British Essex Class
- Thread starter Peg Leg Pom
- Start date
So did Lexington get more, or less use as a training carrier than the RN carriers did from 1955-1991, when she was worn out?
All but Oriskany had the older Hydraulic cats( O had higher capacity steam cats) and lifts operated the heavier A3D Skywarrior, 20,000 pounds more.
The ones with the angled deck upgrade had the Mk7 m1 arresting system, which may have been why the Essex never operated the lighter, but faster landing A-6 and F-4, that I believe needed the Mk7 m3 gear to safely trap them
Skybolt was cancelled in 1962 CVA01 in 1966. The election that brought in Labour was 1964. Work is likely to have begun before the election, making cancellation unlikely. CVA01 will however be quickly cancelled as unnecessary. By 1966 the ships should be close to completion. Victorious would go to the breakers rather than having her last refit. Century and Hermes would be offered for sale mid 60s.
Last edited:
An Essex required about 800 more crew than a Audacious. You would need to make major modifications to an Essex to operate phantoms. Flight deck, catapults, arresting system, blast deflectors and the lifts. Then consider issue of ships being only ones in fleet with those propulsion and other systems. If the UK had the political will to operate fleet carriers there were better domestic options.
Michael
Michael
Admiral Halsey
Banned
The point he was trying to make was the US was more conservative then the FAA.(which given the situations make sense really) Not about the carriers problems and also the Corsair did end up flying from US carriers and it proved to be death incarnate on them.
Eventually, yes - the result of budget cuts and trying to do too much. Apply all those political and cost pressures to a pair of worn-out Essex hulls and what do you get? That's really painful to think about!
The thing is that from what I've read Franklin and Bunker Hill weren't worn out. They were fully repaired and these repairs were done in peace time so probably weren't rushed. They'd been in mothballs since 1947 not because they were wrecks but because it had been planed to convert them in one go once a definitive redesign had been found. That they had been left in mothballs was that by the time a final design was found the USN wanted new Super Carriers not rebuilds.
As for the perceived weaknesses of the top Essex rebuilds you should remember that the ships would be fitted with British equipment and the rebuild would be planed around the aircraft the RN were expecting to operate the Buccaneer S2 and Phantom K.
Last edited:
As far as I can tell, the arresting gear was the sticking point. The A3D 'Whales' were larger and heavier than the F-4, and lifts and cats worked fine for that beast.
That's the big question. Would say, Oriskany be cheaper than a rebuild of an RN carrier in the early '60s?
In the early 60s the question would be would two Essex rebuilds be cheaper than two Centaur class and Victorious, all of which were too small for the aircraft the RN wanted to use. Also don't forget it's the Conservatives that would be making the decision to accept the deal not Labour. The biggest problem I see is convincing the Navy to go along with it, but they could be told this is the price for getting the Polaris submarines, and that new build carriers will have to wait until Ark Royal and Eagle need replacing.
I would imagine that Australia and Canada would be offered a good deal on the two Centaurs. They would fit their needs better than the Majestics they currently had.
Victorious would likely go to the breakers but it might be possible to convince the Indians to buy her for a little more than scrap value.
usertron2020
Donor
Who ever taught you anything about warships?
Why would the USN prefer new supermarkets?
Wouldn't new super-carriers be better? Besides, supermarkets have no engines, no flight crews, no planes, little space for helicopters, no sick bays, no fuel bunkers, no AAA defenses, no officers except for departmental supervisors, no crew save for cashiers and stock boys, no CIC, no magazines (except at the cash registers), and no flight decks. Oh, and there there's the whole "supermarkets can't FLOAT."
The thing is that from what I've read Franklin and Bunker Hill weren't worn out. They were fully repaired and these repairs were done in peace time so probably weren't rushed. They'd been in mothballs since 1947 not because they were wrecks but because it had been planed to convert them in one go once a definitive redesign had been found. That they had been left in mothballs was that by the time a final design was found the USN wanted new supermarkets
Why would the USN prefer new supermarkets?
Wouldn't new super-carriers be better? Besides, supermarkets have no engines, no flight crews, no planes, little space for helicopters, no sick bays, no fuel bunkers, no AAA defenses, no officers except for departmental supervisors, no crew save for cashiers and stock boys, no CIC, no magazines (except at the cash registers), and no flight decks. Oh, and there there's the whole "supermarkets can't FLOAT."Why would the USN prefer new supermarkets?
