Non-propeller aircraft carriers today?

No you were right, I sometimes get so into a debate that I lose track of the context.

As for 1812, the US only won by cheating. The US Commander had already struck his colours when the British ship ran aground and by the standards of the day honour demanded that he keep his word. Then again he did serve a country that was founded as a tax fiddle.:D:D
Need I list how many times the Constitution class frigates pounded their UK counterparts into toothpicks?:p Though in fairness, it really was more a case of "super-frigates" destroying light to heavy frigates. And the RN had its fair share of victories. Thanks to superior numbers, mostly.:p

As to the Great Lakes? Not at all. The US and Canada could not be compared in the War of 1812 regarding the ability to project power onto the Great Lakes. When the British/Canadians built a sloop the Americans were building a brig. When the British/Canadians were building a brig, the Americans were building a frigate. When the British/Canadians were building a frigate (when/if they could), the Americans were building a battleship (not completed by war's end).:eek:

The US were masters of aquatic warfare, not the British.

The nature of aquatic warfare meant many things different than marine warfare in the age of sail. Unreliable winds, shallow waters, storms worse in nature than anything on the high seas save a category 4+ hurricane/cyclone/typhoon...or tsunami:eek:

To illustrate, look at the difference between the wave machine at an amusement park and your own bathtub. Sit in a filled tub, and swing your legs back and forth in and out. Watch the waves crash against each other. Now imagine what happens to a boat/ship trying to stay afloat in all that mess! The wave machine? The waves are a helluva lot bigger, but except for the occasional rogue wave, a ship/boat, under the control of an experienced mariner, can work his way to safety (barring tidal waves) and the nearest port.

Actually, the wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald is the best example of the horrible nature of Great Lakes gales. You get caught in a trough so deep, your ship falls all the way down to the lake bed. You get stuck to the mud, the lake closes over you, and suddenly you're sitting in a submarine 200 feet. A submarine with lots of open windows.:eek::(

Settlement on the Canadian side of the Great Lakes was still relatively primitive compared to the American side. There's no way they can build to the level of the Americans on the Great Lakes in 1812-1814. France has a better chance of building a fleet to challenge the Royal Navy in the English Channel!:rolleyes:

The following is, I admit, a paraphrasing (but the spirit is accurate):
"The Americans, being the masters of aquatic warfare, bested the British in naval campaign on the Great Lakes". Source? "History of the English-Peoples", by Winston Churchill. But then, what does he know about history?:p
Good post, Usertron2020, but you fail to address two key points.

First, there is a difference between transferring your flag and striking your colors. The American commander, Oliver Hazard Perry, transferred his colors from the Lawrence. The Lawrence did strike her colors but only after Perry had transferred his personal flag. Of course, this idea may be hard to grasp if your navy has ships that tend to blow-up and not allow time to allow such a transfer of command.

Second, the US rebellion was actually about more than taxation without representation. Again, a subtle point that might escape those who live in countries with an official church and/or royalty.
 
Good post, Usertron2020, but you fail to address two key points.

First, there is a difference between transferring your flag and striking your colors. The American commander, Oliver Hazard Perry, transferred his colors from the Lawrence. The Lawrence did strike her colors but only after Perry had transferred his personal flag. Of course, this idea may be hard to grasp if your navy has ships that tend to blow-up and not allow time to allow such a transfer of command.

Second, the US rebellion was actually about more than taxation without representation. Again, a subtle point that might escape those who live in countries with an official church and/or royalty.

I do not claim to know the laws regarding naval combat in mid-battle.

As to taxation w/o representation? Well, stevep and I had a long PM correspondence on that issue. Not wanting to add to serious thread derailment, I'll send you the pertinent data by PM if you wish.
 
I don't want to discount the deaths in any wreck they're all tragic, but where a ship at sea can run before a storm for days at a time for ships on the Great Lakes thats not possible so they get forced onto a lee shore and wrecked.

Unless the storm gets them first. On the Great Lakes there is little warning when those monster waves/counter-waves start crashing into each other, and on your poor ship. There's nowhere on a lake for all that force to go.
 
A North American SNJ Texan attempts to land on USS Wolverine off Chicago

North American SNJ Texan landet auf USS Wolverine vor Chicago.jpg
 
Wasn't the USS Wolverine actually just a simple platform for planes to do touch-and-go's, not a true carrier? Or am I thinking of other ships?:confused:
 
Yep a cut down hull an engine, flightdeck, island and funnels. I'm not even sure she and the Sable had any crew quarters. A relatively controled environment to bring new pilots up to a basic level of skill before moving on to real carriers. The two ships were striped down so much that it wasn't commercialy viable to return them to civilian service after the war so they were scraped.
 
The Lockheed Sea Sitter, a project for a wing-in-ground effect vehicle (ekranoplan). The proposed armament was "two 20mm CIWS Gatling guns, a single 105 mm howitzer sticking out the port side, a Kaman SeaSprite anti-sub helicopter and a dozen Lance battlefield missiles in vertical silos." (I think another source also mentions Phoenix missiles)
See link with cut-away drawings http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=4570

lockheed-seasitter.jpg
 
Top