Jump to content

Sea Harrier Carrier deck tiedowns


Recommended Posts

I am looking for some advice on how to model a Sea Harrier tied down to a carrier deck  ( or in my case, Atlantic Conveyor).  Does anyone have any detail on how this was done or better still, is there any aftermarket out there that would help? All I can find is the USN Infini set which appears to be different from the  RN system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there

 

Well I think you are looking for Royal Navy tie downs as I understand (only for wonderful 1/72 scale)  flightpath made an especific set

 

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/flightpath-fp-72-116-us-navy-carrier-deck-diorama-set--357754

 

Maybe you can look for it

 

Regards

 

Armando

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RAGATIGER said:

Hi there

 

Well I think you are looking for Royal Navy tie downs as I understand (only for wonderful 1/72 scale)  flightpath made an especific set

 

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/flightpath-fp-72-116-us-navy-carrier-deck-diorama-set--357754

 

Maybe you can look for it

 

Regards

 

Armando

 

The Invincible class didnt use the American style star shaped tie down, the Royal Navy has its own style of tie down ring, its well illustrated in this previous post from a few years ago:

 

With regards to the Atlantic Conveyor, I believe as she was intended to just be an aircraft transport rather than an aircraft carrier, the deck tie downs were far less rudimentary, the best picture I've seen is this one:

255296517_4628947393815543_1289873367000

 

Hope this helps.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main problem, of trying to align a container ship with an aircraft carrier, is that neither had any relationship in design.  Atlantic Conveyor's conversion was classed as an aircraft ferry. 

 

With regard to the tie-down points, my understanding is that, due to the urgency of the work required, "cowpat" style tie-downs were welded to the deck plates that covered the holds.

 

   Here is my attempt at a rudimentary drawing to show what I mean.

spacer.png

These 'X type' cutouts might not be entirely correct and may be a different shape, such as only having a single slot.

 

Detailed photographs of the ship's deck are hard to come by; however, there is this one which shows some of the tie-downs.

 

spacer.png

(source unknown).

 

cheers,
Mike

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AntPhillips said:

 

The Invincible class didnt use the American style star shaped tie down, the Royal Navy has its own style of tie down ring, its well illustrated in this previous post from a few years ago:

 

 

 

 

Hope this helps.

 

 Hi there AntPhillip

 

My intention was only to take your attention to Flightpath, if my memory doesn't fail me they're the only ones that can be able to have a set for Royal Navy otherwise if not my course of action would be take the drawing bootneck and do a master and then cast some copies (around 30-50) on acrilic dentist resin (they're pretty small anyway at least in wonderful 1/72 scale)

 

Anyway I always also wanted to do the SS Atlantic Conveyor flight plank (I don't know how it was called)

 

Regards

 

Armando

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bootneck said:

The main problem, of trying to align a container ship with an aircraft carrier, is that neither had any relationship in design.  Atlantic Conveyor's conversion was classed as an aircraft ferry. 

 

With regard to the tie-down points, my understanding is that, due to the urgency of the work required, "cowpat" style tie-downs were welded to the deck plates that covered the holds.

 

   Here is my attempt at a rudimentary drawing to show what I mean.

spacer.png

These 'X type' cutouts might not be entirely correct and may be a different shape, such as only having a single slot.

 

Detailed photographs of the ship's deck are hard to come by; however, there is this one which shows some of the tie-downs.

 

spacer.png

(source unknown).

 

cheers,
Mike

 

 

Hi Mike

 

Following the conversation do you have some dimentions or I'll be using a Wild Wide Guess for the Tie Dows?

 

Regards

 

Armando

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Armando,  I was on a different ship; ss Canberra, at the time and didn't actually see these fittings.  You could guesstimate using the feet of the groundcrew for reference.  In my estimation, I would think the diameter was 10 inches [25.5cm].

I have been researching the Atlantic Conveyor for a project build in 1:144 scale; however, it doesn't go down to those specifics at that scale.

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

cheers,

Mike

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank everyone. Especially good to see new photographs of Atlantic Conveyor's deck. Have proved hard to find, guess they were busy with other things at the time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bootneck said:

Sorry Armando,  I was on a different ship; ss Canberra, at the time and didn't actually see these fittings.  You could guesstimate using the feet of the groundcrew for reference.  In my estimation, I would think the diameter was 10 inches [25.5cm].

