DennisJP wrote:
Unfortunatly I think everything would have fell as it happened.
1) Allot of the classes of ships, as far as Destroyers and Cruisers as well as modifications to the Essex's was due to the war. The Sumner, Gearing class Destroyers would not have existed if not for the war.
2) Also the new ships on the drawing bored. The Fast Battleships, Essex Carriers and Fletcher Destroyers were replacements for the older ships. The war only kept allot of the PH BB's in service as well as the Lexington class and Ranger, Carriers.
3) the Essex Class was produced in large numbers only because of the war. If no war it would of been on a replacement basis.
So if the ships were commissioned early it would of been :
1) Replacement of older ships needing retirement. (Fleet Modernization) So would of had fast BB's replacing old ones and Essex Carriers replacing the 7 original Carriers starting with Lexington and Saratoga.
All of this would have been done under normal time lines and budget restraints. With war in 1939 in Europe I believe on going projects would be sped up which I'am sure they were. Essex though was commissioned in December of 1942.
*** The Admiral in charge of the German Navy was tying to get Hitler to delay the war until 1942. If this would of happened then it would have been interesting. Essex would have been in the fleet. I'am sure one other Essex class would have also to replace the Lexington Class.
In summary there seems to be no other way for it to turn out accept the way it did. Looking at the Naval doctrine still favoring the Battleship as well as Political decisions between country's, like the embargo to Japan and Japans decision to invade French IndoChina and China which caused the embargo. As well as public thinking.
This was my thought as well.
As was hinted at earlier in the thread, but not generalized, the existence of Dreadnoughts/Superdreadnoughts were impossible to hide, and if the USN had been successful with carriers in WWI, that success would have been known globally.
You have people already, like Yamamoto Isoroku, who knew and understood carriers, and this would have just further strengthened their position, leading to Japan
NOT attacking the USA, and instead preparing a plan for acting IFF (spelled correctly) America entered the war after Japan attacked the French and Dutch for the Oil in Indonesia and Java.
It would have led Japan to building Supercarriers earlier, rather than Super-Battleships. And, while they might have been armored monsters like the Shinano, the Shinano did not carry very many aircraft. The Japanese would likely have built carriers of that size that had air-wings of 150 aircraft or so, as well as focusing upon newer AA armament that could traverse faster, and had longer range and hitting power. One of the reasons they failed to develop such a weapons system is that they tended to be afflicted by the Victory Disease of Tsushima that kept them thinking in terms of the
Decisive Battleship Battle. Were carriers shown to be the new Naval super-weapon, the Japan would likely have found this to be an inoculation against the Victory Disease Tsushima gave them.
It is likely they would have sought to avoid a confrontation with the USA, and then fought very differently had one occurred.
MB