Aircraft Carrier Design Discussion

The reason I mentioned "CVN65 Enterprise" in the title is that I first came across this design plan in a Chinese book. It was discussed by the author immediately after the 1953 CVAN design plan. Based on this sequence, I initially assumed it was some kind of CVAN plan. It is also possible that I misunderstood.Moreover, the various design plans presented in this paper do not seem to have provided sources, making it hard to believe that the author proposed so many plans solely for this paper. Therefore, I think it is still worth considering where these plans might have originated when or why.
here is book
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240604_201638.jpg
    IMG_20240604_201638.jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 35
  • IMG_20240604_201646.jpg
    IMG_20240604_201646.jpg
    4.1 MB · Views: 31
  • IMG_20240604_201632.jpg
    IMG_20240604_201632.jpg
    3.3 MB · Views: 18
The upper design on the copied page is also from the Meier & Gale paper. The lower is SCB 160, which is indeed CVAN-65 ENTERPRISE.

It's perfectly possible that Meier & Gale did create the sketches for their paper. It would take a decent draughtsperson - which NAVSEA certainly had - about a day to come up with all of them. Added to which, that paper is summarising some of the ongoing design work their team was conducting. You wouldn't expect to see them referenced in such a case.

They might also exist in one of the three referenced documents... but maybe not. I wouldn't be bothered either way. The paper is exactly what I'd expect to see from a design team sharing their learning.
 
Yellow Palace said:
The upper design on the copied page is also from the Meier & Gale paper. The lower is SCB 160, which is indeed CVAN-65 ENTERPRISE.

It's perfectly possible that Meier & Gale did create the sketches for their paper. It would take a decent draughtsperson - which NAVSEA certainly had - about a day to come up with all of them. Added to which, that paper is summarising some of the ongoing design work their team was conducting. You wouldn't expect to see them referenced in such a case.

They might also exist in one of the three referenced documents... but maybe not. I wouldn't be bothered either way. The paper is exactly what I'd expect to see from a design team sharing their learning.
Click to expand...
so actually have no link with development of CVN65. Thanks
 
I have merged the landing deck design posts to the hangar design thread create a wider carrier design thread.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom