Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You again are correct when you say that the Spitfire isn't a panacea against the A6M, but its probably the best alternative in the world to the A6M in late 1941. Plus of course with the sophisticated radar and air direction that would have been a significant advantage tactically.Defending themselves, to a point maybe. Not enough. Spitfire is good but it's no panacea against an A6M.
The RN carriers got sunk in those convoys. And we have gone into this in great detail. The forces arrayed against the Malta convoys did not compare to the KB and IJN forces in the Pacific.
Perhaps as the OP, Shortround6 can provide his prefered scenario as to events in Europe?
Fascinating insight, many thanks for the info. I've read bits and pieces in various places re the cruisers, and it seems in 1940 there was capacity for 10 but none were orderd due to other priorities. Similarly for 1941 and 1942 there was a desire (capacity?) for 7 each, including at least 4 of the 8 inch designs. I have found in Conways some good sumaries as to the wartime programs, but frustratingly it seems to only include ships that were only laid down, not planned but cancelled. Do you have by any chance some short summary of the complete wartime programs including ships by class and including planned but never laid down ships?1938 Programme
2 Lion class BB - ordered 2/39, laid down 6-7/39. Est completion in Sept 1939 was 8/42. Suspended later in 1939.
Implacable - ordered 10/38, laid down 2/39. Est completion in Sept 1939 was 10/41
3 Dido class cruisers - ordered 8/38, laid down 11/38-4/39. Est completion 1941
4 Colony class cruisers - ordered March 1939, laid down 4-7/39. Est completion 10/41 - 6/42
No destroyers
3 Abdiel class fast minelayers - ordered 12/38, laid down 3-4/39
3 River gunboats
3 T class subs
Unicorn (aircraft maintenance ship) - ordered 4/39, laid down 6/39.
Depot ships Hecla & Adamant
1939 Programme
2 Lion class BB - 1 ordered 8/39, the other to be ordered 11/39. Both suspended on outbreak of WW2
Indefatigable - ordered 6/39, laid down 11/39. Est completion 6/42
2 Colony class- to be built in Royal Dockyards but cancelled at end of Sept 1939
2 Colony class - planned for order in March 1940 but see below in War Programme.
1 Abdiel class minelayer
M & N class destroyers - 16 ships
2 Black Swan class sloops
20 Hunt class destroyers
1 River gunboat - cancelled
54 Flower class corvettes
10 Flower class corvettes built in Canada in exchange for Britain building the first 2 Canadian Tribals.
1939 War Programme ordered 4/9/30 to 1/40
6 Dido class
2 Colony class cruisers - ordered 4/9/39 (brought forward by about 6 months from previous plans)
16 O & P class destroyers
36 Hunt class destroyers (20 in Sept 1939 and another 16 in Dec)
7 T class subs
5 S class subs
12 U class subs
48 Flower class corvettes
When we come to the 1940 Programme it becomes more complicated as war approached. So the final Programme was not what was envisaged when discussions about it began in July 1939. But initially it looked something like this (extracted from Moore "Building for Victory"):-
2 Lion class - talks with industry suggested orders could be placed with Swan Hunter and Harland & Wolff around 7-8/40 with completion 42 months later i.e. early 1944. caveat that assumed delivery of armour, guns and mounts on the required schedule.
New 15" gun BB could be built at VA Tyne in an optimistic 36 months subject to the above caveats. But that depended on the H&W gun factory on the Clyde having the gun pits reinstated before any work on refurbishing the old turrets from Courageous & Glorious could begin.
A maximum programme could include
1 or 2 carriers
7-9 Dido/Colony class cruisers
2 depot ships
2 fast minelayers
2 fleet destroyer flotillas (16 ships) of K class or possibly a new class
4 Hunts
4 Black Swans
The position re subs was unknown at that time.
And there was also a new Royal Yacht in the mix!!!
On 15 Aug 1939 Sir Stanley Goodall noted in his diary that the Controller of the Navy wanted:
4 BB
2 carriers
4 Heavy 8" cruisers
6 Small cruisers
PER YEAR!!!
I've already talked in this and earlier posts about what happened on the outbreak of WW2 so won't repeat it here. But in the latter part of 1939 there is a huge amount of chopping and changing, plans made, plans changed. Even ships already building or planned were being affected with completion dates pushed back.
