Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >>

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

- 9/3/2003 8:58:25 AM

MJHerman

Posts: 4
Joined: 9/3/2003
Status: offline

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 1

- 9/3/2003 9:29:24 AM

pry

Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline

[QUOTE=Mogami]Hi, I believe the Japanese placed the Island on opposite sides for Hiryu and Soryu because they envisioned the CV sailing abreast during flight ops. By the time they built Zuikaku and Shokaku they knew better.
(I think Kaga and Akagai were also built as partners)[/QUOTE]

Soryu's island was on the starboard side Hiryu's was on the port.

Hey Mogami below is a short part of Akagi and Hiryu's history about the port island from The Imperial Japanese Navy, By Watts and Gordon 1971. I consider this work one of the best ever done on the IJN
(One of those "Must Have" books for ones WWII reference library) :D

Akagi, Lack of a decent bridge had also been felt, and this too was remedied in the modernization (36-38) a proper island superstructure being constructed amidships on the port side. The port side was chosen as an experiment as it was felt that this would cause less obstruction to a pilot's vision when landing and improve control of flying operations. A similar experiment was tried out on the new carrier Hiryu under construction at the same time. (See Hiryu)

Hiryu
It was hoped that sitting the bridge on the port side would give the commander (Air) better control of flying operations and enable the aircraft to have a greater length of flight deck available for takeoff. In practice it proved a failure. Although it did give greater control of flying operations and better take-off facilities, the bridge seriously restricted the length of deck for landing operations and caused a reduction in aircraft parking space on the flight deck. Far more serious than these defects, however were the conflicting air currents and turbulence which appeared immediately aft of the bridge, causing much distress to the pilots. So dangerous were these defects that the Japanese Navy never again considered sitting the bridge on the port side of a carrier.

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 2