Most valuable Carrier Fighter Of WWII

[fastmongrel]

Parsifal have a whole side of Bacon.

 

[Kevin J]

Dont know how many sorties were flown against Illustrious at sea and in harbour but its amazing she survived. The fact that Illustrious was able to sail to safety must have left the German and Italian commanders frustrated and wondering how so many costly attacks had not been completely sucessful.

Hats off to all the RN, RAN, RAF, Army and Civilians invovled

The RN definitely got it right in building armoured carriers.

 

[fastmongrel]

The RN definitely got it right in building armoured carriers.

Thats a very large family sized can of worms you have just opened . Prepare yourself for incoming

I have often wondered what an Illustrious class would have turned out like if it had not been the armoured box design, probably something that looked close to the late war Centaur class Large Light fleet carriers but built to proper Naval standards with a full suite of AAA and bigger engines. The Centaurs had a hangar big enough for 42 1939 planes and with a deck park it could have carried 60 odd planes. What the RN wanted in 1936 when the designs were ordered was something like an Audacious class. These would have been formidable carriers if built instead of the Illustrious class.

 

[Kevin J]

Thats a very large family sized can of worms you have just opened . Prepare yourself for incoming

I have often wondered what an Illustrious class would have turned out like if it had not been the armoured box design, probably something that looked close to the late war Centaur class Large Light fleet carriers but built to proper Naval standards with a full suite of AAA and bigger engines. The Centaurs had a hangar big enough for 42 1939 planes and with a deck park it could have carried 60 odd planes. What the RN wanted in 1936 when the designs were ordered was something like an Audacious class. These would have been formidable carriers if built instead of the Illustrious class.

One's learning curve requires experience. They were built at a time when battleships could defend themselves against air attack and fighters required a navigator, strike planes too.

 

[JAG88]

What, you need a photo of the Bf109T-0's wings folded or somesh!t?

They were designed to fold as they were elongated over a standard Bf109's wing and wouldn't have fitted belowdecks otherwise.

It would be nice since no one has been able to find one ever, as a matter of fact, there is contradicting information on that regard with most sources claiming the requirements was actually dropped at some point and yes, the 109 could have been sent below since the elevators were large enough to take ALL their intended aircraft types down wings UNFOLDED as I explained earlier.

In my first post I told people it would be wise to tread carefully in German issues, lots of lost information, lots of BAD information and nonsensical specualtion as has been made very clear here...

 

[JAG88]

Happy to listen if you had anything useful or factual to say about it. . have a nice day at your work

Lol! That is rich coming from the guy who complained about "9 aircraft catapults", Ju87Cs having to fold their wings in deck being a problem when pretty much ALL carrier AC had to do that EXCEPT the German ones, a source-less and yet problematic 109T wingfold, a mighty British rage over an "unlawful" 2nd carrier when the UK was already aware of plans for THREE, some sort of unspecified hangar problem due to elevators... and some other crap too funny to remember!

And thx!

 

[DarrenW]

Hi JAG88,

Your passion for the German aircraft carrier program is quite evident and I'm sure you spent countless hours studying every aspect of it. Knowing this, can you tell me if the Stuka (or any other German aircraft for that matter) ever manage to successfully take off and land on the deck of a moving ship at sea? I'm not talking about seaplanes with floats that were lowered by hoists into the water, but an aircraft which was successfully launched and recovered on a ship while using the deck, without being damaged as a result of course.

I'm just curious because I know little to nothing about the Graf Zeppelin carrier and it's development program. Please excuse me for my ignorance here...

 

[JAG88]

Hi JAG88,

Your passion for the German aircraft carrier program is quite evident and I'm sure you spent countless hours studying every aspect of it. Knowing this, can you tell me if the Stuka (or any other German aircraft for that matter) ever manage to successfully take off and land on the deck of a moving ship at sea? I'm not talking about seaplanes with floats that were lowered by hoists into the water, but an aircraft which was successfully launched and recovered on a ship while using the deck, without being damaged as a result of course.

