The USS Robin is shown loaded with Avengers - but the U.S. Navy didn't have a carrier named Robin. Courtesy National Archives.The photo above from the ACG archive was posted on Armchair General’s Facebook page recently. Viewers were asked if they could identify the ship. Joseph Tremain didn’t just identify it correctly, he wrote the following article for ACG about about the unusual story of the U.S. carrier that didn’t exist.
Subscribe Today
It is not unusual for a ship to disappear at sea in wartime—but for a ship as a large as an aircraft carrier to suddenly appear from nowhere is noteworthy to say the least. That is exactly what it must have looked like to Japanese naval intelligence officers listening to American transmissions in the Pacific in early 1943.
This story begins in late 1942 when the United States Navy found itself in a precarious situation in the war with the Japanese Empire. At the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands, the aircraft carrier USS Hornet was sunk and the USS Enterprise was severely damaged, temporarily putting it out of action. That left the USN with only one fleet carrier to carry on the South Pacific campaign in the Solomons. But in May of 1943, during Operation Cartwheel, which was intended to isolate and neutralize the Japanese base on Rabaul, a second fleet carrier suddenly appeared beside the only remaining operational US carrier, the USS Saratoga, which operated out of Noumea, New Caledonia. This new fleet carrier was being called the USS Robin, but it was not listed in the USN inventory, and it couldn’t be The USS Essex, which was nowhere near completion. Yet there she was—a full-sized fleet carrier complete with American Avengers and Wildcats on her deck. This mystery carrier, the USS Robin, might have become famous if it had taken part in any major fleet battle, but instead it has faded from all but the more detailed history books.
The truth was that the "USS Robin" as she was being referred to by many sailors, was actually a British carrier—the HMS Victorious (R38). It was never even really titled or re-named "USS Robin;" rather, it was code-named "Robin" for communication purposes, an intentional reference to the famous—or infamous—English outlaw Robin Hood. But with the lack of American fleet carriers to protect against potential Japanese carrier aircraft in the Solomons and provide cover for operations against Munda and Bougainville, the "Robin" was a much-needed addition to the weakened carrier fleet.
The short, strange story of the Robin began in December of 1942. The United States Navy found itself with only one fleet carrier operational and needed another large carrier to help assist in the theater until the first of the new Essex-class carriers became operationally available. The solution turned out to be simply making a request to the Royal Navy for a loan. The Royal Navy decided to loan the USN an Illustrious-class carrier, the HMS Victorious under the command of Captain L. D. MacIntosh, Royal Navy.
In January of 1943, the Victorious arrived at Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Virginia, to begin modifications and upgrades necessary to handle the American aircraft and equipment. After the Norfolk refit, the Victorious transited the Panama Canal and arrived at Pearl Harbor in March 1943 to join the Saratoga Battle Group, Task Force 14. Between March and May, the Victorious underwent additional modifications at Pearl to specifically handle the American versions of the Grumman TBF Avenger (or British Avenger) and F4F Wildcat (British Martlet). To complete the makeover and new look, the Victorious temporarily shed her typical British Atlantic "admiralty disruptive camouflage scheme" (irregular patterns of dark and light tones) for the American standard navy gray.
U.S. Army map of the Operation Cartwheel area. Click for larger image.On May 17, 1943, the
Victorious, now code-named "Robin," along with USS
Saratoga, arrived at the Solomon Islands as part of Task Force 36 commanded by Rear Admiral DeWitt Ramsey, USN. The
Saratoga and
Victorious would become the core of Task Group 36.3 under Rear Admiral F. P. Sherman along with the USS
North Carolina (BB-55), USS
Massachusetts (BB-59), USS
Indiana (BB-58), USS
San Diego (CL-53), USS
San Juan (CL-54), HMAS
Australia (D84, a heavy cruiser) and several escort vessels. Her ship’s crew was British, but her aircrew and aircraft were American. No one involved had any illusions that she wouldn’t be identified as the
Victorious by enemy pilots, so she proudly flew her British Jack throughout her time with the Yanks, even when only the Yanks were flying on and off her flight deck.
The highlight of the Victorious’s very short career with the USN was her involvement in providing cover during the Munda landings on the island of New Georgia in the Western Province of the Solomon Islands. The Saratoga, with its larger complement of aircraft, supplied the strike force for the landing while the Victorious handled the air cover for the task group. Shortly after this, she supported the Bougainville invasion before leaving for home, and the name USS Robin was once again the sole province of its rightful owner, a long-time minesweeper recently converted to an ocean tug.
