Aircraft Carriers

bd popeye · Sep 30, 2006

Totoro, great observation. I think the USN has longed planned to operate with 10 CVN's for short periods of time or longer. Once the Enterprise is decomissioned in 2014 that will leave the USN with 10 Nimitz class + one CVN-78 class with the Nimitz being retired about 2024. Don't be surprised to see a Nimitz class decomissioned early to reduce the force to 10 CVN's.

IMO the Kennedy was allowed to deteroiate so the USN could save money by decomissioning her and putting that money into other programs and ships.

IDonT · Oct 2, 2006

Jeff Head said:
Midway in June 1942 turned the tides of the naval war in the Pacific when the Japanese lost four carriers in that single battle, although many hard fights still remained. Leyte Gulf in 1944 hammered the door shut in terms of US dominance on the seas. Although there were still battles to be fought, and the Kamikazis would reak terrible havoc (which my father experienced and observed fisrt hand), there were no serious carrier or surface action threats after that.

The large fleet carrier action surrounding Leyte Gulf was very one sided, but the surface action part was a very near thing, partiuclarly off Samar. We lost two of our escort carrier there as the big battleships and cruisers broke through and could have done horrible damage to the anchorage...but were turned back by the ferocious attacks of destroyers and destroyer escorts...who went up against heavy cruisers and battleships.

Amazing stuff.

Here's a great site regarding the Battle off Samar:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

There were only 5 carrier battles in WWII (Coral Sea, Midway, Eastern Solomons, Santa Cruz Islands, Philippine Sea). All but the Philippine Sea happened in 1942. After the Japanese Victory in the Santa Cruz Island, they withdraw their carrier force to rebuild and refit. The USN had only the Enterprise at this time due to Hornet's sinking at Santa Cruz (the last US heavy carrier lost in the war). US military output dominated the Japanese so much that the next carrier battle was heavily one sided. In this battle IJN brought 6 Heavy Carrier and 3 light carriers, while the US brought 7 heavy carrier and 8 light carriers. Even with the Japanese tactical advantage (finding the US force first), their sorties were intercepted hundreds of miles from the US carriers thanks to superior radar and intercept officers. The USN used the fast battleship as bait, 60 miles from the main carriers to tempt the IJN fliers who got through the fighter screen to attack them instead of the carriers. The plan worked and the IJN wasted their combat power on the battleships heavy armor and dense AAA. About a dozen attacks were on the US carriers themselves.

The rebuilt IJN carrier force was destroyed at Philippine Sea. Most of its veteran squadron commanders died that day along with many green pilots. In Leyte Gulf, the carrier force was just a decoy force and they were the only one to succeed in its mission.

Jeff Head · Oct 2, 2006

IDonT said:
There were only 5 carrier battles in WWII (Coral Sea, Midway, Eastern Solomons, Santa Cruz Islands, Philippine Sea).

In Leyte Gulf, the carrier force was just a decoy force and they were the only one to succeed in its mission.

Depends on how you classify a carrier battle. I call that potion of the fight at Leyte Gulf a carrier battle. The Japanese carrier force was a decoy...albeit altogether it only had about 100 planes. But it pitted that force against an American carrier force for a military purpose. They did decoy the US fast carriers there and thus achieved that military purpose. Aircraft were launched, shots were fired, ordinance was expended, and ships were hit and sunk. One sided? Yes, absolutley...but it was a carrier battle.

And the only reason the IJN central force coming through the San Bernadino strait did not achieve its mission is because the Japanese commander lost heart in the middle of the battle when his mistook the ferocious attacks of destroyers and destroyer escorts for cruisers, and the ferocious sorties of Taffy 3 as the fast carrier force. If he had proceeded, he would have succeeded and gotten into the anchorage in all probablilty.

IDonT · Oct 3, 2006

Jeff Head said:
Depends on how you classify a carrier battle. I call that potion of the fight at Leyte Gulf a carrier battle. The Japanese carrier force was a decoy...albeit altogether it only had about 100 planes. But it pitted that force against an American carrier force for a military purpose. They did decoy the US fast carriers there and thus achieved that military purpose. Aircraft were launched, shots were fired, ordinance was expended, and ships were hit and sunk. One sided? Yes, absolutley...but it was a carrier battle.

And the only reason the IJN central force coming through the San Bernadino strait did not achieve its mission is because the Japanese commander lost heart in the middle of the battle when his mistook the ferocious attacks of destroyers and destroyer escorts for cruisers, and the ferocious sorties of Taffy 3 as the fast carrier force. If he had proceeded, he would have succeeded and gotten into the anchorage in all probablilty.

If that is the case, we forgot Admiral Nagumo's raid on the Indian Ocean. The Brits suffered horrible casualties (I think 1 carrier sunk, along with 2 cruisers). This was the second largest concentration of Japanese carrier power (5 fleet carriers) since Pearl Harbor (6 fleet carriers).

One wonders why the RN, with the longest naval tradition of the warring powers in WWII, neglect to advance its carrier fleet. I mean, they were still using the swordfish bi-planes of their carriers (used to good effects on Taranto and crippling the Bismark). I guess the battleship admirals were still in control of the RN at that time. I mean the IJN would have mop the floor with the RN in 1941-1942.

