WI: Angled decks CVs in WWII?

In retrospective, angled decks are an obvious solution to the landing/taking off dichotomy of Aircraft Carriers. It could have been discovered at any point of in the history of these ships.

How would the development of World War Two if the USN developed them first, in 1942? Or if it was the Japanese?
 
What are the different cnstruction needs? Of they're more complicated to design and maintain I can see them being left to one side in the wartime need for swift production
 
From what I have read the angled flight deck was introduced to deal with the first jet planes greater weight and higher take off and landing speeds. Until you get the planes you don't have to have the new carriers.
 
I think that angled flight decks were devEloped in response to jet aircraft. Unless the USN or IJN developed jet aircraft early in the war, I think a angled deck would be somewhat unnecessary. Also, wouldn't the carrier need a catapult to compensate for the shorter flight deck?
 
From what I have read the angled flight deck was introduced to deal with the first jet planes greater weight and higher take off and landing speeds. Until you get the planes you don't have to have the new carriers.

Maybe, but there is the advantage of having a permanently clear landing runway, whereas straight carriers could be blocked by aircraft taking off.
 
I think that angled flight decks were devEloped in response to jet aircraft. Unless the USN or IJN developed jet aircraft early in the war, I think a angled deck would be somewhat unnecessary. Also, wouldn't the carrier need a catapult to compensate for the shorter flight deck?

Pretty much this, you need an earlier development of jet aircraft to spur interest in operating jets safely off carriers.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
They would have very useful, not Earth-shattering, but handy. The ability to conduct all flight operations, both landing and launching, in the same evolution would have been a great help, but if everyone was using it it would mainly even out.

One difficulty would have been that the standard methods of deck parking strike packages would not have worked and something close to today's system would have been needed. That would have required some serious rethinking by air bosses.

Another issue would be that every carrier pilot would have to be retrained (this was the case for the USN & RN when the angled deck came into use, but it was during peacetime when you have time for that). Landing on an angled deck is, frankly, weird as hell. You can't fly straight at the carrier you have to come in off axis and land on a moving target, at an angle. Weird. Now if the angled decks were in use for some time before the war, it would be less of an issue.

The other difficulty would be less of a problem, but still a pain. That involves the Cats. Even though, by 1943, pretty much every USN carrier used catapults to launch aircraft they were hydraulic systems, not the much more efficient steam cats that are in use today.
 
If both sides have angled decks, doesn't that mean that carrier battles are less decisive? Less chance of catching a carrier with its pants completely down, right? I'm not expert, so correct me if I'm wrong.
 
First US flight deck cruisers? (CF?)

I heard the first ones had an angled deck, while later ones were straight. Anyone have (I think) Friendman's book on cruisers on the reason for the angled deck, and why they abandoned it? Would it be possible to build a short, fighters only angled deck to help balance the weight of the bridge? I have started wondering for a timeline where the US does it for that reason. Is it ASB, or REALLY low probability? Maybe lady Lex could scramble an additional 6 fighters at Coral Sea...
 
What about angled decks leading to the possibility of bigger aircraft? Could we have the likes of a naval Beaufort or B25 with long range and a heavy bombload going to sea if angled decks were introduced before WW2?
 
Top