The American batleship revolution

In the waning years of the 19th century, the United States navy was becoming a force to be reckoned with on the world stage—modern battleships were entering service as the nation flexed its industrial muscles. The US Navy was no threat to Britain or Germany at the time—the Royal Navy was huge, and Germany had no concerns in the Western Hemisphere—although some saw that that could change.
A brief dispute with Britain, although never threatening war, drove home the point to the US Navy that Britain ruled the seas.
Some serious planning was done—the US Navy would always be a second class fleet, unless something drastic was done. Naturally, it would have to be relatively inexpensive, given the tight fisted nature of the US Congress.
In 1899, the US Navy started work on the now infamous “12 inch Mark 7” as a part of its ongoing program to improve its weaponry. What it didn’t tell anyone was that the 12” Mark 7 was actually a 14”/45—a weapon far larger and more powerful than any afloat at the time.
When the Connecticut class was being authorized in Congress, naval experts managed to convince Congress to allow the navy a larger displacement for its newest ships, in exchange for canceling two big armored cruisers also planned. This kept displacement—and costs—almost equal. The final changes were slipped into the appropriations bill quietly, in exchange for a “yes” vote on a few pork-barrel projects.
The new Connecticut class battleships were built in relative secrecy, although there were rumors that they represented something new. The intended displacement was not, of course, released.
When Connecticut and Louisiana were revealed to the world—8 14” guns in superfiring twin turrets, heavy armor, and a massive (for the time) displacement, they made every existing warship obsolete—and within a few months, there would be three more in service. (The fact that they displaced 1200 tons more than authorized was quietly hushed up—they were so successful that no one wanted to criticize them) The next generation was already well along, four ships armed with 10 of the new guns.
Unfortunately for the Royal Navy, this display occurred a week after HMS Dreadnought had made the scene, the upstart Americans making her obsolete mere days after she was seen as the greatest warship on earth. What the general public didn’t see was the advantage Dreadnought had due to her turbines—but even so, Connecticut was a shock to the Royal Navy
At the end of 1907, the US had 5 dreadnoughts (the name stuck due to Dreadnought’s dramatic presentation—and more dramatic overshadowing) with 1 fitting out, and three more nearing completion. Two more were in the early stages of construction—these two introducing the triple turret.
Note that this is approximately the same amount of tonnage as historical, but in fewer, larger ships.
Britain, in contrast, had just one, although several more were on the ways. They were faster than the American ships, but armed with the 12” gun. The secret US project had given them a commanding lead in both ships and guns.
Germany also had its first dreadnoughts under construction—designed to fight Britain’s. The first generation was armed with the same 11” gun of their latest pre-dreadnoughts.
Both nations completed several new ships with the 11” and 12” guns, since they could not let the other get a major lead in the new ships, although both nations had crash projects underway to field larger caliber guns. Both ended up with 15” weapons on the ships that were laid down in 1910. Both Germany and Great Britain also attempted to build a 15” single turret that could fit on the barbettes of the older ships, although the projects were abandoned.
The United States was content with a more modest pace of building after its sudden spurt—Congress was once again tight with funds, and the new ships were expensive. However, after the success of the 1899 program, the Vermont, and California class ships, Congress had become willing to set spending limits rather than displacement limits, and then OK the plans the experts put forth. The biggest winner was the Bureau of Ordnance, which could, in the eyes of Congress, do no wrong.
Responding to intelligence reports of British “super-cruisers,” the USS Manila Bay was laid down in 1906, intended to overwhelm any likely cruiser. She was so expensive—and large—that she replaced two conventional armored cruisers in the building program. One of her design criteria was an extremely long range—something that didn’t show up in Jane’s.
She was largely considered a design fiasco due to her light armament compared to contemporary foreign ships, but proved to be a sound design, with plenty of room for modernization. Ironically, this “design fiasco” proved to be the longest serving battlecruiser in any navy, finally decommissioning in 1970.
She was one of the first American capital ships to use oil firing—a collision with the USS Montana put her in the dockyard for an extended time. Since she was out of service anyway, the navy decided to test the oil firing on a ship that was large, fast, but not able to stand up to her potential rivals in other navies.

