, we have a Mobile Airstrip that is basically a bunch of gigantic barges locked together to make a runway almost 2 miles long.

It's great and all, but I dunno, it just seems kind of helpless and slow.

OK, so scrap the jumbo jet lander, and just work on a water-landing ability for the RT-1707... got it.

So now, what is the feasability of making an RT-1707 perform a water landing??:
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/rt1707.gif

If I were to modify them with some sort of pontoons on the wing tips for balance, would the basic shape of the plane be able to take a water landing and beaching?

Well, pontoons on the wings, yeah. You could take the bottom and give it a sort of boat-hull shape to ease movement into and out of the water.

Well, pontoons on the wings, yeah. You could take the bottom and give it a sort of boat-hull shape to ease movement into and out of the water.BWB:
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/bwb.gif

Kinda already looks water-landing capable :P

W/ Pontoons:

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/bwbw.gif

Of course, it would obviously look cooler than that, but still...

Yeah, that actually looks good.

Just think... an advanced version of this guy :P
http://www.sprucegoose.org/images/taxi47-3.jpg

Just think... an advanced version of this guy :P
EDIT-picsnip

Ah, the Spruce Goose, the classic useless seaplane thingy.

Question- Why exactly do you need a aircraft that large capable of sea landing?

OOC: Raysia, if you're thinking of the Pelican ULTRA WIG craft, I've made it already...ask and I'll give you a link to the specs. An 'arrangement' can be made to 'license' sales of the Pelican through your s-fronts...or you could just use them.

Your pick of the "WIG" aircraft looks more like the a burnelli lifting-body design, which would do well for landings such as it is pictured there...and here: http://www.geocities.com/tacticalstudiesgroup/burnelliaircushionlandinggear.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/2116/nexthercules.htm

But that's more of a seaplane (plane that can land on water) than a WIG aircraft (which can 'skim' the surface (without making contact, if possible)).



P.S. I'm interested in the (semi) submersible landing ship...I know the origin of the concept...and I'd be happy to either work on that with you or simply buy production plans when you're done.

the reason i need a sea-landing jumbo jet is for use in enemy nations that don't have working airstrips.

As for the large submersible landing ships... that's just something i always thought it'd be nice to own ;)

OOC: In response to the comment about radar and AC carriers...it's not at all true. Yes, flat surfaces could reflect radar right back to the source...if it is perpendicular to the source. Otherwise, the radar would bounce off of the surface at an angle equal to the angle at which the signal bounced into the surface (the angle of incidence).

Also, by simply placing raised side 'walls' with RAM on the sides of the deck (not in landing or launch areas), by modifying the below-flattop hull so that the surface scatters radar signals, and by reducing the general silhouette of the aircraft carrier (exposing less of the rest of the ship) you can make a carrier that is damn near invisible to conventional land- and ship-based (surface) and longer-range or low-altitude aircraft (effectively near-surface) radars. Those are the primary dangers to ships since most aircraft have to be ready to strike ships at several hundred km out just to escape the ship's SAM systems. I've incorporated these factors into my trimaran AC carriers previously.

Even if the ship only scatters the radar a lot, that's half of the battle. Why? Because most modern surface radars are programmed to ignore the 'surface noise' (Ground Scatter) of radar systems. So, if your ships 'look' like ground scatter on the radar displays then their computers should automatically filter out your ship's presence. More advanced (complicated) radars sometimes filter through the ground scatter for targets, but most nations (RL) could never afford more than a handful of units...if they could make them at all (which they can't).

If you have enemy aircraft within range to pick up reflections from your deck in the first place then you're already farked b/c they're at a fairly high angle (ie, they're right on top of you).

the reason i need a sea-landing jumbo jet is for use in enemy nations that don't have working airstrips.

As for the large submersible landing ships... that's just something i always thought it'd be nice to own ;)

OOC: I know, it's a nice idea...and I was going to develop the Burnelli Landing Seaplane design when I had the time. Until then, I use ULAs (which can land on water thanks to an expanding hover skirt).

