Aircraft Carriers

One of the reasons the USN went to the steam "cat" was a terrible explosion and fire on board the USS Bennington CV-20 killed 103 American sailors and injured 201. The explosion occured in a hydraulic catapult. "At 0811, 28 May 1954, while cruising off Narragansett Bay, the fluid in one of her catapults exploded, setting off a series of secondary explosions which killed 103 crewmen and injured 201 others. Bennington proceeded under her own power to Quonset Point, R. I., to land her injured".

Hydraulic cats?? You gotta be kidding me! Nope the USN had hydraulic catapults.

The USNs only prospective alternative to the Steam Catapult in the late 40s/early 50s was the Cordite/Explosive catapult, using cordite charges (similar to those used in Battleship guns!) to launch large bombers from CVA-58, the aborted USS United States. I always found it astonishing that someone thought using high explosive to launch a bomber carrying a nuclear weapon was a smart idea...

Hydraulic Catapults have an inherent limitation to the size of aircraft they can launch due to the mechanical limits of the wires and pulleys, and this limit had been reached by the late 40s. The H-8 Catapults installed in several Essex class CVs under the SCB-27A program have the distinction of being the most powerful ones ever to go to sea, but not the last. I believe that honour goes to the French CVL Arromanches (ex- HMS Colossus) which may or may not have been operational when she decommissioned in 1974 (she mostly operated helos in her later years, alongside training aircraft like the Fouga Zephyr), whereas all the Hydraulic catapult equipped Essexs had bee retired by then.

IDonT said:

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.

Click to expand...

I think even if the BB's had many AA guns fitted, they'd still end up as floating targets without air cover. The Musashi and Yamato was re-fitted with 146 & 190 AA guns, yet in combat they were only able to shoot a few planes down before being sunk

The Japanese had a very narrow time-period of air/naval superiority in the Pacific, when they had a dominating prescence with more ships, experienced crew, and long-range Mitsubishi Zero aircraft. But over time the US shipbuilding industry basically zerg'ed the Japanese with some 800 Destroyer Escorts (DE), Frigates, and over 100 carriers of various sizes.

Had Pearl Harbor not occured, and the USN deployed its BB's and few Pacific carriers to Philippines (in very beginning of WW2), I think it'd have turned into a "Pearl Harbor' in the Philippines. During that brief period the Japanese Navy had some 420 Mitsubishi Zero's with 2,600 km range and well trained pilots. In aerial combat the ratio was 1:1 vs. US aircraft. The US carriers would've prolly lost all of its aircraft in combat, and the fleet turned into sitting ducks.

adeptitus said:

I think even if the BB's had many AA guns fitted, they'd still end up as floating targets without air cover. The Musashi and Yamato was re-fitted with 146 & 190 AA guns, yet in combat they were only able to shoot a few planes down before being sunk

Click to expand...

Still it took more aircraft than the Pearl Harbor raid several hours sink the Yamato. Japanese AAA were not as effective as the USN's "pom-poms" and the 5inch proximity fuse AAA. In the Battle of Eastern Solomons, South Dakota shot down 30+ Japanese planes in 15 minutes. Furthermore, Adm Spruance put all 7 of his fast battleship as bait, 60 miles in front of the carrier, in the Philippine Sea, to absorb the Japanese Air Attack. Their dense AAA and thick skins made the japanese attack ineffective.

I'm not saying that the Battleship can beat the Carrier, but the Battleship is as close to unsinkable as one can get.

IDonT sez;

Still it took more aircraft than the Pearl Harbor raid several hours sink the Yamato

Click to expand...

and

I'm not saying that the Battleship can beat the Carrier, but the Battleship is as close to unsinkable as one can get.

Click to expand...

Very true. But the air attack proved that it could be done. But let's not discount the fact by the time of the war when Yamato was sunk the IJN was a shell of it's short lived glorious self. The newer crews were poorly trained. And their "salty" shipmates were "battle weary" from not being rotated out of combat. These factors add up to poor damage control. And may have aided the sinking of the IJN Yamato.

