Naval Historywith Dr. Alex

Q&A · 4:05:41-4:06:44

Treaty carrier conversions were compromises, not ideal carriers

No capital-ship conversion earns top marks: Lexington and the Japanese conversions made useful carriers, while Béarn demonstrates how badly inherited hull and machinery choices could constrain the result.

BearnCarrier ConversionsHMS EagleIJN AkagiKagaLexington Class BattlecruisersWashington Naval Treaty
Watch at this timeFull video guide
Question

How should the capital ships converted into carriers around the Washington Naval Treaty be graded?

Short answer

None merits an A: Lexington and the Japanese ships did best, several British conversions were middling, and Béarn was the weakest operational result.

Notes

Each treaty-era conversion carried compromises from a hull designed for another role. The Lexingtons and the principal Japanese conversions reached the upper part of the group and became operationally important carriers. Eagle, Furious, Courageous, and Glorious remain middling solutions with design and employment limitations. Béarn receives the lowest judgment because her inherited characteristics produced an especially poor operational carrier despite the value of gaining experience.