As for the landing ships, I thought that you'd gotten them from G2mil...
See: http://www.G2mil.com/LSB.htm

lol all that stuff you said about stealth low-profile (close to waterline) aircraft carriers... i was gonna say something like that lol

So would it be possible then? have an aircraft carrier whose deck is just above the waterline, with a protective wall along the side to deflect waves et cetera? That would be awesome! Nothing shy of a smart bomb cold hit that! Cruise missiles would have a hard time hitting that low, and anti-ship missiles would be clueless, and just about the only thing that could hit it would be a sub torpedo... but properly escorted it would be fine.

Awesome! And since most of the RMT fighters are STO or VTOL, then it doesn't need to be too big, just big enough to park the planes... and if you do the displacements and ballasts right, you could keep it at whatever waterline you wanted ;)

And as for the landing ships, actually their from Macross, and they are actually SHIPS, like big old carrier-sized ships for dropping off entire armies... but small submersible landing ships would be cool too :)

I'll get to work on all 3 of these projects ASAP.

I'd be happy to work with any of you on submersible vessels... Always nice to see the enemy's response to large amounts of men inexplicably showing up outside his shores.

OK, so as far as the water BWB Mod-kit goes, That's done, just need to make a pic.

Sadly though, I am no good at making ship stats, so I'm gonna have to pull it out of my butt :P
Can someone help me make stats on the following:

Low-Profile/Stealth Aircraft Carrier
Submersible landing ship
Large-Scale (Submersible?) Landing Ship

Or even better yet, since the completion of the RT-3307 Sky Base, RMT wishes to kick it up about 5 notches and attempt to make a FLOATING CITY.... [Is this even possible with <2020 tech? Someone start throwing out ideas ;)]

OOC: It is possible even with modern (2003) tech (hell, even with 1980's tech). Wazzu's Oren Moore Inc. (origionally a mining company...the joke is "Ore and More") has experiance in such construction (using modern tech, even in 2300+, old tech is still good...and less expensive!).

http://members.cox.net/sincityraiders/images/SeaCity.jpg

Got the idea off a book, it is quite simple.

Make a rebar/wire/screen mesh, stick it in the ocean, and run a low current through it. Materials will cling to it and make a sort of concrete. If you make some sort of hollow box, you can fill it with air and float it.

The book suggested making hexagonal segments and attaching them. Taller (and deeper) structures in the middle and thinner ones outside make for a very stable platform.

For power? Simply mix surface (warmer) sea water with deep (colder) sea water to produce mist to turn a turbine to produce electric current. Wallah! The nearby ocean has become your solar (sun heats surface water) power supply, and it already has a lot of energy stored up.

As if that wasn't enough, it would be quite easy to move the city to a new spot (where ocean waters are warmer). Of course, water currents (and anchoring), storms, marine life, and other such things can present a hazard. it is suggested that such cities stay in equatorial zones.

Perhaps you may wish to contract out Oren Moore to build floating cities? The prices are quite reasonable.

On second thought, no, a large-scale lander wouldn't be possible without using a hovercraft... so scratch that one.

But the carrier and the submersible landing craft are still on.

Wazzu: Interesting, but yeah, I was talking about floating in the sky... but oh well, I scratched that off my list anyway. Thanks tho

Wazzu: Interesting, but yeah, I was talking about floating in the sky... but oh well, I scratched that off my list anyway. Thanks tho

OOC: Oh, right, sky. Oren Moore does that too. Though that is closer to a 2100 (or very advanced 2050) tech level. This is a well developed part of Wazzu history (RPed the first in...hmmm...was it February or March?). No gravitics required, simple bournelle's (sp?) equation and not-so-simple light/strong materials (not to mention those that capture light and heat well). Solar heated gasses. The problem is getting the "city" to a high enough point in the first place so that enough sunlight is caught to keep the city afloat.

The idea was presented in one of Poul Anderson's books (can't remember the title).

