Deep breath . . . The USN had eight carriers, prewar. Lexington (CV-2), Saratoga (CV-3), Ranger (CV-4), Yorktown (CV-5), Enterprise (CV-6), Wasp (CV-7), Hornet (CV-8) and Long Island (ACV-1). The first seven were CV’s, fleet carriers (though with Ranger that might be a bit of a stretch), and the last, an escort carrier. You are correct, Wasp was something of an improved Ranger, but was smaller than the Yorktown class due to treaty restrictions. On the other hand, Hornet was slightly larger and somewhat heavier than her Yorktown and Enterprise sisters. There is always a background debate amongst the overly technical as to whether or not Hornet constituted a class of its own, but in the USN she was considered Yorktown class. You see the same sort of debate sometimes raging regarding the Essex class, when someone points out the “long-hulled” Ticonderoga class. Well, I’ve had that discussion with more than one naval aviator with more Essex class experience than you can shake a stick, nope, they were all Essex class as far as the practitioners were concerned. There were authorized prior to the US entry in to the war thirteen Essex class carriers. Authorized in June 1940 were three: Essex (CV-9), Bon Homme Richard -renamed Yorktown (CV-10), and Intrepid (CV-11). Another ten (Kearsarge - renamed Hornet (CV-12), Franklin (CV-13), Ticonderoga (CV-14), Randolph (CV-15), Lexington (CV-16), Bunker Hill (CV-17), Wasp (CV-18), Hancock (CV-19), Bennington (CV-20), and Boxer (CV-21)) were, a month later, authorized. After the US entered the war an additional 19 Essex class carriers were authorized between July and September 1942. Of these six were canceled on 28 March 1945, as they were never started, and the under construction Reprisal and Iwo Jima were canceled on 12 August 1945. In all, twenty four Essex class carriers were eventually completed. Off the top of my head, fourteen of them saw combat service in WW2, all of the original prewar authorizations, except Boxer, plus from those authorized in 1942, Shangri La (CV-38) and Bon Homme Richard (CV-31). There were also light carriers in action, the CVLs, that operated with the CVs, built on cruiser hulls, nine of those, Independence (CVL-22), Princeton (CVL-23), Belleau Wood (CVL-24), Cowpens (CVL-25), Monterey (CVL-26), Cabot (CVL-27), Langley (CVL-28), Bataan (CVL-29), and San Jacinto (CVL-30). At the beginning of the war there were all sorts of aircraft aboard USN carriers. Generally, in one finds in the Pacific F4F fighters, SBD scout-bombers, and TBD torpedo bombers . . . think Lexington, Saratoga, Enterprise, and Yorktown (which left Norfolk a week after the Pearl Harbor attack and was in San Diego by the end of the month). In the Atlantic, things were a bit different. Remember that this was a time of expansion and re-equipping. Ranger carried at various times, not necessarily at the same time, F4Fs, TBDs, and SB2U scout-bombers; Wasp, the same, and Hornet F4Fs, TBDs, and, into early 1942, SBC-4s. Long Island at one point had a squadron VS-201 (VS meaning “scouting squadron) equipped with F2A-3 fighters. My father was assigned to Ranger’s VS-41 in January 1941 after completing flight school; they flew SBC-4 biplane dive bombers. Fortunately for him, the squadron was redesignated a fighter squadron at the end of February and it became VF-42 operating F4Fs. Yorktown’s (then part of the Atlantic Fleet) fighter squadron, VF-5, was still operating F3F biplanes in the summer of 1941, so VF-42 went aboard for neutrality patrol duty and was still aboard when the ship went off to the Pacific and all that entailed . . . early raids, Coral Sea, Midway, and such . . . something for which the VF-5 crowd never forgave. Hornet switched out its SBC-4s for SBDs upon arrival in the Pacific. She kept her TBDs, but had already detached some 15 pilots for transition to the new TBF . . . they were working up in Norfolk and were supposed to fly to the west coast, be ferried to PH and then join the ship. They arrived the day after the ship left for Midway . . . although 6 of them flew out to the island and flew in the battle, 5 were shot down. Ranger, in the Atlantic, kept her SB2Us until shortly before the invasion of North Africa when they were traded in for SBDs. Eventually things settled down, the TBDs that were left went off to training commands replaced in the fleet by TBFs, so the standard CV complement became F4F fighters, SBD scout-bombers, and TBF torpedo bombers. Eventually, the F4Fs were replaced on CVs and CVLs in late 1943 with F6Fs; the SBDs, by the summer of 1944, were replaced by the SB2C, though the venerable SBD soldiered on into late July 1945 as a land-based USMC close support dive-bomber. So, by the last half of 1944, on the CVs you found F6Fs, SB2Cs and TBF/TBMs. We see, as time goes, on the TBFs going away and being totally replaced by their