Ark Royal was probably the best, and in many ways was the pinnacle of the interwar designs. A good airgroup of 60+ (even without deckpark!). Fast, maneouvrable, with an extremely powerful anti-aircraft armament, and enough armour to continue operations after the sort of the damage that usually sunk or drydocked Japanese or American carriers. Her main problem was the poor quality aircraft available early in the war (which was largely an issue of the Fleet Air Arm only coming back to naval control in 1938.)
She served magnificently until late 1941, and, with her long term partners – the heavily modernised battlecruiser Renown and the cruiser Sheffield and their destroyer escorts – she pioneered the techniques later thought of as ‘Fast Carrier Task forces’. Had she survived until the availability of Wildcat's, Hellcat's and Firefly's instead of Fulmar's; and Barracuda's and Avenger's instead of Swordfish and Albacore's: her value would have increased even more.
She was unfortunately sunk by a single torpedo, due more to the new Captain’s panicked attempt to evacuate the crew quickly rather than see what damage control could achieve. (Admittedly the suprisingly quick capsizing of the Great War design Courageous was in his mind.)
It would have been fascinationg to see what Ark Royal, with a deck park lifting her airgroup towards the 90-100 mark, could have achieved in the Indian Ocean or Pacific. She would certainly have been transferred to fight the Japanese in the Indian Ocean had she survived a few months longer, as she was more suitable there, leaving the heavily armoured Illustrious class in the more vulnerable Mediterranean fleets. For a design limited to 22,000 tons by treaty, she was an astonishing achievement. All the sadder that her loss to a single torpedo revealed design and handling flaws that should not have been fatal.
Post by Fear God & Dreadnought! on Apr 15, 2017 0:17:54 GMT
I'm really surprised that no one has voted for the Shokaku class. A number of historians and naval experts have agreed they were the world's best carriers when launched, and Mark Stille, a retired USN commander who has an MA from the Naval War College, states in his comprehensive volume "The Imperial Japanese Navy in the Great Pacific War" that "The Shokaku class was superior to all its foreign contemporaries and was not surpassed until the introduction of the USN's Essex class in 1943."
Formerly "Admiral Jacky Fisher."
"It follows then as certain as that night succeeds the day, that without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious"--George Washington
Akagi would probably be my second choice, maybe not the most practical but absolutely a beautiful ship.
I'll second this. Nothing beats the sleek lines of a battlecruiser hull.
Formerly "Admiral Jacky Fisher."
"It follows then as certain as that night succeeds the day, that without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious"--George Washington
Ark Royal was definitely the best British carrier in 41 but her airgroup could never compete in a carrier battle. She had the best armor yet ended up not being very survivable.
I'd argue the Yorktowns were better than the Lexingtons for the USN. Lex had a bad length to beam ratio for a carrier, too long to have a tight turning radius, hence the class constantly eating torpedoes, and too narrow to have the best hanger facilities. The Yorktowns proved to be massively survivable and able to operate after sustaining damage.
Shokaku was the best IJN design, although other IJN carriers are said to have had better trained air groups. This design and her air group together were the best until the Essexs rolled out.
Ark Royal was probably the best, and in many ways was the pinnacle of the interwar designs. A good airgroup of 60+ (even without deckpark!). Fast, maneouvrable, with an extremely powerful anti-aircraft armament, and enough armour to continue operations after the sort of the damage that usually sunk or drydocked Japanese or American carriers. Her main problem was the poor quality aircraft available early in the war (which was largely an issue of the Fleet Air Arm only coming back to naval control in 1938.)
She served magnificently until late 1941, and, with her long term partners – the heavily modernised battlecruiser Renown and the cruiser Sheffield and their destroyer escorts – she pioneered the techniques later thought of as ‘Fast Carrier Task forces’. Had she survived until the availability of Wildcat's, Hellcat's and Firefly's instead of Fulmar's; and Barracuda's and Avenger's instead of Swordfish and Albacore's: her value would have increased even more.
She was unfortunately sunk by a single torpedo, due more to the new Captain’s panicked attempt to evacuate the crew quickly rather than see what damage control could achieve. (Admittedly the suprisingly quick capsizing of the Great War design Courageous was in his mind.)
It would have been fascinationg to see what Ark Royal, with a deck park lifting her airgroup towards the 90-100 mark, could have achieved in the Indian Ocean or Pacific. She would certainly have been transferred to fight the Japanese in the Indian Ocean had she survived a few months longer, as she was more suitable there, leaving the heavily armoured Illustrious class in the more vulnerable Mediterranean fleets. For a design limited to 22,000 tons by treaty, she was an astonishing achievement. All the sadder that her loss to a single torpedo revealed design and handling flaws that should not have been fatal.