Hmm... *trying to make a pic for a low-profile aircraft carrier... not easy*

You know what would be fun? i mean seriously, just for fun? :)

Optical cloak on the wall of the carrier lol

You know what would be fun? i mean seriously, just for fun? :)

Optical cloak on the wall of the carrier lol
I'd say an aircraft carrier with optical cloak would be somewhat futureistic...

You know what would be fun? i mean seriously, just for fun? :)

Optical cloak on the wall of the carrier lol
I'd say an aircraft carrier with optical cloak would be somewhat futureistic...not to mention somewhat obscenely expensive lol

Allright, Pic completed, now to make up stats :)

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/stcarrier1.gif

AC-180 Alma-Class Low-Profile/Stealth Aircraft Carrier

Builder: Raysian Marine Technologies
Power Plant: Two Nuclear Power Plant (A4W Pressurized Water Reactor) Four shafts, Four propellers, with five blades each
Length, overall: 721 feet (219.8 meters)
Flight Deck Width: 211 feet (64.3 meters)
Beam: 230 feet (70.10 meters)
Displacement: Approx. 67,000 tons full load
Speed: 35+ knots
Aircraft: 18 on Deck, 54 Below Deck
Aircraft elevators: Two
Catapults: One (Rarely used, as this is intended for STO, NVTOL, and VTOL aircraft)
Armament: 4 Sea Sparrow launchers
3 Phalanx CIWS 20mm mounts
Combat Systems: SPS-48E 3-D air search radar
SPS-49(V)5 2-D air search radar
3 Mk91 Fire Control
Multi-Function Radar (MFR) [CVN-77]
Volume Search Radar (VSR) [CVN-77]
AN/SLQ-32(V)4 active jamming/deception
AN/WLR-1H ESM

Service Life: 40 years
Crew: Ship's Company: 1,100; Air Wing: 1,800

Unique Design Features: Made to be especially stealth, leaving no large surfaces facing radar.

This carrier maintains a specific waterline within 3 meters by using several water ballasts et cetera similar to those found on a submarine to control depth.

Although it only has one catapult, this low-profile aircraft carrier is designed to accomodate all manner of STO through VTOL class aircraft.

-----------

OK, that's it for that one, did I leave anything else out? (In case you didn't know, I copied the stats from the nimitz and edited them... I dunno jack about navy ships :P)

EDIT: Number of aircraft held below decks upped to 54, making a total of 72

OK, Got the pic done on the BWB Seaplane

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/seabwb.gif

RT-1707-180 Jumbo BWB Transport Upgraded for Sea Landing/Take-Off/Beaching ability.

Length: 250 feet
Wingspan: 420 feet
Dry Weight: 420,000 lbs
Max Takeoff Weight: 1,500,000 lbs
Max Payload: 500 Tons
Cargo Doors: Front-Loading, Top Loading, and bomb-bay style on some models.
Engines: 3 Raysian Electric PJ-1190 partially Reversable Jet Turbofans, rated at 190,000 lbs of force each. Pontoons on wings also hold drives for a series of Large tractors to help nudge the plane off out into shore when beached. Also uses several deployable outboard motors and rudders to steer in water.
Landing Distance (Water): 9000 feet.
Take-Off Distance (Water): 10,000 feet.

Note: If converted into troop carrier, holds up to 8000 troops.

OOC: Nice Carrier :) Very good job, Now just Make a RF-11E (as a Carrier Born RF-11:-p)

OOC: Nice Carrier :) Very good job, Now just Make a RF-11E (as a Carrier Born RF-11:-p)Speaking of that... what would go on an RF-11 E variant? I don't think there's anything else to change about it...

The D is already Carrier capable, AND STO... so what do we need? Anyone have any suggestions for changes to the RF-11 series?

