Reply to thread

Message

Using them in a dedicated carrier role would be a mistake IMO. Particularly for a smaller country that doesn't have the fleet train that the USN does. They had extremely limited aviation stores storage (ammunition, fuel, spare parts and a small hanger). To make them a true carrier would require nearly a full redesign of the ships internal layout and replacing the island with something much smaller. It's doable, but how much less than a clean sheet design would it cost? One optimized from the start as a carrier? Just for reference, the Príncipe de Asturias is just over 16,000 tons. Yet she can carry 4 more aircraft than an Iwo Jima can. Despite the Iwo Jima being some 2,000 tons bigger. Really better off going with a ship designed as a carrier from the start.

[QUOTE="SSgtC, post: 412520, member: 21522"] Using them in a dedicated carrier role would be a mistake IMO. Particularly for a smaller country that doesn't have the fleet train that the USN does. They had extremely limited aviation stores storage (ammunition, fuel, spare parts and a small hanger). To make them a true carrier would require nearly a full redesign of the ships internal layout and replacing the island with something much smaller. It's doable, but how much less than a clean sheet design would it cost? One optimized from the start as a carrier? Just for reference, the [I]Príncipe de Asturias [/I]is just over 16,000 tons. Yet she can carry 4 more aircraft than an [I]Iwo Jima [/I]can. Despite the [I]Iwo Jima[/I] being some 2,000 tons bigger. Really better off going with a ship designed as a carrier from the start. [/QUOTE]

Verification