Battleship 1912 was huge by the standards of the time, mounting 8 of the new 16” guns—and also finally bringing the USA into the turbine age with their battleships. The American battle line was still notoriously slow, (most ships could make 20 knots, but foreign navies were doing 22 or more) and the American fleet was relatively small in numbers. However, no one doubted the overall firepower advantage the Americans had. As one Royal Navy analyst put it, while campaigning for more ships, “The American battleline is slow. All this means is that when it wants to go somewhere, it will take a while—but no fleet on Earth can stop it.”
Another one said, “Our fleet can go anywhere it wants—unless the Americans are going there.”

Where do we go from here? The USA starts with a huge edge in dreadnoughts, both numbers and power—and with a bureau of ordnance that is in very good favor with Congress. As war clouds gather in Europe, what effects does the increased power and innovation posed by the American Navy create?


USS Connecticut, Commissioned 1906

Displacement: 23000 tons
Dimensions: 590 x 86 x 27’
Machinery: Vertical triple expansion, 18 knots, Range of 6000 nautical miles at 10 knots
Armor: Main belt 11”, upper belt 3”, Turret face 12”, Conning Tower 12”, deck 5” over vitals
Armament: 8 14”/45’s in four twin turrets, 20 3” guns, 2 21” submerged torpedo tubes

Design note: Unlike contemporary battleships, Connecticut and her successors—and the Manila Bay and hers, had a main armament elevation of 30 degrees

USS Manila Bay, Commissioned 1909

Displacement: 22000 tons normal
Dimensions: 620 x 86 x 27
Machinery: Turbines, 4 shafts, 25 knots, 12,000 nautical mile range at 25 knots (18000 miles after 1913 conversion to oil
Armor: Main belt 6.5”, upper belt 2”, Turret face 10”, Conning Tower 12”, deck 5” over vitals
Armament: 6 10” guns in three triple turrets, 8 x 4”, 18 x 3”, 4 x 21” submerged torpedo tubes



Picture created by Big Rich (often found on the Naval Fiction Board

Vermont.jpg
 
Last edited:
With increased naval power, I think we'd see earlier entry into WWI. My reasoning? I think we'd see American cargo ships being escorted across the Atlantic by American warships. The instant one of those cargo ships is preyed upon by a German sub or whatever...bingo, American entry into WWI.

Maybe I'm wrong.
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
Effects are none that I can see. Given a much earlier US entry it might scare the Germans into staying in port even more than they did, which was a lot, yes??

Now if some are along in the Battle of Jutland that would be a different story, but the Brits didn't sail with anyone, did they?
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
NapoleonXIV said:
Effects are none that I can see. Given a much earlier US entry it might scare the Germans into staying in port even more than they did, which was a lot, yes??

Now if some are along in the Battle of Jutland that would be a different story, but the Brits didn't sail with anyone, did they?

Historically the US Sixth Battle Squadron was part of the Grand Fleet (or sailed as part of it, was an adjunct to it) from 1917

So, here it depends on when the US enters the war...or if they do

Am still thinking about that one !

Grey Wolf
 
If the US introduced a warship bearing 14in guns the British will reply with a similar caliber, which would in turn cause the Germans to adopt a larger caliber than the 11in. Nothing will proceed as in the US does all sorts of great stuff and the other Powers do nothing.

If dreadnoughts weren't dreadnoughts, they would be just battleships. Not Vermonts, etc. - I've heard that thesis before. When it came to naval matters the world was Royal Navy-centric, and followed its designations - hang any suggestion from the Americans.

Seems to me that there is an attempt to malign the successful concept of the battlecruiser.
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Given that it went from dreadnought to super-dreadnought (for those 13.5" gunned ones, lol) I contend that the name of super-battleship might well get used inb context

I do agree that if the US introduces a larger calibre (sic) of main gun then the UK is gonna be looking for an even bigger one. And Germany will follow slower but more steadily.

Britain will probably stick with the 15" for a while as in OTL, but at the same time work on 16", perhaps in a battlecruiser variant

The Germans will presumably adopt the 14" and then the 16.25" much quicker than in OTL

What effect has this on other naval powers ? Well, IMHO only two others are really in the race per se and these are Japan and Russia. Note that with Russia plans for 16" gunned battleships were to have been put before the Duma in late 1914, so they have the political will to keep up.