Current stats:
Our best Fighter, by far:
Raysian Aerospace RF-11D "Archangel"
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/rf11d2.jpg
Tech Level: 2006+
Specifications:
Classification: The Ultimate Multirole
Crew: 2
Wing Span: 35.84 ft (11.20 m)
Length: 49.63 ft (15.51 m)
Weight: 55,018 lb empty (but including QAAM launchers and standard load) / 83,122 lb max. take off
Powerplant: 2 Vectored-Thrust REPH-1100 Pulse-Det Hybrids
Max Normal thrust: 25,000 lbs
Max plus afterburner: 30,000 lbs
Pulse Detonation: adds 7,500 lbs

Aux Power: Two Raysian Aero Aux. Pulse-Det "Blaster" pods, each outputting an additional 15,000 lbs of force (for STO and quick accelleration)
Maximum speed (with only QAAMs onboard, full fuel, and all engines and boosters at full, and flying at 30,000 feet): Mach 3.5
Cruising speed: Mach 1.15
Range: 2,400 km / 1,500 miles
Service Ceiling: 69,000 ft
g limits: +13, -9 (So be careful!) Automatic Safeties prevent the plane from pulling unsafe g-forces and harming the pilot.
Airframe can stand up to 15gs
Armament: One GSh-30-1 30mm cannon on the nose, One Raysia Arms FC-216 Flak Cannon mounted dorsally (35 ammo), 2 QAAM reloaders (with 6 QAAM-28s in each, for standard load), plus up to 22,000 lbs of payload over 8 hardpoints.

Unique Features: The turret mounted Flak Cannon with 35 ammo, Quad-rudders/tails, 3D thrust vectoring, "Blaster" pods for STO ability, and all are Carrier capable. Radar signature easily confused for a Mig-29, and has SuperManeuverability comparable to the Su-37 or F-22. Has built in reconnaissance equipment such as a digital Camera. Missiles can fire any direction.

Computers: Advanced Autopilot to automatically land the plane on a carrier or runway in case the pilot gets knocked out or any other emergency like that, may be engaged by C&C or a wingman. The HUD is used in tandem with the "VisorScreens," which is a display projected onto the Visor of the Pilot's helmet, and uses a sort of compass in tandem with the computer that can allow him to see highlighted targets in any direction, even what used to be a blind spot beneath him or behind him. The 'VisorScreen' does not display the Altitude, pitch, and Speed like the HUD, as most pilots found this very confusing, but the 'VisorScreen' does control the Flak Cannon's direction.

Another cool new feature of this plane is its ability to interact with and control up to 2 UCAV wingmen from the Navigator's seat... something that can come in handy in situations where jamming is heavy and the UCAVs can't be controlled by long distance.

Price: 45,000,000

ASW/ASuW version, you'll need it to fight threats against your carrier.

ASW/ASuW version, you'll need it to fight threats against your carrier.Sans abbreviations please ;)

BTW, these 2 items are now up for sale:

http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=108525

Anti Submarine Warfare/Anti Surface Warfare

Oh, that, well I just released the Su-37 R-Type for those roles;
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/rtype.htm

Perhaps I should note that it is carrier capable

Are you sure? Normally you'd have to have a MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detector) to track down submarines, I doubt you have that on an attack fighter. You can't just throw out some torpedos and hope it would hit the submarine.

Are you sure? Normally you'd have to have a MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Dectector) to track down submarines, I doubt you have that on an attack fighter. You can't just throw out some torpedos and hope it would hit the submarine.Then why the heck are you suggesting it?

And the attackers would use information fed from AWACS et cetera.

OOC: Nice to see that other people here are fans of both Macross and Kitsune and Mischa's Rifts designs. :) I've also incorporated inspirations from Blue Submarine 6 in the Federation Navy.

http://phalanx.i8.com/index.html

OOC: Ray...on the carrier design.

The walls would either be:

\
..\
../
/___________


or

\
..\
....\__________

not
..../
.../
/_________

----

In terms of the weaponry, the Sea Sparrows and other systems would be best if integrated into the radar shields...read the description of my carriers that follows for what I mean. Also, get a new CIWS gun. I use the Millennium Gun (RL prototype/concept, only WA uses it on NS). Also, RAMs are a nice cheap new self-defense weapon that you could easily throw into the hulls (they're slated for the next generation of my AC carriers). The Barak VL point-defense missile system (http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/missile_systems/sea_missiles/barak/Barak.html) is also nice.

