ORIGINAL: el cid again
ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior
ORIGINAL: el cid again
In RHS I DELIBERATELY have the E16 upgrade to the M6A1 - because it is simply a better floatplane. We have E13s upgrade to E16s. You are not REQUIRED to upgrade if you do not wish to do so. E16s are the historical plane used by half the semi-carriers air groups (the other half use Judy's). [FYI we all were wrong about the semi-carriers - they will operate BOTH float and regular bombers]
How so with regular bombers do semi-carriers 'operate' them? Unless it is a flat plane they are not able to recover them at sea.
OK - this is apples and oranges. You are of course quite correct - and I was talking about CODE - not operations.
In fact, the Japanese semi-carrier concept ORIGINALLY ONLY specified regular CV aircraft! They were concieved of as a way to get EXTRA carrier bombers - along side regular CVs - to a battle area. Any bombers that survived were then to divert to land bases or other carriers. At which point the semi-carriers lost meaning as aircraft carriers. Rather than have them wholly one shot deals, they MODIFIED the concept so that SOME of the planes on both ships would be seaplanes. It was not exactly 50-50 for each SHIP, but it was 50-50 for the FORCE! [One ship had 13 seaplanes and 9 dive bombers, the other had complimentary numbers] For details see The Hybred Warship.
The Japanese used the German Hein Mat to recover seaplanes while underway. This technology dragged a "mat" from a beam swung out to the side of the ship - on which the seaplane would sit down - and a crane could then hook on and lift her aboard. An alternative form used the mat astern. Since that technology was mature - it solved the "unable to recover" problem without requiring the ship to stop.
One of the problems with the semi-carrier concept is that recovery is problematical. It is not unsoluable. You have seen US carrier planes land into a net: it could be done. The problem is the air currents are not very predictable due to the superstructure, and the exhaust gasses of centerline stacks are also not nice, in more than one sense. Until the advent of VTOL this was not an easy problem to solve. It has a lot to do with why US and Japanese studies of semi-carriers did not get funded. The more practical of them had the guns on the main deck - below a proper flight deck - which just was not as long as the ship.
The USN was also recovering floatplanes while underway for years:
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/ac-u ... /soc-r.htm
