Battle of the Java Sea, 1942. the ABDACOM force, consisting of ships from the Royal Navy, US Navy, Royal Netherlands Navy and the Royal Australian Navy got defeated pretty roundly.
Carrier-based torpedo planes were involved in that action, so it counts.
The beginning? :dubious:
It is pretty sad, a lot of Americans haven’t (there are likely to be many exceptions to that, particularly on this board.) American history tends to downplay the vital role the French played, possibly because of modern-day American attitudes about the French. Depending on successful French naval action wouldn’t fit well with the preferred narrative.
I’m surprised no Americans have mentioned the “Battle of the Capes” which allowed them to trap Cornwallis in Yorktown, essentially ending the American Revolutionary War.
That was only incidentally a naval battle. De Grasse’s fleet mainly just prevented the RN from being able to evacuate the Army, forcing the surrender.
And continuing the war. Or ending it on less favourable terms, the French had send out peace feelers already, and the Continental Congress’s kitty was all but bankrupt, if the war went on…, which it would have had Cornwallis escaped.
Both sides wanted it over.
As a proud Ohioan, I came in to mention this. There is a heroic statue of Commodore Perry just across the street from where I work.
Old Ironsides (Post #4) is an old favorite of mine. 
(Richard Armour said the ship defeated the "Derrière, which shot only grapes.") 
And don’t forget the *Bonhomme Richard, * which the Serapis pretty much turned to Swiss cheese–but the Brits lost that battle anyway.
Jones: I have not yet begun to fight!
Sailor: Well, don’t you think it’s about time you did? The bloomin’ ship’s about had it!
True about The French. Also, we shouldn’t forget their daring raid when, against all odds, they succeeded in sinking the unarmed Rainbow Warrior in an heroic operation half way round the world in Auckland in 1985.
“Britain: An attitude towards The French since 1066”
A few more:
Britain was the most consistently formidable European naval power from at least the 17th-20th centuries. They kind of had to be to compete considering geography and demography. But that hardly means they were invincible or always won. They lost a few semi-significant battles, a few campaigns and many smaller actions in the course of a largely very successful era of naval dominance.
John Paul Jones and [del]Raymond Burr[/del] Old Ironsides came to mind immediately. Sounds like ‘battle’ has had its definition limited to the encounters the Royal Navy won.
This is nonsense from one end to the other. The fact is, though, history classes prior to the college level are characterized by having a lot of material packed into a short span of time; calling them “surveys” would be too kind, but at the same time it’s hard to imagine how they could go into much more depth on anything without leaving some important things out entirely. Especially now that history has (rightly) moved away from the names-dates-battles Great Man Theory historiography and at least pays lip service to the role of broader social forces.
I think that what is really significant is that, after the Nazis overran and crushed France in 1940, and the British stood alone against the Axis in Europe, that the Axis failed to beat down the British. Hitler’s ill-fated attack on the Soviet Union, and Pearl Harbor, were still a long time off. Surre, the British lost some battles, but certainly now facing the Axis they were grimly determined to return with their shields or on them.
You forgot the Dardanelles Operation of 1807.
The Dardanelles; the Royal Navy’s Afghanistan.
It is rumored that Jones said, “Now I’ve got the son of a bitch!”, but that obviously does not go down well in Middle School History.
I don’t think so. IIRC all the planes were land mased twin-engine bombers.
The Genzan Air Group was Navy. They may have flown from land bases, but they were a naval unit.
They were not carrier-based.