Also, many ships have integral (in-hull) torpedo launchers. If thing is semi-submersible then you might consider throwing on 3-6 tubes per side (6-12 total...3-6 facing forward and 3-6 backwards).

---------

My AC Carriers follow the theory that it is better to buy several smaller, faster, and capable carriers over a single large AC carrier with limited range and intervention capabilities. These aircraft carriers use the Trimaran hull form that has made GINY a famous warship producer. These hull forms allow for greater speeds and survivability in warships. Details and system info below.

General info:
http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=412238#412238
---------

'Standard'-type (Jonathan Netanyahu-Class) Trimaran Aircraft Carrier:
Standard Capacity:
50- Fixed-wing Aircraft
15- Rotary-wing Aircraft (medium size)^
25- UCAVs (Full-sized, approaching size of manned aircraft. Units are stowed until use, not all expected to return from any mission)
12- UAVs/UARs (Small craft. For spotting and scouting, not all expected to return from any mission)

Unit cost is a fixed $3.6bn.

---------

'Light'-type (Ehud Barak-Class) Trimaran Aircraft Carrier:

Standard Capacity:
30- Fixed-wing Aircraft
12- Rotary-wing Aircraft (medium size)^
15- UCAVs (Full-sized, approaching size of manned aircraft. Units are stowed until use, not all expected to return from any mission)
8- UAVs/UARs (Small craft. For spotting and scouting, not all expected to return from any mission)

Unit cost is a fixed $2.8bn.

---------
NOTE: Aircraft sold separately. ‘Standard Capacity’ is a recording of the most common deployment by numbers and classifications, reflects a balanced multi-mission capable force. Actual deployment figures will vary.
---------

^- For type classification information (and small and large craft general models), see the linked post:
http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1162726#1162726

--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------

Each of these vessels have the following:
Has 3 elevators* (2 for the light model) and a stealthy, low-slung design. These carriers use virtual and telepresence technology to eliminate the large "island" on the deck of the carrier, which is replaced by a squat, radar deflecting station about 2 stories tall as with the other designs, and to allow for better command and control of crew. Raised (with portions retractable) "radar shields" will prevent the activity on the ship's deck from reflecting radar signals towards receiver stations.**

Has 1 ramped launch lane (for VSTOL and high-lift aircraft(STOL) such as X-47 Pegasus UCAVs) and 2 "standard" launch lanes (for other planes and non-combat planes). The catapults use the EMALS (Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System), which cuts down on the 'down time' between aircraft launches.

Armaments:
Mixed-use Offensive/Defensive Systems
1- Ship-based MTHEL II system (WA advanced version, extended range, improved ID and tracking ability (based on Counter-battery radar, to assist in return fire from the fleet), and improved operating system)
6(4 on light)- Sea Sparrow integrated missile pods (48(32)missiles)
6- MDG-351 35mm "Millennium Gun" stations (advanced CIWS, mounted atop and within sections of the LASRB)
4 (2 on light)- Mk.32 Integrated Triple-mount SVTT (surface vessel torpedo tubes, total of 12 (6) torpedo tubes.)

Defensive Systems:

Large Area Surface Radar Baffling (LASRB, the "Radar Shield," actually a part of the ship shell, which extends down to the water at an angle that is intended to deflect signals either up into the sky or down into the water.)
Large-spread EW/ECM station (placed at ends to provide fleet/task force-wide EW/ECM coverage. Based on the AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare (EW) system)
PCMS (Passive Counter Measures System. Uses Radar Absorbent Materials (RAM) and other specialized materials.)
Degaussing (MCM) systems
MK-53 Nulka Decoy Launching System (DLS)
Machine Noise Reducing Measures (Torpedo Counter Measures)
Prairie/Masker II Noise Masking System
Dragged Torpedo Decoys
Several Wide-Area Navalized "Shortstop" Electronic Protection System (WANSEPS) (a proximity fuse electronic countermeasure system that prematurely detonates artillery shells and other fuses at a safe distance from the target)
Barak Point Defense Missile System (a mini-VLS S2A anti-missile system)


There are also 2 'empty' integrated missile stations that can be used to launch box or rail-launched missiles of various sorts. These stations can be used for a variety of uses as the purchaser sees fit.

