CVs - American vs British

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9891
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

CVs - American vs British

Post by ny59giants »

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?
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Jellicoe
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:00 pm
Location: Kent, UK

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by Jellicoe »

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
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 14356
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by btd64 »

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
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050

AKA General Patton

DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9891
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by 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.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Jellicoe
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:00 pm
Location: Kent, UK

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by Jellicoe »

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
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 14356
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by btd64 »

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
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050

AKA General Patton

DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9891
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by ny59giants »

This book came up during my search.

https://www.amazon.com/British-Aircraft ... 1591140749

Just wondering if anyone has it and is it worth the cost?
[center]Image[/center]
Ian R
Posts: 3440
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cammeraygal Country

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by Ian R »

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

This book came up during my search.

https://www.amazon.com/British-Aircraft ... 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.
"I am Alfred"
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 14356
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by btd64 »

Looks good for the price. You can get a used copy too....GP
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050

AKA General Patton

DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
Ian R
Posts: 3440
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cammeraygal Country

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by Ian R »

"I am Alfred"
Buckrock
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:10 am
Location: Not all there

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by Buckrock »

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-t ... worthwhile
This was the only sig line I could think of.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20416
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Ian R

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

This book came up during my search.

https://www.amazon.com/British-Aircraft ... 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(]
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by rustysi »

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]
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
Hano
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:11 pm

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by Hano »

I found this to be a very useful and informative read....

https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Carriers-F ... B07FPHSWFM

I hope it helps
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by 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.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Ian R
Posts: 3440
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cammeraygal Country

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by Ian R »

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.
"I am Alfred"
User avatar
geofflambert
Posts: 14887
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: St. Louis

RE: CVs - American vs British

Post by geofflambert »

ORIGINAL: rustysi

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.

Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”