Swedish Hangarkryssare of 1946

Discussed on Warship Projects as well:
http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/9401-swedish-aircraft-carrier-cruiser-1946/
 
Tzoli said:
Discussed on Warship Projects as well:
http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/9401-swedish-aircraft-carrier-cruiser-1946/
Click to expand...

In addition to the reasons that Tzoli and others on that thread have come up with for the design, I would add the likelihood that the Swedish Navy was also trying to re-establish it's naval aviation branch (it had been absorbed by the Swedish airforce upon it's creation as an independent service back in 1926, and needless to say the Marinen weren't too happy about this bit of bureaucratic backstabbing/turf grabbing).
 
Grey Havoc said:
Tzoli said:
Discussed on Warship Projects as well:
http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/9401-swedish-aircraft-carrier-cruiser-1946/
Click to expand...

In addition to the reasons that Tzoli and others on that thread have come up with for the design, I would add the likelihood that the Swedish Navy was also trying to re-establish it's naval aviation branch (it had been absorbed by the Swedish airforce upon it's creation as an independent service back in 1926, and needless to say the Marinen weren't too happy about this bit of bureaucratic backstabbing/turf grabbing).
Click to expand...

While that is admirable that would not enough to create such a well made design for a coastal navy, but could strengthen the ideas we discussed in the thread.
 
I took a peek at that ship on the other blog. If the design is this well along in 1946, it must have been started in around 1943, putting it as a wartime project. It makes more sense in tat light.
 
It does not look very much like the 1926 pre Gotland carrier , to me it looks more German .
 
shaba said:
It does not look very much like the 1926 pre Gotland carrier , to me it looks more German .
Click to expand...

At least on my computer it does not look at all. The picture can't be opened.
 
There are two very long baseline rangefinders, presumably for the 120mm mounts. Post-war, they would be likely candidates for replacement with radar directors.

As for the lighter guns, there are mainly 25mm guns in the gallery, which would be manually directed. The 40mm guns at the corners might be the M/36 F-36, a Swedish twin mount on a gyrostabilized platform with an on-mount rangefinder. The Swedes didn't have access to Allied wartime experience so they might not have realized the benefit of off-mount directors like the USN's Mk 51 yet.

Edit: Looking at the drawings again, the 40mm mounts look to be more enclosed than the M/36. Presumably a new design. There's not enough detail to see what they did about possible on-mount direction.
 
Petrus said:
shaba said:
It does not look very much like the 1926 pre Gotland carrier , to me it looks more German .
Click to expand...

At least on my computer it does not look at all. The picture can't be opened.
Click to expand...


This might help. Part of the deck plans cleaned up a little bit. The Swedish archives are excellent for their content but could really do with a large sheet scanner for public use.
 

Attachments

  • swe_cvl_46.png
    swe_cvl_46.png
    1 MB · Views: 1,002
It's the 1926 design that shaba posted that doesn't want to open. I'm having trouble with it too.
 
TomS said:
It's the 1926 design that shaba posted that doesn't want to open. I'm having trouble with it too.
Click to expand...


Yes it is a corrupted file. I tried to fix it with two different programs but no dice. Then I just searched for that file name on Google and presto. Its a shipbucket style drawing. Here it is as a png. I would recommend deleting shaba's file and scanning your computer afterwards. It is about 10x bigger than it needs to be for such an image.
 

Attachments

  • SWECVhangarkryssare1926.png
    SWECVhangarkryssare1926.png
    17.9 KB · Views: 858
TomS said:
It's the 1926 design that shaba posted that doesn't want to open. I'm having trouble with it too.
Click to expand...
That's funny it worked fine when i first posted it
Yes it is a corrupted file. I tried to fix it with two different programs but no dice. Then I just searched for that file name on Google and presto. Its a shipbucket style drawing. Here it is as a png. I would recommend deleting shaba's file and scanning your computer afterwards. It is about 10x bigger than it needs to be for such an image.
yeah it disappeared from my computer and i cant find the picture on the internet which is not the one Abraham posted
 
TomS said:
There are two very long baseline rangefinders, presumably for the 120mm mounts. Post-war, they would be likely candidates for replacement with radar directors.