Although Victorious’s stint with the US Navy was not as illustrious as it could have been, that did not detract from her otherwise proud place in history. Before the USN loan, the Victorious was involved in the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck and, after returning to the Royal Navy, she took part in the sinking of Bismarck‘s sister ship, the Tirpitz. She would later return to the Pacific, once again working with the USN, and take part in the battle for Okinawa.
Inset area shows British sailors wearing shorts; see enlargement below.
Thanks to Gerald and the rest of ACG for publishing the article.
I see that the article states that ‘Her ship’s crew was British, but her aircrew and aircraft were American.’ According to my copy of ‘Send Her Victorious’, the biography of the ship written by Lt Commander M. Apps, although the aircraft, Martlets (F4F-4Bs) and Avengers TBMs were American they were flown by pilots of 832, 896 and 898 squadrons of the Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm.
15 Avengers of 832 Squadron flew from USS Saratoga during operations in the Solomons in July 1943, ‘the first and one of the few occasions on which British Aircraft operated from a United States aircraft carrier’ (ibid)
Thank you for the information Paul. I would like to add that the H.M.S. Victorious carried American and British squadrons at various times and compliments during this operational period.
To add to your information that you supplied, FAA 832′s Avengers (these are true Avengers, not Tarpon variants later supplied to Britain) were assigned to air group 3 and operated off of U.S.S. Saratoga (CV-3) during June/July of 1943, and squadrons 896 & 898′s Martlets operated off of U.S.S. Charger (CVE-30). Victorious also had a fourth squadron, 882, made of Martlets, but 882 was assigned to the headquarters of Admiral Halsey, Commander South Pacific Forces, onshore at Noumea throughout the operation.
If you look carefully at the tails of the American Avengers and Hellcats you will see the American squadron white number(s) although they are not legible, and the absence of the FAA vertical striped flag. Although there could definitely be British Martlets and Avengers down below, there are only American aircraft on the deck.
If you find additional information on this bit of history, please let me know. Thanks.
My father served with Royal Navy from 1937 and on the “Vic” from 1941 – 1946 and he would shake his head in disbelief that they ended up with an Ice Cream maker and Coca Cola machine during her refit to serve with USN. He never knew the “Vic” was code named “Robin” until I found the information on the internet a few years ago. Another difference which he mentioned (not that he spoke very often about the war) was the American aircraft carriers had timber decks and how the “Vic’s ” steel deck saved her during Kamikaze attacks.
Hi Jackie
My father also servied on the “Vic” when it was in the Pacific. He like your Father did not talk very often about the war. However, he did tell me the story about timber and steel decks and how it saved the ” Vic” on more than one occaision.
Cheers
Colin
was the victourious involved in the battle of okinawa
Yes Ken, in 1944 the Victorious returned to the Pacific after assisting in the sinking of the Tirpitz. In 1945, Victorious, Illustrious, Indefatigable and Indomitable operated as British elements working with U.S. Fifth Fleet in the battle of Okinawa. Victorious was successfully hit by three kamikaze attacks, which her metal deck protected her and allowed continued operations within hours of the hits. Victorious was also intended to take part in Operation Olympic if Japan had not surrendered.
This Commission was my fathers first Draft as a recently trained Air Mechanic drafted to 832 RNAS. He had is 21st Birthday of New Caledonia having travelled from the UK to Norfolk VA for the refit and then through the Panama Canal to Pearl Harbour before leaving for the South Pacific. He makes reference to American personnel looking after the aircraft and I have one or two photo’s of Avengers and Wildcats landing on. The Wlidcats (Martlets?) have Bristish markings and the Avengers US markings 4R on the fuselage. Its not clear if these are from the same trip however. I also have photos of march pasts of senior commanders including Admiral Nimitz.
Interesting period in our shared history
David, I would love to see digital images of the Vic. Personal photos taken by service members are hard to find and often allo amazing discoveries previously undocumented or unpublished. You can go to Jax Photo Evolution (one word) dot com to obtain my contact information. Thanks.
