Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Speculative History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Speculative History Speculative History Forum - Alternate History, What If Questions, Pseudo History, and anything outside the boundaries of mainstream historical research


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 20th, 2012, 06:00 AM   #11

pablo668's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: Perth, Western Australia. or....hickville.
Posts: 1,804

Hmmm, if you had aircraft patrolling for subs you might be ok, remembering that WWII subs had to surface from time to time to replenish air/batteries. More often than modern subs at least.
pablo668 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old March 20th, 2012, 06:02 AM   #12

diddyriddick's Avatar
Forum Curmudgeon
 
Joined: May 2009
From: A tiny hamlet in the Carolina Sandhills
Posts: 11,245

Quote:
Originally Posted by bartieboy View Post
You think so? As you know ww2 ships were not exactly made of wood, and their big guns could very well pose a threat to aircraft (In some cases)
Actually, many were very lightly armored. There were two design philosophies in CV design in WWII. The RN had armored flight decks. The Japanese, and to a greater extent the Americans, did not have armored flight decks but had extended range (critical for operations in the Pacific) and embarked more aircraft for more striking capability. You pays your money and you takes your choice.
diddyriddick is offline  
Old March 20th, 2012, 06:09 AM   #13

pablo668's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: Perth, Western Australia. or....hickville.
Posts: 1,804

Off topic a little, as ships changed over time the ideas on armour became different.
You could only put so much armour on a ship due to displacement.
The final concept as far as 20th century battleships was concerned was the all or nothing principle.
Basically put armour where you need it, around machinery, magazines etc, don't have any/much where it's not so critical....ie, the very front of the focsle.....or around the rudder...Doh!
pablo668 is offline  
Old March 20th, 2012, 06:14 AM   #14

Lawnmowerman's Avatar
Cutting your grass
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,702
Blog Entries: 1

Try reading WW 2.0 in which a modern fleet transports back to 1941, it is quite good.
Lawnmowerman is offline  
Old March 20th, 2012, 06:17 AM   #15

diddyriddick's Avatar
Forum Curmudgeon
 
Joined: May 2009
From: A tiny hamlet in the Carolina Sandhills
Posts: 11,245

Quote:
Originally Posted by pablo668 View Post
Hmmm, if you had aircraft patrolling for subs you might be ok, remembering that WWII subs had to surface from time to time to replenish air/batteries. More often than modern subs at least.
Absolutely.

To be clear, I would think that a Nimitz-class carrier group could withstand assaults by any 4-5 WWII era CVs. Even the smaller and less well-equipped Invincible-class could hold off significantly larger numerical WWII era air attacks. But eventually sheer numbers could score.

On the sub threat, I'm not saying that a WWII diesel/electric boat WOULD score against a modern fleet carrier. Rather, I see that as the greatest threat-particularly with the CVN's escorts removed from the equation.
diddyriddick is offline  
Old March 20th, 2012, 06:52 AM   #16

pablo668's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: Perth, Western Australia. or....hickville.
Posts: 1,804

Quote:
Originally Posted by diddyriddick View Post
Absolutely.

To be clear, I would think that a Nimitz-class carrier group could withstand assaults by any 4-5 WWII era CVs. Even the smaller and less well-equipped Invincible-class could hold off significantly larger numerical WWII era air attacks. But eventually sheer numbers could score.

On the sub threat, I'm not saying that a WWII diesel/electric boat WOULD score against a modern fleet carrier. Rather, I see that as the greatest threat-particularly with the CVN's escorts removed from the equation.
I am in complete agreeance with you.
pablo668 is offline  
Old March 20th, 2012, 07:38 PM   #17

skizzerflake's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 1,785

The modern carrier would have radar and could see incoming planes and ships way before the scout planes of WW II would have found the new ship. Launching a few modern jets that could fly too high and too fast to be attacked, the new carrier could take down the old one before it could counter-attack or even know where the new carrier was. The new carrier, with its nuke engine and unlimited range, could run down anything in the ocean or run away if it chose. Even if the time transport kept the new ship from using satellites or GPS, the advantage in weapons and range would be decisive. The Japanese fleet of Dec 1941 would literally never know what had hit them.
skizzerflake is offline  
Old March 20th, 2012, 08:33 PM   #18

Belgarion's Avatar
Cynical Optimist
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: Australia
Posts: 2,313

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawnmowerman View Post
Try reading WW 2.0 in which a modern fleet transports back to 1941, it is quite good.
World War 2.0 by John Birmingham is a great alternate history/science fiction series. The modern weapons of the multinational task force are effective, but changing history has its downside.

A modern CVN operating without its battle group would be extremely vulnerable to a WWII submarine attack, even with the advantage of modern ASW aircraft.
Belgarion is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Speculative History

Tags
1941, carrier, modern


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
US carrier numbers at the end of WW2. The Harlech man American History 16 January 21st, 2012 11:51 AM
Solution to the Carrier Isoroku295 War and Military History 131 March 30th, 2011 03:34 PM
First night operations from a carrier at sea Terrible Turk War and Military History 8 December 19th, 2010 05:31 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.