Editing Midway-class aircraft carrier (section)

===1940s===
The [[Hull classification symbol#Aircraft carrier type|CVB-41]]-class vessels (then unnamed) were originally conceived in 1940 as a design study to determine the effect of including an [[armored flight deck]] on a carrier the size of the {{sclass|Essex|aircraft carrier|4}}. The resulting calculations showed that the effect would be a reduction of air group size—the resulting ship would have an air group of 64,<ref>Friedman, ''U.S. Aircraft Carriers'', p. 213: "Table 9-1. Evolution of Schemes for the Midway Design 1940–41". Design CV-D displaced 28,000 tons and had a nominal complement of 64 aircraft.</ref> compared to 90–100<ref>Roberts, John, ''The Aircraft Carrier Intrepid'', p. 8. London: Conway Maritime Press, 1982.</ref><ref>Friedman, ''U.S. Aircraft Carriers'', p. 138: Friedman discusses how the proposed ''Essex''-class carriers were designed for a nominal complement of 74 aircraft in 4 squadrons of aircraft, but these numbers were constantly revised due to changes in aircraft weight and dimensions, and the perceived increased need for fighters which had smaller dimensions than strike aircraft.</ref> for the standard ''Essex''-class fleet carriers. As it progressed, the design also became heavily influenced by the wartime experience of the [[Royal Navy]]'s armored carriers:
{{Blockquote|As a result of study of damage sustained by various British carriers prior to our entry into the war, two important departures from traditional U.S. Navy carrier design were incorporated in the CVB Class, then still under development. {{HMS|Illustrious|87|6}} in an action off [[Malta Convoys|Malta on 1 January 1941]] was hit by several bombs, three of which detonated in the hangar space. Large fires swept fore and aft among parked planes thereby demonstrating the desirability of attempting to confine the limits of such explosions and fires by structural sectionalization of the hangar space. On the CVB Class the hangar was therefore divided into five compartments separated by 40 and 50-pound [[Special Treatment Steel]] (STS)<ref>STS = Special Treatment Steel. STS was a form of high tensile steel that was often used to provide armor protection. 40 and 50-pound refers to armor that was {{convert|1|in|mm|adj=on}} or {{convert|1.25|in|mm}} thick (40 or 50-pound weight per square ft).</ref> division bulkheads extending from the hangar deck to the flight deck, each fitted with a large door suitable for handling aircraft. It is hoped that this sectionalization, in conjunction with sprinkler and fog foam systems, will effectively prevent fires from spreading throughout the hangar spaces, as occurred on {{USS|Franklin|CV-13|6}} on 30 October and 19 March. The damage experiences of several British carriers, which unlike US Carriers were fitted with armored flight decks, demonstrated the effectiveness of such armor in shielding hangar spaces from GP bombs and vital spaces below the hangar deck from semi-[[Armor-piercing shell|armor-piercing]] (SAP) bombs. Accordingly, the CVB Class was designed with an armored flight deck consisting of 3-1/2-inch STS from frames 46 to 175 with a hangar deck consisting of two courses of 40-pound STS between frames 36 and 192. Although none of the CVB Class carriers were completed in time to take part in war operations, the effectiveness of armored flight decks against Kamikaze attacks was demonstrated by various carriers attached to the [[British Pacific Fleet]] ... |<ref>Bureau of Ships, Navy Dept [http://www.researcheratlarge.com/Ships/CV13/1946DamageReport.html CV13 Damage Report]</ref>}}

The concept went to finding a larger carrier that could support both deck armor and a sufficiently large air group. The weight-savings needed to armor the flight deck were achieved by removing the planned cruiser-caliber battery of {{convert|8|in|mm|0|adj=on}} guns and reducing the 5-inch antiaircraft battery from dual to single mounts. Unlike the Royal Navy's aircraft carriers, for which the armored deck was part of the ship structure, the ''Midway'' class retained their "strength deck" at the hangar deck level and the armored flight deck was part of the [[superstructure]]. They would be the last USN carriers to be so designed; the immense size of the succeeding {{sclass|Forrestal|aircraft carrier|0}} [[supercarrier]]s would require a new deep-hulled design carrying the strength deck at the flight deck level to produce a stronger and lighter hull.

The heavily subdivided arrangement of the machinery spaces was based on that of the {{sclass|Montana|battleship}}, while the two inner propeller shafts were partially enclosed in skegs, similar to contemporary battleship construction.<ref>{{cite book|last=Friedman |first=Norman |title=U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design History |year=1983 |publisher=Naval Institute Press |location=Annapolis, Maryland |isbn=0-87021-739-9 |pages=219}}</ref> While the ''Essex''-class carriers had eight main engineering compartments, the ''Midway''-class had 26, including twelve boiler rooms well off the centerline and four widely separated engine rooms. More extensive use of electric arc-welding than in previous warships reduced the weight by about 10 percent of what would have been required for riveted structural assembly.<ref name=tbg>{{cite journal |last=Grassey |first=Thomas B. |year=1986 |title=Retrospective: The ''Midway'' Class |journal=Proceedings |volume=112 |issue=5 |pages=182–199 |publisher=[[United States Naval Institute]] }}</ref>

The resulting ''Midway''-class carriers were very large, with the ability to accommodate more planes than any other carrier in the U.S. fleet (30–40 more aircraft than the ''Essex'' class). In their original configuration, the ''Midway''-class ships had an airwing of up to 130 aircraft. It was soon realized that the coordination of so many planes was beyond the effective [[command and control]] ability of one ship.{{why|date=December 2022}}  However, their size did allow these ships to more easily accommodate the rapid growth in aircraft size and weight that took place in the early jet age. The forward flight deck was designed for launching 13-ton aircraft; and the aft flight deck was designed for landing 11-ton aircraft, assuming in-flight expenditure of fuel and ordnance.<ref name=tbg/>

While the resulting ships featured excellent protection and unprecedented airwing size, they also had several undesirable characteristics. Internally, the ships were very cramped and crowded. [[Freeboard (nautical)|Freeboard]] was unusually low for such large carriers; in heavy seas, they shipped large amounts of water<ref name=tbg/> (only partially mitigated by the fitting of a hurricane bow during the SCB-110/110A upgrades) and corkscrewed in a manner that hampered landing operations. The follow-up ''Forrestal''-class featured a deeper hull that had more freeboard and better seakeeping.

In contrast with the earlier {{sclass|Lexington|aircraft carrier|5}}, {{sclass|Yorktown|aircraft carrier|5}} and {{sclass|Essex|aircraft carrier|5}}-classes, the beam (width) of the ''Midway''-class carriers meant that they could not pass through the [[Panama Canal]].

Although they were intended to augment the US Pacific fleet during World War II, the lead ship of the class, {{USS|Midway|CV-41|2}}, was not commissioned until 10 September 1945, eight days after the [[surrender of Japan]].<ref name=tbg/>

While ''Midway'' and ''Coral Sea'' followed the US Navy's policy of naming aircraft carriers after battles (two {{sclass|Casablanca|escort carrier}}s gave up their names for the larger ships), USS ''Franklin D. Roosevelt'' inaugurated the policy of naming aircraft carriers after former US Presidents that the US Navy generally follows today.