--------------------------------------
Notes:
*- The elevators are not the 'normal' aircraft elevators. To avoid problems with the radar baffling ("radar shields"), the elevators are large rectangular lift structures placed centrally towards the rear of the ship and they're adjacent so that a large number of aircraft can be rapidly lifted at once and then rapidly deployed.

**-Sea Sparrow and other missile pods are integrated (hidden) in motile panels of the "radar shield," so when a missile is required to fire, the panel is simply dropped out of the way and the missile(s) are fired towards the targets, torpedo tubes are also included in the baffles. Also included in these panels are and Active Phased Array/Multi-Function Radar (APAR/MFR) hidden in panels and countermeasures equipment.

--------------------------------------

The ‘Standard’ carrier has a TOTAL crew (Ship’s Crew plus Airwing and Aircrew) of approx. 3,500 and the Light has a crew of about 3,100. This vastly reduced crew (in comparison to other ships) has been made possible by the extensive use of automated systems. These automated systems include facilities for moving munitions and vital equipment, usually used to allow small management crews move large loads. Also included in automation are several of the engine components. To enhance the ship’s ability to operate in damaged conditions (Fight Hurt), these systems can also be manually operated in most cases.

The cruise speed is over 38 knots (48+kts top speed) for both ships (they use high-power nuclear reactors for their electric-powered waterjet and screw engines) and the average cruising speed is about 35 knots. The ships are about average length for their class but the ship is wide enough to place the three, wide launch lanes across the bredth of the foredeck (one bearing a 'ski-jump' ramp for special aircraft launches). Also, the ship has a visible height of about 1/2-3/4 that of the Nimitz-class, which helps avoid visual detection when sneaking up on enemy shores (and reduces RCS-reduction costs).

Special Features:
Integrated Information System
Supports the transfer and integration of voice, video and data information between audio, video and computer systems. Key features will include common and standard operating systems, network functions, communication protocols, interfaces and message structure.

Fiber-Optic Backbone
Single, integrated, commercial and military standard compliant physical grid supporting communications between systems/equipment via fiber-optic cables and electric-to-optic conversion devices. Key feature is providing end-to-end connections using ruggedized commercial off-the-shelf components. The ship-wide fiber-optic data relay system is resistant to EMP attacks and the fiber-optic cables themselves will not carry or receive EMI-causing signals.

Zonal Electric Distribution System
Open system architecture DC electrical distribution with standard interfaces between components. Power conversion and conditioning are performed locally from a single ship-wide DC electrical power bus to provide each end user the type/quality of power required. DC power allows for solid state control, which achieves power continuity in case of a fault and provides for near-instantaneous recovery from power interruptions. In addition to the survivability benefits inherent in uninterrupted power, this system is anticipated to be easier to install, require less physical cabling and provide greater flexibility for ship upgrades than current electrical systems. Isolates the potential for problems and minimizes any effect on the rest of the ship.

Multifunctional Embedded Antennas
Reconfigurable, multiple apertures electronically combined to provide an antenna tunable across wide frequency bandwidth and sensitivity parameters. The apertures are embedded in composite materials integral to the ship structure and may include combined or separate transmit and receive modules. Reduction of the number of antenna systems for communications and radars provides potential to improve performance by avoiding antenna blockages, reducing the structure required to support antenna placement, life-cycle costs and maintenance manpower requirements.

Modified Island Structure
The island’s configuration, function and materials are designed to satisfy aircraft support functions while minimizing its impact on ship control and flight deck operations. Benefits are reduced air disturbances caused on the flight deck by the island, more efficient flight deck arrangements, and reduced radar and infrared signature characteristics. This configuration improves flight deck access and reduces electronic self-interference.

