What wood were wooden flight decks made of?

[Stephan Wilkinson]

During WWII, U. S. carriers had wooden flight decks. (The Brits at that time, I understand, were pioneering the use of armored flight decks.) Does anybody know what kind of wood was used? Teak?

[rtwpsom2]

Douglas Fir, though later in the war portions where the planes landed were replaced with teak for durability. IIRC the boards were 3-1/8" thick. I don't recall the width of the planks.

[tom d. friedman]

teak, while durable to the elements weathers quickly cosmetically. it grays out & is a royal pain in the butt to keep looking good.

[lmritger]

The USS Yorktown (CV-5) had a deck of Douglas fir... I know because my grandfather helped lay it down.

Can't speak for other carriers, though.

Lynn

[alang]

The USS Princeton Veterans, Inc. has a plenty of pieces of the Princeton's flight deck that comes with a letter of authenticity and a nameplate, they are 8" long by 4" wide by 1" thick. I know that members can get one for $5.00 shipping & handling. Their website is: www.ussprincetonvetsinc.org

[ZRX61]

teak, while durable to the elements weathers quickly cosmetically. it grays out & is a royal pain in the butt to keep looking good.

Rinse it with diluted bleach, brings the original color back, also works for redwood.

[JOMiller]

Often wondered the same thing. I've been told Douglas fir,
spruce, and teak. Perhaps it's what was available. Have
several pieces of CV-6 flight deck.

[tom d. friedman]

what of Japanese, british, Canadian carriers?? if i'm not mistaken the flight decks of those were armored....... why u.s. carrier decks weren't armored baffles me considering our large gap in technology.

[Kyleb]

what of Japanese, british, Canadian carriers?? if i'm not mistaken the flight decks of those were armored....... why u.s. carrier decks weren't armored baffles me considering our large gap in technology.

It is/was all a matter of trade-off's. The British Carriers were tough, but that deck armor came at the price of greatly reducing aircraft compliment, which meant they had fewer fighters to stop the bombers before they got the chance to attack the carrier(s).

[JOMiller]

U.S. CV decks were wood for two reasons.........

1. The wood would "give" a bit when a plane landed,
thus a slight cushioning effect.

2. It was believed a metal flight deck would make the
ship top heavy and increase the chance of a capsize.

Owen

[JohnB]

I'd think that a metal deck (without any type of surface material) would be awfully slippery for an aircraft to land on. Deck paint like they use on ships wouldn't wear well and may not have been much better for traction.

[Stephan Wilkinson]

Why would it matter if the deck is slippery? Landing carrier aircraft don't use brakes and traction to stop, they use hooks and wires. Obviously if it's slippery like ice that's another matter, but I'm sure they used some kind of anti-skid coating.

[JohnB]

Why would it matter if the deck is slippery?

Because I'm not a trained naval aviator.
If I'm landing a fast aircraft on a moving wet surface, with grave consequences for going over the side, I'd prefer some traction.
Eventually, you'll have to apply brakes when parking.

Maybe I'm just a wimp...and it's a good thing I wasn't a Corsair pilot in "the Big One".

[Stephan Wilkinson]

Apparently this is only a make-believe problem, since I don't think anybody has built a wooden-deck carrier since 1945.

[groundpounder]

I would think that the ease of repair and replacement would be a huge factor as well as all of the other reasons mentioned.