Akagi and Kaga retro-conversion?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed May 30, 2007 6:47 pm

Is it true that Akagi and Kaga actually retains their original capital ship barbettes as well as the original gun magazine internal layout so they can be rapidly converted back to battleships in time of war?

nick · Post by **nick** » Thu May 31, 2007 11:17 pm

I think that what you said is kinda real. I just saw this in wikipedia:

"The history of this ship's development reflects the logic of Imperial Japanese Navy admirals in moving from a reliance on battleships and battlecruisers, to a reliance on aircraft carriers. Originally, the Akagi and a similar ship, the Kaga (originally laid down as a battleship) were intended in the event of war to be quickly converted to capital ships. They contained the turret barbettes, magazines and other equipment to support big gun turrets. Gun turret crews and fire control crews received training. The wooden flight deck and hangar deck were designed to be quickly stripped off, to make room for big gun turrets to be mounted. By 1935-1938, the IJN admirals believed the aircraft carrier to be the equal of the capital ship. Akagi and Kaga received extensive rebuilds to improve aircraft handling capacity because plans to convert them to capital ships were abandoned."

I think their idea is kinda

Hope this works

Nick

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:09 pm

I was actually asking the question to verify the account in Wikipedia. I've not seen any other references to this effect, and the Wikipedia article itself does not cite reference to support this claim.

ModelWarships Gallery Page · Post by **ArizonaBB39** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:55 pm

I just saw this in wikipedia:

I wouldn't put too much trust in Wikipedia, as it is edited by anyone who wants to and most educational institutions frown upon using it as a source in any research... (I've had teachers tell my class that they would flunk a paper if wikipedia was used as a source for information)

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 7:23 pm

This sort of things would be consistent with Japanese inter-war practice, however. When these carriers were built, Japan's behavior was to violate subtly the terms of the existing treaty regime to as far an extent as is possible without bring about an immediate collapse of the treaty, but while at the same time also secretly laying the maximum amount of groundwork, far more directly than any other power, to facilitate an immediate and massive rearmament the minute the treaty restrictions are removed.

Some other examples of this practice includes building the Magomi class, officially class-B cruisers, in such a way so they could be re-armed within weeks to class A standards without any major structural modification. Magomis were heavy cruisers disguised with light cruiser armaments. The same with training ship Hiei, which was converted with the intention to rapidly upgrade the ship to fast battleship in mind. Several Japanese fleet auxiliaries were also designed with structural and equipment in place to support a rapid conversion to aircraft carrier.

Since the Japanese were forced to convert Kaga and Akagi to carriers, they presumably would have preferred these hulls as battleships. So it would not be out of character for them to build into the conversion all the facilities needed for the immediate reconversion of the carriers back to battleships.

However, what makes sense and is in keeping with character is not automatically a reality. So I would like to know if this preparation for backwards conversion was an actuality or an urban legend.

nick · Post by **nick** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 9:01 pm

I think your right Ari, I was very mindless about the the top of the mainpage in wikipedia saying:

"the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit

He He

JoeA · Post by **JoeA** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:35 am

I've seen good articles in Wikipedia though, those with extensive footnotes and references at the end and articles are given ratings as well as warnings "articles without sourced statements" will be labeled as such at the bottom.

Seasick · Post by **Seasick** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 10:21 pm

The barrbets in the ship wouldn't be removed in the conversion they were still there because removing them would be inpractical. Converting the ships back to BB and BC formats would be cost prohibitive because of the hanger and flight decks would have to be removed and much of the ships piping would need to be extensivly modified. The barrbets and magazines would be useful for storage of aircraft munitions (torpedos and bombs) as the barrbets armor and hoist system could be rebuilt to bring the bombs and torpedos up from the magazine in a relitivly well protected location.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 12:12 am

Seasick wrote:The barrbets in the ship wouldn't be removed in the conversion they were still there because removing them would be inpractical. Converting the ships back to BB and BC formats would be cost prohibitive because of the hanger and flight decks would have to be removed and much of the ships piping would need to be extensivly modified. The barrbets and magazines would be useful for storage of aircraft munitions (torpedos and bombs) as the barrbets armor and hoist system could be rebuilt to bring the bombs and torpedos up from the magazine in a relitivly well protected location.

The barbette of the Shinano was completely removed for her conversion to carrier.

Dan K · Post by **Dan K** » Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:30 pm

The initial design with retention of barbettes may have been true when the ships were first converted. However, by the time of their rebuilding in the mid 1930s, the likely ascent of the CV as a potent capitol ship type was clearly recognized and any thought of reconversion was abandoned. Ships plans for the rebuilt Akagi and Kaga do not show barbettes for magazines.

Werner · Post by **Werner** » Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:48 pm

Akagi & Kaga were already the two most expensive ships ever built by the IJN, including conversion costs. I think they would be the last in line for another conversion.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Jun 23, 2007 10:40 am

No new info, but the inclusion of barbettes and the like would have probably reduced the available lower hangar space. That partially might account for the lower aircraft complements carried by Akagi and Kaga compared to Lexington and Saratoga, their two closest contemporaries. The inclusion of the barbettes might also help to explain the double hangar concept if my first supposition about carrier complement being reduced by the barbettes is accurate; they needed a second hangar to carry a useful aircraft load.

Just an idea? Feel free to shoot me down.

Robert