Alternative Energy Catapults
Electromagnetic Catapults: A launch-assist mechanism, which will propel the aircraft to takeoff velocity using a traveling electromagnetic wave produced by a linear motor. When compared to current steam driven catapults, the EMALS (Electro-Magnetic Air Launch System) will provide the following benefits:
Independence from the ship’s propulsion plant;
A 50-percent reduction in system weight;
A 65-percent reduction in system volume;
An increase in energy capacity with a highly controllable acceleration and deceleration profile;
An increase in reliability and availability;
A 30-percent decrease in manpower required. This technology is similar to that used to propel high-speed "bullet" trains in some countries. By the use of this more efficient, more controllable system, maintenance costs for the airframes of carrier-launched aircraft can be reduced as the EMALS system can adjust independently and automatically for the launch of each aircraft (So that a JSF will receive the push that it needs, not the push that an F/A-18 needs). This reduced wear also reduces costs and manpower requirements while releasing valuable space that would otherwise be set aside for materials to address these damages.

Ski Jumps
An upward-sloped ramp at the forward end of a section of the flight deck provides aircraft with a more optimum flyaway angle. This translates into benefits such as reduced takeoff velocity, increased payload capacity and reduced wind-over-deck requirements. (Note: Ramps are optional…off-set to the right of the deck to allow larger planes to be launched/landed in the double-lane beside).

Passive Jet Blast Deflector
Redesigns and new materials mean reduced maintenance costs and time. The system affords increased safety for deck crews.

Automated Weapon Selection and Movement
Integrated family of procedures, magazine design, weapons elevators, passageway layout, information management systems, decision aids and reduced manpower ordnance-handling equipment to increase weapons’ throughput, increase sortie generation rates and minimize risks associated with ordnance handling and stowage. Material movement devices, semi-autonomous, gravity compensated weapons handling devices, damage control automation systems and components help reduce the ship's crew and costs.

Computerized and Automated Aircraft Diagnostics and Repair
Semi-automated refueling and servicing in a new configuration and deck location (versus other and older aircraft carriers) provides faster, more efficient airwing pit stops and requires fewer people. This helps reduce the maintenance time and allows for an increased sortie rate. Computerized scanners search for structural weakness in parts, allowing aircrews to replace only the damaged portions when necessary, cutting costs and reducing inventory demands.

Improved Hanger Bay Organization
The designs reduces the clutter observed in other vessels while also providing the facilities necessary for the storage, retrieval, and deployment of aircraft of all sorts.

Reconfigurable Living Spaces
Life-of-the-ship modular construction designs provide flexibility and reduce cost.

Expanded Bandwidth
More onboard and off-board capability gives the ship a communications edge. Both in combat and while on peaceful deployments.

Advanced Systems for Flight Operations Management
Family of information management and decision aids to facilitate mission planning, aircraft control, aircraft/pilot information upload and download, aircraft turnaround and aircraft launch and recovery. May include a family of high performance, integrated aviation work centers along with several pit stop-type aircraft servicing stations strategically positioned about the ship. Benefits include:
Improved aviation safety;
Significant manning reduction;
Increased sortie generation rate;
Flight deck optimization;
Reduced aircraft support equipment;
More efficient maintenance and built-in servicing and support flexibility for follow-on generations of aircraft.

WA- LOL i know nothing of Navy tech... if you could rewrite the stats for me, that'd be awesome :)

As for the walls...

was that a typo? Or were you saying I was right? lol

You said:

>_< works,
\__/ works
but /__\ doesn't work...

well I made it \__/... so what is the problem?

Water is the ____ to the right. To the left in my diagrams is the ship.

Ray, I'll try to help you out with some, but I have a lot of writing to do for college apps. Feel free to use what I've mentioned in my description and I'll try to get back to advise you about your stats.

Water is the ____ to the right. To the left in my diagrams is the ship.

