What if virtually every aircraft carrier was sunk in WW2

[ghappy1000]

What if virtually every fleet aircraft carrier of the Japanese, German, US and Royal Navies were sunk in WW2? [Requires various pods]:
Besides the otl, Graf Zeppelin is completed and the US and Japanese at Coral Sea identify the targets correctly and make the fleet carriers the main target.
Here's how it would occur:
Graf Zeppelin completed in late 1941. [Maybe the pod is after the sinking of the Bismarck, carrier aviation is considered important and Graf Zeppelin gets completed .]
March 1942: Graf Zeppelin joins Tirpitz and attack an Arctic convoy. HMS Victorious is sunk but the 2 British battleships prevent Tirpitz from attacking.
In the aftermath, the Royal Navy recalls its aircraft carriers from the Indian Ocean and USS Wasp does not do ferrying of aircraft to Malta [Graf Zeppelin is a more dangerous threat].
May 1942: The Americans find that the Shoho is not the main carrier force and the Japanese find the oiler and destroyer they attacked otl are not important targets. In the battle, the Japanese lose Shokaku and the US Lexington and Yorktown.
June 1942: When Midway occurs, the US has 3 aircraft carriers to 5 Japanese [Saratoga gets repairs completed faster and needed escorts and aircraft or the torpedo hit might not occur because Graf Zeppelin would keep US intentions on sending Hornet to the Pacific dubious]. The Japanese lose all the 5 major carriers involved but the US also lose the 3 they have. [or the battle is delayed by a week due to transfer of aircraft to Zuikaku from other carriers or the 'no Yorktown at Midway scenario'] It is not 100% that Zuikaku would be part of the battle and same with Saratoga, but Saratoga at Midway is more likely.
29 June 1942: The Graf Zeppelin is sunk by the Royal Navy while the Royal Navy loses 1 aircraft carrier. Tirpitz is also sunk for the lost of one of the escorting battleships and the Arctic Convoys get suspended. [more or less due to butterflies]
11 August 1942: The U 73 fires its torpedoes at HMS Indomitable instead of Eagle. The next day, Italian bombers sink HMS Eagle and HMS Argus [due to sinking of HMS Victorious and lack of armoured flight decks] while Pedestal Convoy is escorted. [Maybe Furious is also sunk by an Italian submarine, but not likely and might be too much.]
Possible after effects? [I assume USS Wasp still gets to the Pacific and the Graf Zeppelin means that Malta and especially, Madagascar and even Ceylon become less important for the British].
Edit: When Zuikaku focuses on Yorktown more, it loses more aircraft.

 

[ScrewySqrl]

The US Navy response to carriers being sunk was basically a Dorito's commercial:

"Crunch all you want, we'll make more".

in OTL the US Navy started with 8 Aircraft Carriers. Langley, Ranger, Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown, Enterprise, Hornet, Wasp. By October, 1942, only Ranger was still intact, and that was because it was in the Atlantic. Didn't matter. In January 1943,. the first batch of Essexes completely replaced all the losses and then some.

 

[Tom Colton]

Nobody ever builds any more aircraft carriers ever again, because those things are cursed.

 

[ghappy1000]

Possible consequences for WW2

Maybe Guadacanal gets cancelled and/or Operation Torch is modified to deal with the new conditions? And, what does it do to Operation Husky and the Pacific Campaigns?
[Got the information from Wikipedia ]
And, what does this do to the carriers completed in 1943 onwards, especially fleet carriers. After all, they're still sunk by aircraft.
And, this does not butterfly any RN carrier loss before 1942.

 

[David S Poepoe]

Improved designs and more carriers built. Additional and more stronger escorts. More carriers green-lighted.

 

[Johnrankins]

The US Navy response to carriers being sunk was basically a Dorito's commercial:

"Crunch all you want, we'll make more".

in OTL the US Navy started with 8 Aircraft Carriers. Langley, Ranger, Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown, Enterprise, Hornet, Wasp. By October, 1942, only Ranger was still intact, and that was because it was in the Atlantic. Didn't matter. In January 1943,. the first batch of Essexes completely replaced all the losses and then some.

This! Basically it is impossible for Japan to sink American aircraft carriers faster than the US can build them. Japan went all out to do that OTL and wasn't even close to doing so. They may do a bit better but unless you ISOT them some modern carriers or something they aren't capable of doing THAT much better!

 

[Hoist40]

in OTL the US Navy started with 8 Aircraft Carriers. Langley, Ranger, Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown, Enterprise, Hornet, Wasp. By October, 1942, only Ranger was still intact, and that was because it was in the Atlantic. Didn't matter. In January 1943,. the first batch of Essexes completely replaced all the losses and then some.

Slight correction. USS Langley was not an aircraft carrier, in 1937 it was converted to a seaplane tender with half its flight deck removed.

USS Long Island (Escort Carrier) was the 8th Carrier, it was commissioned June 1941

 

[MikeTurcotte]

How?

How were all these carriers sunk? That is the real question. Enemy action? If so what type of enemy action? Guns from BBs or CAs? Subs? Land-based air? ASBs?

 

[Generaloberst]

How?

How were all these carriers sunk? That is the real question. Enemy action? If so what type of enemy action? Guns from BBs or CAs? Subs? Land-based air? ASBs?

There weren't all sunk. For instance, Enterprise was just pulled out of action IIRC and Saratoga was torpedoed but not sunk.