I'm just curious because I know little to nothing about the Graf Zeppelin carrier and it's development program. Please excuse me for my ignorance here...

No problem, you are excused.

 

[Shortround6]

I would agree on the size of the elevators however the bad information goes both ways (not blaming you for this one)
a website on the wreck states
"
To facilitate the catapult launches, German carrier aircraft were to use a special cold-start fuel mix of oil and 87 Octane gasoline added to a separate small fuel tank in each plane.

In this way, aircraft could have been brought up from the hangars and immediately catapulted off without any need for engine warm-up prior to launch.

Once airborne, a pilot would have simply waited for his aircraft's engine to attain normal operating temperature before switching back to the plane's primary fuel tank."

Now this makes no sense as written. Warming up the engines has everything to do with lubrication and nothing to do with fuel supply/mixture or anything else in the intake system. Nobody I ever heard of added engine oil to the gasoline to help starting in cold weather on any kind of gasoline engine.
Many aircraft had dilution systems where fuel was added to the engine oil just before shutdown to thin the oil out to make for easier starting, fuel would evaporate out while the engine warmed up. This sounds like a variation on that, separate oil supplies rather than diluting the entire oil supply?

I do like the bit about simply waited for his aircraft's engine to attain normal operating temperature if it was a fighter tasked with intercepting an incoming strike though.

The catapults (plural) may have been able to launch nine aircraft each at 30 second intervals if the carrier was sailing in calm seas. Moving the eight aircraft after the first would be difficult on a heaving, rolling deck and launches (although perhaps no more difficult than an allied carrier) often had to be timed (plane reached end of deck) for when the bow was either level or tilted upwards, leaving the deck with the the deck pointed down could lead to a very short flight, this is true for any carrier. Some of the fly off rates for allied carriers have to be looked at with that in mind, theoretical vs practical launch rates.

 

[GrauGeist]

...and fighters required a navigator, strike planes too.

Which dedicated carrier fighter aircraft of any world navy, between WWI and WWII, had a navigator??

 

[DarrenW]

No problem, you are excused.

Hello again JAG88,

Thank you so much for the very detailed and fact-filled response. With your help I now know for certain that the Nazi regime wasn't capable of fielding any actual carrier aircraft during WWII, and that this fact further proves out the widely accepted notion concerning the technical superiority of both the Allies and Imperial Japan in the field of naval warfare.

 

[GrauGeist]

It would be nice since no one has been able to find one ever, as a matter of fact, there is contradicting information on that regard with most sources claiming the requirements was actually dropped at some point and yes, the 109 could have been sent below since the elevators were large enough to take ALL their intended aircraft types down wings UNFOLDED as I explained earlier.

In my first post I told people it would be wise to tread carefully in German issues, lots of lost information, lots of BAD information and nonsensical specualtion as has been made very clear here...

I was being sarcastic - fact of the matter is, the elevators of the Graf Zepplin and Peter Strasser (as well as the intended other two carriers in the class) were large enough to accomodate the Bf109T without folding wings.
Only the Fi167 and Ju87C had folding wings.

 

[Kevin J]

Which dedicated carrier fighter aircraft of any world navy, between WWI and WWII, had a navigator??

The Dauntless and Skua, both Scout / Dive bombers so they performed CAP successfully; Fulmar too, although that was simply an all weather day, later night, fighter. The navigational aids at the beginning of WW2 simply weren't adequate for operating single seat fighters outside visual distance of the carriers.

 

[JAG88]

I would agree on the size of the elevators however the bad information goes both ways (not blaming you for this one)
a website on the wreck states

We can all make mistakes, the point is how you handle it.

To facilitate the catapult launches, German carrier aircraft were to use a special cold-start fuel mix of oil and 87 Octane gasoline added to a separate small fuel tank in each plane.

In this way, aircraft could have been brought up from the hangars and immediately catapulted off without any need for engine warm-up prior to launch.

Once airborne, a pilot would have simply waited for his aircraft's engine to attain normal operating temperature before switching back to the plane's primary fuel tank."