So in Jan 1940 the 1940 Programme now looked like this as a plan only:-
2 Lion class
New 15" gun BB
2 carriers (a new assessment was that the fleet now needed a total of 14/15)
5 Belfast type cruisers
5 Dido class cruisers
Of that little lot the only survivors as actual orders were the 15" BB in the shape of Vanguard and 1 carrier, tentatively named Irresistible, intended as a modified Implacable. Space for the carrier in the Programme could not be found and its design was further modified in the light of war experience and eventually ordered in March 1942. Then in late 1942 it was decided to build her as the third unit of the Audacious class (Audacious & Eagle had been ordered in May & Aug 1942 respectively). She was finally laid down as Ark Royal iv in May 1943. (In 1945 Eagle was cancelled and in 1946 Audacious became Eagle).
So the final 1940 Programme and its Supplementary partner included:-
4 flotillas (32 ships) of Intermediate destroyers
18 Black Swan class sloops
30 Hunts
9 T class subs
20 S class subs
22 U class subs
3 minelaying subs of a new class cancelled 7/41
30 Flower class corvettes (6 cancelled 1/41)
27 River class frigates (design began around 10-11/40)
Pre WW2 there was a need seen for a trade route carrier and the 1936 tentative building plan incuded 1 per year 1936 -1940. There were also plans drawn up for conversions of fast cargo liners to fill the role (these proved too valuable in other roles in WW2). But beyond some plans set out in Friedman's "British Carrier Aviation" book they came to nothing. RN plans for mid-1939 looking forward to war in either Europe or the Far East in 1942 show Hermes, Courageous & Glorious seemingly in the role (the latter pair with only 24 aircraft).
A 1938 a policy document set out the RN carrier requirement and it was revised in Jan 1940. The numbers of carriers required in each case was 14 but there was a change in emphasis. Figures are for 1938 and 1940:-
Home waters - 4 / 2 (minimum, or 3)
Med & Far East - 4 / 4
Trade routes - 5 / 7
Gunnery co-operation training - 1 / 1 (Argus)
Total - 14 / 14 (or 15)
And in Jan 1940 the carrier fleet consisted of:-
Argus (training carrier)
Furious
Eagle
Hermes
Glorious
Ark Royal
Building - 6 armoured carriers (3 expected in 1940, 2 in 1941 & 1 in 1942)
So at that stage the fleet was considered to be 2 short. Of course it would only have been 1 short but for the loss of Courageous. This may be how the 1940 Programme was originally being looked at. IIRC the next time this exercise was carried out it was 1942 and the number of carriers had reached huge numbers, leading to the large numbers of the Colossus / Majestic classes being ordered in 1942 as well as 3 Audacious class (2 light fleet carriers being deemed the equivalent of 1 fleet carrier). But that was with 3 years of war experience off Norway & in the Med.
Unicorn's intended role has been much misunderstood. She was designed as an aircraft maintenance ship ( a depot ship for aircraft if you like) with the ability to be used as a training carrier. She had much more in the way of workshop spaces than any normal carrier would require. But it was the shortage of carriers that caused her initial use in 1943 to be as an operational carrier, for which role she was not ideal (Seafire pilots on her at Salerno have described the experience of landing on her as like dropping off a cliff due to the poor airflow around the aft end of her flight deck). By the end of the year she had been refitted to fulfil her original role and sailed to the Indian Ocean to support Illustrious and her air group in the IO. AFAIK there were never any planned follow ons for her. When more aircraft maintenance ships were seen as being needed to support IO/Pacific operations in 1943, 2 of the Colossus class hulls were converted to emerge 1945/46 as Pioneer & Perseus.
By 1941 the trade protection threat had evolved from chasing raiders to protecting convoys in the Atlantic against submarines and aircraft. The soluion to that was then seen as the escort carrier. The first, Audacity, was converted 1-6/1941 and was lost before the year was out. 6 were ordered from the USA in 1941 under Lend Lease. And from there the fleet expanded.
HiMy preferred scenario is there is a war in Europe as the butterflies get really out of control otherwise.
Lion class built or not built depending on how great a threat Germany and Italy are for instance. Development of the entire RAF depending on German/Italian threat as in what kind of bombers and how many?
Development of tanks?
Does Japan even seriously consider going to war ( or just escalating things in China) without Germany and Italy pinning down UK and French forces?
My six Lions can beat your 3 Yamato's in 1944
I have tried to outline (very sketchy) earlier. Things go pretty much as historical (maybe the British loose one less carrier to stupidity by May of 1940) and then things go a little bit worse for the Germans. Not a lot, maybe France lasts a few weeks longer? Maybe not. More French ships Join the Free French? French NA joins the Free French?