 

[Johnrankins]

There weren't all sunk. For instance, Enterprise was just pulled out of action IIRC and Saratoga was torpedoed but not sunk.

I think he means the premise for this post. How were "virtually every aircraft carrier sunk" in the ATL WW2?

 

[ScrewySqrl]

Slight correction. USS Langley was not an aircraft carrier, in 1937 it was converted to a seaplane tender with half its flight deck removed.

USS Long Island (Escort Carrier) was the 8th Carrier, it was commissioned June 1941

Langley was still sunk by the Japanese. Long Island wasn't finished working up in December.

 

[ScrewySqrl]

There weren't all sunk. For instance, Enterprise was just pulled out of action IIRC and Saratoga was torpedoed but not sunk.

I did say 'intact', regarding OTL. They were out of action.

 

[Mookie]

If they were sunk by battleships then the doctrine would switch and we would have battleships today as main measure of country's force since A-carriers proved to be useless against them. If they were just sunk by random ships it would be attributed to bad leadership and more would be built with larger escorts.

 

[Saphroneth]

If they were sunk by battleships then the doctrine would switch and we would have battleships today as main measure of country's force since A-carriers proved to be useless against them. If they were just sunk by random ships it would be attributed to bad leadership and more would be built with larger escorts.

Mind you, it'd take some pretty incredible blunders to repeatedly have carriers sunk by battleships. Naval gun range is pretty large, ie out to the visible horizon, but even the poorest air group can double that.

It seems like there's two really viable methods. One is to have things which aren't surface ships do the sinking, like submarines or land air power. In which case, it'd be that aircraft carriers are best as utility ships and too vulnerable as the tip of the spear.
The second would be if 1945-scale RADAR (i.e. gun-laying radar, proximity fuzes and so on) was around in 1939. That'd make surface ships much more proof against air power, and would make SAGs and CBGs much more even. In such a situation, the relative durability of the surface-action ships and their uninterceptability of attack (can't shoot down a shell) would be what turns the trick.

 

[Mookie]

Mind you, it'd take some pretty incredible blunders to repeatedly have carriers sunk by battleships. Naval gun range is pretty large, ie out to the visible horizon, but even the poorest air group can double that.

It seems like there's two really viable methods. One is to have things which aren't surface ships do the sinking, like submarines or land air power. In which case, it'd be that aircraft carriers are best as utility ships and too vulnerable as the tip of the spear.
The second would be if 1945-scale RADAR (i.e. gun-laying radar, proximity fuzes and so on) was around in 1939. That'd make surface ships much more proof against air power, and would make SAGs and CBGs much more even. In such a situation, the relative durability of the surface-action ships and their uninterceptability of attack (can't shoot down a shell) would be what turns the trick.

Well yes and no, if you can provide enough light escorts to the Battleship to neutralize air-power in form of Destroyers. The carriers are defenseless without planes. So its basicaly a race between plane development and AA development.

 

[Saphroneth]

Well yes and no, if you can provide enough light escorts to the Battleship to neutralize air-power in form of Destroyers. The carriers are defenseless without planes. So its basicaly a race between plane development and AA development.

It really took VT fuzes to make ships capable of shooting down lots of naval aircraft. (The close flak at Midway certainly didn't prevent hits striking home, say.) That and/or gun-laying RADAR.
If Yamato had one or both of those, she'd have done better than she did OTL on her death ride, say. While even a slight improvement would have saved PoW or Repulse.

 

[GarethC]

Improved designs and more carriers built. Additional and more stronger escorts. More carriers green-lighted.

Many of those carriers have been sunk by aircraft, so there's going to be evolutions of doctrine about CAP control and air wing makeup (which may be wrong!!!) - but in any case, they are obviously effective offensive platforms, just very vulnerable ones.

You might see the USN trying to borrow ASV-equipped Albacores, or shove a set into a TBF to try to get a primitive AEWC platform in service and extend the detection range of the carrier task force.

If it appears that CAP can't stop an alpha strike, air wings may change to be more strike-heavy - or more fighter-heavy if it was a near-run thing that a couple extra sections of F4Fs could have prevented.

If the carriers are lost because damage control was at fault, then new designs will have increased compartmentalisation and buoyancy and better (and more redundant) fire suppression systems. If it's torpedo damage that does them in, then you might see TDS blisters and void/tank layouts as well. If it's bomb damage, then some deck armour system of some kind will be tried.

 

[Mookie]

It really took VT fuzes to make ships capable of shooting down lots of naval aircraft. (The close flak at Midway certainly didn't prevent hits striking home, say.) That and/or gun-laying RADAR.
If Yamato had one or both of those, she'd have done better than she did OTL on her death ride, say. While even a slight improvement would have saved PoW or Repulse.

But Yamato was alone basicaly. No ship can take a carrier solo at long range and live. Especialy not an entire fleet of them as is case with attack on Yamato.

 

[Saphroneth]

But Yamato was alone basicaly. No ship can take a carrier solo at long range and live. Especialy not an entire fleet of them as is case with attack on Yamato.

OTL, entire fleets didn't do much better. Carriers are faster than other ships and have a longer range - they're the kiters of the seas.

 

[RamscoopRaider]

But Yamato was alone basicaly. No ship can take a carrier solo at long range and live. Especialy not an entire fleet of them as is case with attack on Yamato.

Yamato had a light cruiser and 8 destroyers riding along with her, and the IJA launched a 115 plane distraction as well, none of this helped her

Mind you Yamato was on a suicide run anyways