Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Considering that their allies the Japanese (through the Junyo , Shinyo, Kaiyo and Taiyo classes) and Italians (thru Aquila) both converted merchantmen/liners to aircraft carriers, why didn't the...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
It's interesting, and rather telling, that it's hard to argue that the conversions weren't technical failures.
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Shang Ma Ke wrote:Considering that their allies the Japanese (through the Junyo , Shinyo, Kaiyo and Taiyo classes) and Italians (thru Aquila) both converted merchantmen/liners to aircraft carriers,...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Germany still had people who had served on submarines, commerce raiding light cruisers and Kaiserliche Marine naval air service too. So KM should have known better then to spend a single pfenning on...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Dave Bender wrote: How do you figure that?Scharnhorst class dreadnoughts were laid down during 1935 and pushed to completion during 1939. Give the two Graf Zeppelin class CVs equal priority and they...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
1911. Marinefliegerkorps established. 1912. Marinefliegerkorps budget exceeds 1 million marks. 1913. Marinefliegerkorps long term plan to create 6 naval air stations. 1914. Marinefliegerkorps...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
The big thing was that Air Marshal Meyer, nee Goering, repeatedly stated that he controlled everything that flew and was no willing to give up on this position. Look at the MM needing to change a...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Goering controlled everything that flew because Luftwaffe was the only WWII era German service branch willing to spend part of the budget on aircraft. If 1930s Germany wants a naval air service then...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Check out www.launch-systems.com. This is my ICCALS catapult that I am trying to sell to MOD.......This is catapult situation is a total screw-up as you will see. General ATOMICS EMALS beat ICCALS...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Raeder wasn’t ignorant of naval air power; he invested heavily: he bought primary trainers for KM; advance trainers for KM and first line fighters, Bf.109s, and dive bombers, Ju.87s. Then watched...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Given that one of the major problems with Seafires was their undercarriage, specifically its narrow track and relatively long length, you would have to think that a 109 would suffer even more...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Larrikin22 wrote:Given that one of the major problems with Seafires was their undercarriage, specifically its narrow track and relatively long length, you would have to think that a 109 would suffer...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
1940 KM had fewer then 10% of required aerial mines. This forced Luftwaffe to resort to conventional bombs vs Port of London and other such English...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
bgile wrote:Larrikin22 wrote:Given that one of the major problems with Seafires was their undercarriage, specifically its narrow track and relatively long length, you would have to think that a 109...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Several other thoughts: Germany didnt have the massive number of destroyers, cruisers, corvettes or other escort ships to form a carrier group that could defend the carrier from submarine or aerial...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
KM wasn't only navy that though torpedo bombers was thing of past in '34-'38. Given that everything that flies is 'owned' by LW; transferring aerial torpedo development to LW makes sense. Aerial mines...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Dave Bender wrote:1940 KM had fewer then 10% of required aerial mines. This forced Luftwaffe to resort to conventional bombs vs Port of London and other such English...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
don4331 wrote:KM wasn't only navy that though torpedo bombers was thing of past in '34-'38. Given that everything that flies is 'owned' by LW; transferring aerial torpedo development to LW makes...
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
With no convoys to escort, what is the purpose of these CVEs?It can't be fleet air defence. By this time there is no fleet to defend.
View ArticleRe: Why no Kriegsmarine merchant-converted carriers?
Narrow track: additionally, the Grummans had relatively big rudders/stabilizers which avoided the airstream-blanking issues that affected the small-tailed Spit and 109 in nose-up (i.e. landing)...
View Article