Eastern Aircraft TBM cousins . . . same plane different builder. There were also other “cousins” wandering through the picture . . . SBWs and SBFs were SB2Cs made by Canadian Car and Foundry and Fairchild Canada. All looked the same; you have to read the bureau numbers to tell the difference. CVLs carried the F6F and the TBM. Hungrily waiting their turn for duty on the big carriers were the F4Us and eventually that happened too, with F4Us and their FG cousins serving alongside the workhorse F6Fs aboard some, but not all, of the CVs by the end of the war; first assigned aboard a CV were some Marine VMFs soon to be followed by USN VBFs and VFs. The growing air groups for the large carriers, the CVBs, Coral Sea, FDR, and Midway were scheduled to be exclusively F4U in their fighter make up. The third type of F4U, built by Brewster, the F3A, never made it co combat aboard a carrier . . . they were considered inferior to the Vought and Goodyear versions and were only used for training. Again, from the pictures you really can’t tell one from the other, you have to read the bureau number. Aboard the Pacific Fleet’s Escort Carrier Force, the CVEs of carrier divisions 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 you find various stripes of air groups/squadrons. In CarDiv 22, made up of four somewhat larger Sangamon class CVEs, one generally finds the CVEG, translated as the Escort Carrier Air Group, and usually made up of F6Fs and TBMs. In CarDivs 23, 24, 25, and 26, composed primarily of Casablanca class CVEs, you usually find VC (translates as “composite squadron”) and VOC (”Observation Composite Squadron”) squadrons, made up of FM-2 (an improved F4F) and the ubiquitous TBM. In CarDiv 27, all of the Commencement Bay class CVEs, besides a CVEG group and a CVEG(N) – a night operations escort carrier air group – both made up of F6Fs and TBMs, we find something called a MCVG, a Marine Carrier Air Group; these were made up of a fighter squadron with the F6F for night and photo work, the F4U and FG for fighter work and a Torpedo-Bomber squadron using TBMs. MCVGs 1, 2, 3, and 4 made it into action aboard the escort carriers Block Island (CVE-106), Gilbert Islands (CVE-107), Cape Gloucester (CVE-109), and Vella Gulf (CVE-111). In the Atlantic, USN CVEs generally operated in as ASW hunter-killers, with VC squadron type complements. Notable exceptions were during the invasion operations Torch and Anvil-Dragoon. In Torch, USS Ranger operated F4Fs (VF-9 and VF-41) and SBDs (VS-41); USS SUWANEE (ACV-27) had TBFs (VGS-27), and F4Fs (VGF-27, VGF-28, and a detachment from VGS-30); USS Sangamon (ACV-26) operated F4Fs (VGS-26) and SBDs (VGS-26); and USS Santee (ACV-29) operated F4Fs (VGF-29) and TBFs (VGS-29). The fourth Sangamon class carrier, USS Chenango (ACV-28) participated in Torch as an aircraft transport, carrying the 33rd USAAF Fighter Group, with 78 P-40Fs. The ACV “Auxiliary Carrier” designation later changed to CVE, “Escort Carrier”. In Anvil-Dragoon, USS Tulagi (CVE-72) operated the 26 F6Fs and 2 TBMs of VOF-1; USS Kasaan Bay (CVE-69) operated VF-74 with 32 F6Fs and 3 TBMs. Whew! Rich
I just found in Wikipedia (not exactly an specialized site, though) that several carriers from the British Pacific Fleet operated Barracudas: HMS Vengeance, HMS Glory, HMS Venerable and HMS Colossus. Also, I found a site, Military Art Gallery Home Page, in which among other paintings supposedly based on true war stories, there´s one about the allied raids on Java and Sumatra, in 44, depicting Corsairs and Barras doing their thing. The source that I used for my previous posting (no. 31) is as of April/May 1945 & lists these carriers as either having arrived in the Pacific by VJ Day or being on the way there at that date & doesn't give their air complements. British Naval Aviation by Ray Sturtivant says that they arrived in Australia in July/August 1945 & each had 1 squadron of Barracudas & 1 of Corsairs. They had 162 aircraft in total but Sturtivant doesn't split these out between the 2 types or the 4 carriers. These ships were light fleet carriers & were smaller & with unarmoured flight decks but their hangars with 17.5 feet high, making them more useful than the armoured carriers in the jet age. A number were sold to Commonwealth & foreign navies after the war. Between April & July 1944 HMS Illustrious, with Barracudas & Corsairs, & the USS Saratoga, with Avengers & Hellcats, carried out attacks on Sumatra & Java. After Illustrious had gone for a refit in July & the Saratoga returned to US control, Indomitable & Victorious, also with Barracudas, attacked Sumatra & other targets in the Dutch East Indies from August to October 1944. After the attacks on the island of Car Nicobar on the 17 and 19 October, the Barracudas were replaced by Avengers prior to the ships joining the newly formed British Pacific Fleet.
thankyou leonard,very imformative.so gibbo,you are telling me that the british pacific fleet,which i presume attacked at least some of the japanese home islands,did so without any specified dive bomber.if so ,why not.there seems to be plenty of american aircraft about,tbf,tbms.why not use this preponderence,dauntless or helldivers.i dont think these aircraft were larger than avengers etc.i just dont get why not.yours very sincerely,lee.
More OOBs - and BTW any corrections cheerfully accepted. I am a great collector of lists, all kinds of stuff. Operations Meridian I (24 Jan 1945) and Meridian II (29 Jan 1945) – Strikes on oil refineries at Palembang, Sumatra. Report as published in the London Gazette can be found at http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/LondonGazette/39191.pdf HMS Indomitable: 5th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr (A) T.W. Harrington, RN 1839 Squadron: Hellcat I & II; Lt Cdr S.F.F. Shotton, DSC, RNR 1844 Squadron: Hellcat I & II; Lt Cdr M.S.Godson, RN 857 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) W.Stuart, DSC & 2 bars, RNVR HMS Illustrious: 15th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr(A) A.M. Tritton, DSC & 2 Bars, RNVR 1830 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) Tritton 1833 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) N.S.Hansen, DCS, RNVR 854 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr W.J.Mainprice, RN, Lieut Comdr RNLt Cdr(A) F.C.Nottingham, DSC, RNVR [from 29 Jan 45] HMS Victorious: 47th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Col R.C. Hay, DSO & bar, DSC, RM 1834 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) R.D.B. Hopkins, RN 1836 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) C.C. Tomkinson, RNVR 849 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) D.R. Foster, DSO, DSC, RNVR HMS Indefatigable: 24th Naval Fighter Wing: ; Lt Cdr(A) A.J. Thomson, DSC, RNVR 887 Squadron: Seafire F.III; Lt Cdr(A) Thomson 894 Squadron: Seafire L.III; Lt Cdr(A) J. Crossman, DSO, RNVR 1770 Squadron: Firefly I Maj V.B.G. Cheeseman, DSO, MBE, DSC, RM 820 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) S.P. Luke, RN Operation Iceberg I – Okinawa Campaign HMS Indomitable: 5th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr(A) Harrington 1839 Squadron: Hellcat I & II; Lt Cdr Shotton 1844 Squadron: Hellcat I & II; Lt Cdr Godson 857 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) Stuart HMS Illustrious: 15th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr(A) Tritton 1830 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) Tritton 1833 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) Hansen 854 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) Nottingham [lost 27 March 45], Lt Cdr R. E. Jess, DSC, RCNVR HMS Victorious: 47th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Col. Hay 1834 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) Hopkins 1836 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) Tomkinson [lost 26 March 45], Lt Cdr J.B. Edmundson, DSC, RN 849 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) Foster HMS Indefatigable: 24th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr(A) Thomson, Lt Cdr N. G. Hallett, DSC & bar, RN [from 12 March 45] 887 Squadron: Seafire F.III; Lt Cdr(A) Thomson, Lt Cdr Hallett [from 12 March 45] 894 Squadron: Seafire L.III; Lt Cdr(A) Crossman 1770 Squadron: Firefly I; Maj Cheeseman 820 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) Luke HMS Formidable: 6th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr(A) R.L. Bigg-Wither, DSC & bar, RN 1841 Squadron: Corsair IV; Lt Cdr(A) Bigg-Wither 1842 Squadron: Corsair IV; Lt Cdr(A) A.McD. Garland, RNVR 848 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) T.G.V. Percy, RN Operation Iceberg II – Okinawa Campaign HMS Indomitable: 5th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr(A) Harrington 1839 Squadron: Hellcat I & II; Lt Cdr Shotton, Lt Cdr B.H.C. Nation, RN [from 26 April 45] 1844 Squadron: Hellcat I & II;; Lt Cdr Godson, Lt Cdr P.J.P. Leckie, RN [from 12 May 45] 857 Squadron: Avenger I;I Lt Cdr(A) Stuart HMS Illustrious: 15th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr(A) Tritton, 1830 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) Tritton 1833 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) Hansen 854 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr Jess HMS Victorious: 47th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Col Hay 1834 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr(A) Hopkins, Lt Cdr(A) J.G. Baldwin, DSC, RN [from 26 April 45] 1836 Squadron: Corsair II; Lt Cdr Edmundson 849 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) Foster HMS Indefatigable: 24th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr Hallett 887 Squadron: Seafire F.III; Lt Cdr Hallett 894 Squadron: Seafire L.III; Lt Cdr(A) J. Crossman 1770 Squadron: Firefly I; Maj V.B.G. Cheeseman 820 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) Luke, Lt Cdr(A) F.L. Jones, DSC & bar, RNVR [from 18 May 45] HMS Formidable: 6th Naval Fighter Wing: Lt Cdr(A) Bigg-Wither 1841 Squadron: Corsair IV; Lt Cdr(A) Bigg-Wither 1842 Squadron: Corsair IV; Lt Cdr(A) Garland, RNVR [KIA], Lt Cdr(A) D.G. Parker, DSC, RNVR [from 27 April 45] 848 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr(A) Percy Operation Inmate, Strikes on Truk, June 14 & 15 1945 HMS Implacable: 803 Squadron: Seafire L.III; Lt Cdr(A) L.D. Wilkinson, DSC, RNVR 880 Squadron: Seafire L.III & FR.III; Lt Cdr(A) R.M. Crosley, DSC & bar, RNVR 1771 Squadron: Firefly I; Lt Cdr W.R.J. MacWhirter, DSC, RN 828 Squadron: Avenger II; Lt Cdr F.A. Swanton, DSC, RN Regards, Rich
cheers,thankyou for all your help,perhaps you could help me out with both u.s and r.n aircraft armament,including weight of bombs,torpedoes and other ordenance.yours very sincerely,lee.
According to British Carrier Aviation by Norman Friedman, the low aircarft capacities of British carriers meant that the RN was forced to amalgamate types. Initially, the Skua served as a fighter/dive bomber but was unsatisfactory. The Albacore & the Barracuda were meant to be torpedo/dive bombers. Friedman says on p. 215 that 50 SB2U Vindicators, originally ordered for France were obtained but relegated to training. 'The much better Douglas Dauntless (SBD) appears not to have been on offer.' Later, the Admiralty tried to get Helldivers but 'the US Navy could not spare it in any numbers.' Friedman goes on to say, on p. 217, that 'Later...the FAA used its fighters as steep glide bombers.' Avengers were also often used as glide bombers by the RN.
This might be true with the armoured British carriers, (Illustrious/Implacable class) but it does not explain why the other British carriers had such a small capacity. The Furious, Eagle, Glorious etc. did not have armoured decks, yet had such a small # of aircraft. Why did the Furious have only 36, when it had 2 hangers, & full flight deck, of similar size & disp. to "Yorktown". Even compared to the lighter "Soryu" or "Ranger" it had only about half the aircraft or less. The Eagle was a converted Battleship, (as was "Kaga") 26,000 tons, yet could only hold 25 aircraft while the Kaga held about 90. Even though the Eagle only had a single hanger I would think they could do better. Does anyone know why this was? Was it just RN doctrine? Or inefficient design? Furious & Eagle were very early designs so probably were inefficient compared with later designs. Glorious & Courageous could carry 48 aircraft each but carried fewer at the times of their sinkings because the RN ws short of aircraft. They & Furious were converted from similar battlecruisers so this suggests that some lessons were learnt from the earlier conversions. Eagle was converted from an older & smaller battleship than Kaga. Normally, carriers converted from other warships carried fewer aircraft than purpose built ships of the same size. The Lexington & Saratoga carried fewer than much smaller, purpose built US carriers.
I thought it was refreshing of Warload to put aside the political correctness that has stifled free speech in these times. That means that I can't use Wog either. We have a lot down here in Oz. Funny how things turn out isn't it. Our chaps spent six years shooting at them not long back.
thankyou leonard,very imformative.so gibbo,you are telling me that the british pacific fleet,which i presume attacked at least some of the japanese home islands,did so without any specified dive bomber.if so ,why not.there seems to be plenty of american aircraft about,tbf,tbms.why not use this preponderence,dauntless or helldivers.i dont think these aircraft were larger than avengers etc.i just dont get why not.yours very sincerely,lee. As Gibbo says the US could not spare any. The Indefatigable had room for a 4th squadron, the Firefly was used both as a fighter & a light bomber
Furious & Eagle were very early designs so probably were inefficient compared with later designs. Glorious & Courageous could carry 48 aircraft each but carried fewer at the times of their sinkings because the RN ws short of aircraft. They & Furious were converted from similar battlecruisers so this suggests that some lessons were learnt from the earlier conversions. Eagle was converted from an older & smaller battleship than Kaga. Normally, carriers converted from other warships carried fewer aircraft than purpose built ships of the same size. The Lexington & Saratoga carried fewer than much smaller, purpose built US carriers. My data says that the Eagle could carry 25 aircraft, is that hanger space? Suppose the carrier was used ONLY for fighter CAP, all the Swordfish & Skua's or Albacore's being taken off, would there be room for more fighters rather than the larger Swordfish? Also (for example) if it was used as a fighter only carrier would they be able to deck-park an additional 6 or 8 fighters? The reason I ask is that I feel for many of the Med operations (eg. "Pedestal" or the Crete evacuation) it would have been more prudent to have an ALL FIGHTER complement, due to the heavy Axis air attacks. Also because the Med did not have the great distances as in the Pacific, I feel that the British could have operated the longer-range Swordfish (1,000+ range) from land, leaving all the carrier space for fighter protection. I know this may be a tricky question to answer but I would be interested in your opinions.
Fighter complements were increased for Operation Pedestal: Victorious; 16 Fulmars from 809 & 884 squadrons, 5 Sea Hurricanes, 885 squadron, 12 Albacores, 832 squadron. Indomitable: 9 Martlets (UK name for Wildcat), 806 squadron, 22 Sea Hurricanes from 800 & 880 squadrons, 16 Albacore, 827 squadron. Eagle: 16 Sea Hurricanes, 801 squadron, 4 Sea Hurricanes, 813 squadron. Some Albacores were carried in case the Italian surface fleet put to sea. Sea Hurricanes & early Seafires didn't have folding wings, as they were essentially Hurricanes & Spitfires with an arrestor hook plus some structural strengthening to allow them to be catapulted. Thus, using Sea Hurricanes instead of Swordfish didn't increase aircraft capacity. One reason for British aircraft capacities being low was that the RN didn't use deck parks until forced to during the war so the capacities were those of the hangars. The lifts on the Illustrious class & Ark Royal couldn't carry non folding Sea Hurricanes so these ships had to stow these aircraft on deck, which also increased capacities. Objections to deck parks would be the impact of Atlantic weather on aircraft & the risk of greater damage if a carrier was bombed with aircraft on deck I've had a further look at the Friedman book that I quoted from earlier. He says that the RN was well aware that Hermes, Eagle & Argus were inefficient designs, being too slow & carrying too few aircraft. As Britain had not built up to the carrier tonnage permitted by the Washington Treaty, scrapping these 3 ships would have enabled the construction of 2 carriers of the maximum permitted 33,000 tons or, more likely, 4 17,000 ton vessels. The Treasury didn't allow this, arguing that the RN already had more carriers than any other navy; this was in the 1920s.
cheers,thankyou for all your help,perhaps you could help me out with both u.s and r.n aircraft armament,including weight of bombs,torpedoes and other ordenance.yours very sincerely,lee. The website linked below has details of all aircraft used by the RN, including ones such as the Dauntless & Helldiver that weren't used operationally by the British. Royal Naval aircraft database of the Fleet Air Arm Archive 1939-1945 Contents Page
Fighter complements were increased for Operation Pedestal: Victorious; 16 Fulmars from 809 & 884 squadrons, 5 Sea Hurricanes, 885 squadron, 12 Albacores, 832 squadron. Indomitable: 9 Martlets (UK name for Wildcat), 806 squadron, 22 Sea Hurricanes from 800 & 880 squadrons, 16 Albacore, 827 squadron. Eagle: 16 Sea Hurricanes, 801 squadron, 4 Sea Hurricanes, 813 squadron. Some Albacores were carried in case the Italian surface fleet put to sea. Sea Hurricanes & early Seafires didn't have folding wings, as they were essentially Hurricanes & Spitfires with an arrestor hook plus some structural strengthening to allow them to be catapulted. Thus, using Sea Hurricanes instead of Swordfish didn't increase aircraft capacity. One reason for British aircraft capacities being low was that the RN didn't use deck parks until forced to during the war so the capacities were those of the hangars. The lifts on the Illustrious class & Ark Royal couldn't carry non folding Sea Hurricanes so these ships had to stow these aircraft on deck, which also increased capacities. Objections to deck parks would be the impact of Atlantic weather on aircraft & the risk of greater damage if a carrier was bombed with aircraft on deck I've had a further look at the Friedman book that I quoted from earlier. He says that the RN was well aware that Hermes, Eagle & Argus were inefficient designs, being too slow & carrying too few aircraft. As Britain had not built up to the carrier tonnage permitted by the Washington Treaty, scrapping these 3 ships would have enabled the construction of 2 carriers of the maximum permitted 33,000 tons or, more likely, 4 17,000 ton vessels. The Treasury didn't allow this, arguing that the RN already had more carriers than any other navy; this was in the 1920s. Thanks for the info. I still think it would have been better to fly the Albacore's directly from Gibraltar or Malta, to make space for more fighters. The convoy needed every fighter possible for this kind of mission. (perhaps they could have prevented the heavy damage to the decks of the Indomitable & Victorious) They could have also used Coastal Command Whit 5's or Hampdens from land.