A job for the weekend as I need to take them from the Album dad put together at the time. Some photos taken by the ships photographer as well as some impromptu shots of USN and British Navy personnel working on Deck. 832 RNAS linked up with Saratoga again in May 1944 when 832 were temporarily deployed in HMS Illustrious. Illustrious and Saratoga were part of a task force deployed on raids against Japanese oil installations at Surabaya Java.
Best
Hi David,
I served on the Victorious 1957 to 1960, her first commission after her Post WWII refit, we visited the USA July and August 1959, but never traversed the Panama Canal.
Check out my home page. http://www.barrylockyer.com/ there is a link to the Victorious page.
I would appreciate copies of any photographs you have for my collection and the benefit of all ex Victorious Sailors.
Yours Aye
In the early years of US involvement in WW2 it was the British providing assistance to the USN rather than the other way round. In early 1942 the UK also had to lend the USN 50 anti-submarine vessels (and crews) and a Fleet Air Arm Squadron to protect New York Harbour.
The USN was totally unprepared for war (despite every warning) and ended up being far more dependent on the RN than they would of liked – so HMS Victorious was converted into USS Robin.
At Okinawa the British protected the USN southern flank and their aircraft carriers proved more or less invulnerable to Kamikaze’s, taking repeated hits with no effect – they literally ‘bounced off’.
Later US carrier design was modelled on the Illustrious class design principles.
Media and public perceptions of the Naval war in WW2 are very distorted. The British lost more ships in the battle for control of the Mediterrenan than the USN lost in the Pacific. British warship sinkings in WW2 were over twice as much as the USN.
The largest British carrier battle ‘Operation Pedestal’ is largely written out of the history books – mostly because it was carriers against land based aircraft. In terms of ‘air doctrine’ its very significant, because the carriers, which were very difficult to sink, could maintain local air superiority of the convoy they were protecting.
A lot of the British carriers were wrecked (Illustrious and Indomintable both had their hulls warped) but were still able to function. In contrast US carriers were easily put out of action – but easily repaired.
I disagree with the claim that “it was the British providing assistance to the USN rather than the other way round.” It is true that the RN temporarily lent 24 armed trawlers (22 A/S Strike Group), 3 destroyers and six corvettes to the US Eastern Sea Frontier in early 1942, of which 14 were available to that command by 1 April 42. The act was much needed and greatly appreciated, but it is hardly a fair, complete or accurate representation of the total mutual aid relationship of the time.
Further, the FAA squadron that was lent was to the RN’s benefit, not an act of charity to the US. At the outset of the US’s participation in the war, the US wanted to retain a shipment of coastal patrol long range bombers that were originally destined as aid for Britain. These aircraft were badly needed to strengthen the US Eastern Sea Frontiers’ defenses. As a compromise, Britain offered the temporary use of the squadron to ensure an uninterrupted supply of US-built patrol aircraft. In this light, we see the balance of aid was mutual, rather than one-sided. On the other hand . . . from Mar through Dec ’41, 2,400 US aircraft were provided to Britain; by comarision . . . during the 1942 U-boat blitz in the western Atlantic, the RN provided the US the temporary use of just one squadron. In this light, things do look one-sided, but in the opposite context.
But let’s put this in strategic perspective. For much of the previous 2 years, the US had been providing the RN every bit of aid allowed by law, and some that was not. This aid included not just materiel, but operational deployments that enabled the RN to concentrate its strength where most critical. In doing so, the US assumed risk at home, as it diverted war production from its own armed forces to those of Britain. Some examples:
- By 1940, France, Britain and the Commonwealth countries bought nearly 90% of US aircraft production.
- By the end of ’41, we had not only transferred the 50 destroyers, but an additional 10 Lake class 230 ft Coast Guard cutters (transfers that were not included in the eventual total of 886 ships transferred to the RN during the war).
- Despite the lack of escorts available to the USN, in mid-41 we committed to providing the RN 100 escorts. (78 DEs were eventually delivered; the RN’s Captain class frigates).
- Roughly half of the escort carriers built in US yards through the end of ’42 were given to the RN (38 total CVEs were transferred to the RN). By comparison The British built only 5 CVEs during the entire war, and employed one German prize in this role.
- The basing agreements had permitted redeployment of RN assets to other theaters, while the US assumed responsibility for security of those vacated areas. Backfilling those bases diverted US ships – and especially patrol aircraft – that later would be sorely needed off the US coast in early 1942.