To me the important part would be kicking Italy out of NA in late winter or spring of 1941. No Greek adventure.
This reduces British losses of all kinds. May or may not open the Med to ship traffic?
It does give the British some combat experience.
It frees up a lot of equipment (and this is relative, the British built somewhere between 5-6000 Hurricanes by the end of 1941, NONE went to the Far East by Dec 7th 1941) to equip Commonwealth forces in Malaya, Burma, Singapore, Hong Kong and Australia.
This is against the backdrop of the escalating embargos/trade sanctions that brought Japan to the attack stage.
Again, this is just my idea of what was plausible. Possible and probable may lie on either side.
Well, it's your scenario, but imo it's much more unfavourable to the british than even the OTL situation, because they will fight against ALL the IJN (since the US is no part of this war) while still being involved in an european war. Even if the european war goes better, imo there is no way they'll have 6 Lions ready in 1944, look at the building program disruption caused by just entering the war 1939, BEFORE France was defeated and the situation looked far grimmer.My preferred scenario is there is a war in Europe as the butterflies get really out of control otherwise.
Lion class built or not built depending on how great a threat Germany and Italy are for instance. Development of the entire RAF depending on German/Italian threat as in what kind of bombers and how many?
Development of tanks?
Does Japan even seriously consider going to war ( or just escalating things in China) without Germany and Italy pinning down UK and French forces?
My six Lions can beat your 3 Yamato's in 1944
I have tried to outline (very sketchy) earlier. Things go pretty much as historical (maybe the British loose one less carrier to stupidity by May of 1940) and then things go a little bit worse for the Germans. Not a lot, maybe France lasts a few weeks longer? Maybe not. More French ships Join the Free French? French NA joins the Free French?
To me the important part would be kicking Italy out of NA in late winter or spring of 1941. No Greek adventure.
This reduces British losses of all kinds. May or may not open the Med to ship traffic?
It does give the British some combat experience.
It frees up a lot of equipment (and this is relative, the British built somewhere between 5-6000 Hurricanes by the end of 1941, NONE went to the Far East by Dec 7th 1941) to equip Commonwealth forces in Malaya, Burma, Singapore, Hong Kong and Australia.
This is against the backdrop of the escalating embargos/trade sanctions that brought Japan to the attack stage.
Again, this is just my idea of what was plausible. Possible and probable may lie on either side.
edit> I will say that the whole idea takes a suspension of disbelieve that the US won't get involved after they lead the trade sanctions and embargos and were building up Army and Air force assets in the Philippines and the Philippines occupying a roughly 1000 mile by 1000 miles area right in the middle of the Japanese supply lines/operational area. I have no explanation for that and simply accept it as given in order to get British Commonwealth vs Japan scenario off the ground.
Sorry, that was joke to show how wild the "what If" could get.Even if the european war goes better, imo there is no way they'll have 6 Lions ready in 1944,
How does the TBD Devastator compares with the Albacore? Judging by the speed figures shown the TBD is a fast aircraft compared to the Albacore! And recall the TBDs were simply slaughtered at Midway. And re british carrier aircraft combat radius (not range) , are there examples as to demonstrated maximum radius (and what those figures are) when operating from carriers? The Skuas might have done 300nm, but from a land base, not quite sure it will be the same from a carrier. Perhaps they were overloaded with fuel when operating from land?
Well King George is a class, I really just mentioned it to note that the British had some modern battleships.
I mean, sometimes. It didn't seem to be a huge problem for the Japanese in most of their surface engagements, including against British ships although I think the big one with the British was in the day. The Japanese did very well during night surface actions, generally. I think I made that pretty clear already.
Kongos may be battlecruisers but they can kill battleships, and what happened to the Hiei at the first naval battle of Guadalcanal could have happened to any ship. The armor protects to a point but at very close range even the light AA guns can cause serious damage.
I think you are grossly overestimating the size and power of the British fleet here, especially in terms of what they would likely have in the Pacific. I certainly don't have any problem understanding your claim, I just don't buy it. I think the RN will have a very hard time against the IJN in a surface battle, though I don't know that for sure and I'd love to see an accurate simulation of it done I'm sure I'd learn something.
What I do know is you are grossly oversimplifying the matchup here. SR is too a little, by focusing kind of exclusively on 1941, but he's close to reality.
Well they did have a little fight in the IO. It did not go well for the British.
I don't know if you are biased or not, I have carefully gone through the details and for example, I wasn't sure of all the details when I looked them up (I was basically going by the operational history) but the numbers are pretty stark you seem to be rather casually dismissing the Japanese torpedoes here. I would not be so confident if I was in a warship at night, sailing toward their possible vicinity... Ever read Neptune's Inferno?
The only RN carrier sunk in convoys to Malta was the older HMS Eagle. That went down to a submarine.
The only RN carrier sunk by air attack during the entire war was HMS Hermes.
The only RN carrier sunk in convoys to Malta was the older HMS Eagle. That went down to a submarine.
The only RN carrier sunk by air attack during the entire war was HMS Hermes.
RAF torpedo bombers.
Pre-war the Beaufort was intended to be the RAF's new torpedo bomber and it entered service from early 1940.
The Wellington became a stopgap TB in the Med from the very end of 1941 (first operations early 1942) due to a lack of Beauforts. These were conversions of bomber aircraft. The Mk.VIII for Coastal Command which appeared in both Leigh Light and TB versions didn't start to come off the production line until around March 1942.
The Hampden was also used as a stopgap TB with UK based squadrons due to a shortage of Beauforts from April 1942.
The requirement for a torpedo carrying Beaufighter as a successor to the Beaufort didn't arise until Dec 1941. A prototype was flying in May 1942 and it was Nov 1942 before the first started flying operationally.
As for what might have beens, the RN sought information from Supermarine on 15 Dec 1939 for production of 50 Spitfires with folding wings. Supermarine responded on 2 Jan 1940 with a drawing of the Type 338 with folding wings and a Griffon engine. Then by various machinations that became a proposal for an initial 50 hooked Spitfires with folding wings. The whole project was cancelled at the end of March 1940 by no less a person than Churchill then First Lord of the Admiralty. (See Spitfire The History by Morgan & Shacklady)
Now, with no war in Europe maybe Churchill doesn't become First Lord (he was reppointed to the post on 3 Sept 1939 the day war was declared). Then what happens to the Griffon Spitfire with folding wings concept?
The cancellations and restarts for the Seafire were ongoing due to different ministries and different ideas on requirements.
The Fulmar was thought at first to be the better option as it had good air time and the second seat would take pressure
off the pilot. Didn't work out perfectly as the opposition in the Med was land based with high performance.
The Battle of Britain was the next fly in the ointment. The RAF got priority of Spitfire production and R&D for the type.
From early 1942 build priority shifted again towards aircraft for bomber command.
By August 1942 it became obvious that a higher performing carrier fighter was needed. The supplies of Martlet's from
the U.S. were not as high as required due to the USN's needs in the Pacific so the Seafire finally got its chance.
The first versions were shoved into service far too soon with any possible changes to the under carriage etc not being
given any time.
War priorities can be a bloody nuisance sometimes.
How well would the Kido Butai fair against 300-400 land based aircraft?They would be doomed against the Kidō Butai
One aircraft that conspicuously missing from the above is the TBD...
The USN statistical Digest gives the data for SBD carrier based bomb loads and max was 1000lb.
SBDs at Midway:
"The Hornet's dive bombing force comprised thirty-four SBD-3 Dauntlesses, apparently half of them armed with 500-lb. bombs and the rest with thousand-pounders. First to take off were fifteen SBDs from Scouting Eight led by Lt. Cdr. Walter F. Rodee. Next came the "Sea Hag," Cdr. Ring, and two wingmen from Bombing Eight, and finally the sixteen SBDs of Bombing Eight proper under Lt. Cdr. Robert R. Johnson...
The Enterprise's launch did not proceed as smoothly as that of her sister Hornet. At 0706, the fifteen SBDs of Earl Gallaher's Scouting Six began taking off. The initial six carried only a single 500-lb. bomb apiece, but the last nine added one 100-lb. bomb under each wing. Then came the group leader, Wade McClusky, and his pair of VS-6 wingmen. Finally Dick Best's fifteen VB-6 SBDs took off, laden by the far more potent thousand-pounders..." (First Team V.1)
All of the above SBDs were carrying the maximum bomb load possible given the wind and the position of the aircraft on the flight deck. All the SBD squadrons were tasked with a strike mission against the KB; none were tasked with recon.
Ok, I'll bite, Just how many airliners did the Italians and Germans modify?modified airliners
How well would the Kido Butai fair against 300-400 land based aircraft?
Wiki, terrible source, corrections welcome.
Used against Pedestal.
The Japanese are trying to attack large Islands, not atolls. This is not a deep sea fight, it is a fight to get a number of small invasions ashore in areas hundreds of miles apart.