Rookie II - Saving MacArthur - against opponent no. 5

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 5th 1943 - pages 1 - 2

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 5th 1943 - page 3

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 10th 1943 - pages 1 - 2

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 10th 1943 - page 3

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 15th 1943 - pages 1 - 2

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 15th 1943 - pages 3 - 4

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 20th 1943 - pages 1 - 2

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 20th 1943 - pages 3 - 4

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 20th 1943 - page 5

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 25th 1943 - pages 1 - 2

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 25th 1943 - page 3

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 30th 1943 - pages 1 - 2

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star June 30th 1943 - pages 3 - 4

[BBfanboy]

Those Japanese subs continue to be deadly! How many do your Intel weenies say you have sunk so far?

Re: the Independence class carriers - they were CVLs, never CVEs, and they were built on hulls started as Baltimore class CAs. For that reason, they had turbine engines from the outset, never diesels. So why only 10,000 tons when a Baltimore CA displaces over 12,000 tons? A CVL carries much of its weight much higher above the waterline than a CA with its tapering superstructure shape. A full deck of aircraft would further threaten stability so the ship had to hold weight to 10,000 tons.

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star July 5th 1943 - pages 1 - 2

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star July 5th 1943 - pages 3 - 4

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star July 5th 1943 - pages 5 - 6

[Mark VII]

Pretty sure they were built on Cleveland class hulls.

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Re: the Independence class carriers - they were CVLs, never CVEs, and they were built on hulls started as Baltimore class CAs. For that reason, they had turbine engines from the outset, never diesels. So why only 10,000 tons when a Baltimore CA displaces over 12,000 tons? A CVL carries much of its weight much higher above the waterline than a CA with its tapering superstructure shape. A full deck of aircraft would further threaten stability so the ship had to hold weight to 10,000 tons.

Independence class carriers

[Leandros]

ORIGINAL: Mark VII

Pretty sure they were built on Cleveland class hulls.

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Re: the Independence class carriers - they were CVLs, never CVEs, and they were built on hulls started as Baltimore class CAs. For that reason, they had turbine engines from the outset, never diesels. So why only 10,000 tons when a Baltimore CA displaces over 12,000 tons? A CVL carries much of its weight much higher above the waterline than a CA with its tapering superstructure shape. A full deck of aircraft would further threaten stability so the ship had to hold weight to 10,000 tons.

Independence class carriers

You are correct on Cleveland and my remark that they were "a new class of Carriers" should be understood as not CVEs, but an improved version of the CVE concept - namely a somewhat longer flight deck which could facilitate the Hellcat, and better machinery to increase the speed.

Apart from that our reporters have absolutely no clue on naval matters - or writing English.

Fred

[Leandros]

Brisbane Evening Star July 10th 1943 - pages 1 - 2