- The Pan-American Safety zone was patrolled and enforced by the USN in the years leading up to Pearl Harbor. Reluctant to risk bringing the US into the war, Germany restricted its U-boats to the eastern Atlantic prior to 7 Dec ‘41. (Fewer than 5% of U-Boat sinkings between 1 March and 6 Dec 41 took place west of the Greenland meridian.) This vastly eased the RN’s task, enabling it to focus its limited strength in a tremendously reduced arena.
- The US had taken responsibility for protection of Greenland and its waters, and relieved British forces of the responsibility for Iceland.
- Further, 3 months before Pearl Harbor, the US “White Patrol” (2 battleships. 2 cruisers, 2 destroyer squadrons) had assumed responsibility for blockading German ship movements through the Denmark Straits (the possible break-out of the Tripitz being the fear).
- Beginning 3 months before the official US entry into the war the USN assisted in convoy escort duties in the western Atlantic, and from mid-Oct 41, had taken responsibility for escort of HX and fast ON convoys. In addition, we assumed responsibility for tasks such as convoying 20,000 British troops from Halifax to the Far East (and subsequently Australian troops from Suez to Freemantle, and delivery of reinforcements to Singapore) in US hulls, escorted most of the way by US warships (convoy sailing 10 Nov 41).
That’s a LOT of help to be dismissed so cavalierly, and yet it barely scratches the surface. The US badly hampered its own pre-war mobilization in order to help the RN cope with the U-boat threat in the eastern Atlantic. By comparison, it is remarkable how little the RN aided the allied effort when the U-boat threat shifted to the western Atlantic. And that’s the strategic point. When the threat was in the eastern Atlantic, the RN received extensive US support. When the threat shifted, it would only make strategic sense to shift forces to cope. But this the RN did not do, except for such minor examples as given. Instead, the extensive naval power the US had helped the RN field remained committed to a vastly reduced threat. (See maps on pg 58 and 124, Vol I, History of US Naval Operation in WWII for depictions of the dramatic shift of U-boat operations during this period.) At the least, it is a clear example of strategic inflexibility. At worst, a cynic might – unjustifiably – conclude the relationship was rather one-sided.
Clearly the original assertion is incorrect; the US provided ample assistance to the British during this period. The fact is, both sides needed each other badly, and aid flowed – generously – both ways to the degree that each could provide. No one over here has forgotten the Tizard mission, the origin of the plans for the invaluable classes of landing craft, or the battle-won expertise that was provided freely by the British. Nor are we unaware of the failings of the USN early in the war. But to belittle the contributions from this side of the pond is ungenerous, to say the least. In fact, battles such as the Java Sea demonstrate that both navies were fighting and dying together, and at that point, neither doing especially well, whether new to the war, or with a couple years’ experience under their belts.
Actually it was all about the UK defending the USA and teaching the USA how to wage war. . . .
Although in 1942 the Japanese and Germans were at the height of thier expansion its was clear to any one observing the strategy and economics of the war that Axis defeat was inevitable.
The UK and Russia had decided the course of the war with the Battle of Britain and the Battle of Moscow.
The war was essentially won in 1938 when the British made a planned switch to a war economy – some 5 years ahead of Germany. In 1941 the British were building more aircraft than Germany, Japan and Italy combined, 5,000 more than the USSR and 5,000 less than the USA.
In 1942 the USA was a liability. Shipping losses to U-boats had fallen steadily throughout 1941 only to reach spectacular levels with the entry of the USA into the war. All major historical authorities – Morrison, Roskill, Churchill, Bauer and even General Marshall are agreed this was entirely due the incompetence of the US Navy and the stupidity of Admiral King.
The correspondence between King and Marshall can be found in Bauers history and ends in effect, with an Army General correctly advising a US Admiral on maritime tactics. . . .
If we go further into the history we find that the USAAF in the UK was getting something like 70% of its supplies locally untill 1943 (its in the USAAF history).
The story of the USA ‘coming to the rescue’ of the UK is propaganda story that suited both the British and the USA. The reality was very different, starting with the Arcadia conference., where the British subtly forced US to model its war economy and planning on the British system.
The reality is the USA knew nothing about managing a modern war and learned everything from the UK. The history of the WAAC’s makes interesting reading if you want to go there, simply because it has the US Army learning (the hard way) exactly what they had already been told.
