Originally Posted by
Bing
The RN's armoured carriers had a number of protective features against fire, some of which reduced the amount of fuel and munitions that could be carried*. Initially the USN didn't think these features were desirable as they ate into the capability of the air group, this changed after one of the major battles in the Pacific, I forget which one but Prof Alexander Clarke has a channel on YouTube where he goes into the detail which is worth a watch.
Much has been made over the years regarding the armored flight decks on the British carriers vs. the unarmored flight decks on the Essex class carriers. At least according to an exhibit on the Intrepid in NYC, the lack of armor was an conscious design trade off - an armored flight deck would have impacted the hangar deck area and would have sharply reduced the max number of aircraft the carrier could handle. Instead, the hangar deck was armored (to protect the guts of the ship) - accepting the potential damage risk in order to carry many more aircraft.
While a few Essex class carriers suffered horrific battle damage, I don't think any were sunk.