As for the lighter guns, there are mainly 25mm guns in the gallery, which would be manually directed. The 40mm guns at the corners might be the M/36 F-36, a Swedish twin mount on a gyrostabilized platform with an on-mount rangefinder. The Swedes didn't have access to Allied wartime experience so they might not have realized the benefit of off-mount directors like the USN's Mk 51 yet.
Click to expand...

There is actually what seems to be a primary radar dish/rectangle on the forward main rangefinder. You can see it's drawing on the side and front views. Also there is a smaller, probably air warning radar and multiple smaller antennae like things on the mainmast just above the forward rangefinder
 
covert_shores said:
Is that an ice breaking bow? That would be interesting.
Click to expand...

Not sure, but it could be a possibility as the Northern Sea and Baltic are quite cold waters.

As for radars, Sweden had their own radar development. For example this PS-41 land based radar from around 1951:
http://www.aef.se/Marktele/Notiser/PS-41-2.htm
While the destroyer HMS Öland of 1948 were equipped with PS-63, PS-041, and PE-36 sets
 
That ship seems to have a very shallow draft - though I am no expert. Would it have limitations on its operating area?
 
starviking said:
That ship seems to have a very shallow draft - though I am no expert. Would it have limitations on its operating area?
Click to expand...

Not that shallow, similar tonnage vessels had around this kind of draft: 4-6 meters. Dido for example on smaller tonnage had this much draft.
 
The shallow draught and ice-breaking bow indicates to me that this vessel was indeed intended to operate part of the kustflottan in the baltic coast, most likely this is a study to replace gotland as the aviation element of the "heavy coastal fleet" doctrine. Gotland was rather liked by the swedes, and only the inaviability of modern floatplanes discontinued its use, so if that was indeed proplem, then its not farfetched thougth to think of proper landing deck solution. The drawing dates immediately after WWII, and thus I can imagine how the vast triumphs of oceanic fleets aircraft carriers and aircrafts in general had deep imbact of naval planners in Sweden.
Perhaps the tactical limitations and cost-effectivenes of such vessel as part of mobile aircover for the coastal BBs or cruiser led torpedo-vessel flotillas that replaced them during this time period was indeed bit impractical, compared to the aviability of land based aircrafts doing the same job, so its no wonder we hear this desing only from now and from these rather intial stage plans. I recall reading that the inter-service rivalry in Sweden was also rather strong and the Air Force somehow "won" by getting to keep their outlandish aircraft figures while the navy descented during the cold war years.
 
Tzoli said:
starviking said:
That ship seems to have a very shallow draft - though I am no expert. Would it have limitations on its operating area?
Click to expand...

Not that shallow, similar tonnage vessels had around this kind of draft: 4-6 meters. Dido for example on smaller tonnage had this much draft.
Click to expand...


Good point. However, it wouldn't have the same beam.
 
TomS said:
There are two very long baseline rangefinders, presumably for the 120mm mounts. Post-war, they would be likely candidates for replacement with radar directors.

As for the lighter guns, there are mainly 25mm guns in the gallery, which would be manually directed. The 40mm guns at the corners might be the M/36 F-36, a Swedish twin mount on a gyrostabilized platform with an on-mount rangefinder. The Swedes didn't have access to Allied wartime experience so they might not have realized the benefit of off-mount directors like the USN's Mk 51 yet.

Edit: Looking at the drawings again, the 40mm mounts look to be more enclosed than the M/36. Presumably a new design. There's not enough detail to see what they did about possible on-mount direction.
Click to expand...

There appears to be an air search radar and two main directors with optical rangefinders and their own radars which I assume would control the 120mm guns. Aside from that I can't see any evidence for any other directors. I am genuinely curious about Swedish AA fire control though, are there any pictures available of the M/36 F-36 gyrostabiliser mounting?
 
Despite being the 40mm Bofors guns are the most famous and well known AA guns finding pictures about the different variants is a very difficult task!
 
Tzoli said:
Despite being the 40mm Bofors guns are the most famous and well known AA guns finding pictures about the different variants is a very difficult task!
Click to expand...

I realize I'm really late to the party here, but I found some gun drawings that may or may not be helpful: http://imgur.com/a/660ua
 
Thanks! Nice to see real drawings of these weapons!
 