The reason that the fleet carries its own strike aircraft, rather than relying on land based ones, is that they are then under the direct control of the fleet commander. There may be communications or navigation difficulties in co-ordinating with land based aircraft & they will take longer to arrive than carrier based ones.
Deep breath . . . In Torch, USS Ranger operated F4Fs (VF-9 and VF-41) and SBDs (VS-41); USS SUWANEE (ACV-27) had TBFs (VGS-27), and F4Fs (VGF-27, VGF-28, and a detachment from VGS-30); USS Sangamon (ACV-26) operated F4Fs (VGS-26) and SBDs (VGS-26); and USS Santee (ACV-29) operated F4Fs (VGF-29) and TBFs (VGS-29). The fourth Sangamon class carrier, USS Chenango (ACV-28) participated in Torch as an aircraft transport, carrying the 33rd USAAF Fighter Group, with 78 P-40Fs. The ACV “Auxiliary Carrier” designation later changed to CVE, “Escort Carrier”. In Anvil-Dragoon, USS Tulagi (CVE-72) operated the 26 F6Fs and 2 TBMs of VOF-1; USS Kasaan Bay (CVE-69) operated VF-74 with 32 F6Fs and 3 TBMs. Whew! Rich During Torch both Sangamon and Santee operated a mix of SBD and TBF in scouting (?) squadrons VGS-26 and VGS-29. Rich, you are forgiven because the breath was running out! Note that Suwannee didn't embarked non-folding wings SBD, so was carrying a bigger airgroup vs other sisterships (38 vs 30-31). Max
so it seems that no r.n carriers used dive bombers in the pacific campaign,barracuda,dauntless sdb or helldivers.yours very sincerely.lee. Actually Barracudas were used in the Indian Ocean operations during 1944, from april till october. Later RN carriers got Avengers in preview of Pacific operations. Illustrious only used Avengers during the strike on Surabaja of 17 may 1944, because it had longer range than Barracudas. Barracudas were embarked on 4 smaller carriers of Colossus class, but it was decided to replace them with Firefly ASAP the trouble with bombs was solved. Max
Lee, She was an Illustrious Class: Illustrious, Indomitable, Formidable and Victorious, but did have design changes to up her aircraft capacity early on. Early in the war, she carried 55 aircraft (Seafire and Albacores) compared to her sisters who carried 36. By later in the war (1945), she was operating Corsairs and Avengers, but carried less of these than she did of the British-designed aircraft. Maybe some of the Royal Navy brains here knows why. I wondering if it had anything to with hangar overhead and height of the folded wings of the American-designed aircraft. Just a guess. Indomitable was altered during building, and had a second hangar added, therefore had larger complement. She had a bigger lift as well, so was able to put down Seafires or Hurricanes. Unfortunately having a second hangar meant that it had lower roof (to reduce topweight), so a Corsair would not fit with wings up-folded. This is why she and the following Implacables could only operate Seafires, Fireflies and Hellcats. I guess that the reason Seafire had the complicate Z-like folding wings, is to fit in those carriers. Obviously Grumman and Fairey planes had no height problems. The reason for Indomitable had actually less planes during Meridian is that she had spare planes for the fleet in her lower hangar, at least 6 Corsairs and 4 Avengers, and her upper hangar was actually shorter than in her sisters. Max
