Carriers!! (1 Viewer)

[MP-Willow]

I would hope the RN dose order at least one of the carriers, even if they are not the supper carrier Numits class. But here is an idea, why not ask for the new Nimitiz carrier being layed down for the USN, the Goerge W. Bush

 

[Glider]

We wouldn't have enough sailors to man it.

 

[MP-Willow]

Glinder, then that is a good reason to make a bigger Navy. The RN wonce spanned the globe in Every sea and ocean a fleet in force

 

[Glider]

MP, I am ex Fleet Air Arm and assure you that it hurts when I think what we used to be able to do. Obviously we couldn't compare to the USN but in quality size for size, we were second to no one.

 

[plan_D]

In World War 2 the Royal Navy almost matched the USN in size at the end. At the start, the Royal Navy was larger. With the Commonwealth too, we were only one or two warships off the size of the USN.

The days have gone when Naval supremecy meant global supremecy though. The Royal Navy doesn't need to be huge, Britain's day as world leader have been and gone. Now, we sit back and keep our say but leave the major trouble to the top dogs, America!

 

[Glider]

I am afraid that we were nowhere near the size of the USN at the end of the war. To match the USN you would have had to combine the British, Japanese, Italian and German fleets, excluding all the losses.

But I agree with you in that our days are long gone.

 

[plan_D]

The USN only had 405 warships on V-E day. The combined Commonwealth had something like 397.

 

[Glider]

I don't know where your numbers come from but they had over
25 Battleships
59 Cruisers
26 Fleet carriers
65 escort carriers
Of the above I have excluded any vessel sunk during the war or transferred to the RN
Of destroyers life is too short but they built about
175 Fletcher Class destroyers
70 Bristol Class
24 Benson Class
70 Summer Class
This excludes all the Pre war destroyers of which 199 were in commission at the start of the war and destroyer escorts built in vast numbers

The RN didn't come close

 

[plan_D]

Warships, Glider, not capital ships only.

 

[Glider]

Plan D The total above comes out to over 700 without going down to escorts. I doubt if the USA lost almost half their navy to get it down to 405.
As I said the RN didn't come close

 

[plan_D]

Strength as of September, 1939 - 332. Comissioned to August, 1945 - 553. Total in service - 885 (without escort).

In service includes:
20 Capital vessels.
65 Carriers.
101 Cruisers.
461 Destroyers.
238 Submarines.

Note: Total in service includes captured vessels and U.S lend lease, which was sent back.

Warship does include all vessels with offensive capability. The numbers I got didn't include Destroyers.

 

[Glider]

Sorry but my figures don't agree with yours. I would like to check my sources, can you tell me where your figures are from.
I make it that during the war we only built about 30 cruisers and half of these were Dido AA cruisers. That said we started the war with more cruisers the USN basically having none in 1939
We also only built approx 140 destroyers during the war less than half the USA production and 13 Fleet carriers again less than half the USA production.

My guess is that the term destroyers includes the escorts for the RN and not for the USN.

If you could assist me in checking the details it would be appreciated

 

[plan_D]

It's not very well laid out but it's in here somewhere:

http://www.naval-history.net/NAVAL1939-45RN.htm

 

[Glider]

Thanks, Apologies for the delay but my computer had problems

 

[MP-Willow]

Glider, I destroyer's life is not that short is it? Or maybe it is the captins like to play a lot more risks, like driving up to a beach to near beaching the boat so they can fire in support of the Marines

 

[maxs75]

Hi guys,

In no way Royal Navy was as powerful as United States Navy at the end of WW2. May we speak about Carriers, Convoy escorts, fleet oilers or LSTs? Or about embarked fighters?

Royal Navy was for sure the first Navy in the World in 1939 at war's start, but not for sure in september 1945.
Even if the lend-lease ships (LSTs, CVEs, DEs...) are counted as British, RN was still smaller than USN.


Max

 

[Glider]

I am not disagreeing with you, my posting was to emphasise the difference between the two Navies.

 

[syscom3]

.....That said we started the war with more cruisers the USN basically having none in 1939
......

I show the USN had 18 heavy cruisers and 9 light cruisers in commision by 1940. All of them were considered modern having been commisoned from 1929 through 1940.

27 cruisers is far from "none"

 

[Glider]

Apologies I was thinking of the Light Cruisers. I know you had a handful but they (Omaha class) were more like WW1 ships.

 

[syscom3]

The US had seven BROOKLYN class light cruisers and two ST. LOUIS Class light cruisers (which were more or less BROOKLYN cruisers).

Aside for a couple of old Omaha cruisers stationed in the Philipines at the outbreak of hostilities, I dont think this class saw any action.