Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!hc!pprg.unm.edu!unmvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att!cbnews!military@att.att.com
From: military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Are Aircraft Carriers Obsolete?
Message-ID: <3448@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 25 Jan 89 03:52:11 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Lines: 49
Approved: military@att.att.com


 rupp@cod.nosc.mil (William L. Rupp) writes:
>
>Why confine our speculation to examining the effects of carrier accidents?  The
>experiences of WWII show that it doesn't take much to strike a carrier off a
>navy's list of assets.  Whereas a battleship can take a hell of a pounding and
>still keep firing (with a single turret left operational, a BB is still
>a disagreeable customer), a bomb or two on the flightdeck can make a flattop
>incapable of operating fixed wing aircraft.  By the way, I have read that the
>RN carriers of WWII had armored flightdecks which allowed them to take more
>punishment than their U.S. navy counterparts.  Do we armor our flightdecks now?

The Navy was very impressed with those British carriers, so that the
Midway Class, which came out just postwar, had armored flight decks.
The Forrestals were the first US carriers to use the flight deck as a
structural member (i.e., carrying the longitudinal load of the ship,
as opposed to an "add-on", and so the deck was constructed of 3" plate,
though it is not know whether this was armor or structural steel.  While I
can find no reference, I feel confident that such is still our practice.

(reference: Roger Chesneau, "Aircraft Carriers of the World, 1914 to the
Present, an Illustrated Encyclopedia; Naval Institute Press, Annapolis,
1984)

BTW, while the British decks were quite resistant to bombs, if and when
they were penetrated, the ship was unrepairable at sea.  In contrast,
US carriers, with the thinner wood/metal construction of the deck,
were capable of repairing some damage.  For example, a the ragged edges of
the hole could be cut away, and the hole patched, while at sea. I seem
to recall several incidents, including Yorktown at Midway.  She suffered
three bomb hits in the first attack, yet, as I recall, was ready to operate
aircraft again by the time the Japanese second wave appeared.

>Maybe we could build four 15,000 ton ships, each with 20-25
>VSTOL's for the price of one Nimitz class.  Four little ships spread out over
>500 miles would present a more difficult target than one Nimitz.

Can a 15,000 ton ship carry Tomcats ?  E2's ?   British-style Harrier-
carriers have their uses, but they don't have the kind of capability of
a Nimitz; 6 of them don't have the same capability as one Nimitz.  Better
in some ways, but worse in others.


-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  - 
Bill Thacker      moderator, sci.military      military@att.att.com

"War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life
or death; the road to survival or ruin. It is mandatory that it be 
thoroughly studied."   -  Sun Tzu