What if, Iowa battleship into aircraft carrier aka Illinois-class carrier

[lordroel]

What if, Iowa battleship into aircraft carrier aka Illinois-class carrier

So initially, the Iowa class was to consist of only four battleships with hull numbers BB-61 to BB-64: Iowa, New Jersey, Missouri, and Wisconsin. However, changing priorities during World War II resulted in the battleship hull numbers BB-65 Montana and BB-66 Ohio being reordered as Illinois and Kentucky respectively; Montana and Ohio were reassigned to hull numbers BB-67 and BB-68. At the time these two battleships were to be built a proposal was put forth to have them constructed as aircraft carriers rather than fast battleships in the aftermath of the Battles of Coral Sea and Midway. As proposed, the converted Kentucky would have had an 864-foot (263 m) long by 108-foot (33 m) wide flight deck, with armament identical to the carriers of the Essex class: four twin 5-inch gun mounts and four more 5-inch guns in single mounts, along with six 40 mm quadruple mounts. The idea was abandoned after the Bureau of Ships decided that the converted ships would carry fewer aircraft than the Essex class, that more Essex-class carriers could be built in the same amount of time, and that the conversion project would be significantly more expensive than new Essexes.

Plan I: Preliminary design plan prepared for the General Board as part of an exploration of carrier conversions of warship hulls then under construction. This plan, dated June 1942, represents the conversion of Iowa class battleship hulls. It would have produced a ship somewhat similar in external appearance to the Essex (CV-9) class, but with lower freeboard, only two aircraft elevators, one catapult, and an 864' long flight deck set well back from the bow. The drawing bears the handwritten notation, dated 12 June 1942, "This conversion apparently will not materialize."



Nice art made by by Tzoli on Deviant Art of a Kentucky class Aircraft Carrier Design.



Plan II

[stevep]

   lordroel ,

  Interesting idea but as you say fairly impractical.  Building a purpose designed carrier is cheaper, more efficient and quicker than doing a conversion of a Battleship hull.  Especially when the US was laying down so many ships anyway. 

  Possibly the only way they might see service was if say Coral Sea and/or Midway both go very bad for the USN with most of their carriers sunk and few if any Japanese ones lost.  In that case there might be enough panic that its decided to convert some of the hulls under construction, although their likely to be fairly redundant by the time they enter service as there will be a lot of Essex class already in action.  [Mind you this might not be clear at the time if the summer of 42 went very badly and since the allies might have an inflated view of how many new carriers Japan was laying down].

  Steve

[lordroel]

Jul 25, 2020 11:04:35 GMT stevep said:

   lordroel ,

  Interesting idea but as you say fairly impractical.  Building a purpose designed carrier is cheaper, more efficient and quicker than doing a conversion of a Battleship hull.  Especially when the US was laying down so many ships anyway. 

  Possibly the only way they might see service was if say Coral Sea and/or Midway both go very bad for the USN with most of their carriers sunk and few if any Japanese ones lost.  In that case there might be enough panic that its decided to convert some of the hulls under construction, although their likely to be fairly redundant by the time they enter service as there will be a lot of Essex class already in action.  [Mind you this might not be clear at the time if the summer of 42 went very badly and since the allies might have an inflated view of how many new carriers Japan was laying down].

  Steve

Would the Midway class of OTL be bigger than the Illinois-class.

[stevep]

Jul 25, 2020 11:09:51 GMT lordroel said:

Jul 25, 2020 11:04:35 GMT stevep said:

   lordroel ,

  Interesting idea but as you say fairly impractical.  Building a purpose designed carrier is cheaper, more efficient and quicker than doing a conversion of a Battleship hull.  Especially when the US was laying down so many ships anyway. 

  Possibly the only way they might see service was if say Coral Sea and/or Midway both go very bad for the USN with most of their carriers sunk and few if any Japanese ones lost.  In that case there might be enough panic that its decided to convert some of the hulls under construction, although their likely to be fairly redundant by the time they enter service as there will be a lot of Essex class already in action.  [Mind you this might not be clear at the time if the summer of 42 went very badly and since the allies might have an inflated view of how many new carriers Japan was laying down].

  Steve

Would the Midway class of OTL be bigger than the Illinois-class.

