Carrier Essentials

How would you make the carrier a widely deployed asset, along the lines of the battleship in the lead up to wwii in the post WWII world? In other words make having a carrier essential to having a navy worth the name.
 
First airplane is developed 10 years earlier and their value is proven in WWI. Maybe the Kaiser decides to bypass the battleships in favor of carriers and does a Pearl Harbor on Scapa Flow in 1914. Wait, did I just suggest a raid on Scapa Flow!?!?! :)

In all seriousness, WWI would have proven the concept had aircraft been further developed by then.
 
An earlier appreciation of the utility of airpower

Perhaps have RNAS aircraft attack HSF capital ships in a Jutland analogous type WW1 battle or more likely have them give regular and concise information to the Main Grand Fleet on the movements of the main HSF fleet so that it can close the trap and hour or 2 earlier than OTL earning the British a decisive victory before sundown.

That would turn some heads

Perhaps a massed carrier launched Sopwith Cuckoo attack on the HSF main base in early 1918 causes serious damage where the Gun line of the Grand fleet could not hurt them
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Uh...

You did. All the major fleets (the IJN, RN, USN) were in the carrier business by 1922. The second level fleets (RM, MN, KM) had plans for or were operating a carrier/seaplane carrier.

The type did not become the lethal weapon that exited WW II until the aircraft tech caught up to the tactics that were in place by 1930.
 
Get rid of WWI, the Pacifism that resulted from the aftermath is going to severely curtail military procurement, and the economic consequences are going to cause a depression sooner or later, and by the time the 3rd Tier nations can start seriously thinking about ordering them, round II will be soon and the big guys won't be selling
 
Get rid of WWI, the Pacifism that resulted from the aftermath is going to severely curtail military procurement, and the economic consequences are going to cause a depression sooner or later, and by the time the 3rd Tier nations can start seriously thinking about ordering them, round II will be soon and the big guys won't be selling

Hrmmm... so the Sheffield plan being a disaster and France wining WWI in a walk over (Of course those perfidious albions did nothing, no i don't care that they took those casualties)... leaving mainland Europe divided into the French and Russian sphere and the Empires in full competition with each other.

My own initial thoughts was a successfully persecuted Suez crisis, where French and British carriers flattened enough of Egypt that the Egyptians capitulated before the US could really get involved. In the aftermath no one who wants to be a power would be willing to forgo a carrier as they are seen as essential to projecting power in any meaningful sense. Still not sure how to keep the USN's hyper dominance of the waves from throttling a naval race though.
 
Didn't this happen already, or why else would nations like Argentina and Thailand have operated carriers until they ran out of money...?

Pre-WW2 can happen almost as in the OTL. Maybe have even more interest in circumventing the Washington Treaty by the major powers so that there are more hulls already in the beginning of the war in the major navies. Have Billy Mitchell taken seriously and not forced to resign?

Even without this, once it's clear that relations with the Soviets have turned sour (so already in 1945 before any of the WW2 carriers have been scrapped) have the US demand right from the start that its allies take a greater role in the anticipated Atlantic convoy escort and closing the GIUK gap - hence most NATO countries would operate at least one carrier to fill the commitment, initially surplus USN or RN hulls, later new designs lighter than a full supercarrier but still large enough to launch and recover a wider selection of jets than WW2 leftovers. In OTL, even the Netherlands had a light carrier so it's plausible to have a German carrier, Norwegian carrier, Greek carrier, etc. The Soviet Union counters this with the carriers of their own and imposes this requirement also to its satellites, so you would see actual Soviet carriers much earlier than OTL and have a Polish carrier, Bulgarian carrier, etc. China cannot be left behind the Soviet Union so also jumps in to the Carrier Race, prompting other Asian nations to follow suit. South Africa needs a carrier to support its Bush Wars, Pakistan will want to get even with India, etc.

With the advent of Harrier (and Yak-36/38) it becomes even easier and cheaper to operate a "carrier" since a through-deck cruiser is enough to act as a light carrier, even though for political reasons you would call it something else (as Japan is currently doing with its "helicopter-carrying destroyer" that conveniently can land F-35B's).

All this would make the current argument over Spratly and Paracel islands much more interesting, with several carrier fleets playing chicken with the Chinese and each other... :biggrin:
 
How would you make the carrier a widely deployed asset, along the lines of the battleship in the lead up to wwii in the post WWII world? In other words make having a carrier essential to having a navy worth the name.

And this is different from OTL how? :confused
 
And this is different from OTL how? :confused

How many carriers were there, compared to the number of battleship? In OTL the Carrier took the capital role from the battleship right as everyone and their brother gave up on their navies. How many nations stepped back and let their carrier capability go, rather then keeping it up as an essential part of being even a minor naval power? Admittedly light carriers and LPDs which can serve as Carriers are beginning to make a come back... But the Carrier still lacks the numbers, and variety of the battleship.
 
How many carriers were there, compared to the number of battleship? In OTL the Carrier took the capital role from the battleship right as everyone and their brother gave up on their navies. How many nations stepped back and let their carrier capability go, rather then keeping it up as an essential part of being even a minor naval power? Admittedly light carriers and LPDs which can serve as Carriers are beginning to make a come back... But the Carrier still lacks the numbers, and variety of the battleship.
Hull numbers for battleships were inflated by the pre-WW1 naval race, whilst post-war carriers have been fewer in number because of increasing cost. Count instead the number of countries which operated dreadnought battleships, and which operate or have operated carriers.

Battleships and aircraft carriers
  • Argentina
  • Brazil
  • France
  • Italy, though their light carrier is quite recent
  • Japan
  • Russia/USSR
  • Spain. Okay, they were the smallest, slowest dreadnought battleships ever, but they still count.
  • United States of America
  • United Kingdom
Battleships but not carriers -
  • Austria-Hungary, which stopped being a country before aircraft carriers came along.
  • Chile. Which is odd, considering Argentina and Brazil.
  • Germany - though not through want of ambition, and it was a close-run thing. Germany is really a continental power, so a navy is a luxury for them.

Carriers but not battleships
  • Australia. They did have a battlecruiser though, which might count.
  • Canada. Proposals for Canadian battleships before WW1 foundered on political grounds.
  • China. They weren't really in a position to build dreadnoughts, but they had a pretty decent fleet before the First Sino-Japanese war.
  • India. There was this small issue over the British Empire at the time.
  • The Netherlands; their planned battleships fell through after the Archduke got himself shot.
  • Thailand, if you're feeling generous and counting CHAKRI NARUEBET as an aircraft carrier rather than a funny-looking Royal yacht-cum-OPV.
Also-Rans
  • Greece operated predreadnoughts, but her dreadnoughts were never completed. It's hard to see the use she'd have for carriers.
  • Turkey, including the Ottoman Empire. Her dreadnoughts put in good service in the Royal Navy. YAVUZ probably counts though. They're trying to get flat-topped amphibious ships at the moment.
That doesn't look like aircraft carriers are getting missed out at all.
 
Top