Now this makes no sense as written. Warming up the engines has everything to do with lubrication and nothing to do with fuel supply/mixture or anything else in the intake system. Nobody I ever heard of added engine oil to the gasoline to help starting in cold weather on any kind of gasoline engine.
Many aircraft had dilution systems where fuel was added to the engine oil just before shutdown to thin the oil out to make for easier starting, fuel would evaporate out while the engine warmed up. This sounds like a variation on that, separate oil supplies rather than diluting the entire oil supply?

I agree, it seems to be backwards. Often information comes filtered through people without a technical background (like me, tbh) which is why we have messy references to both the cold start and catapult launch procedures.

I do like the bit about simply waited for his aircraft's engine to attain normal operating temperature if it was a fighter tasked with intercepting an incoming strike though.

Holding back during the climb would certainly defeat the purpose of the cold-start procedure, wouldnt?

The catapults (plural) may have been able to launch nine aircraft each at 30 second intervals if the carrier was sailing in calm seas. Moving the eight aircraft after the first would be difficult on a heaving, rolling deck and launches (although perhaps no more difficult than an allied carrier) often had to be timed (plane reached end of deck) for when the bow was either level or tilted upwards, leaving the deck with the the deck pointed down could lead to a very short flight, this is true for any carrier. Some of the fly off rates for allied carriers have to be looked at with that in mind, theoretical vs practical launch rates.

IIRC it was 1 per minute per cat, so 1 every 30s for GZ. In that context the rails might have helped with the aircraft movement in addition to try to speed up the launch.

 

[JAG88]

Hello again JAG88,

Thank you so much for the very detailed and fact-filled response. With your help I now know for certain that the Nazi regime wasn't capable of fielding any actual carrier aircraft during WWII, and that this fact further proves out the widely accepted notion concerning the technical superiority of both the Allies and Imperial Japan in the field of naval warfare.

It was my pleasure!

 

[GrauGeist]

The Dauntless and Skua, both Scout / Dive bombers so they performed CAP successfully; Fulmar too, although that was simply an all weather day, later night, fighter. The navigational aids at the beginning of WW2 simply weren't adequate for operating single seat fighters outside visual distance of the carriers.

But they weren't dedicated fighters.

Naval fighters, that operated from aircraft carriers during the interwar years, up to and through WWII, were single-seat types: French, British, Japanese, American and so on.

 

[JAG88]

I was being sarcastic - fact of the matter is, the elevators of the Graf Zepplin and Peter Strasser (as well as the intended other two carriers in the class) were large enough to accomodate the Bf109T without folding wings.
Only the Fi167 and Ju87C had folding wings.

Oops, I must have missed the sarcasm.

Peter Strasser is a made up name, pure speculation by some author, the DKM named its ships at launch, until then it was Carrier B, Battleship J and the like.

Funny thing, most sources claim the 109T did not have folding wings, but delcyros went to the archive and found a document on the T2 indicating that the folding mechanism had been welded shut, so...

Hope I didnt miss any sarcasm.

 

[DarrenW]

It was my pleasure!

Mine too.....

 

[Kevin J]

But they weren't dedicated fighters.

Naval fighters, that operated from aircraft carriers during the interwar years, up to and through WWII, were single-seat types: French, British, Japanese, American and so on.

So long as you're flying in clear weather then you're okay. How many Lightnings never returned to base in the Aleutians? Lots. What twin engine fighter did the RAF use in great numbers? It wasn't the Whirlwind, it was the Beaufighter. Bad weather loses single seat planes.

 

[GrauGeist]

So long as you're flying in clear weather then you're okay. How many Lightnings never returned to base in the Aleutians? Lots. What twin engine fighter did the RAF use in great numbers? It wasn't the Whirlwind, it was the Beaufighter. Bad weather loses single seat planes.

Regardless, world navies still had single-seat fighters from the advent of the carrier on through WWII.

Part of pilot training involves a great deal navigation instruction, even today.