WesWorld

I agree, and I argued much the same just last night on IRC. The "Essex 1.5" would settle all of my concerns about size. As Jason said to me, it's the Goldilocks design: not too big, not too small, just right.

Remember that the F7F was designed to fit a Midway class, not a Midway to fit an F7F!

Yes and as I said, I shall build the Goldilocks carrier, and not the Midway 0.5. So whats the deal?

I'm intrigued by the "Goldilocks" carrier as it's dimensionally the same as an Essex but much heavier. The block coefficient used seems very full for a ship like this. I'd have a look at lowering it to ~0.50 which'll reduce the power requirements significantly.

Also square root of 11750t gives 108 aircraft rather than 91, so there might be some fat there to trim as well.

Oh I could probably tweak Goldilocks somewhat and get the tonnage down to around where Essex was historically, but this does allow some growth potential for future rebuilds/refits. The carrier is to last until the 1970's after all, so yes it may be a bit heavy at the present but 10 or 20 years down the road the USN will no doubt appreciate the extra weight. Perhaps it is a bit foreshawdowing, but the USN did build ships historically to last several decades in active service, so its not that much of a stretch that they would do so in this case.

And it also means the USN is relegated once again to building a ship which I will note would be 10,000 tons lighter than your own carriers laid down 2 years earlier, and 5,000 tons less than the Iberian carriers already in service. And we all know how Americans think, bigger equals better, my source on this is Mister Jeremy Clarkson .

For what it's worth, Canada's been fairly satisfied with it's rebuilt Courageous and Glorious (and soon, Furious). But the RCNAS is only just starting to aquire modern aircraft, too.

Ranger's modernization, which originally scheduled to begin later in the year, but a surplus of funds was discovered after the investigation against former President Long, and therefore its modernization will begin in Q1.

USS Ranger, United States Aircraft Carrier laid down 1920 (Engine 1941)

Displacement:
29,886 t light; 30,730 t standard; 33,201 t normal; 35,177 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
869.61 ft / 850.00 ft x 102.00 ft (Bulges 110.00 ft) x 26.00 ft (normal load)
265.06 m / 259.08 m x 31.09 m (Bulges 33.53 m) x 7.92 m

Armament:
8 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (4x2 guns), 55.12lbs / 25.00kg shells, 1941 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
8 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns in single mounts, 55.12lbs / 25.00kg shells, 1941 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts - superfiring
76 - 1.10" / 27.9 mm guns (19x4 guns), 0.67lbs / 0.30kg shells, 1941 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
90 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns (45x2 guns), 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1941 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 938 lbs / 426 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 300

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 563.00 ft / 171.60 m 12.12 ft / 3.69 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 102 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead and Bulges:
2.50" / 64 mm 563.00 ft / 171.60 m 19.70 ft / 6.00 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 2.00" / 51 mm

- Armour deck: 3.00" / 76 mm, Conning tower: 3.00" / 76 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 159,251 shp / 118,801 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 4,446 tons

Complement:
1,229 - 1,598

Cost:
£4.127 million / $16.509 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 132 tons, 0.4 %
Armour: 5,425 tons, 16.3 %
- Belts: 1,149 tons, 3.5 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 1,026 tons, 3.1 %
- Armament: 39 tons, 0.1 %
- Armour Deck: 3,143 tons, 9.5 %
- Conning Tower: 67 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 4,209 tons, 12.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 12,020 tons, 36.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,315 tons, 10.0 %
Miscellaneous weights: 8,100 tons, 24.4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
49,441 lbs / 22,426 Kg = 791.1 x 5.0 " / 127 mm shells or 8.5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.17
Metacentric height 6.9 ft / 2.1 m
Roll period: 17.5 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.03
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.17

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has raised forecastle
Block coefficient: 0.478
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.73 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 29.15 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 49 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 60
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 26.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 6.00 ft / 1.83 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 27.90 ft / 8.50 m
- Forecastle (17 %): 27.90 ft / 8.50 m (20.00 ft / 6.10 m aft of break)
- Mid (50 %): 20.00 ft / 6.10 m
- Quarterdeck (17 %): 20.00 ft / 6.10 m
- Stern: 20.00 ft / 6.10 m
- Average freeboard: 21.31 ft / 6.49 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 89.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 175.6 %
Waterplane Area: 56,638 Square feet or 5,262 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 144 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 154 lbs/sq ft or 751 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.20
- Longitudinal: 0.95
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

90 Aircraft as built