HMS Queen Elizabeth
Discussion
Catch it on youtube tomorrow, scheduled live stream - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFjTbqvDeY0
Speculatore said:
Trivia - Some Cummerbunds come with pleats. These are to be worn with the open part of the pleat pointing upwards as traditionally it is where gentlemen used to place their opera tickets.
Yay! I didn't know this and am pleased to learn it. Although I stopped wearing one in the 90's - bit old fashioned nowadays. But I did wonder why they were pleated.FourWheelDrift said:
Catch it on youtube tomorrow, scheduled live stream - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFjTbqvDeY0
Live now
My guess would be because aircraft propellers usually spin clockwise when viewed from the rear, which means planes are more likely to pull to the left on take-off and landing. So the superstructure on the right means you fall in to the sea rather than taking out the bridge.
Then as we moved in to the jet age there wouldn't have been any good reason to change it.
Then as we moved in to the jet age there wouldn't have been any good reason to change it.
RizzoTheRat said:
My guess would be because aircraft propellers usually spin clockwise when viewed from the rear, which means planes are more likely to pull to the left on take-off and landing. So the superstructure on the right means you fall in to the sea rather than taking out the bridge.
Then as we moved in to the jet age there wouldn't have been any good reason to change it.
Yet the Rolls Royce Griffon, initially designed for carrier aircraft, rotated in the opposite way from a Merlin and caused a swing to the right. It could be that once a pilot remembers to use a load of rudder to counteract the swing, they are as likely to use too much as too little.Then as we moved in to the jet age there wouldn't have been any good reason to change it.
Originally I think it was something to do with early carrier aircraft experiments and operations at the end of WWI and just after using rotary engined aircraft and the torque of the engines spinning as Rotary engines do would be forcing the aircraft to the left so they didn't want anything in the way on that side so stuck the bridge on the right and it just became tradition. As far as I know apart from Argus, Furious and a couple of other flat decks that didn't have a permanent bridge structure at all only one ship had it's bridge on the left and that was the Japanese WWII carrier Akagi. It was originally converted from a Battlecruiser hull with no bridge structure but one was added during modernisation and I guess it fitted easier on the left.
Steve vRS said:
LotusOmega375D said:
Why are aircraft carriers seemingly always right hand drive?
Easier to overtake in when driving in UK waters?It's now just "tradition" mainly, but back in WW2 much was down to the torque effect of single piston engined prop-driven aircraft. They tend to "pull left" when cranked up for take-off, and are also easier/safer to get on deck when it's "clear left". It also brings the aircraft in astern in a "left to right" movement across field of view from the island. Port side islands were used by the Imperial Japanese Navy, who thought it a good idea, in multi-carrier fleets, to be able to bring aircraft in to land from both sides, setting up two approach patterns. In practice it was confusing, and gave them no real advantage over American carriers in the Pacific war. Having the island on the Port side meant controllers and deck crew looking back and watching the aircraft approach "right to left", which isn't natural to a western educated person who reads from left to right. If Arabic or Hebrew speaking nations had developed the aircraft carrier first, port side islands might have been the norm. Fast forward to the jet age and the torque effect of the propeller is gone, so it simply boils down to controllers viewing approaching aircraft left-to-right and tradition really.
Some of the early carriers, especially converted merchant vessels, had a central wheelhouse with a flat top that was winched up and down to provide a continuous flat deck during flying operations, or featured no island at all...
USS Langley - CV1... https://www.militaryfactory.com/ships/detail.asp?s...
HMS Argus is regarded as the first true aircraft carrier, but she was converted from an ocean liner that was under construction when WW1 started...
https://www.fleetairarmoa.org/news/on-this-day-14-...
https://www.maritimequest.com/warship_directory/gr...
The first ship ordered, laid down, and completed as a carrier from the outset, was HMS Hermes. Ordered in 1917, she wasn't commissioned until 1924, but from the line drawings below, you can see that she set the pattern for what a carrier would look like. Which might also de-bunk the "pulling left due to propeller torque" theory, as those early aeroplanes were nowhere near as powerful as a Hellcat or Seafire winding up to launch...
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/uk/brit_cv1_hermes....
Angled flight decks came along in the early 1950s, initially just painted markings on straight deck carriers for trials purposes. HMS Centaur was the first with a physically adapted angled deck, the Americans follwed suit with their Essex Class carriers at refit, and the first carrier to launch with an angled deck from design stage was HMS Ark Royal in 1955. This allowed increased flexibility, including simultaneous launch and recovery operations on deck, and a larger island with more on deck parking. With the end of conventional fixed wing aviation in the Fleet Air Arm, the RN went back to non-angled decks as the Sea Harrier and rotary assets gained no advantage from an angled deck.
The Queen Elizabeth class too have 'straight' decks for their STOVL (and rolling landing
) operations with F-35s and helicopters...
...although there were some CGI renderings early in the design process that proposed a Queen Elizabeth class with an angled flight deck to operate conventional fixed-wing assets...
If you really want a giggle, though, Google "Chinese catamaran aircraft carrier"...
FourWheelDrift said:
Originally I think it was something to do with early carrier aircraft experiments and operations at the end of WWI and just after using rotary engined aircraft and the torque of the engines spinning as Rotary engines do would be forcing the aircraft to the left so they didn't want anything in the way on that side so stuck the bridge on the right and it just became tradition. As far as I know apart from Argus, Furious and a couple of other flat decks that didn't have a permanent bridge structure at all only one ship had it's bridge on the left and that was the Japanese WWII carrier Akagi. It was originally converted from a Battlecruiser hull with no bridge structure but one was added during modernisation and I guess it fitted easier on the left.
Two. Hiryu and Akagi. With a starboard side island, aircraft approach and turn in from the port rear quarter. The Japanese idea was that in multi-carrier operations, mixing carriers so they had one with a port-side island steaming alongside one with a starboard side island, with the islands closest to one another, would mean that returning aircraft could form two separate approach patterns turning in from either side. Or at least I read that somewhere. Maybe it's just one of those myths that grew legs? I think it caused as many issues as it solved, and anyway, carrier design and development ultimately ended up in the hands of the US Navy with some input from British sources, so Imperial Japanese Navy ideas on carrier operations had a very short lifespan in the end...Google it.
From memory China's is a home built design, based on the Russian carrier they bought a few years ago.
USA are Ford class.
Indian one is similar in appearance to the Russian ones too, maybe designed with their assistance?
Italian one is officially a helicopter ship, but will be able to launch and recover F35B aircraft.
The Turkish one is not a true aircraft carrier either, but an assault ship which can launch aircraft.
From memory China's is a home built design, based on the Russian carrier they bought a few years ago.
USA are Ford class.
Indian one is similar in appearance to the Russian ones too, maybe designed with their assistance?
Italian one is officially a helicopter ship, but will be able to launch and recover F35B aircraft.
The Turkish one is not a true aircraft carrier either, but an assault ship which can launch aircraft.
Cold said:
Some say the propeller theory about the islands doesn't really hold true these days now that jet engines are so prolific.
@tespilotjim would like put the argument forward that perhaps it's still relevant.
(Just a reason to share his awesome picture
)
Indeed, thank you for sharing that awesome picture!@tespilotjim would like put the argument forward that perhaps it's still relevant.
(Just a reason to share his awesome picture
)Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff