British Military Pictures & Videos
- Thread starter Obi Wan Russell
- Start date
Re: British Military Pic Thread
Great pictures guys!!!
Hey Obi Wan..Do you in the deep recesses of your hard drive have any more pictures of USN/USMC aircraft on the flight deck of a RN CV? If so please post 'em! Thanks!..
I use to have a bunch of pics of RN F-4's on the JFK back in '72 ..but my nutty ex-wife in a fit of rage destroyed my old USN pics I left behind instead of sending them to me... Oh well....
Quick question Obi Wan..Why are there two island's on the "QE"?
Thanks!
Great pictures guys!!!
Hey Obi Wan..Do you in the deep recesses of your hard drive have any more pictures of USN/USMC aircraft on the flight deck of a RN CV? If so please post 'em! Thanks!..
I use to have a bunch of pics of RN F-4's on the JFK back in '72 ..but my nutty ex-wife in a fit of rage destroyed my old USN pics I left behind instead of sending them to me...
Oh well....Quick question Obi Wan..Why are there two island's on the "QE"?
Thanks!
Re: British Military Pic Thread
My guess is that the aft island focuses on landing ops, while the fore island is for launch and C&C. That way the two islands are each closer to their areas of responsibility on deck. I may be completely wrong and out to lunch, but those are just my thoughts on it.
What do you say Obi Wan?
I know you asked Obi Wan...but I will take a crack at it if you don't mind.bd popeye said:
My guess is that the aft island focuses on landing ops, while the fore island is for launch and C&C. That way the two islands are each closer to their areas of responsibility on deck. I may be completely wrong and out to lunch, but those are just my thoughts on it.
What do you say Obi Wan?
Re: British Military Pic Thread
Agreed. I've thought the same about the size of the Island on the Kuznetsov, the Varyag, and the INvinsible for that matter...as well as the two Island config on the QE. I guess we shall see, I am sure they have their reasons, which to them will be perfectly logical and understandable.bd popeye said:
Re: British Military Pic Thread
The two Island configuration puzzled me too, but it kind of grows on you. The forward island is the ships bridge and fore funnel combined while the aft Island is Flyco (flying control) and the aft funnel (stack) and added together would take up about as much space as a regular island. The arrangement also allows for some redundancy in case of battle damage, ie the aft island can double as an emergency bridge and the fore one as flyco if needed.
Glad to see other arms of the British forces depicted here, after all I did call this the British Military Pic Thread.This is an open party, anyone can join.
I have some more pics of cross deck ops, and here they are!
Top row; HMS Hermes cross decking with USS Ranger, hang on didn't the UK Gov. say Hermes was too small to operate Phantoms? third from left is a Banshee from USS Coral Sea getting a close look at HMS Eagle's deck in 1955
2nd row; two shots of F-4s from VF-102 from USS Independence aboard HMS Ark Royal in 1975, and a cople more of that USMC F-4 that 'joined' 892 NAS for a while.
The two Island configuration puzzled me too, but it kind of grows on you. The forward island is the ships bridge and fore funnel combined while the aft Island is Flyco (flying control) and the aft funnel (stack) and added together would take up about as much space as a regular island. The arrangement also allows for some redundancy in case of battle damage, ie the aft island can double as an emergency bridge and the fore one as flyco if needed.
Glad to see other arms of the British forces depicted here, after all I did call this the British Military Pic Thread.This is an open party, anyone can join.
I have some more pics of cross deck ops, and here they are!
Top row; HMS Hermes cross decking with USS Ranger, hang on didn't the UK Gov. say Hermes was too small to operate Phantoms? third from left is a Banshee from USS Coral Sea getting a close look at HMS Eagle's deck in 1955
2nd row; two shots of F-4s from VF-102 from USS Independence aboard HMS Ark Royal in 1975, and a cople more of that USMC F-4 that 'joined' 892 NAS for a while.
Last edited:
Re: British Military Pic Thread
Obi Wan..U da' man!..Thanks so much for posting those pictures.
I love Phantoms. You could see them comming. All that black exhaust. And they landed so hard. If you were in the hangar deck and a F-4 landed..you knew it...Tough aircraft..very tough.
How old are those pics of the Ranger aircraft "cross-decking" as we use to say?
Obi Wan..U da' man!..Thanks so much for posting those pictures.
I love Phantoms. You could see them comming. All that black exhaust. And they landed so hard. If you were in the hangar deck and a F-4 landed..you knew it...Tough aircraft..very tough.
How old are those pics of the Ranger aircraft "cross-decking" as we use to say?
Re: British Military Pic Thread
The Ranger/Hermes cross decking pics date from January 1963 off the Phillipines. I've heard some criticism of the Phantom for it's smoky exhausts, but I preferred to think of it as an open invitation to enemy aircraft to 'come and have a go if you think you're hard enough', kind of way. British Phantoms had RR Spey engines, which were a lot less smoky, and the US nearly bought the spey engined F-4 for the USN. Designated the F-4L and would have been suitable for Essex class CVs, but things got in the way as usual and the order never materialised. Perhaps they couldn't get their heads round the fact that it would have been an Americanised Angliscised American Aircraft. Try saying that after a few beers!
from left; 892 NAS spent two weeks aboard USS Saratoga in 1969 for Carrier Qualifications during which their extra hot Spey Afterburners bent the 'Sara's JBDs! Middle two pics; 892 ops aboard the Ark Royal, and in the last pic you can make out the words 'USS SARATOGA' under the tail of the nearest plane.
after the demise of the Navy's only F-4 training sqn (767 NAS) in 1972, the Phantom Training Flight (PTF) was formed with seven FG1s under RAF control but Navy manned. The last F-4K in RN colours is one of the first manufactured and is displayed at the Fleet Air Arm Museum at RNAS Yeovliton in Somerset aboard the 'ARK ROYAL!'
