Aircraft Carriers

[lazs2]

yeah... all six bombs from a B17 hit the CV.  Now that's realistic eh?

gavor... see my point (refer to earlier thread for my opinion of you)?
lazs

[popeye]

Uh...oh....there's that R word again.

[Replicant]

Originally posted by Busher
Hey Gents
If I am not mistaken, WW2 AC Carriers were built with wood decks, presumably to allow easier repair in the battle field.

Busher

Heya Busher

I think all the US carriers had wooden decks, however, since you mention WW2 AC Carriers, most Royal Navy had armoured flight decks - unfortunately we don't have one!  

Regards

Nexx

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by Replicant
I think all the US carriers had wooden decks, however, since you mention WW2 AC Carriers, most Royal Navy had armoured flight decks - unfortunately we don't have one!  


The wooden decks were to save weight, I believe, rather than to facilitate repairs.  Consequently US carriers could carry more planes farther than could English carriers.  OTOH, of course, there was a significant difference in the effect of a kamikaze on the two deck types.

- oldman

[Ripsnort]

LOL banana!

[gavor]

Sorry lazs but I think the weight of common opinion agrees with me. I found bananas remark amusing.
If you've started to think that I no longer have the right to find things amusing, perhaps you should review how you think. I'm slightly perplexed by your abusive demeanour.

Anyway, back on topic. I'm surprised by the tonnage needed to sink the CV, whenever im on board or launching from it, nme attackers always appear to take it down in one pass. I've been of the opinion the CV was a little frail. Looks like I'm wrong .

[NUTTZ]

On bean and beer night in the FDB's Officers club, just a low fly-by usually sinks them.

NUTTZ