wi:Malta class instead of eagle class

Yes but they're not the answer to all [prayers that many people think they are. Their rebuilds to incorporate angled decks and steam catapults should be easier and therefore cheaper and the problems that arose in the 60s with bigger aircraft shouldn't be as acute compared to the Eagle and Ark Royal due to their size and speed. But even they will require replacement at some point in the 70s or early 80s after 20-30 years of service. Perhaps this decision could be made by the Conservative government from 1970 and perhaps the bigger carriers could see CVA01 not designed with too many tricks, but stuff like stagflation, the winter of discontent and the withdrawal east of Suez would still happen unless these 2 ships fundamentaly altered the Suez crisis.
 
Would building the maltas instead of the eagles have a knock on effect on the RN and the FAA?
I think you need to build the Audacious class ships to get to the Malta concept. Otherwise you're going from 32,000 ton (full) Illustrious/Implacable size to 57,000 ton (full) Malta size, an unrealistic jump IMO.

What I would have liked is for the fifteen Colossus/Majestics and four Centaurs to be reduced, with focus on getting the four Audacious class built and commissioned before the end of the 1940s. This will then lead to the Malta class.
 
Top