Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Ark Royal's survival would also present a challenge, since there's no example to tell Britain's carrier designers to subdivide boiler rooms or enact other damage control systems or measures.The problem is you need hindsight to know the armoured sides of the Illustrious and following classes isn't worth adding - there's still no Radar when they are being designed and there aren't enough cruisers, to ensure your carrier group always has one. But yes, more Ark Royal with modifications to sub-divide the boiler rooms would have been better.
Me too, after first an upgrade to radar, AA and CIC. I can envision Ark Royal's deck with Martlets and maybe Chesapekes, followed by Hellcats and Tarpons when available.I would have loved to have seen Ark Royal in the Pacific.
Ark Royal's boiler rooms were divided. Two boilers in each three boiler rooms situated abreast each other. Her issue lay in the single compartment above those three boiler rooms which contained the boiler uptakes which took the boiler gases across the ship to the funnel on the starboard side. As she listed to starboard and sank lower in the water, water entered that compartment, gradually cutting off the gas flow and allowing each boiler room to flood in turn so forcing their evacuation.Ark Royal's survival would also present a challenge, since there's no example to tell Britain's carrier designers to subdivide boiler rooms or enact other damage control systems or measures.
Ark Royal's boiler rooms were divided. Two boilers in each three boiler rooms situated abreast each other. Her issue lay in the single compartment above those three boiler rooms which contained the boiler uptakes which took the boiler gases across the ship to the funnel on the starboard side. As she listed to starboard and sank lower in the water, water entered that compartment, gradually cutting off the gas flow and allowing each boiler room to flood in turn so forcing their evacuation.
Small jets like the Sea Vampire would fit down the lifts. But compared to the postwar surplus of newer carriers on hand (6 x Illustrious/Implacable class, 7 x Colossus/Majestic) and those under construction (8 x Colossus/Majestic class, 4 x Centaur, 3 x Audacious), HMS Ark Royal would be thoroughly worn out by then and would need a complete teardown like HMS Victorious.I wonder how suitable the Ark would have been to basing jets, once that age had broke?
I agree, but only if more and better fighter aircraft are available. Otherwise our additional Ark Royal units are going to die in the MTO. In Jan 1941, HMS Illustrious was attacked by 24-36 Stukas and hit by six 1000 lb bombs, plus a near miss, followed by 13 Stukas attacking the next day, scoring another bomb hit on Illustrious. Then, when undergoing emergency repairs at Malta, Illustrious was attacked by by 17 Junkers Ju 88s and 44 Stukas, being hit again by a single 1,000 lb bomb, plus several damaging near misses. In these raids the few number of slow Fulmars were unable to stop these unescorted Luftwaffe attacks. Then, in May 1941, HMS Formidable was attacked by Ju 87 Stukas, all of which got through to the carrier, hitting her with two 1,000 lb bombs. In both cases, Illustrious and Formidable survived, but needed more than six months months of repair in Norfolk, VA, at the generosity of a then non-combatant USA. While the armoured fight deck did not prevent these hits from destroying flight ops, I'm not sure Ark Royal would survive at all.Its a personal belief I admit but the time and resources spent on designing the various Illustrious classes would have been better spent on a modified, (or even unmodified) Ark Royal design. The carriers would have been available much earlier and quite possibly an extra carrier built for the same outlay.
Nope.Small jets like the Sea Vampire would fit down the lifts.
Agreed, especially if we see Ark Royal serve with Sommerville at Ceylon in March/April 1942, Crace (or other?) at Coral Sea in May 1942 and perhaps a supporting role in Midway, followed by action across the PTO. A major refit will be necessary by autumn/winter 1942 - is that at CA, WA, UK or Simonstown?The Ark Royal would have been worn out after fighting in WW2, no matter what fitted onto her lifts and into her hangers.
Ark would have been very useful in any of those actions. She would have been great to have around during the Solomons campaign.Agreed, especially if we see Ark Royal serve with Sommerville at Ceylon in March/April 1942, Crace (or other?) at Coral Sea in May 1942 and perhaps a supporting role in Midway, followed by action across the PTO. A major refit will be necessary by autumn/winter 1942 - is that at CA, WA, UK or Simonstown?
I think that rather Ark Royal would've been used in the reinforcing of Malta. I can't see Sir Winston, or anyone in the Admiralty, detaching Ark semi-permanently to save the USN.
I prefer imagining HMS Ark Royal at sea than under it.
Using Ark Royal on the Malta run wasn't something you'd want to do. It was something they may have had to do. Like sending Wasp into the front lines.