If you ever come to see or read about a very large Bofors mount of 16 barrels, that would be awesome!

In Friedman's "British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After" he mentions that DNO proposed in 1947 a quadruple 3in gun, and previously a sixteen-barrel (sexdecuple) Bofors for high rates of fire against modern aircraft and missiles.
 
Somewhat related:
This short article by Bo H. Hallenius is from Warship International, N°1, 1979.

varie_20151031_0001.jpg



Now the question is, what this Ornen Light Carrier or aircraft carrying cruiser be?
 
Found this drawing somewhere on the Internet a few years ago. Apparently, it's a Swedish project for an aircraft carrier with six 21cm guns two triple turrets, that can collapse under the flight deck.
I still haven't found any other info about this ship, except for the under-deck turret drawing (but why it states 15cm guns, while the ship drawing states 21cm ones?). Maybe someone on this forum has more info on this weird thing?
 

Attachments

  • 1691509812615.png
    1691509812615.png
    801.5 KB · Views: 227
  • 1691510154362.png
    1691510154362.png
    665.4 KB · Views: 216
fdra-naval.blogspot.com

Armada: Svenka Marinen (durante la guerra fría)

Blog sobre armadas, fuerzas navales y fluviales del Mundo.
fdra-naval.blogspot.com fdra-naval.blogspot.com
Swedish CV

This project is only known from detailed sketches (but not plans). It was part of the ambitious naval plan of World War II, which saw a dramatic increase in shipbuilding, especially with the Tre Kronor cruisers, new destroyers and submarines. It was a fairly small aircraft carrier, displacing only 8,000 tons, well protected, armed and still carrying a supply of twenty fighter aircraft. It was perhaps too ambitious as a design due to the limited size and displacement, forced by the limited size of the Yards basins.

The overall appearance resembled a British aircraft carrier, with a large, rounded bridge island forward of an aft deck, two step lifts in the middle of a straight deck which, as shown in the view above, allowed only folding wing aircraft to be stacked alongside, little space available for aircraft to take off in a straight line from the rear of the deck - however, there was what could be a catapult forward ("even throttle"), otherwise these aircraft would have to take off in about 130 metres. The project was not very far from being a proposal to the Admiralty, there was no official name associated with it and it was never ordered. Conways is also silent on the matter. See the authority signing the sketch.

Specifications: as shown on the drawings
Dimensions: 140 m wide / 148.2 m wide x 20 m wide / 28.4 m wide long x 5.5 m long
Displacement: 7,800 tonnes standard, 8,100 tonnes FL
Machinery: 28,000 shp: 25 knots max.
Aviation: 20 de Havilland Sea Vampire carried
Armament: 4 × 2 12 cm, 16x 40 mm Bofors, 17 25 mm
Armour: 75 mm (3 inch) belt, 25 mm torpedo bulkheads, 25 + 50 mm deck
Crew: 535 men
Click to expand...
Swedish carrier 1946.jpg
It's interesting to see that the air group envisaged was made up of Sea Vampires.
It's quite innovative for a time when most navies were buying Sea Furies.
 
Maybe I'm missing something, but the usefulness of a CV seems very limited in the small Baltic sea with Sweden's central position.
 
It's something like a thousand km from Sweden's main naval base Karlskrona to the northernmost point of the Gulf of Bothnia. Having a mobile airfield to cover that stretch of coast might be the object.
 
It's interesting to note on the plan that the Vampire has folding wings.
Have the Swedes considered developing their own Sea Vampire ?
The Sea Vampire has no folding wings, due to its small size. It passed through the Colossus elevators.
 
dan_inbox said:
Maybe I'm missing something, but the usefulness of a CV seems very limited in the small Baltic sea with Sweden's central position.
Click to expand...
Well, the reason was, that first generation jet fighters have a very limited range. They couldn't efficiently protect the fleet from coastal bases. On the other hand, in late 1940s anti-air artillery pretty much stopped to be an efficient deterrent against modern fast bombers carrying guided bombs (or even standoff missiles, like "Bat"), and guided missiles were still in development, so... carrier fighters were the only way to protect fleet from air attacks.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom