But we are not comparing it to the USN, its the RM that's never built or operated any CVs before....A 1934 laid down ship fully worked up v a 1941 laid down conversion...... I really question if Aquila will be better?
Valid question.
Valid answer here.
Compare to the Ark Royal.
Immediate notice, antitorpedo bulges and blast liner on the Aquila. NOTHING on the Ark. Stability and Flotation Reserve. Better on the Italian. Topweight. Italian hull better.
Rudder control? About equal. Hanger layout? HATE that British double decker as it is a blast alley driving DOWN into the ship's guts. Fuel tank wet stowage? Both use the British water jacket system which NEVER worked. That track and trolley feed system to the air compressor powered catapults (not steam powered as it was described in the text) gets around the deck yoyo and the training of deck personnel in plane handling. It has not been introduced since, because US practice has been to use a plane tractor post WW II for moving around trapped and stopped aircraft. Besides men can gauge how to park aircraft in a deck park. The Aquila would have followed JAPANESE aircraft handling, with strike below to fuel and arm. That is a check against here, but until the British learned American practices to fuel and arm on deck instead of in the hanger, they would have been in the same pickle as the Italians in an aircraft carrier duel.
Unit machinery on the Italian. British? All the generators and boilers grouped together. What KILLED the Wasp, killed the Ark Royal.
Compare to US practice.
1. Unlike the Ark Royal, the Italians paid attention to a torpedo and dive bomber defense, hanger venting and aircraft movement from hanger to launcher. The Italians were not entirely clueless about these problems.
2.
This is Italy's start point.
Certainly better than the Commandant Test.
As to aircraft why would the Re.2001 OR Serie II actually be better than Seafires when flown by pilots with almost no experience at working at sea........ and operation on a very questionable flight deck, look at post war US thought on it in your own link.
I trust the students of Alexander Kartvelli more than Mitchell to design a flying brick. For one thing the Regianne is a better deck trapper with a more robust fuselage and wider set apart wheels> It won't tear itself apart coming in hot.
Wiki
question about on your aircraft list, why do you think they are that bad?
Fairey Swordfish,
Gloster Gladiator &
Gloster Sea Gladiator both first flight in 1934, yes they should have been replaced earlier but thats more priorities not under FAA control....and Sordfish was still prefectly good ASW aircraft all war.
Supermarine Seafire Whats that wrong with it, landing may be hard but its very fast and good fighter for its time?
Blackburn Skua (19
40-1942) IN service in 38 FF 37 and sunk the first major warship at sea........
Fairey Albacore first flight 38 OK this is a stupid idea by then it should have been a monoplane
Fairey Barracuda FF1940 What's really wrong with it apart from 3 years of delays from BoB/RAF?
Blackburn Firebrand FF42 killed by engine priority to RAF,
Fairey Fulmar (1940-1945)
Fairey Firefly (1943-1956) not a great idea but both would kill unescorted bombers perfectly well.
They never faced enemy naval aircraft in a parity setting. I doubt a Seafire would do well against a Grumman. Its land based brethren did not fare so well against Nakajima or Mitsubishi.
Blackburn Skua, was overweight, handled like a pig in a dive and was unstable.
Fairey Albacore, has been given a lot of unfair, undeserved knocks, but it would have fared no worse than an unescorted Devastator. I.E. guaranteed DEAD aircrew. Needs fighter escort and then it could do the job.
Fairey Barracuda, underpowered, overweight, has a NASTY habit to invert when the dive brakes are retracted when applying counter-rudder in a dive. FATAL for a dive bombing attack..
Blackburn Firebrand. The Sabre proposed never worked properly. Centaurus replacement required a fatter nose which introduced stall instability and an over-torque never properly solved. PILOT KILLER.
Fairey Fulmar and Fairy Firefly. Lucky in the Ceylon Raid they never met Kido Butai or the IJNAS. Those guys were deadly.
Why not add the Sea Hurricane that should have been in service in 1938/9 if the sea lords request had been followed?
Compared to the (Italian) it is faster than Re.2001 carrying more and available far earlier?
Not a bad choice. Don't get into a turning fight with the Italians.
My knock against the Reggiane is its air to air armament. SAFATS are NTG. Here the British have an edge.