[ArrogantBustard]

Your objection is noted. I reject it as both irrelevant, and as a probable attempt to "move the goalposts". All of those ships sank directly a result of enemy action; none were scuttled. Fires and secondary explosions do not count as scuttling; they do count as a consequence of the attack.

Yes, IJN damage control doctrine as well as fuel handling and ordnance handling doctrine sucked. Badly. Damage control is one factor an attacker must overcome when attempting to sink a ship. Had their DC been better, some of those ships might have been saved. It wasn't, and they weren't.

The fact remains that we sank several of their fleet carriers and they sank one of ours.

I'll grant that sinking a capital ship (CV or BB) is damn difficult. WWII, along with a whole lot of Cold War and "peacetime" experience (including H-bomb tests and SINKEXes) illustrate the difficulty. But to claim flat out that no carriers were directly sunk in the Pacific in WWII is just plain false.

[central_va]

But to claim flat out that no carriers were directly sunk in the Pacific in WWII is just plain false.

I meant to say none of our carriers, but still they are damn hard to sink no question.