Carrier trained air units

[ndworl]

I'm a bit confused about how to get air units carrier trained. On a couple of threads, it has been suggested you train them on CVs (as in put them on a CVE and sail around somewhere safe), but this has been rejected by others. Does anyone know definitively?

[dr.hal]

There is only one way to get a unit from carrier capable to carrier trained and that's by having them on a CV type ship. If you want to do so a CVE in backwaters is a very safe way to do so, but not necessary. A "capable" unit can still fight and conduct operations in the front line, with a higher op loss rate. I've not found this loss rate to be excessive so if I need the unit at the front, I don't hesitate. Remember a CVE has its place on the front as well, it is an effective escort. If you keep it in the rear it is not in the fight. Thus your opponent "wins" in the sense that the CVE is "out of the action" without him needing to sink it. So how you do things is a choice, with both alternatives having pros and cons. This would be dictated by the situation you are in. I know this is a "non answer" but it really does depend upon your situation. I've never seen the need to wait for a capable unit to be "trained" before needing them on the front (I think it is 90 days, but not sure). The wait is not worth the price. But that's me.... Hal

[ndworl]

Thanks
So, the units will eventually be carrier trained if embarked on a CV? I take your point completely, about the costs and benefits of holding back a fighting unit, plus possibly a highly skilled but not carrier trained air group. I suppose I was thinking of a poorly trained air group. It might be better to let them get to a higher stage of preparation than commit them and an irreplaceable ship (we're obviously talking about the Japanese) to combat.

[Ian R]

Has anyone actually seen a carrier capable air unit improve to carrier trained?

I once replaced the air groups on a couple of US carriers (you have to take the whole group off if you do this) with a 100 plane mix of 52 F4U1d and 48 SB2C, including a couple of 16 plane RNZAF Corsair squadrons to work the numbers. They sailed around for a year, and with all the groups' exp up in the 90s op losses were not visibly greater than usual, but they never became carrier trained.

Edit - in case it matters, they were never on training while on board, they trained up on ground missions in the Solomons before going ship board.

[tocaff]

Carrier capable v carrier trained yields negligible differences in Ops losses. Carrie capable will stay that way as you can train pilots in exp levels only, nothing specialized as in AE.

[Capt]

Well I don't know anything definitively but what I do is use 'Carrier Capable' units in the exact same way as 'Carrier Trained' with no visible difference EXCEPT they perform much better as their experience levels increase.

The experience level increase does not need come from carrier operations.

[kmitahj]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Has anyone actually seen a carrier capable air unit improve to carrier trained?

Not in Classic WitP. As far as I know the only way to change the status of airgroup to Carrier Trained is by modifying the scenario in the editor so that the airgroup will enter the game on the carrier deck. In other words starting location (carrier deck or land base) decides if given airgroup will be considered carrier trained or only carrier capable (assuming equipped with carrier-capable airplane model)