  Well checking Wiki their about 100' longer and a little wider I think.  Plus they would be purpose built carriers and being built somewhat later could include more lessons learnt early in the war.  As such an Essex would probably be a better carrier than an Illinois and Midway definitely so.

[lordroel]

Jul 25, 2020 11:22:28 GMT stevep said:

Jul 25, 2020 11:09:51 GMT lordroel said:

Would the Midway class of OTL be bigger than the Illinois-class.

  Well checking Wiki their about 100' longer and a little wider I think.  Plus they would be purpose built carriers and being built somewhat later could include more lessons learnt early in the war.  As such an Essex would probably be a better carrier than an Illinois and Midway definitely so.

I also would think that the Illinois-class carrier when enter into service would be around 1944/45 i guess.

[stevep]

Jul 25, 2020 12:25:19 GMT lordroel said:

Jul 25, 2020 11:22:28 GMT stevep said:

  Well checking Wiki their about 100' longer and a little wider I think.  Plus they would be purpose built carriers and being built somewhat later could include more lessons learnt early in the war.  As such an Essex would probably be a better carrier than an Illinois and Midway definitely so.

I also would think that the Illinois-class carrier when enter into service would be around 1944/45 i guess.

 

  In which case they definitely will be of relatively little use.  As it is extra carrier hulls at this stage might mean some of the Midways end up cancelled post-war.

[lordroel]

Jul 25, 2020 15:14:20 GMT stevep said:

Jul 25, 2020 12:25:19 GMT lordroel said:

I also would think that the Illinois-class carrier when enter into service would be around 1944/45 i guess.

 

  In which case they definitely will be of relatively little use.  As it is extra carrier hulls at this stage might mean some of the Midways end up cancelled post-war.

I think the same, so 2 Illinois-class carriers instead of 3 Midway-class aircraft carriers, which would you pick.

[stevep]

Jul 25, 2020 15:19:43 GMT lordroel said:

Jul 25, 2020 15:14:20 GMT stevep said:

 

  In which case they definitely will be of relatively little use.  As it is extra carrier hulls at this stage might mean some of the Midways end up cancelled post-war.

I think the same, so 2 Illinois-class carriers instead of 3 Midway-class aircraft carriers, which would you pick.

  If I was a naval man probably the three Midway's presuming that doesn't drain too many resources from other parts of the navy given post war cuts.  If I was a politician, with the massive dominance of the USN at the end of WWII could mean two Illinois already constructed could seem more attractive than three Midway's not yet completed.

[lordroel]

Jul 25, 2020 15:23:19 GMT stevep said:

Jul 25, 2020 15:19:43 GMT lordroel said:

I think the same, so 2 Illinois-class carriers instead of 3 Midway-class aircraft carriers, which would you pick.

  If I was a naval man probably the three Midway's presuming that doesn't drain too many resources from other parts of the navy given post war cuts.  If I was a politician, with the massive dominance of the USN at the end of WWII could mean two Illinois already constructed could seem more attractive than three Midway's not yet completed.

Especially if two Illinois-class carriers would enter into service whit the war in the Pacific still going on. 

[1bigrich]

I have a couple issues with this.

First, a conversion is never as efficient as a purpose built design. Second, the proposed conversion has only two elevators. USN practice was to warm engines in the hangar, hence open hangars, and move planes to the flight deck for launch. Having only two elevators is going to impede this movement.

Historically the ships weren't needed as carriers. There were 26 Essex class laid down, and three Midways, A further six Essex and three Midways were planned but cancelled with the end of the war. Of the 26 Essex, only Reprisal and Iwo Jima never completed. And with World War 2 era planes, the Midways were felt to be too big. The air group was so large it couldn't be easily managed aboard ship. They needed that size for the growth in aircraft the coming years saw, but at the time the Essex class were felt to have about the perfect air group.

Beautiful artwork of the concept, though....

M7 thoughts,

[lordroel]

Jul 25, 2020 17:38:46 GMT 1bigrich said:

I have a couple issues with this.

First, a conversion is never as efficient as a purpose built design. Second, the proposed conversion has only two elevators. USN practice was to warm engines in the hangar, hence open hangars, and move planes to the flight deck for launch. Having only two elevators is going to impede this movement.