That's what happens when you're using a tablet, damn thing keeps changing what I write. Either that or the American equivelant of the N.A.A.F.I (NAVY, ARMY, AIR FORCE INSTITUTE) is getting ideas above its station.
Just be wary about some of the claims - if they were really in that good a condition, the U.S. would have used them and mothballed others in the class. That they did not suggests something awry, but this might not show up in the books (slightly bent hull, for instance).
UK .vs. U.S. systems is more than just the electronics - engines, fuel storage, electrical systems, etc will all be different. Rippng the lot out basically forces you to tear it down to the keel and start again - you're dealing wth very basic things like how you source your spare parts that were different between the navies.
Not necesarily. The sequence of upgrades might have been such that applying the "definitive modifications" to the Franklin or Bunker Hill was more expensive at any given point than the incremental refit and modifications to, say, Bennington. "Okay, to put the new radar and cats onto Bennington and buff the latest round of bents and scratches out is $25 million, whereas to add the angled deck, the new radar, the new cats, and not have to deal with any dents and scratches on Franklin is $100m. Hmm...looks like we're refitting Bennington again." The point about spares sourcing and basic design standards is the real big thing the dissuades this--either you take one of the Essexes and radically retool your entire naval practice to handle it, refit the Ark one more time, or you just build a new carrier (or more likely get told to do without, for a few decades, as IOTL).
Actually, the fully-repaired Franklin and Bunker Hill were considered to be in the best condition ("like new") of all of the Essex's. They were preserved in mothballs for what was supposed to be the ultimate refit. However, before that could happen the advances in jet aircraft overtook the capabilities of the Essex's. By the mid-50's the mindset was that it was better to wait for new and more capable designs that could handle new and bigger aircraft than to refit two more carriers that would be first-line warships for only about another decade. This is also why there wouldn't be much point to the UK acquiring a couple of Essex's unless they got them immediately after the war.
And the Navy was thinking on future ships would be nuclear powered, not WWII leftovers with Bunker C
OK, done a bit more reading. Franklin was very heavily damaged above deck 3, but only smoke and water damage below that with the boilers apparently OK (damage report is here - which doesn't actually make it clear if all the boilers were useable). After "complete repairs and authorised alterations were accomplished", Franklin went straight to the inactive fleet. After that she remained in reserve until sold for scrap. The only reference I can find to "excellent condition" is at HazeGray, which also seems to be the source for everything from the hangar floor up being rebuilt - the Navy damage report skims over it, and it should be noted that at the time it would have been perfectly legal for the USN to shift money assigned to rebuilding the Franklin to other ships without Congressional authorisation. One of the other reasons I'm uncomfortable with the claimed details of the reconstruction is that it overlaps what happened to Oriskany - much of the SCB-27 stuff came about as a result of the damage to Franklin, and the rest was clearly incipient. So why raze the ship down to hangar deck level and build an entirely new flight deck to a design you know will soon be obsolete, when you could just wait a year or two and build it to the new standard?
Bunker Hill had major Kamikaze damage in May 1945, and was used for Magic Carpet from September 1945 to January 1946. That rather suggests that any repairs were somewhat incomplete (enough to keep the weather out but not to operate aircraft, simply because they didn't have enough time for a full reconstruction above the hangar deck), and after that she went straight to the reserve and never came out of it again. The Navy damage report isn't yet available, however.
Overall, I just really struggle with the idea that you'll pick the two ships that suffered the very worst battle damage and hold them in reserve for the biggest conversion which will turn them into your ultimate carriers. However, I have no problems at all believing that two carriers which suffered very serious battle damage were patched up after the war to a level that would keep the water out but not enable them to operate aircraft, and then shunted off to reserve in order to free up the money they would need for a proper rebuild for use on other carriers (Oriskany, for instance).
I still can't figure out how a refitted 32, 000 ton Essex would be better than a 45, 000 ton audacious that are a decade newer, never damaged and designed by the British for their requirements. What's more I can't believe that either is as good as a new CVA01 which isn't vastly more expensive than the combined cost of of OTL Ark Royal and Blake (or Tiger, I can't recall which) or what the two Essex would cost to update.