HMS Hermes (95), reasonable interwar rebuild

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

But really the only changes I desperately want for Hermes by spring 1942 is her CAG, outriggers, crash barrier, fighter director office and maybe radar if we can justify it. Give Hermes eighteen of the FAA's first folding Martlets in addition to eight Albacores. Yes, we can't operate far from immediate sources of bunker oil and avgas, so we'll need to concede operational endurance, and assign a "fast" oiler/supply vessel.

Dammit, as I wrote the above I can sense our resident contrarians, suitably triggered and needing to tell us why this couldn't, wouldn't or shouldn't have occurred. Bait one is likely the availability date of folding Martlets. Next may be the CAG size, or radar availability. Other than this, IDK.
 
resident contrarian


If you want four aircraft in the air from dawn till dusk (say 12 hours) and split between two fighters for CAP and two Swordfish for long range recon/patrol you may have a problem.
assuming each plane burns 30 gallons an hour in cruise you are using up about 1400 gallons a day. The Hermes, as unmodified, held 7000 imp gallons. about 5 days supply at the rate calculated, adjust usage as you see fit, however.

18 Martlets will hold 2160 imp gallons in the internal tanks.

Fairey Albacores fuel load??????

There were plans to increase the fuel capacity to 13,000 gallons.

building/providing high speed support ships because you carrier is too small to sustain operations on it's own is hardly cheap or effective.

For your consideration.

Courageous.......34,500 gals
Unicorn................36,000 gals
Colossus..............98,600 gals
Majestic...............75,000 gals
Audacity..............10,000 gals
Activity.................20,000 gals
Vindex..................52,000 gals
Attacker.............41-52,800 gals (reduced from 151,500 gals)


as an alternative may I suggest the RN just acquires the Pretoria Castle a bit earlier and converts it to the carrier set up without stopping at the armed merchant cruiser stage?
Or take your fast oiler/replenishment ship and just built a hanger and flight deck on top.
 

Hmm, essentially I agree with you, Freebird, but I suspect Vindictive and the C Class cruisers might not have been suitable as carrier conversions. On paper they certainly compare with possible escort carrier conversions in terms of displacement, size etc, but none were done so. That would require a vast amount of redesign, but with the resources available in wartime, certainly feasible. In peacetime between the wars in a cost cutting environment the escort carrier doesn't make as much sense as devoting efforts to building fleet carriers. I suspect the Vindictive's only hope as a carrier is as a seaplane tender without a landing deck.

Hermes' problem was that she was a product of her time. There wasn't really much else to go off at the time expectation wise, except Furious and Argus, both of which were conversions of existing hulls. By the time she was launched in September 1919 they were just figuring out how to stop an aeroplane on a carrier deck; there was still a lot to learn and by the time she was introduced into service two years later, carrier aircraft had not progressed much beyond Great War technology. Even by the late 20s early 30s it was recognised the ship was too small and suffered inadequacies as a result, not to mention the trim issues, with rear watertight compartments being permanently flooded to maintain trim, that even dictated what specific grade of fuel oil it could carry. In late 1930 the carrier could carry eight assembled Fairey IIIFs, four assembled Ripons, and seven unrigged Flycatchers and because of hangar space there was none available for more unrigged aircraft. It was noted that Ripons in packing cases could be carried on deck, but it was impractical because of the strain on the deck, which hints at a not entirely robust structure/further exacerbation of the trim issues.

Could the RN have given it a new lease of life if under gone an overhaul? Probably if enough money was thrown at it, but to what end result (as our resident contrarian asks)? Certainly small improvements, such as radar and stuff that you mention, Admiral wouldn't have gone amiss, but the bottom line is that it was in the wrong place at the wrong time when it was sunk. Hermes (and Argus) could act only as ferry/training carriers owing to their size in the 40s.
 
Hey Shortround6,

Although I do not consider Friedman the ultimate in accuracy, his 'British Carrier Aviation' describes the flight deck as follows:

"Other details generally followed current cruiser practice. Protection was similar to that in the large Raleigh class cruisers, but the flight deck (which was the strength deck) had to be fairly thick, adding dome additional protection against bombing." [I think the 1" flight deck was an early version of Ducol ('D' steel) but I cannot say for sure.]

IIRC the more recent 'British Aircraft Carriers' by Hobbs mentions the same construction method. My copy is in storage at the moment so I cannot check to be sure.

Below is a half-cross section of the hull at the boiler room. In it you can see that the hangar deck does not continue to the hull sides - this would normally disqualify it as the main strength deck (I think).

 
Strip all the flight equipment out of Hermes. Install workshop spaces and turn her into a fast transport and repair vessel for supporting the Fleet Carriers.

Use the useful parts to convert some modern Diesel engine freight vessels into trade protection Aircraft Carriers. The Union Castle line was building some fast cargo liners in the 30s that might have made good carriers. MV Stirling Castle - Wikipedia
 
HMS Unicorn had arrestor wires. Some aircraft needing maintenance would still be flown to Unicorn, and presumably Hermes.

The pair of Light Fleet Carriers Perseus and Pioneer that were built as maintenance and transports didn't have arrester wires and Perseus had workshops on the flight deck. Pioneer had workshops and a large crane on the flight deck. Aircraft for maintenance were moved by crane if they were at sea or barge in harbour.

Unicorn wasn't originally designed to have full flight gear but the design was modified during construction to provide an extra Carrier. She wasn't modified to carry out her original task till after use during the invasion of Sicily.
 
I see that. Interesting.



Here's Hermes similarly equipped, crates (rather than a shop) aft and large crane. As an aside, note how low Hermes' hawsehole and anchors are placed.

 
Last edited:
For my two cents worth I think you've hit the nail on the head with that...
Given hindsight and the tech of the time, what would the perfect 10,800 ton carrier of the early 1920s look like? My vote, one or two wide, uniformly rectangular boxes running from stem to stern, enclosed to the weather and sea at both ends, capable of at least 28 knots, with focus on the maximum amount of combat aircraft, bunker fuel, avgas, bombs, torpedoes and ammunition possible. Once this and the necessary machinery is taken in account we can allocate the remaining displacement to flight ops (arrestor gear, crash barriers, outriggers), protection and damage control, command and control (bridge, island...), communications, accommodations and provisions. Something akin to an enlarged Ryūjō (9,000 tons, 29 knots, 48 aircraft) or slightly lighter Chitose class.

Granted, to envision such a carrier entering service in 1924, the year Hermes commissioned will require ship designers to be attuned to what aircraft (and their size, weight, fuel consumption, etc.) and ordinance designers were working on from 1918 (the year Hermes was laid down) and already planning into 1924 and beyond. For example Blackburn's Dart torpedo bomber, designed in 1919 and first flying in 1921, armed with a 1,548 lb. Mk.VIII torpedo would likely be Hermes' first TSR.
 
Last edited:
what would the perfect 10,800 ton carrier of the early 1920s

You run into the same problem as the Hermes in 1935 and later. The early 1920s airplanes used 200-400hp engines and were lucky to carry a pair of 116lb bombs.
torpedo plane carried a short 18in torpedo that weighed just under 1000lbs and was single seater without a machinegun to do that.

Fuel storage, magazine space, deck strength and other design details will not be adequate for mid 1930s aircraft.
 

Users who are viewing this thread