Talk:Japanese aircraft carrier Shōkaku

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Japanese aircraft carrier Shōkaku article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / Asian / Japanese / World War II Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	Asian military history task force
	Japanese military history task force
	World War II task force

Japan: Military history High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 09:40, May 11, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the joint Japanese military history task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: Kako River (Japan)
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Pure Japanese, Vinland Saga (TV series), Japanese destroyer Ume (1944), Mai Fujisawa, Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

[edit]

How long was Shokaku out of action after Coral Sea?

Shokaku - most powerful carrier in the world?[edit]

I'm repeatedly removing the note about Shokaku being the most powerful carrier in the world at the start of World War II. Lexington and Saratoga were equal to or superior to Shokaku, and were built ten years earlier. Akagi and Kaga were slower, but were in other respects equal to or superior to Shokaku. Note that I'm not trying to add "superior to any other carrier" labels to any of the above ships. The situation is sufficiently muddy that calling any of these ships "best in the world" is POV. TomTheHand 18:58, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

whether or not it was the most powerful carrier in the world at the start of World War II it is hard to say (Enterprise was probably equal) however Lexington, Saratoga, Akagi and Kaga were all converted from battlecruisers or battleships and they were much slower and their range wasn't as good. Loosmark (talk) 01:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lexington and Saratoga were as fast as or faster than Shōkaku, and had enough range to sail from San Francisco to Tokyo and back without refueling; the range difference isn't a significant point. TomTheHand (talk) 01:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources i've give the Shokakus as slightly faster. do you have any good source for the range? Loosmark (talk) 10:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This source indicates that Saratoga reached 34.99 knots on her trials. I don't have the source at hand for Lexington's 34.82 knot trial speed. Navsource.org notes that their design endurance was 10,000 nautical miles at 10 knots; Tokyo is about 4100 nautical miles from San Francisco, so I gave that as an example. TomTheHand (talk) 14:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyo San Francisco is 4100 nautical miles however i think thats in straight line in practise you can't sail like that due operational factors, antisub zigzaging ,sea conditions etc. etc.

btw the second link you give indicates her speed was 33.25+ knots. Shokaku's speed was 34,2 knots according to [1].

Loosmark (talk) 14:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So... in summary... they were capable of about the same speed, Lexington and Saratoga carried a larger air group, more armor, and more armament, had an insignificant disadvantage in range, and were completed ten years earlier, and so if you edit this article to state that Shokaku was the most powerful carrier in the world, I will remove it. TomTheHand (talk) 18:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For one, Lexington and Saratoga carried 78 aircraft, while Shokaku and Zuikaku carried 84, and spotting planes made up some of their aircraft, while the Kakus devoted their entire group to attack aircraft. This is made less impressive by the fact that the Lexs were bigger than the Kakus, yet carried less aircraft since they were conversions and not purpose built designs. This is not even stating the aircraft the Kakus carried were all superior to any of the aircraft Lexington carried by the Kaku's commissioning (besides maybe the Dauntless).

The kaku's belt was slightly thinner than the Lexs, 6.5-inches vs 5-7-inches, but their deck was much thicker at 2.6-5.2-inches vs the Lex's 0.75-2-inch deck.

Pretty much every source I've seen states the Lexingtons as 32.5 knot carriers, while the Kakus could make 34.6 knots

It's simple, the Shokakus were simply better carriers then Lady Lex and Saratoga. If you doubt this, just remember which ships sank USS Lexington.

Shokaku class aircraft carriers (naval-encyclopedia.com)-source Micheal Harrens (talk) 00:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

more armor? i went to check:

belt Lexinton 127mm Shokaku 45mm with 165mm over magazines deck Lexington 55mm Shokaku 100mm with 130mm over the magazines. more armament? Lexington and Saragota were converted battlecruisers and such they carried those big twin 203mm LA guns which were completely useless for a carrier. for heavy AA they carried 12 (single) 127mm guns. Shokakus on the other hand had 16 (8 double) 127mm thus their armament seems better. Loosmark (talk) 19:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

25mm guns[edit]

When Shokaku was sunk, her 25mm guns were 70. "96 25mm guns" is her sistership Zuikaku's datum at the Battle of Cape Engano(1944). Byouyou 22:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Navy link is dead. 199.48.74.226 (talk) 21:02, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]