German and British CV's will suck?

[SmurfOpax]

Hi,

 

i stumbled over a nice detail .

 

UK Carriers

Argus class  18 Planes

.

.

.

Implacable class - 54 Planes (Commissioned 1944)

Audacious class     - 60 Planes (Commissioned 1951)

 

 

US Carriers

Langley Class - 36 Planes

.

.

.

Midway Class - 100 Planes (Commissioned 1945)

 

German Carriers were planned to carry around the same number of Airplanes as the British Carriers. Looks like it will be no fun to play British or German Carriers.

[Userext]

they might have nearly twice the survivability?

[caldark]

Well the British aircraft carriers have armored carrier decks so will prob be able to take more damage.. either way they will try and balance them out in some way or another.
The RN also used better fuel storage systems on their carriers.. basically the fuel tanks sit within sea water tanks, and the early RN carriers had a lot of AA weapons compared to other nations.

 

So yeah the RN carriers may carry less planes but should be able to survive more hits..

Also another reason the US carriers had more planes is because they parked them on the deck of the carrier as well.. very bad if they got attacked.

You also have to remember that the US got a lot of tactical information from the RN before they entered the war and helped them develop their later carriers like Midway that actually had an armored deck like the RN carriers.

 

 

[MrFingers]

I've been to the USS Intrepid in August, and there was a section dedicated to the "differences in armour plating between different types of aircraft carriers". It turns out that the American way of armouring the ship (a lightweight flightdeck, and an armoured floor of the flight hangar) deemed more effective against heavy bombardments and kamikaze attacks (since the ship is more of an armoured bunker with a flightdeck on top of it, instead of an armoured deck with pretty vulnerable sides (like the British have). Also since the armour is closer to the waterline, it makes the ship way more stable and less top-heavy than their British counterparts.

 

 

The Tier X British CV should be "Project Habakkuk"

[SmurfOpax]

Survivability could be a way to balance this. But on the downside it will also help the British/German CV's to bring much more Torpedos on Target (less planes shot down). So it could happen that US/IJN CV's suck when you make the planes to strong.

[CensorMeDaddyWG]

Since german carriers existed in planning only I'd like to start the motion to arm them with 38cm artillery. Nothing says 'german' better than a nice set of big guns, ja? 

[Userext]

Survivability could be a way to balance this. But on the downside it will also help the British/German CV's to bring much more Torpedos on Target (less planes shot down). So it could happen that US/IJN CV's suck when you make the planes to strong.

 

KM/RN can have less damaging torpedoes maybe?

[Adwaenyth]

Since german carriers existed in planning only I'd like to start the motion to arm them with 38cm artillery. Nothing says 'german' better than a nice set of big guns, ja? 

 

Actually the Graf Zeppelin was intened to have 16 single mounted 15 cm guns (8 per side). So she actually has the same amount of guns as a St. Louis per side.

[Wischmob_von_Eimer]

Since german carriers existed in planning only I'd like to start the motion to arm them with 38cm artillery. Nothing says 'german' better than a nice set of big guns, ja? 

 

^This!

 

Germany did not have even enough conceptual carriers to fill up the ranks up to tier 10, so Wargaming can open another 50 bottles of vodka and start creating new ones. There should be at least one submercible carrier with 20 Schwerer Gustav as multi purpose Anti Air Defence.

[MrFingers]

Actually the Graf Zeppelin was intened to have 16 single mounted 15 cm guns (8 per side). So she actually has the same amount of guns as a St. Louis per side.

That hydrogen-filled citadel though!

[SmurfOpax]

That's what i found after 30 seconds.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_Germany

 

And as we know WG there are sure some more dusty old Blueprints no one has ever seen before

[T0byJug]

Ok The American CV carried such large Air groups because they practised something call DECK Parking.. That is they stored a large number of Aircraft on Deck. This is something the RN generally did not do!! when they did they could embark an air group of 81 on the Implacable-class aircraft carrier and 71 aircraft on the Illustrious class CV's.  Though this is not as large as the American CV air groups its still pretty big

 

Deck parking had disadvantages as for example it would take longer to turn aircraft around (get them back in the air again) as you had to move all the Deck aircraft around to clear deck for tak off

 

Another thing that would be interesting is the RN Baracuda TP/DB  Think being able to get in game and then decide if you want you Barracuda to be a dive bomber or a torp bomber depending on wht you want to attack!!! :

[mr3awsome]

I've been to the USS Intrepid in August, and there was a section dedicated to the "differences in armour plating between different types of aircraft carriers". It turns out that the American way of armouring the ship (a lightweight flightdeck, and an armoured floor of the flight hangar) deemed more effective against heavy bombardments and kamikaze attacks (since the ship is more of an armoured bunker with a flightdeck on top of it, instead of an armoured deck with pretty vulnerable sides (like the British have). Also since the armour is closer to the waterline, it makes the ship way more stable and less top-heavy than their British counterparts.

