USS Wasp was something of an anomaly. She was built from spare steel left over from construction of the Yorktown class ships. Smaller than the Yorktowns, she was still larger than the CVLs of the Independence class that would follow. Because of her small size and light weight, she was not nearly as well-protected as the Yorktowns. Even though, the spread from I-19 would probably have been fatal to Enterprise had she been the target. It would have taken Enterprise longer to die.
There is a split of opinion regarding the participation of I-16 in this incident. I have seen reconstructions of the torpedo tracks that indicate that every hit on every American ship was scored from the same spread fired by I-19, including one torpedo that passed directly under the Hamman, I believe. If so, it was the single most effective submarine attack ever delivered, sinking a carrier and destroyer, damaging a battleship, and almost claiming a second destroyer.
By my count, the Wasp and soon Hornet sinkings bring to five the number of US fleet carriers lost (Langely, Lexington, Yorktown, Wasp, Hornet) with only three left afloat -- Saratoga, Ranger and Enterprise.
Enterprise is now damaged, out of action, Ranger is in the Atlantic, which I think will leave only one in the Pacific: Saratoga.
In the mean time, the Brits have also lost five fleet carriers (Hermes, Glorious, Eagle, Courageous, Ark Royal), and the Japanese three.
All this makes me wonder:
A) Are these newfangled aircraft carriers all they're cracked up to be?
After all, they seem awfully easy to sink, and what real good are they anyway?
B) Wouldn't we be better off building more battle ships -- they're tougher to sink, and guns more accurate?
Seriously, at this point, don't aircraft carriers look like an experiment that failed?