angled deck carrier in WW2?

just got the book, Aircraft Carriers of the World.....page 8-9 clearly shows an angled deck carrier [ number 11 ] with cats and jets...caption clearly states '''the USS Intrepid was an Essex class carrier...these ships were the backbone of the US fleet in the Pacific war from 1943-1945'''....??? clearly a major error of the book?

 

I believe that it was modified after the war.

 

roger ,..I thought about that, but, that should be mentioned....ty for helping out......

 

Yeah, the caption is correct, but misleading.

The Essex class were the backbone of the Most of the Pacific Fleet, this is true. However, there were 2 major modification programs to the Essex class: SCB-27 which undertaken between 1947-55, ans SCB-125(during which the class received the "hurricane bow" and angled deck undertaken 1952-59).

 

I knew a carrier enthusiast would come along with the facts soon enough.

 

To elaborate a bit on what Takao said, the angled-deck conversion Essex class ships were refered to as 27-Alphas or 27-Charlies depending on what phase of the SCB-27 program they fell under. The major difference was that the Alphas had hydraulic catapults while the Charlies had steam catapults. Intrepid was a 27 Charlie.

 

I thought it might be a conversion....yes, so someone not knowledgeable on carriers would assume they had angled decks in WW2...very misleading and wrong, if you ask me...yes, I've heard / read of the conversions, but not in detail.....much thanks all replies...very good/interesting info [ as usual from you ]

 

great details....I am always weapons champion on Jeopardy because of you guys!......what's more efficient, hydraulic or steam?

 

bronk, A good ship to investigate is the Essex Class carrier USS Lexington CVS 16. She was under construction when word came in about the Coral Sea so the frame was renamed Lexington in honor. She went on to a long battle record in the war. After the war when was modified with an angle deck and became a training ship in the Gulf Coast for the Navy. You could visit her when in port at Pensacola, Fl. Though much modified a trip through her below deck felt pretty much like a Essex class carrier. Eventually she became a museum ship and is open to the public at Corpus Christi, Tx.

Great example of a ww @ carrier later modified to extend her service life.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=uss+lexington+cvs+16&qpvt=USS+Lexington+CVS+16&qpvt=USS+Lexington+CVS+16&FORM=IGRE#view=detail&id=AE3AFEB8FC99AFDD693841A7D90522B633EBB985&selectedIndex=65

In WW 2 guise:

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Crash+USS+Lexington+CV16&Form=IQFRDR#view=detail&id=86E46956198F9028CD11C18D31441C3BD5089E73&selectedIndex=18

 

super nice site, like 'heaven'! with the model pics also

 

Aside of the Lexington, there are 3 other preserved Essex class carriers.

The USS Yorktown is at Patriot's Point(Charleston), South Carolina
The USS Intrepid is in NYC.
And the USS Hornet is over on the west coast at Alameda, California.

I visited the Yorktown back in the mid-80's, and used to visit the Intrepid every few years, but have not been back to see here since she was completed refurbishment in 2008.

 

lucky you...maybe I'll make a thread on WW2 ships visited

 

I was hoping one of the experts would answer this, but to me the fact that steam catapults replaced hydraulic suggests that they are more effective for modern aircraft. Steam cats came in with the jet age, heavier aircraft with higher takeoff speeds needing longer catapults. My guess would be that a steady supply of steam can keep up the pressure better in a longer catapult. I've read that one advantage of nuclear-powered carriers is the essentially unlimited supply of steam for intensive flight ops.

I'm not sure exactly how hydraulic catapults work. A hyraulic fluid is basically a transmission medium, it needs to have pressure applied to it in order to exert pressure elsewhere, what would be the source? Knowledgable comments needed.

 

Something about ships Carronade doesn't know? Say it ain't so!

 

ha

 

From what I've read, it was easier to adapt steam catapults to heavier aircraft and longer deck strokes. Also read that steam catapults had a more linear acceleration and a bit softer start to the cat stroke. Hydraulic cats supposedly 'slammed' the aircraft at the start of the stroke.

This link should answer your questions on how the hydraulic H-8 on the Essex class worked.
http://www.hnsa.org/resources/manuals-documents/single-topic/catapult-type-h-mark-8/

 

looking at those diagrams, and with as many people involved with, and on deck, for flight ops, I'd say they have a fantastic safety record

 

Thanks - ask and ye shall receive! Quite a mechanism, electricity from steam-powered generators runs hydraulic pumps that compress air as an energy storage medium - everything except a flywheel, which incidentally was used in some early catapults.