What if angled flight decks were introduced in world war 2?

I hinted at the solution in my earlier post: ..........................
Sounds like a fictional aircraft carrier that I wrote about in "Canloan '46."
...........................

RCNVR catamaran carrier helmsmen learned that if they kept the bow a few points to starboard (of the wind) pilots quit grumbling about turbulence.
 
People have already written about why an angled flight deck might not help all that much, or potentially be even worse, if it's the safety factor your wanting then you might be better off with an earlier introduction of the mirror landing aid.
It might help once approach speeds increased. However, in 1944, a F6F Hellcat would approach a carrier at about 80 knots (stall speed was 69 knots with gear and flaps http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f6f/f6f.html). With the carrier running at 30 knots, the closing speed is 50 knots (57 mph). At that speed I don't think a mirror site gives any help over a batsman? And we need to check that a mirror site works for taildraggers who can't easily see over the nose on approach.

IIRC, the Japanese carriers did not have a batsman at all, instead relying on a lighting system for landing guidance. Does anyone have info on this, including crash rates?
 
I seem to recall reading about an American early- thirties design for a scout cruiser that almost invented the angled deck by accident; there's a picture of it on Shipbucket- http://shipbucket.com/images.php?dir=Never%20Built%20Designs/United%20States%20of%20America/CAV%20Flightdeck%20Cruiser%201931%20Design.png

if, improbably, the thing had actually managed to get built- as a replacement for the Omahahahahaha class maybe (an opinion, not a typo,)- then there would have been plenty of time before the war to play with the concept and wring the problems out.

How would you get that procurement decision sounding sensible enough to be made?
 
Top