What if Britain had built large aircraft carriers, ...

From the Washington Naval Treaty to the end of the Second World War.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: What if Britain had built large aircraft carriers, ...

Post by RF »

The escort carriers that were used in WW2 were small vessels, frequently converted merchant ships, not the large fleet carriers that were proposed in place of battleships at the start of this thread. These small carriers and CAM ships were designed initially to deal with maurauding Focke Wulf 200 bombers rather than U-boats, though their role evolved into anti-submarine work.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
neil hilton
Senior Member
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 2:31 pm

Re: What if Britain had built large aircraft carriers, ...

Post by neil hilton »

One thing that should also be considered is the weather and the day/night cycle. CVs of that era have very limited usage conditions, ie no bad weather and no nighttime operations. Look what happened to Glorious, caught in bad weather and unable to launch aircraft. Battleships can operate in fairly bad weather and at night. Thus an all carrier force is unable to provide consistant coverage of any given sea area.
Veni, vidi, verrimus!
I came, I saw, I swept the floor!
Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: What if Britain had built large aircraft carriers, ...

Post by Bgile »

neil hilton wrote:One thing that should also be considered is the weather and the day/night cycle. CVs of that era have very limited usage conditions, ie no bad weather and no nighttime operations. Look what happened to Glorious, caught in bad weather and unable to launch aircraft. Battleships can operate in fairly bad weather and at night. Thus an all carrier force is unable to provide consistant coverage of any given sea area.
IIRC Glorious could have launched aircraft if she had begun preparing to launch them sooner. Wasn't her commander criticised for not having patrol aircraft up?
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: What if Britain had built large aircraft carriers, ...

Post by RF »

Yes indeed. The commander in question wasn't a great believer in the concept of airpower. Just the sort of person you would want in charge of an aircraft carrier.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Seekanone
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 8:37 pm

Re: What if Britain had built large aircraft carriers, ...

Post by Seekanone »

What do you define as large? The size of airgroup or of the ship itself, or both? The Audacious and Malta classes would have been large by any standards but would not have been finished until 1945-47 at the earliest. In the late 1930s, Great Britain was not capable of building CVs of the size I think you have in mind.
The large carriers Britain was thinking of in 1940-43 were meant for action in the Pacific against Japan. In that local, the 36,500 ton and 45,000 ton carriers would have been ideal with air groups of 80 and 100 aircraft respectively. What would have been even more critical would have been new aircraft for the air groups but such were in the pipeline and US aircraft would have been sufficient in the meantime until RN aircraft could have become operational.
IMHO, I believe the RN could have used large carriers but more so in the Pacific than the Atlantic and perhaps after 1944. By that time, Bismarck had long been sunk by Ark Royal and Victorious's efforts and Tiripitz had been crippled by Bomber Command and CVEs. :D
Post Reply