What air group (number and types of aircraft) was Ark Royal carrying when she was sunk in November 1941?
- Battleship Vs Battleship
- Should Battleships Be Back In Service?
- The United States Navy
- The Royal Navy
- The European Navies
- The Commonwealth Navies
- The Asian Navies
- Aircraft Carriers
- Fighting Ships Of The World
- Submarines
- Designing A Navy/Ship
- The Land Forces
- The Air Forces
- The Naval Fiction Board
- The Politics Of War
- Naval Help
Ark Royal Nov 1941 Air Group?
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Hardrada55 |
Ark Royal Nov 1941 Air Group? |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 40 (29-Oct-2007 14:28:37) |
|
||
|
seasick |
|||
|
Posts: 4127 (30-Oct-2007 00:10:58) |
Swordfish, Fulmars, and Skua
|
||
|
StewartG |
|||
|
Posts: 423 (30-Oct-2007 13:04:21) |
807 - 12 Fulmars
808 - 12 Fulmars 812 - 12 Swordfish 816 - 9 Swordfish 825 - 9 Swordfish |
||
|
maxs75 |
|||
|
Posts: 299 (31-Oct-2007 13:51:02) |
Ark Royal was coming back from a delivery to Malta, when she carried 26 Hurricanes and Argus 11 more.
If Ark had really aboard 54 FAA planes and 26 RAF, the total is 80. Were the Hurricanes carried partially disassembled? Or were the 54 FAA assigned on paper and some of them left at Gibralatar? See my thread about Eagle: http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/4228 Thanks in advance Max |
||
|
StewartG |
|||
|
Posts: 426 (31-Oct-2007 21:53:15) |
I've just checked Roskill on this and he says Ark and Argus launched 37 Hurricanes and 7 Blenheims, which has got
me boggling somewhat. Surely some mistake?
|
||
|
JNiemczyk |
|||
|
Posts: 5685 ( 1-Nov-2007 20:05:53) |
I suspect the Blenheims came from Gib. AFAIK they were occasionally used to lead fighters in to Malta, though Fulmars with their two man crew also performed
this duty.
|
||
|
StewartG |
|||
|
Posts: 427 ( 1-Nov-2007 22:15:11) |
I hope you're right.
The exact quote (from "War at Sea" vol I, p 533) is "...on the 10th of November he [Somerville] sailed again, this time with his flag in the Malaya, with the Ark Royal, Argus, Hermione and seven destroyers to launch thirty-seven Hurricanes and seven Blenheim bombers." The great circle range from Gibraltar to Malta is 1109 miles, which would go up a bit to 1300 miles or so if you wanted to avoid French North Africa. A Blenheim IV ought to be able to do that (max range 1450 miles), but a Blenheim I couldn't. |
||
|
dunmunro1 |
|||
|
Posts: 1255 ( 2-Nov-2007 02:10:17) |
Maybe that's where the USN got the idea to bomb Tokyo with carrier launched, twin engined bombers...
but somehow I think Roskill made a mistake, cause this is the first I've heard of it. I wonder if it is theoretically possible? |
||
|
Admiral Beez |
|||
|
Posts: 4206 ( 2-Nov-2007 15:39:58) |
It certainly would have been feasible to fly the Blenheim off an Ark Royal or Illustrious size carrer. The Blenheim had a wingspan of 56 ft and an loaded
weight of 14,400 lb, powered by two 920 hp Bristol Mercurys. The Fairey Barracuda Mk II's wingspan was only 9' shorter, and had a Max takeoff weight of
14,080 lb when powered by its one 1,640 hp Merlin. With its longer wingspan and greater engine power, the Blenheim should be able to get off the deck with a
credible warload. Of course, the bomber will need to land somewhere.
|
||
|
Mark E Horan |
|||
|
Posts: 345 ( 2-Nov-2007 21:59:06) |
Gents;
The Blenheims were most certainly NOT carrier launched. They flew out from Gibraltar on scheduled intervals to meet each deckload flight. The ship's airgroup was as Stewart indicated above, but, while the entirety of both fighter squadrons were aboard for defense, significant elements of all three TSR squadrons were left ashore at Gibraltar. She was actually carrying about 12 TSRs, not all operational. She was scheduled to add a six-plane fighter squadron of Martlets (non-folding, at least initially) to give her some high-performance fighters for CAP operations. The squadron was due to arrive in late-November or early-December. It was planned to keep them in a deck park, which would have required outriggers being added. Mark |
||
|
Hardrada55 |
|||
|
Posts: 41 ( 2-Nov-2007 22:13:22) |
Thanks for that interesting information. I wonder if the 6 Marlets would have supplemented or supplanted the Fulmars? "Add" would seem to indicate 24
Fulmars plus 6 Marlets. That would have resulted in a 60 plane air group. Not that the Ark couldn't have handled that size air group.
|
||
|
StewartG |
|||
|
Posts: 429 ( 3-Nov-2007 17:16:25) |
Mark
Thanks for that - I was hoping you would show up and sort this out for us. Ark's intended Martlet squadron was 881, I believe. Hardrada 54 Fulmars / Swordfish in the hangar plus six Martlets on deck / outriggers should have been easily doable. In late 42 and 43 it was quite common for the Illustrious-class ships to have a hangar-full of folding types with 5-10 non-folding Seafires on outriggers. |
||
- Battleship Vs Battleship
- Should Battleships Be Back In Service?
- The United States Navy
- The Royal Navy
- The European Navies
- The Commonwealth Navies
- The Asian Navies
- Aircraft Carriers
- Fighting Ships Of The World
- Submarines
- Designing A Navy/Ship
- The Land Forces
- The Air Forces
- The Naval Fiction Board
- The Politics Of War
- Naval Help