I have been researching the Atlantic Conveyor for a project build in 1:144 scale; however, it doesn't go down to those specifics at that scale.

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

cheers,

Mike

Thanks a lot Mike

 

That's exactly my assumption as large as the ground crew shoes 

 

As always observation is the key

 

Regards

 

Armando

 

PS Anyway I still be waiting to get some 1/72 scale containers maybe in 3D

 

Edited by RAGATIGER
forgot something
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, bootneck said:

Sorry Armando,  I was on a different ship; ss Canberra, at the time and didn't actually see these fittings.  You could guesstimate using the feet of the groundcrew for reference.  In my estimation, I would think the diameter was 10 inches [25.5cm].

I have been researching the Atlantic Conveyor for a project build in 1:144 scale; however, it doesn't go down to those specifics at that scale.

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

cheers,

Mike

This is just what I need to model the landing pad (1/48). Could you give me the width of the hull? I can work out the rest from there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

paddling about in my components drawer I came across this and remembered your question.

 

Not sure  this is relevant but as the question Sea Harrier tiedowns was asked and these could be relevant I decided to pop 'em in here. Royal Navy Deck tie downs as used for helicopter options and available it seems at Hannants.

 

16607457414351805052457639217769.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably unlikely that Atlantic Conveyor would have had standard RN ringbolt lashing points, Bill - they need to be built into the deck from the outset to be any good.    

 

I strongly suspect that Mike is right with his x-shaped slots thing, because the flight deck of Fearless was similar (albeit flush with the deck) - bearing in mind that the LPDs' "flight deck" was actually designed originally as an "Upper Vehicle Deck", on the basis that FS & ID would always operate with an LPH (Albion or Bulwark), so would operate aircraft but never have to host them.  That's why they had no hangar.

 

You can see the x-shaped slots in the photo below, of Fearless' flight deck en route home from the South Atlantic in July 1982, carrying 4 x Sea King Mk.4 of 846 NAS and 2 x brand new A109 aircraft which were captured at Stanley racecourse and flown on board by an ETPS-qualified pilot from 846.  

 

The point of the slot system was that it was compatible with the tie-down points below in the tank decks (the ships were essentially large military car ferries).  For aircraft lashings we would use an adaptor called an "elephant's foot"; a flat plate, roughly 6" in diameter (from memory), with a welded adaptor on the base that fitted securely into the x-shaped slot, and a normal ring-bolt on top onto which we fitted the lashing.  It's hard to see in this poor-quality photo, but there must be elephant's feet attached to the chain lashings.  I've been trying to find a photo which shows elephant's feet clearly, but failed.

 

FS flight deck 4 x SK 2 x A109 July 1982

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Ex-FAAWAFU said:

Probably unlikely that Atlantic Conveyor would have had standard RN ringbolt lashing points, Bill - they need to be built into the deck from the outset to be any good.    

 

I strongly suspect that Mike is right with his x-shaped slots thing, because the flight deck of Fearless was similar (albeit flush with the deck) - bearing in mind that the LPDs' "flight deck" was actually designed originally as an "Upper Vehicle Deck", on the basis that FS & ID would always operate with an LPH (Albion or Bulwark), so would operate aircraft but never have to host them.  That's why they had no hangar.

 

You can see the x-shaped slots in the photo below, of Fearless' flight deck en route home from the South Atlantic in July 1982, carrying 4 x Sea King Mk.4 of 846 NAS and 2 x brand new A109 aircraft which were captured at Stanley racecourse and flown on board by an ETPS-qualified pilot from 846.  

 

The point of the slot system was that it was compatible with the tie-down points below in the tank decks (the ships were essentially large military car ferries).  For aircraft lashings we would use an adaptor called an "elephant's foot"; a flat plate, roughly 6" in diameter (from memory), with a welded adaptor on the base that fitted securely into the x-shaped slot, and a normal ring-bolt on top onto which we fitted the lashing.  It's hard to see in this poor-quality photo, but there must be elephant's feet attached to the chain lashings.  I've been trying to find a photo which shows elephant's feet clearly, but failed.

 

 

 

 

Nice one Crisp, Googling "Elephant Foot Lashing Point" brings up some images that combined with your description gives a good idea of what it involved, I dont think the exact type is shown, but I can understand how it would work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...