Suitability of the Admiral Class BC for conversion into carriers?

Were the Admiral Class battlecruisers suitable hulls for conversion into large aircraft carriers like the Lexington and Saratoga? No the Hood herself as she was too far along in construction but could the hulls of some of the other three have been redesigned if construction was restarted post war?
 

Hoist40

Banned
I don’t see any reason why they could not be converted

However when the conversion occurred would matter. The Lexington’s had the advantage of waiting until the late 1920’s for completion which allowed the US Navy to learn some lesson. The advantages of having a island structure, the ducting of smoke up instead of to the stern, the importance of a large flight deck.

Early British conversions from the beginning of the 20’s did not have those lessons learned. So if converted early the Hood CV’s might require another big shipyard job in the 1930’s to fix earlier design faults
 
I don’t see any reason why they could not be converted

However when the conversion occurred would matter. The Lexington’s had the advantage of waiting until the late 1920’s for completion which allowed the US Navy to learn some lesson. The advantages of having a island structure, the ducting of smoke up instead of to the stern, the importance of a large flight deck.

Early British conversions from the beginning of the 20’s did not have those lessons learned. So if converted early the Hood CV’s might require another big shipyard job in the 1930’s to fix earlier design faults

I think I can keep two of them on the slips until the same time frame as the Lexingtons so they could take advantage of seeing what the American ships look like.
 
Im not terribly knowledgeable but I've looked at the statistics and they compare well with the Lexington class conversions.

About the same tonnage, draft, beam and length
 

Hoist40

Banned
I think I can keep two of them on the slips until the same time frame as the Lexingtons so they could take advantage of seeing what the American ships look like.

They don’t even have to watch the US ships, the British were converting and building more carriers then anyone else so they would learn the lessons on their own. In fact the US probably learned a lot of lessons watching the early British ships. So you can probably do the conversion at the same time as the US or even a couple of years earler. Its just if you do it in 1919 then its not going to be as good a conversion as 1925
 
They don’t even have to watch the US ships, the British were converting and building more carriers then anyone else so they would learn the lessons on their own. In fact the US probably learned a lot of lessons watching the early British ships. So you can probably do the conversion at the same time as the US or even a couple of years earler. Its just if you do it in 1919 then its not going to be as good a conversion as 1925

I think I can keep two of them on the slips until the same time frame as the Lexingtons so they could take advantage of seeing what the American ships look like.

Landshark

Agree with Hoist40 on this. Don't think the Lex and Sara were completed until the late 20's anyway. Also the early British converts from Fisher's follies were handicapped by the fact they were already largely completed ships, with pretty full superstructure for instance. Eagle, for all her inadequate size and speed was built virtually from the start I believe with a flush deck and control tower. Similarly the small Hermes, which I think was completed 1921-23 had all the basic structure of the basic carrier.

Not sure when the hulls of the other 3 Admirals were scrapped but if they were kept til a modified WNT - having seen one of you're other threads, then quite possibly would be very good for Britain. [You really need to avoid the forming of the RAF, or at least them getting their hands on the FAA, to give Britain a top level carrier force].

Steve
 
So I think we've established that the Admirals would be suitable for conversion now onto more specific questions about plane numbers and how they'd stack up as ships against the Lexingtons?
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
So I think we've established that the Admirals would be suitable for conversion now onto more specific questions about plane numbers and how they'd stack up as ships against the Lexingtons?


With the RN devotion to the Armored flight deck and fully enclosed hangers, along with the second flight deck that the RN and IJN tried?

Figure 50-60 aircraft in the 1920's, down to mid 40s by WW II. As a comparison the Lexington was rated for 120 aircraft, although she rarely carried more than 90, even in the early days (Akagi, which shared the RN 2nd flight deck design, carried 60 aircraft +25 or so disassembled in a lower hold).

USN doctrine was to max out the size of each air wing to the size of the carrier, something that was facilitated by the use of squadrons that were not necessarily wed to a particular ship (as an example, on 12/7/41 Ranger had VF-5 on board instead of "her" VF-4 since VF-4 was transitioning to the F4F). IJN practice was to keep air groups together and have the same group assigned to a ship. This turned around and bit the IJN a couple times during the early part of the war.

As far as how they would stack up, it all comes down to the aircraft and weapons the planes had available. I would take a late war Independence with her 34 aircraft (TBF and F6F or F4U) and her 5"/38 AAA over a 1939 Lexington with 90 SB2U, TBD and F3F with her 8"/55 MK 9 guns and 5"/25 AAA. Unfortunately the FAA tended to suffer in the aircraft department, although an ATL FAA would doubtless do far better.
 
With the RN devotion to the Armored flight deck and fully enclosed hangers, along with the second flight deck that the RN and IJN tried?

They probably won't have armoured flight decks. I don't think it was a feature of RN carriers until the Illustrious. Also I the second flight deck is out. By the time these conversions will start Hermes will have been built so we'll be looking at some more like her or the Lexingtons.

Figure 50-60 aircraft in the 1920's, down to mid 40s by WW II. As a comparison the Lexington was rated for 120 aircraft, although she rarely carried more than 90, even in the early days (Akagi, which shared the RN 2nd flight deck design, carried 60 aircraft +25 or so disassembled in a lower hold).

I'm aiming for something more on the level of the Lexingtons if I can get it.

USN doctrine was to max out the size of each air wing to the size of the carrier, something that was facilitated by the use of squadrons that were not necessarily wed to a particular ship (as an example, on 12/7/41 Ranger had VF-5 on board instead of "her" VF-4 since VF-4 was transitioning to the F4F). IJN practice was to keep air groups together and have the same group assigned to a ship. This turned around and bit the IJN a couple times during the early part of the war.

I'll have to look into FAA doctrine on that if I can.

As far as how they would stack up, it all comes down to the aircraft and weapons the planes had available. I would take a late war Independence with her 34 aircraft (TBF and F6F or F4U) and her 5"/38 AAA over a 1939 Lexington with 90 SB2U, TBD and F3F with her 8"/55 MK 9 guns and 5"/25 AAA. Unfortunately the FAA tended to suffer in the aircraft department, although an ATL FAA would doubtless do far better.

Changes to the FAA and it's planes are discussed at length in my max FAA thread. ITTL the RN will diffinately have parity with America and Japan in terms of aircraft performance.
 

Deleted member 9338

Will they also carry cruiser class guns as the Lexington did.
 
I think I can keep two of them on the slips until the same time frame as the Lexingtons so they could take advantage of seeing what the American ships look like.
But why would the RN wait to see what the USN is doing? That seems very unrealistic. Not Invented Here syndrome would seem particularly tough to overcome as the Royal Navy viewed itself as being superior all other navies and the RN also invented the carrier.

IOTL the RN paid almost no attention to the innovations the USN made in carrier aviation in the experiments run on the USS Langley. Why would they humble themselves to such extent in your timeline?
 
They probably won't have armoured flight decks. I don't think it was a feature of RN carriers until the Illustrious.
They'd made a vague attempt at it with Ark Royal, but if I've read it correctly, ended up with .75" which probably wouldn't count for anything.
 
Top