pampa14's Aviation Click Bait

Fantastic photos, pampa14. Thanks for sharing them here.

 

I'm pretty sure it was HMS Illustrious at Tarento.

 

It was.

The debate was over this photo of USS Ranger he included in his mix.


There is also a shot of the HMS Ark Royal included in the Taranto page.


Oh, and welcome to the forum!

 

Since Ranger got her first Avengers on 14 April 1942, the obvious question is why is this photo included regarding a 1940 attack?

 

The picture is censored, isn't it?
http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020445.jpg
The radar-set is invisible. :eyebrows:

And the last question is a good one.

 

Yes, the photo is censored. Even if the radar was facing the camera side-on, it would still be noticeable.

Pampa likes to keep us ship & aircraft spotters on our toes, so he slips in the occasional "Easter egg."

Well, that, or he is not as careful in selecting his photos as he should be.

 

Both the harbour attack pictures with big waters columns don't look like Taranto, and can't be of the attack as they were taken in the daytime, one could be the Piraeus (Athens) under Luftwaffe attack as the ship in the foreground looks like a pre-dreadnought ad there are not many instances of air attacks on one of them. The other (sailes_attack.jpg) I can't place.

 

Good spot! Never bothered to look at those. However, you are thousands of miles off.

This is an excellent illustration of doing you research before you publish. While the two attack photos are from "Operation Judgement", they are not from "Operation Judgement"(the attack on Taranto), but from "Operation Judgement"(the attack on Kilbotn, Norway). The ship you are questioning is the HNoMS Harald Haarfagre/German AA ship Thetis, and both photos are of the attack on the German submarine base at Kilbotn, Norway, on May 4, 1945.

Forgot to add the obligatory Wiki link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Judgement_%281945%29

 

The Ju 87 C was a version of the famous dive bomber Stuka proposal to operate with German aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin. The link below provides more information and pictures of this uncommon version of the Ju 87 Stuka. Hope you enjoy and I count on your visit.


http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.com.br/2011/02/stuka-naval.html


Cheers.

 

Great pictures as always! The Germans planned to use an unusual catapult system in which the aircraft would be moved into position on a trolley; this appears to be shown in a couple of the photos.

 

The Stuka as a torpedo bomber? Hmmmmm. I would think converting the Arado AR 196 would be a better option for low level flight. Any ideas on this?

 

They may have wanted to minimize the number of aircraft types. Their Graf Zeppelin carrier would only have carried about forty planes despite being comparable in size to the Essex class. At first there was going to be a dedicated torpedo bomber, the Fi-167 biplane, plus Stukas and Me-109Ts, the carrier version of their standard fighter. Later they changed the air group to just Stukas and 109s.

 

Only 40 aircraft. Interesting. How many did a British aircraft carrier carry?

 

Early in the war, most of them also had 30-40, and sometimes a full complement was not available. Ark Royal's capacity is listed as 60 or 72, but I've never seen her actually carrying more than 56. At that time the British, and I assume the Germans, defined capacity as the number of aircraft that could be stored in the hangar. Later in the war the RN was able to increase capacity by about 50% by using a deck park like the USN did. Their last wartime carriers, Indefatigable and Implacable, carried as many as 81 and the earlier armored deck carriers 54-56.

Escort carriers usually had 15-24. Later in the war they started building light fleet carriers with about 33 aircraft; several were commissioned during the war but none saw combat.

 

One of the other big drawbacks as planned from what I recall was that the catapult system they planned on installing could only launch about half of her planes before it ran out of steam and required an hour or so before pressure built back up. There's been some debate as to whether or not she could launch planes and which ones without the catapults.

 

I recall that too, think it might have been compressed air or something. Anyway an odd system, AFAIK no other navy considered anything like it.

 

I think it was over on kbismarck that someone pointed out that the Germans had a fair amount of experiance with sea plane carriers. Those typically used catapults for launching their aircraft so they carried over some of their experiance in that regard to the Hindenberg. The US did have some catapults in some of their carriers I beleive that could launch fighters from the hanger deck. That may have been post war but I seem to recall it was something experimented with and abandoned during the war.

 

Did the navalized 109s and Stukas have strengthened landing gear, that is one of the critical necessities for an aircraft to effectively operate aboard CVs.

 

The following link has some pictures of this curious and unusual version of the Flying Fortress, used to test the engine Wright XT-35 Typhon. I hope you enjoy and I count on your visit.


http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.com.br/2011/01/boeing-b-17-modificadas.html


Cheers.

 

wait, i can't translate. so it was used solely to test an engine?