The IJN was unable to streamline its training program, which in prewar years had produced qualitatively the best Naval aviators in the world, but only after a long training process (up to two years), whereas the USN decided it was better to train a large pool of good pilots instead of a small pool of excellent pilots. This is in no way a slur on the the US Navys aviators, as the reasoning was that they would get a lot of 'on the job' training in combat and benefit from being posted to squadrons with experienced pilots, learning by osmosis! Also the USN was able to adjust its tactics and strategies to the unfolding war situation much better than the Japanese, who wasted a lot of time on the carrier building front by not coming up with a standard design that could be built in numbers (until the 'Unryu' class, a modified 'Hiryu' design) until it was too late. Of course Japan could not hope to match the industrial capacity of the US, but they squandered their early lead and their leadership were only consistent in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Obi Wan Russell said:

The IJN was unable to streamline its training program, which in prewar years had produced qualitatively the best Naval aviators in the world, but only after a long training process (up to two years), whereas the USN decided it was better to train a large pool of good pilots instead of a small pool of excellent pilots..

Click to expand...

IMHO, the short version of this once the war got going was simply this...the US took its best pilots and had them train the new personnel who then entered service fairly proficient. The Japanese used their best pilots up until they were dead.

On one hand you had an ever increasing capable set of new pilots coming into the theater of operations with the Americans, and an ever decreasing capable group of pilots coming in for the Japanese. The ultimate outcome was obvious.

The US has continued this philosophy ever since and it has served her very much for the good.

bd popeye said:

Jeff..Check you real email I sent you an intresting page!

Jeff I really think the US should take the Constellation and Independence and re-fit them has "speical Forces" ships. They could carry SEALS,Rangers USMC recon. Or regular Army and USMC troops like a super LPH. All sorts of equipment i.e. helos, vehicles and all assoicated equipment would be on board. Much like the USS America was equipped to invade Hati in the 1990's. USAF & US Army helos could deploy on board for many different type missions.

The ships could be stationed on each coast and be ready in time of crisis.
The ships could also be use to transport large amounts of equipment whenever & where ever necessary. Of course the ships could be use in humanitarian missions.

Otherwise these fine ships will be at the bottom of Davey Jones locker.

Click to expand...

Good idea, but how about $$$ for it? CV-63 was used in that role in 2001 during enduring Freedom and can be used again if necessary. CV-64 was supposed to be stationed in Japan but was/is in such bad shape that she got stationed in Bremerton, WA instead. CV-62 & CV-61 - maybe, but how much it would cost operating them in the long run?

Originally Posted by MIGleader

it would be very interesting if someone somehow managed to obtain a super carrier from the u.s. if china can aquire enough u.s debt, they could threaten the u.s to pay its dues or surrender some weapons to pay those dues.

EternalVigil said:

No offense MIG but the US would never give up a super carrrier like that. Not going to happen.

Click to expand...

China would never ask US for a "hand me down" carrier:
1. So she won't "lose face";
2. She knows the US won't give/sell it anyway;
3. She doesn't need a supercarrier & already has old Russian carriers;
4. She is building/going to build her own.

As for scrapping, the Indians sent Clemenceau back to France-

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If the emabargo against PRC is lifted, it won't surprise me if that ship is sold to China for "scrap" and then used by the PLAN!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Re: The Building of America's next "super" Carrier

If they were operated in the 'Super LPH' role suggested, then savings could be made by only reactivating half the steam plant for a speed of 20knots (as was done with the Essex class CVs converted to the LPH role in the 60s), requiring a smaller crew and freeing up accomodation for troops, and as the catapults and arrestor gear would not be required less engineers would be needed also. Imagine a couple of Forrestal class LPHs loaded with 2,000 Marines and 30 V-22 Ospreys, 30+ F-35Bs and a squadron of attack helos (eg Cobras) ready to sail at short notice. But as we all know, the politicians will blow the money on something much less useful (like the Air Force!).

Re: The Building of America's next "super" Carrier

Obi Wan Russell said:

If they were operated in the 'Super LPH' role suggested, then savings could be made by only reactivating half the steam plant for a speed of 20knots (as was done with the Essex class CVs converted to the LPH role in the 60s), requiring a smaller crew and freeing up accomodation for troops, and as the catapults and arrestor gear would not be required less engineers would be needed also. Imagine a couple of Forrestal class LPHs loaded with 2,000 Marines and 30 V-22 Ospreys, 30+ F-35Bs and a squadron of attack helos (eg Cobras) ready to sail at short notice. But as we all know, the politicians will blow the money on something much less useful (like the Air Force!).

Click to expand...

I've got bad news for you: they are interested in spending more $$$ on new carriers & other weapons systems rather thasn saving $$$ by using older ships.