The Ranger/Hermes cross decking pics date from January 1963 off the Phillipines. I've heard some criticism of the Phantom for it's smoky exhausts, but I preferred to think of it as an open invitation to enemy aircraft to 'come and have a go if you think you're hard enough', kind of way. British Phantoms had RR Spey engines, which were a lot less smoky, and the US nearly bought the spey engined F-4 for the USN. Designated the F-4L and would have been suitable for Essex class CVs, but things got in the way as usual and the order never materialised. Perhaps they couldn't get their heads round the fact that it would have been an Americanised Angliscised American Aircraft. Try saying that after a few beers!
from left; 892 NAS spent two weeks aboard USS Saratoga in 1969 for Carrier Qualifications during which their extra hot Spey Afterburners bent the 'Sara's JBDs! Middle two pics; 892 ops aboard the Ark Royal, and in the last pic you can make out the words 'USS SARATOGA' under the tail of the nearest plane.
after the demise of the Navy's only F-4 training sqn (767 NAS) in 1972, the Phantom Training Flight (PTF) was formed with seven FG1s under RAF control but Navy manned. The last F-4K in RN colours is one of the first manufactured and is displayed at the Fleet Air Arm Museum at RNAS Yeovliton in Somerset aboard the 'ARK ROYAL!'
Last edited:
Re: British Military Pic Thread
Well Obi Wan since you are a Jedi Knight I have to believe you..But as someone that served on a Essex class(USS Hancock CVA-19)..I don't think an Essex class could have handled a F-4. It's was just to heavy for the coating the USN had over the wooden flight deck. As it was F-8 Crusaders tore that deck up. In fact as one of those brave souls that stood between the Catapults during launch F-8's threw up splinters when they took off.(Uncovered wood planks ran along side the catapults) Also landing may have been a problem . Because of a (daytime) crash that I witnessed F-8's were forbidden to land on an Essex class at night after 1975...That is because new steel had been added installed under the arresting wire and it was raised a few inches and caused havoc with Crusader landings...Maybe the USN had some sort of re-fit planned if this re-engine plan came into being...Deck space would have not been a problem. Demension wise it was only slightly larger (hieght,width and folded wing span) than a Crusader. The F-4 would have had only one foot clearance in the Hangar deck...
Just my 2 cents worth..
Well Obi Wan since you are a Jedi Knight I have to believe you..But as someone that served on a Essex class(USS Hancock CVA-19)..I don't think an Essex class could have handled a F-4. It's was just to heavy for the coating the USN had over the wooden flight deck. As it was F-8 Crusaders tore that deck up. In fact as one of those brave souls that stood between the Catapults during launch F-8's threw up splinters when they took off.(Uncovered wood planks ran along side the catapults) Also landing may have been a problem . Because of a (daytime) crash that I witnessed F-8's were forbidden to land on an Essex class at night after 1975...That is because new steel had been added installed under the arresting wire and it was raised a few inches and caused havoc with Crusader landings...Maybe the USN had some sort of re-fit planned if this re-engine plan came into being...Deck space would have not been a problem. Demension wise it was only slightly larger (hieght,width and folded wing span) than a Crusader. The F-4 would have had only one foot clearance in the Hangar deck...
Just my 2 cents worth..
Re: British Military Pic Thread
Probably explains why they didn't buy it. Someone at McDonnell Douglas probably thought 'if an F-4K will fly from a British CV, they're about the same size as an Essex, maybe we can sell these to the US Navy too,' without looking too closely at the flight decks of the Essex class. When the Labour Government of 1966 cancelled the new CVA-01 program the US Government offered Britain three Essex class for next to nothing in order to keep the RN in the Carrier club (which three was never specified, but may even have been three of the unmodernised vessels so they could be refitted to British standards from the start). Having made one stupid descision the British government followed it up with another one and said no. Then to compound this they announced that the only operation Carriers were needed for was covering Amphibious ops, and as we would only do this in future alongside the USN, Carriers would be phased out altogether.
Since then, the RN has commissioned FIVE Carriers, by the simple expedient of not calling them carriers. Politicians may be opposed to them, but most don't even know what a carrier looks like.
Probably explains why they didn't buy it. Someone at McDonnell Douglas probably thought 'if an F-4K will fly from a British CV, they're about the same size as an Essex, maybe we can sell these to the US Navy too,' without looking too closely at the flight decks of the Essex class. When the Labour Government of 1966 cancelled the new CVA-01 program the US Government offered Britain three Essex class for next to nothing in order to keep the RN in the Carrier club (which three was never specified, but may even have been three of the unmodernised vessels so they could be refitted to British standards from the start). Having made one stupid descision the British government followed it up with another one and said no. Then to compound this they announced that the only operation Carriers were needed for was covering Amphibious ops, and as we would only do this in future alongside the USN, Carriers would be phased out altogether.
Since then, the RN has commissioned FIVE Carriers, by the simple expedient of not calling them carriers. Politicians may be opposed to them, but most don't even know what a carrier looks like.
Last edited: