CVs - American vs British

CVs - American vs British (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

ny59giants -> CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 11:24:11 AM)
Looking for a book that explains the development of their respected CV forces. The Brits go with the armored deck while the USA and Japan did not. I was talking with John 3rd on his way back from his cabin in western Colorado on Sunday. In the game, the Yorktown Class has 90 aircraft at 19, 875 tonnage. Meanwhile, I'm seeing the early '42 Indomitable Class with 45 aircraft at 22,600 and the Illustrious Class with just 33 aircraft at 23,000. The numbers just seem to show some serious issues with capacity or did the armored deck cost that much in aircraft capacity or hanger space?

Jellicoe -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 11:39:51 AM)
Yes they did trade aircraft capacity for armour, on both deck and sides. all that armour meant more issues with stability and smaller lifts too. Indomitable had a second hanger deck but with a low cieling which limited use to certain types of aircraft. They also needed to be able to operate in the north atlantic hence enclosed bows etc. Later use of deck parks upped the capacity somewhat but still way way less than an Essex The carrier was designed pre radar with the intention of operating in the Med against land based air with fighters that were simply not as good as land bases variants. The armour assumed that the bomber would get through. It also assumed that the high level bomber would be more dangerous than it actually was. It was a good design relative to the threat specification but the war and developments made the design obsolete more quickly hence the short lived service lives relative the Essex class (they were also hard used as well) HMS Victorious was rebuilt at great expense for further service but quite frankly the RN would have been better served building new operationally and financially

btd64 -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 11:42:19 AM)
Hey, how are you doing? My understanding is that the British didn't have aircraft with folding wings, and that's the capacity thing. As far as books go, I have one on ww2 ships which includes carriers, but I don't remember the title. And I would need to dig it out....GP

ny59giants -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 12:01:19 PM)
Doing relatively well as I turn 62 in a few weeks, Brian. I judge it by how many specialist doctors I now see each year. Only one at age 50 and now up to four besides my primary care physician (PCP). I saw a book on Amazon, but want to see if others have a book they would recommend.

Jellicoe -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 12:25:11 PM)
They did have folding wing aircraft - Swordfish, Fulmars etc all had folding wings - saw them myself last month at the Fleet Air Arm museum at Yeovilton. Early Sea Hurricanes were fixed wing however. As for reference, beyond Conway's I have Robert Chesneau's Aircraft Carrier of the World. I can't imagine that Friedman hasn't done something on RN carriers but thats one I dont have. David Brown's excellent 'Nelson to Vanguard' is also worth a look

btd64 -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 12:26:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ny59giants Doing relatively well as I turn 62 in a few weeks, Brian. I judge it by how many specialist doctors I now see each year. Only one at age 50 and now up to four besides my primary care physician (PCP). I saw a book on Amazon, but want to see if others have a book they would recommend. Glad to hear it. The book I have is I believe Jane's Ships of WW2. I just can't get at it right now. To much stuff in the way. But I'll go give it a try....GP

ny59giants -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 12:35:49 PM)
This book came up during my search. https://www.amazon.com/British-Aircraft-Carriers-Development-Histories/dp/1591140749 Just wondering if anyone has it and is it worth the cost?

Ian R -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 12:48:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ny59giants This book came up during my search. https://www.amazon.com/British-Aircraft-Carriers-Development-Histories/dp/1591140749 Just wondering if anyone has it and is it worth the cost? There are some very good youtube discussions of this very topic. It was very much a design philosophy thing - The RN built the Ark Royal (with an Implacable size airgroup) to fight in the Pacific, along with the existing Furious, Glorious and Courageous, and then turned its attention to the European littoral where they intended the armoured carriers to survive hits from 1000kg bombs. Theyt did not think any airgroup could climb to altitude to intercept a detected incoming strike - pre radar. Along the way radar became a thing and turned all their thinking tits-up. The armoured carriers did have one good attribute, though - they could sweep a kamaikaze hit overboardand carry on operations.