Thats funny, because the Franklin's career was ended by a kamikaze, and none of the British carrier's were. 

As for side protection, the British carriers have an armoured side to the hangar, making it less vulnerable than the USN's carriers. 

In general British CVs seem to carry a heavier AA armament, which should be quite advantageous. 

 

All in all European CVs should be a lot more survivable than their Pacific peers, due to the nature of their operational environment.

[Spellfire40]

And you dont win a game by being more surviable as an CV. What your planes do is what matters.

 

 

Cya 

 

Spellfire40 

[T0byJug]

Some interesting facts about RN CV and Kamikaze hits...

 

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-042.htm

HMS Formidable

Struck by a Mitsubishi A6M Zero "Zeke" carrying one 250 kg bomb which created a 2 foot square hole and a 24 x 20 foot depression in the armored flight deck... Flying operations restarted by next morning hit again 5 days later Struck by a kamikaze into the after deck park which killed one and wounded eight.  Deck depressed 4.5 inches with a supporting beam distorted by 3 inches. Flying operations restred in under 1 hour

 

HMS Victorious 
9 May 1945:  Struck by two kamikazes.  The first was a Mitsubishi A6M Zero "Zeke" making a shallow dive which hit the flight deck at Frame 30 near the forward lift (elevator), slid across the deck and into "B2" 4.5-in mount.  This hit created a 25 sq. ft. hole and depressed the deck over an area of 144 sq. ft.  In addition, bulkheads in the area were buckled, both "B" group 4.5" mountings were put out of action with one gun barrel destroyed, the ship's accelerator [a type of aircraft catapult] was broken and small fires were started.**  The second kamikaze hit a glancing blow against the port side aft, destroying four Corsairs and a 40 mm gun director.  This hit also put an arrestor unit out of action.  The two attacks killed four, seriously wounded four more and less-seriously wounded an additional twenty.  Victorious was able to fly off planes one hour later and could land planes twelve hours later.  Fully back in action after two days.  Repairs took one month. 

 

RN ships did not get hit any where near as much as US ships but when they did they generally managed to resume operations . something US Carriers did not find so easy.

 

[Adwaenyth]

That hydrogen-filled citadel though!

 

So captain of the King George V actually ruled England? 

[Battledragon]

No, but the ship was actually the then king, George VI's dad. 

 

[fnord_disc]

It's well-known that RN carriers were the most resilient of the war by a long shot. Taiho without all the flaws in its design would have only approached their durability.

 

As for the strength of German carriers - that's anyone's guess. Small complement but great planes maybe.

[Comrad_StaIin]

irl the Hosho-class carried 17 planes

[SmurfOpax]

@kotkiller

the start isnt the problem .... in High-Tier it gets intresting when you have half the airplanes

[Fi_8_8_8_8]

Best dive bombers of WWII should be interesting to see Stukas own the skies 

 

[Vulgarny]

Stukas werent best DB of II WW.

[Userext]

british had really good DBs. The bomb that messed up tirpitz. They should have the best DBs

[Hauptbahnhof]

Thats funny, because the Franklin's career was ended by a kamikaze, and none of the British carrier's were. 

As for side protection, the British carriers have an armoured side to the hangar, making it less vulnerable than the USN's carriers. 

 

All the British carriers hit by heavy kamikaze damage ended their careers, just not right away but after the war. The big top heavy armor was impossible to permanently repair after being distorted by hits, so none of the Carriers could continue service after WW2.

 

"In effect, the hulls became progressively twisted and rippled as damage mounted up. This killed Formidable and Illustrious (both ships were surveyed in 1947 to assess the expenditure required to repair them and it was found that both were beyond economical repair."

 

Another argument could be made that the British extra armor resulted in smaller fighter air-groups, so an American Carrier in the same situation would be able to prevent a bomb or kamikaze hit entirely by shooting down the attacker before it got in range to hit thanks to the extra fighters.

 

Further reading:

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-030.htm

[Adwaenyth]

british had really good DBs. The bomb that messed up tirpitz. They should have the best DBs

 

The Avro Lancaster is not a DIVE bomber but a high level bomber... and the tallboy was a 5 ton monster bomb that could only be carried by a large bomber.