Of the eight Colossus only 4 were complete before the wars end, The 5 majestic were from the 50's through 60's, the first Centaur was commissioned in 53.
The Saipan class were based (designed?) upon cruiser hulls, but were indeed built from the hull up as carriers, they were finished right as ww2 ended.
Aye, I mentioned in my post that most of the British CVLs were only laid down during the war (once it was clear they weren't going to be finished by the time the war ended, the Brits slowed down a heap on building, I suspect in no small part because they were nearly bankrupt, while the US could afford to 'finish off' its ships a lot better - if the war had gone until 1947 against an enemy with a naval presence, I expect that most of those CVLs would have been completed before war's end, but the UK would have had to borrow even more from the US), but you didn't say "Most light carriers during the war", just "most light carriers"
. On the issue in question, the Brits (when they were building to complete, as opposed to putting them on hold for a few years while they balanaced the books) did build CVLs quicker than CVs. The Saipan's weren't finished until 1946/1947, so it's a bit hard to tell how quick they could have been built during wartime, as the US slowed down their construction when it became clear they'd got the job done as well (they just didn't slow as hard or for as long as the British). I'd say that, in general, CVLs should be quicker to build than CVs even if they're not converted cruiser hulls.
it took 14 months to build the Hornet CV
15 months for the Essex
Saipan Class CVL's 12/13 months build time
Going back to the colossus class carriers, the original plan was to build them in 21 months, they eventually had to extend the schedule to 27 months, and only 2 of the 4 managed to meet that revised schedule.
my point is CVL's weren't as fast to build compared to CV's as people in this thread are claiming they were once you account for the fact that they're conversions.
an interesting article for this topic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1942_Design_Light_Fleet_Carrier#Design_and_construction, seems like the British CVL's all evolved from the Colossus class, which i found interesting.
Hornet was quick, and while Essex took 18 months from laid down to commissioned, the second Essex class ship, Yorktown, was finished in 15. However, these are greased lightning times for a CV to be built, and faster than the Independence class CVLs. I doubt, highly, that it's indicative, as 27,200 ton ship being quicker to build than a 10,660 ton ship in general just doesn't hold water. It'd be the equivalent of building battlecruisers because they're quicker to get out than CLs. Accordingly, I'd expect those times to be reflect relatively unique circumstances in the US at the time, and I'd bet a particular focus on the Essex class, or issues with the Independences.
If you compare the 13,190 ton Colossus CVLs (Colossus at 30 months, Glory at 32 months and Ocean at 33 months, according to Conways, unless I've got my math wrong) to the 23,450 ton Implacables (Implacable at 66 months, Indefatigueable at 54 months), we get a very different story, and one that I'd expect to be far more indicative of the difference in the time it took between building a CV vis-a-vis a CVL than the Essex/Independence example.
Not trying to have a go here, just trying to argue the point because I believe it's the case. At the end of the day, a ship that's more than twice as large should take a good deal longer, and I'd expect (but haven't done the research, so might be wrong) the historical examples that are exceptions to the rule have extenuating circumstances.