Obi Wan Russell · Oct 3, 2006

The RNs carrier fleet was in such a poor state at the start of WW2 because for twenty years it had had no control over its own aircraft. During WW1 there were two British military air forces, he Royal Flying Corps (Army) and the Royal Naval Air Service, both large and innovative in their respective fields. On the 1st April 1918 (yes a fitting day) the two services were amalgamated into the Royal Air Force and the RN lost control over Naval Aviation. The RAF had little interest in anything other than the development of land based bombers and neglected carrier aircraft during their time in charge and the Navy didn't regain control until 1937, but by then it was too late to re equip in time for the outbreak of war. Also the lack of experienced senior naval aviators in the Naval Hierarchy meant there was a lack of clear direction in aircraft development (leading to the introduction of ill thought out fighters such as the Fairey Fulmar, which would have been a better aircraft if it had been a single seater from the start). Eventually as the war progressed the RN began to recieve American aircraft under Lend Lease and by the end of the war the RNs carrier strike capability was equal in quality, if not quantity to the USN. In the case of the Indian Ocean Raid, HMS Hermes was lost off the coast of Ceylon with no aircraft aboard (she only had 14 swordfish torpedo bombers assigned anyway) and the Navy was still being run by 'Battleship' admirals who saw Carriers as auxilliary warships for reconnaisance mainly (as was the USN too, though the situation was changing faster there), and at the start of the war only the IJN High Command truely appreciated the value of carriers. Ironic then that they finished the war with none.

IDonT · Oct 3, 2006

Obi Wan Russell said:
The RNs carrier fleet was in such a poor state at the start of WW2 because for twenty years it had had no control over its own aircraft. During WW1 there were two British military air forces, he Royal Flying Corps (Army) and the Royal Naval Air Service, both large and innovative in their respective fields. On the 1st April 1918 (yes a fitting day) the two services were amalgamated into the Royal Air Force and the RN lost control over Naval Aviation. The RAF had little interest in anything other than the development of land based bombers and neglected carrier aircraft during their time in charge and the Navy didn't regain control until 1937, but by then it was too late to re equip in time for the outbreak of war. Also the lack of experienced senior naval aviators in the Naval Hierarchy meant there was a lack of clear direction in aircraft development (leading to the introduction of ill thought out fighters such as the Fairey Fulmar, which would have been a better aircraft if it had been a single seater from the start). Eventually as the war progressed the RN began to recieve American aircraft under Lend Lease and by the end of the war the RNs carrier strike capability was equal in quality, if not quantity to the USN. In the case of the Indian Ocean Raid, HMS Hermes was lost off the coast of Ceylon with no aircraft aboard (she only had 14 swordfish torpedo bombers assigned anyway) and the Navy was still being run by 'Battleship' admirals who saw Carriers as auxilliary warships for reconnaisance mainly (as was the USN too, though the situation was changing faster there), and at the start of the war only the IJN High Command truely appreciated the value of carriers. Ironic then that they finished the war with none.

I think losing 24 carriers in 4 years have something to do with it.

I believe they actually have 3 carriers, survivors of the decoy force in Leyte Gulf, moored by the time of surrender.

Assuming that Pearl Harbor did not happen, the USN main plan was to have its battleships push through and relieve the Philippines. These battleships would have been easily sunk by aircraft, like Prince of Wales. At this stage of the war, few warships had adequate AAA and these BB were slow and don't have that thick deck armor. Midway was truly a miracle.

Obi Wan Russell · Oct 3, 2006

Midway was truly a miracle, and Pearl Harbour was a blessing in disguise. With the Battleships out of the picture the USN had no choice but to fight a carrier war, and for the first year the Americans only had to fight a holding action, until their industry could begin to supply the reinforcements needed to win a war of attrition (as predicted by Admiral Yamamoto himself). If the war had followed the American prewar model (Japanese attack the Phillipines, US Battle fleet sails to repulse Japanese...) then the war could have been very different, ironically.

IDonT · Oct 3, 2006

Here is a quiz:

Why do carriers have their Islands on the starboard side (right side)?

The Brits did invent many things that made jet operations on carriers possible.
1.) Mirror Landing System
2.) Angled Flight Deck
3.) Ski-Jump
4.) Hurricane Bow

The USN perfected the Steam Catapult.

The IJN was the first to developed a carrier doctrine along with the first carrier base plane that is superior to many of its land based counter parts (Zero).

bd popeye · Oct 3, 2006

IDonT said:
Here is a quiz:

Why do carriers have their Islands on the starboard side (right side)?

The Brits did invent many things that made jet operations on carriers possible.
1.) Mirror Landing System
2.) Angled Flight Deck
3.) Ski-Jump
4.) Hurricane Bow

The USN perfected the Steam Catapult.

The IJN was the first to developed a carrier doctrine along with the first carrier base plane that is superior to many of its land based counter parts (Zero).

In answer to your question. Ahem...

There are several reasons. Initially the island was placed on the starboard side because early (propeller) aircraft turned to the left more easily (an effect of engine torque). Obviously such an aircraft can execute a wave-off to the left more easily, so the island was put to starboard to be out of the way.

Oh yea..I cheated!

Got the info on this web site below. Honestly I did kinda sorta know this but was not 100% sure

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Obi Wan Russell · Oct 3, 2006

IDonT said:
Here is a quiz:

Why do carriers have their Islands on the starboard side (right side)?

The Brits did invent many things that made jet operations on carriers possible.
1.) Mirror Landing System
2.) Angled Flight Deck
3.) Ski-Jump
4.) Hurricane Bow

The USN perfected the Steam Catapult.

The IJN was the first to developed a carrier doctrine along with the first carrier base plane that is superior to many of its land based counter parts (Zero).

The USN perfected the Steam Catapult? That would mean 'refined' after the British invented it. The first Steam Catapult to go to sea was installed aboard the Colossus class maintenance carrier HMS Perseus in 1952:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

USN aircraft were present for the trials as well as RN types and this lead to the steam catapult being adopted by both Navies and others.

Aircraft Carriers

bd popeye

The Last Jedi

IDonT

Senior Member

Jeff Head

General

IDonT

Senior Member

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

IDonT

Senior Member

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

IDonT

Senior Member

bd popeye

The Last Jedi

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master