Historically the ships weren't needed as carriers. There were 26 Essex class laid down, and three Midways, A further six Essex and three Midways were planned but cancelled with the end of the war. Of the 26 Essex, only Reprisal and Iwo Jima never completed. And with World War 2 era planes, the Midways were felt to be too big. The air group was so large it couldn't be easily managed aboard ship. They needed that size for the growth in aircraft the coming years saw, but at the time the Essex class were felt to have about the perfect air group.

Beautiful artwork of the concept, though....

M7 thoughts,

So if they where build and completed it is as stevep mentioned before, for politician reasons and not militarily reasons.

[1bigrich]

The cuts Truman and the Congress imposed on the US military postwar bordered on the ridiculous. The draw-down was massive. I'm not sure continuing construction of a conversion would be a priority. So many recently commissioned ships were going into 'mothballs' at the time.

Regards,

[lordroel]

Jul 25, 2020 18:04:55 GMT 1bigrich said:

The cuts Truman and the Congress imposed on the US military postwar bordered on the ridiculous. The draw-down was massive. I'm not sure continuing construction of a conversion would be a priority. So many recently commissioned ships were going into 'mothballs' at the time.

Regards,

Looking at this: UNITED STATES NAVY AT WAR Final Official Report to the Secretary of the Navy Covering the period of March 1, 1945, to October 1, 1945 By FLEET ADMIRAL ERNEST J. KING and going to page 32 is impresive what they cancllled that year.

During the period 1 March to 1 October 1945 the following combatant ships were completed: 4 aircraft carriers (one of which was MIDWAY, the first of the three 45,000 ton carriers under construction), 8 escort carriers, 3 light cruisers, 6 heavy cruisers, 53 destroyers, 2 destroyer escorts and 24 submarines. During this same period over 300 auxiliary ships were completed by the Navy and the Maritime Commission, among them six of the most modern air conditioned hospital ships in existence. The landing craft and district craft construction programs were continued, with the delivery of large numbers of each type. Twenty-nine mine-sweeping vessels were delivered. It was necessary to place particular emphasis upon the production of repair ships of all types. The large numbers of these delivered during this period, together with existing ships of the type, performed indispensable services in the forward areas in returning quickly to service many of the ships damaged in the Okinawa operation.

To meet changing conditions of war during this period, it was necessary to undertake a number of conversions of ships from one type to another. Notable among these was the conversion of certain patrol craft to control vessels for amphibious Operations; frigates and certain patrol craft to weather station ships; a large number of personnel landing ships to gunboats for close inshore support of amphibious operations; a number of destroyer escorts to fast transports; certain destroyers and destroyer escorts to radar picket ships; and a number of destroyers to high—speed mine sweepers.

During the later phases of the war, as Japanese sea power waned, a review was made of the Navy’s shipbuilding program to bring it in line with estimated operational requirements. On 10 August 1945

the Secretary of the Navy approved the termination of contracts for the construction of 56 combatant ships and 39 vessels of other types. Following the surrender of Japan, a complete review was made of the status of the construction and conversion program of auxiliaries, landing craft, district craft and small boats, in consequence of which the total number of cancellations was raised to the following:

Combatant Ships ......... 56

Auxiliaries ............... 94

Landing Ships ........... 2

Patrol Craft .............. 44

District Craft ............ 121

Small Landing Craft...over 8,000

[stevep]

Jul 25, 2020 18:04:55 GMT 1bigrich said:

The cuts Truman and the Congress imposed on the US military postwar bordered on the ridiculous. The draw-down was massive. I'm not sure continuing construction of a conversion would be a priority. So many recently commissioned ships were going into 'mothballs' at the time.

Regards,

  1bigrich,lordroel,

  That's why I was thinking if they were completed or nearly so and the Midway's were massively less advanced then they might be preferred to incomplete Midways.

  There was definitely going to be a huge draw-down after WWII.  Both because it was the end of an huge and exhausting conflict and because of the massive superiority the USN had over everybody else.  Only Britain was left with a substantial battle-fleet and not only was it a close ally but due to its dire economic position it was going to have an even deeper cut back in forces.  As such despite the commitments the US was taking on in replacing Britain as the premier naval power and hence a large responsibility in maintain peace and order on the world's oceans it would need a much smaller fleet. 

  Steve

[francolasto69]

Surely an option that could had been taken in case of defeat on Midway .