Ray, I'll try to help you out with some, but I have a lot of writing to do for college apps. Feel free to use what I've mentioned in my description and I'll try to get back to advise you about your stats.Well, will the way the the boat is shaped now work? Or do I need to go and make a new pic lol

It might work, but it doesn't really shield the decks from Low-altitude airborne radars (since the deck isn't covered well)...I'm afraid that that might mean a new picture.

OOC:
I think they mean smaller submarines that is the tactical equivalent of a fighter on air.
OOC-Bingo. We're talking little guys zipping around at 60-120 knots using MHD and Hydrogen breathing rockets, and in the case of the expensive ones, supercavitation.

The problem with MHD's is that they require a lot of energy and cooling, and work best on a small scale. I've seen a few prototype MHD's, and one flash-boiled the water it drove. The cooling's not so hard to come by, but they do require a lot of energy. It's a neat concept - drive water without making noise - but it's not so practical.

OOC:
I think they mean smaller submarines that is the tactical equivalent of a fighter on air.
OOC-Bingo. We're talking little guys zipping around at 60-120 knots using MHD and Hydrogen breathing rockets, and in the case of the expensive ones, supercavitation.

The problem with MHD's is that they require a lot of energy and cooling, and work best on a small scale. I've seen a few prototype MHD's, and one flash-boiled the water it drove. The cooling's not so hard to come by, but they do require a lot of energy. It's a neat concept - drive water without making noise - but it's not so practical.
Not practical now... Practical in 2070? Hell yeah.

WA- I would really appreciate it if you could fix the stats I wrote up :)

OOC: As soon as I finish re-making my AC carrier specs...hehehe

Oh, that, well I just released the Su-37 R-Type for those roles;
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/rtype.htm

Perhaps I should note that it is carrier capable

If you are really looking into effective anti-submarine mehods I'd suggest:

1. Dedicated ASW aircraft (American P-3C Orion, carrier-borne S-3B Viking, and rotatry wing SH-60 Sea Hawks -- with the Orion being far powerful), and;
2. Dedicated attack submarine themselves (The US and Soviets used them for years in the ASW/ASuW warfare -- dedicated attack submarines, with good performace and quieting technologies, are unmatched in ASW warfare).

Yes, your attack Su-37s might be able to drop a few torpedoes, but they cannot match any other forms of ASW warfare.

My specs are done: http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2497028&highlight=#2497028

I'll work for you soon.

Oh, that, well I just released the Su-37 R-Type for those roles;
http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/rtype.htm

Perhaps I should note that it is carrier capable

If you are really looking into effective anti-submarine mehods I'd suggest:

1. Dedicated ASW aircraft (American P-3C Orion, carrier-borne S-3B Viking, and rotatry wing SH-60 Sea Hawks -- with the Orion being far powerful), and;
2. Dedicated attack submarine themselves (The US and Soviets used them for years in the ASW/ASuW warfare -- dedicated attack submarines, with good performace and quieting technologies, are unmatched in ASW warfare).

Yes, your attack Su-37s might be able to drop a few torpedoes, but they cannot match any other forms of ASW warfare.*sigh* You missed it entirely... Zvarinograd said I should make an RF-11 variant that does ASW/ASuW... you obviously told him I can't, but you didn't need to go into all that detail lol

Ehm......Well, I drew up designs for a super-carrier/floating airbase capable of launching and retrieving AN-225s (Largest MODERN aircraft)..........It never got completed because I need a good sketch artist. (Its completely in my head and on paper. And I'm no artist.) Yeah....

Raysia, some more about stealth ships:
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/visby.htm

(look at the pictures near the end for hull form)

*sigh* You missed it entirely... Zvarinograd said I should make an RF-11 variant that does ASW/ASuW... you obviously told him I can't, but you didn't need to go into all that detail lol
Sorry/

But obviously, Anti-Surface operations are entirely possible with a few modifications in your RF-11. But still, I don't see how could a modified fighter aircraft can do Anti-submarine warfare at all.