Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It is tragic that the USN didn't adopt armoured flight decks until it was too late.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_armoured_to_unarmoured_flight_deck_designsAmerican carriers of the Essex class suffered very high casualties from serious kamikaze hits, though they did survive. USS Franklin was struck by two 250/550 kg/lbs armour-piercing bombs, one of which penetrated her armoured hangar floor and set off ammunition, killing 724 personnel. USS Bunker Hill was severely damaged by pair of kamikaze hits which killed 346 men. Each these USN carriers suffered more casualties than all the British RN armoured carriers combined, illustrating the life saving features of RN carrier design. Illustrious, which had the highest toll, suffered 126 fatal casualties and 84 wounded when hit by six 1100lb bombs on January 10, 1941.
The articles at the bottom of the wiki page you have posted seem to strongly disagree with your opinion, RCAFson. Based on reading those articles, I would say that the US used the correct decision in building their carriers as they did. The British carriers, besides carrying a smaller air group were also less habitable in the Pacific because of their more enclosed hanger decks.
It would have been interesting however if a RN task force had encountered Japanese forces like that the US fought against in 1942-43.
Yes, unfortunately the RN's only potential carrier vs carrier action, in April 1942 pitted two RN fleet carriers against 5 IJN carriers. The USN never had to face that kind of opposition until mid 1944 when they easily outnumbered the IJN fleet.
Huh? What about Coral Sea and Midway?
Coral Sea was two USN fleet carriers versus two IJN fleet carriers and a light carrier, and Midway was 3 USN fleet carriers versus 4 IJN fleet carriers. The USN never faced greater numbers of IJN fleet carriers than the RN until June 1944, at the Battle of the Philippine Sea where the IJN had 6 fleet carriers and 3 light carriers, but by then the USN had 7 fleet carriers and 8 light carriers.
This issue has been debated many times.
The armored flight deck has advantages and disadvantages. And in this case, having a carrier of that displacement with an armored deck would mean a smaller air group compliment, meaning more carriers would be needed to do the missions. Which means more targets for the Kamikazi's to hit.
The armored flight deck was a non starter untill the Midway class set the new standards of armor AND a nice sized air group.
The Eastern Solomons had 2 US CV versus 3-4 (depending on when you count them) Japanese Heavy and Light Carriers. I believe the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands had the US in an inferior numbers role. In truth, the US fought all it's Pre-44 carrier battles at a numerical disadvantage in terms of Carriers. But once production ramped up (and the doctrine was refined), the numbers and the odds changed.
As for the Armored/Non-Armored debate, you can pretty much pick your side on that one. Armor flight decks had advantages as did nonarmored.