Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Would the RN have been better off with six more Ark Royals? We lose the armoured flight deck that presumably contributed to their survival from bomb and kamikaze strikes, but we gain a larger air group that may allow for single seat fighters like a folding Sea Hurricane.Part of the RN problem was the limited deck capacity of the RN carriers.
It still doesn't change the interception problem in pre-radar days.Would the RN have been better off with six more Ark Royals? We lose the armoured flight deck that presumably contributed to their survival from bomb and kamikaze strikes, but we gain a larger air group that may allow for single seat fighters like a folding Sea Hurricane.
The system avoided direction finding by the use of a narrow beam rotating at a certain speed which the TAG could anticipate.Type 72 was also limited in range (c70 miles IIRC). And its use was against RN policy of operating in radio silence (the RN WW1 experience produced good results from direction finding). In the Med in 1941 use of radar was limited to daylight hours for the same reasons.
..
The Butt Report of Aug 1941 was the first wide spread crack...
The Butt Report of Aug 1941 was the first wide spread crack in Bomber Command belief system, which they tried to rebut in their own report. The internal battles last well over another year.
Would the RN have been better off with six more Ark Royals? We lose the armoured flight deck that presumably contributed to their survival from bomb and kamikaze strikes, but we gain a larger air group that may allow for single seat fighters like a folding Sea Hurricane.
Good points. If we can have Britain exit the treaties earlier and swap out the Illustrious and Implacable classes with six 38,000 ton Audacious class we'll have the best all round AFD large CAG carrier. Though they are rather short ranged as completed, I assume with more displacement dedicated to protection, machinery and flight ops over fuel load. Now we can have the folding Sea Hurricane or other single seat fighters we want.So everyone wanted armoured flight decks in the 1930s and accepted that something had to give to get it. And for the USA & Japan, that meant waiting until they were no longer bound by Treaties.
But it was UK, who reduced the limit for carriers in LNT '36 from 36k tons (33k tons + 3k tons for "AAA and ASW protection) to 23k tons... (On the other hand, they were putting in caveats to allow Battleship tonnage to increase to 45k tons).Good points. If we can have Britain exit the treaties earlier and swap out the Illustrious and Implacable classes with six 38,000 ton Audacious class we'll have the best all round AFD large CAG carrier. Though they are rather short ranged as completed, I assume with more displacement dedicated to protection, machinery and flight ops over fuel load. Now we can have the folding Sea Hurricane or other single seat fighters we want.
The Audacious class' greater aircraft capacity allows for specialized types, so eliminating the need to find a fighter role amongst the two-seaters.I still don't see where Audacious class changes FAA aircraft choice from Fulmar to Sea Hurricane.
Indomitable at 23000 tons would seem to be a more plausible choice than Audacious at 38000 tons, which was beyond the UK capacity to build during the prewar expansion of the RN,The Audacious class' greater aircraft capacity allows for specialized types, so eliminating the need to find a fighter role amongst the two-seaters.
CARRIERSBut it was UK, who reduced the limit for carriers in LNT '36 from 36k tons (33k tons + 3k tons for "AAA and ASW protection) to 23k tons... (On the other hand, they were putting in caveats to allow Battleship tonnage to increase to 45k tons).
Scheme | Approved | For | Heavy | Medium | Light | Torpedo | Fighter | GR/GP | GR/FB | Army | Overseas | Naval | Note |
A | 18-Jul-34 | 31-Mar-39 | 8 | 8 | 25 | 2 | 28 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 27 | 16.5 | 8 light, 5 fighter squadrons reserve units |
C | 21-May-35 | 31-Mar-37 | 20 | 18 | 30 | 2 | 35 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 27 | 16.5 | 11 light, 5 fighter squadrons reserve units |
F | 25-Feb-36 | 31-Mar-39 | 20 | 38 | 0 | 2 | 30 | 7 | 6 | 11 | 37 | 26 | 11 medium, 5 fighter, 4 army squadrons reserve units. FAA to 40 squadrons by 1942 |
H | 24-Feb-37 | 31-Mar-39 | 20 | 55 | 0 | 2 | 34 | 7 | 6 | 11 | 30 | 30 | 7 medium, 9 fighter, 4 army squadrons reserve units, partially approved |
J | not | mid 1941 | 64 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 38 | 13 | 6 | 11 | 45 | 50 | 7 medium, 9 fighter, 4 army squadrons reserve units |
K | not | 31-Mar-41 | 58 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 38 | 13 | 6 | 11 | 39 | n/a | 3 medium, 9 fighter, 4 coastal, 4 army squadrons reserve units |
L | 27-Apr-38 | 31-Mar-40 | 47 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 38 | 13 | 6 | 11 | 39 | n/a | 3 medium, 9 fighter, 4 coastal, 4 army squadrons reserve units |
M | 7-Nov-38 | 31-Mar-42 | 85 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 50 | 7 | 6 | 9 | 49 | n/a | 14 fighter, 4 coastal, 2 army squadrons reserve units, approved in principle |