In 1939 the Poles brought the secrets of their decoding of Enigma to the British and the French. Had things been different and the British been really up against the Tizard mission would of gone to the USSR – and the British had a workable design for a nuclear bomb from the ‘tube alloys’ project
Britain and the USSR would of won, and the USA would be a minor player on the world stage.
It’s a fascinating insight into WWII that the French knew throughout WWII that the British were probably decoding German codes – but never let on. . . . .
Very interesting. I only heard of ROBIN a few years ago and certainly no U.S. history books will acknowledge the help of the Royal Navy.
‘Pedestal’ however, may have been written out of the history books but the Merchant Navy has not forgotten it. Neither have the government or people of Malta as witnessed, I understand, by the annual service of remembrance in Valletta harbour.
Great work: I love these sites uncovering barely remembered, or entirely forgotten, facts and/or incidents.
Well gentlemen, I do not propose to get involved in who won the war ? however, a couple of small points that may be of interest.
The H.M.S Victorious Association, still has many members in its ranks who served, and were injured in the Pacific on Victorious.
Operation Meridan (one and two) when the attack on the Japanese fuel storage and oil refineries near Palembang, are still discussed after tot time at our meetings. This is history very real to many of our members. I would say, I have not heard any of these members( many of them who had already served two or three hard war years)speak about who did what in these theatres. However, I would urge you corrispondents not to over look the fantastic efforts and sacrifices made by so many young Canadians flying at this period.
Best Regards Stan McLellan Chairman HMS Victorious Association. ex Vic.
Thank you Stan. The intent of the article was not to credit every possible element involved in this overlooked piece of history, which of course would be almost limited, lol. The goal was to bring to light a piece of history that is practically lost within the annals of history, especially within WWII studies in the United States of America. If your association has a website, especially any page(s) detailing the ‘Robin’ codename and operations, please post them here, it would greatly enhance this article. Thank you very much.
First mention I have found at this point, advises.
” The carrier (Victorious) reached San Christobalat mid-day on the 10th Feb.1943, and preparded to pass through the Panama Canal. As she passed the USS Stalker,she intercepted a signal fromthe USS Massachusetts which read “What,s the Limey flat top?”. Although the reply was not decoded, for the purpose of security Victorious was generally refered to as the USS Robin- with a sense of humour and a knowledge of ornithology, there was scope for some interesting signals.
Taken from “send her Victorious” by Michael Apps Lt. Commander RN copyright 1971 SBN no. 718 0102 1 published by William Kimber and Co..
Apps commanded 814 squadron, and his book is generally taken as the definitive record of Victorious and her long career, but we live and learn.
I will ask some of our veterans at our next meeting, to see if they can shed further light on USS Robin, I do know a couple have mentioned the name in the past.
Hi Stan
My father William Dobbie served on the HMS Victorious (USN Robin) in the Pacific. My Dad died some years ago and I received his war service record and various other momentoes from his time on the Victorious. I was exited to hear that there are still some surviving members from the Pacific campaign. I live in Australia and will be in the the UK in mid to late September 2013. I would love to meet the survivors and speak to them about there time in the Pacific. Would this be possible? If not, I was hoping I could speak to you by phone say when I am in the UK.
Hi Colin, we have surviving members all round the globe, and several interested parties in Australia, (very popular place to head for after the war, and Victorious brought a large number of war brides back to Uk in 1945, many who subsequently did not not like the climate and headed back!
The main Victorious reunion this year will be held first week-end of October, which may be too late for you, we meet for the week-end in Coventry (central in the UK). I live in Leeds (northern England), and two of my very good veteran mates live with ten minutes of my home. One who was burned in a Kamakaze strike in 45, the other who served on carriers including Glorious and old Ark Royal (both sunk) served out his time in the Pacific on Victorious. Both fit, but not young men !!! would be happy to meet you I’m sure.We have lost a couple of our best this year, time takes its toll.
The Victorious Web site is http://www.hmsvictoriousassociation.com if you have a look on the sites “Gallery” we have a couple of thousand pictures there.Tab on WW11 file. All my details are on this site and I can be contacted there. there.or leave a message on the guest book. I will keep an eye on this site now I have found it.Best Regards,
Stan McLellan Chair Vic Assoc.