btd64 -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 12:49:17 PM)
Looks good for the price. You can get a used copy too....GP

Ian R -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 12:54:20 PM)
Here are some links for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_DEHvLvMak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dHdGHP8hCg&t=4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtzzU-Jgdcc&t=5258s

Buckrock -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 1:13:23 PM)
As an alternative, the Armoured Carriers website contains solidly referenced information on British designs and includes comparisons with their American cousins. Hobbs' book is one of the many references used for the site. The link below from the website is a good starting point on the two design approaches. https://www.armouredcarriers.com/were-the-armoured-carriers-worthwhile

BBfanboy -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 5:01:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ian R quote: ORIGINAL: ny59giants This book came up during my search. https://www.amazon.com/British-Aircraft-Carriers-Development-Histories/dp/1591140749 Just wondering if anyone has it and is it worth the cost? There are some very good youtube discussions of this very topic. It was very much a design philosophy thing - The RN built the Ark Royal (with an Implacable size airgroup) to fight in the Pacific, along with the existing Furious, Glorious and Courageous, and then turned its attention to the European littoral where they intended the armoured carriers to survive hits from 1000kg bombs. Theyt did not think any airgroup could climb to altitude to intercept a detected incoming strike - pre radar. Along the way radar became a thing and turned all their thinking tits-up. The armoured carriers did have one good attribute, though - they could sweep a kamaikaze hit overboardand carry on operations. A kamikaze or an SB2C-1 Helldiver trying to land! [X(]

rustysi -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/11/2021 7:24:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ny59giants Doing relatively well as I turn 62 in a few weeks, Brian. I judge it by how many specialist doctors I now see each year. Only one at age 50 and now up to four besides my primary care physician (PCP). I saw a book on Amazon, but want to see if others have a book they would recommend. Yeah, ya know you're old when you have more doctors than friends.[:D]

Hano -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/12/2021 9:32:08 AM)
I found this to be a very useful and informative read.... https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Carriers-Fought-Carrier-Operations-ebook/dp/B07FPHSWFM I hope it helps

obvert -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/12/2021 11:56:32 AM)
This pretty much sums up the differences and the outcomes. Although the armored decks (apparently) shrugged off hits, the force did unseen damage to the hull structure since the deck and hanger were internal rather than external to the ship's hull as on USN CVs. http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-030.php It'd be interesting to model the different philosophies of armor vs no armor in a typical early war 2 v 2 carrier battle. As it turned out, most of the USN carriers lost were sunk by torpedoes, so the deck may not have mattered anyway.

Ian R -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/12/2021 12:08:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: obvert This pretty much sums up the differences and the outcomes. Although the armored decks (apparently) shrugged off hits, the force did unseen damage to the hull structure since the deck and hanger were internal rather than external to the ship's hull as on USN CVs. http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-030.php It'd be interesting to model the different philosophies of armor vs no armor in a typical early war 2 v 2 carrier battle. As it turned out, most of the USN carriers lost were sunk by torpedoes, so the deck may not have mattered anyway. A couple of big bombs through the wooden flight deck- especially if one damages an elevator - amounts to a mission kill on a USN carrier. That is the real difference having an armoured deck made. By 1944 the USN had enough carriers that that ceased to be a fatal operational difficulty. As you say, those impacts did warp the integral armoured box hull structure, making most of those carriers unsuitable for post war rebuilding and service life extension - a problem the USN did not have with the SCB recconstructions of the Essex class.

geofflambert -> RE: CVs - American vs British (8/12/2021 3:52:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rustysi quote: ORIGINAL: ny59giants Doing relatively well as I turn 62 in a few weeks, Brian. I judge it by how many specialist doctors I now see each year. Only one at age 50 and now up to four besides my primary care physician (PCP). I saw a book on Amazon, but want to see if others have a book they would recommend. Yeah, ya know you're old when you have more doctors than friends.[:D] Just choose older doctors so you can go to their funerals.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.265625