With all due respect to that Naval Historian (may have been British), her air capacity was also a very limiting feature. Yes, she was well designed, but a Lexington vs. Ark Royal battle is no battle at all. The question did not ask "ton-for-ton", but just "best". Of course, these are all "opinions", as is mine.
P.S. Yes, I'm American!
Großadmiral Swizzle
Browncoat by fandom; Cossack by blood; American by birth; Virginian/Husband/Father by wife; Libertarian by choice; Human by race; Christian by grace.
Post by Fear God & Dreadnought! on Apr 15, 2017 17:22:30 GMT
I agree with Lcdr Swizzle. The nature of this thread implies that the discussion should focus solely on what people consider to be the MOST capable carrier in 1941, not the most efficient for its tonnage, the most beautiful, etc. Anyway, I personally think it is futile to try to rank units from best to worst, considering the fact that each one of these ships had its own strengths and weaknesses. That being said, the Shokaku class (just like the Yamato class), constructed free of Treaty limitations, was designed to have no equal among her foreign counterparts, and as I stated previously, a number of naval historians and experts consider the class to have only been surpassed by the Essex class of 1943.
"It follows then as certain as that night succeeds the day, that without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious"--George Washington
Ark Royal was probably the best, and in many ways was the pinnacle of the interwar designs. A good airgroup of 60+ (even without deckpark!). Fast, maneouvrable, with an extremely powerful anti-aircraft armament, and enough armour to continue operations after the sort of the damage that usually sunk or drydocked Japanese or American carriers. Her main problem was the poor quality aircraft available early in the war (which was largely an issue of the Fleet Air Arm only coming back to naval control in 1938.)
She served magnificently until late 1941, and, with her long term partners – the heavily modernised battlecruiser Renown and the cruiser Sheffield and their destroyer escorts – she pioneered the techniques later thought of as ‘Fast Carrier Task forces’. Had she survived until the availability of Wildcat's, Hellcat's and Firefly's instead of Fulmar's; and Barracuda's and Avenger's instead of Swordfish and Albacore's: her value would have increased even more.
She was unfortunately sunk by a single torpedo, due more to the new Captain’s panicked attempt to evacuate the crew quickly rather than see what damage control could achieve. (Admittedly the suprisingly quick capsizing of the Great War design Courageous was in his mind.)
It would have been fascinationg to see what Ark Royal, with a deck park lifting her airgroup towards the 90-100 mark, could have achieved in the Indian Ocean or Pacific. She would certainly have been transferred to fight the Japanese in the Indian Ocean had she survived a few months longer, as she was more suitable there, leaving the heavily armoured Illustrious class in the more vulnerable Mediterranean fleets. For a design limited to 22,000 tons by treaty, she was an astonishing achievement. All the sadder that her loss to a single torpedo revealed design and handling flaws that should not have been fatal.
With all due respect to that Naval Historian (may have been British), her air capacity was also a very limiting feature. Yes, she was well designed, but a Lexington vs. Ark Royal battle is no battle at all. The question did not ask "ton-for-ton", but just "best". Of course, these are all "opinions", as is mine.
P.S. Yes, I'm American!
I'm American too; but heres were i think he's right; I'm not even going to put any BC turned into CV in that category and i'm not looking at game stats;; if you wanted a whole fleet of those be my guest. The Shokaku /Yorktown Classes and Ark Royal were the premier carriers and carrier designs of early carrier warfare, what really separates them is doctrine more than anything else. The British always found away to reinvent the weapons of war and the carrier was no exception, the IJN had better carrier planes than the USN but doctrine cost them;; The USN had better carrier planes than the UK; The author clearly stated its weakness was in its air groups but as a carrier with those weaknesses it still fought well in a theater with little wiggle room not the vastness of the Pacific. The UK in the early war led the way with weapons innovation and technology i'm sure you know about the Tizard Box; I personally would not under estimate them.
Post by Fear God & Dreadnought! on Apr 16, 2017 1:26:15 GMT
I think it would be great if everyone who voted posted a comment on why they chose the ship they did. Could someone explain why they think the Lexington class is superior to the Shokaku?
Formerly "Admiral Jacky Fisher."
"It follows then as certain as that night succeeds the day, that without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious"--George Washington