France and Italy IMHO are really only looking at each other, with Austria-Hungary a more minor concern for both of them

It would be interesting to see if one of the South American nations decided on ordering a 16" gunned dreadnought if they becamse more popular

Grey Wolf

David S Poepoe said:
If the US introduced a warship bearing 14in guns the British will reply with a similar caliber, which would in turn cause the Germans to adopt a larger caliber than the 11in. Nothing will proceed as in the US does all sorts of great stuff and the other Powers do nothing.

If dreadnoughts weren't dreadnoughts, they would be just battleships. Not Vermonts, etc. - I've heard that thesis before. When it came to naval matters the world was Royal Navy-centric, and followed its designations - hang any suggestion from the Americans.

Seems to me that there is an attempt to malign the successful concept of the battlecruiser.
 
With an eralier DN battleship, and one with heavier armament, the battelship race will begin sooner, and probally a Great War in abaput 1913, or maybe 1912. The American battlefleet will be bigger and more powerful, with heavier guns, while the British and Germans lag bhind. A British 16" will come aorund in about 1917, while a German 16" ship might come around sooner.

With an earlier developement to 16" guns, heavier 18" guns might show up in American battleships by the end of the war, and maybe even British, Japanesse, and maybe enven the French may be alying down ships armed with 18"'s. This could mean a very different World War 2.
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
I don't see the naval race in itself leading to war, also if you have one occur for some reason in 1912 or so you have a very different dynamics in the Balkans, heck the Ottoman Empire still owns a great swathe of it

Maybe heightened tensions COULD lead to the First Balkan War escaping into general war, but it would need something additional as a catalyst that I can't see coming directly from a battleship race

Grey Wolf

Mikey said:
With an eralier DN battleship, and one with heavier armament, the battelship race will begin sooner, and probally a Great War in abaput 1913, or maybe 1912. The American battlefleet will be bigger and more powerful, with heavier guns, while the British and Germans lag bhind. A British 16" will come aorund in about 1917, while a German 16" ship might come around sooner.

With an earlier developement to 16" guns, heavier 18" guns might show up in American battleships by the end of the war, and maybe even British, Japanesse, and maybe enven the French may be alying down ships armed with 18"'s. This could mean a very different World War 2.
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
"This could mean a very different World War 2."

It seems I have much to learn about battleships so please elaborate on that statement (you know you want to :) ) I can see that some battles might be fought at longer ranges and I'd REALLY hate to be under a WWII shore bombardment but I can't see as how it would change much more than that.

My understanding was that the day of the dreadnought had passed to the carrier by WWII. Why spend millions to have cannons that send a ton of explosives 25 miles when you can have airplanes carry them hundreds?

OTOH the scenario would have extreme effects on the arms race that went on between the wars, and this might have an effect by changing budgets, is that what you were referring to?
With the Japanese it might have been almost tragicomic since they seemed to follow both strategies ( i. e. they built battships and carriers). Maybe they'd even bankrupt themselves, vote out the warlords, not need all the oil for invasions that weren't happening, sit out WWII and then become a superpower by splitting the world's reconstruction markets with the US :rolleyes:
 
What I menat by a "A very different World War 2" was that with more battleships armed with 18"-guns, the Yamamoto-class would most likey be armed with 20" guns, but that is not much of a change. If the United States had joined the Entente earlier in the Great War, the US Army and Navy will have learned some combat lessons. I might want to change taht to say, "A somewaht different World War 2".
 
ripples across the ocean

I have a few thoughts on the likely course of events.
Britain and Germany, concerned about each other, wouold probably build a few 11" or 12" ships--Dreadnought is in service, and Bellerophon already laid down. There are undoubtably some 12" turrets already on order for the next few ships--at least a few will be used. I'd expect the other two Bellerophons to be completed. At the same time, larger gun callibrs are rushed into development, but this takes time--quite a bit of time.
Incidently, Brazil probably goes to the USA for its battleships--Britian won't have 14" or 15" guns for some time, while the US is already building 14's.
This could also strain US/British relations, as Britain was determined to be the world's most powerful navy, and for a few years, until the new guns come out and have ships under them, they are not. The percieved firepower of Americna built ships may also take more business than just Brazil away from British yards, leading to some more complaints.
I never claimed that dreadnoughts would be called anything else--HMS Dreadnought was first (barely) and I stated that I thought the name would stick.
There is NO attempt to malaign the battlecruiser type--it had a necessary place in the fleets of the time. It is just that the American Navy's first one was not as good as the German and British entries--lighter armament on a bigger (and more expensive)hull. Every navy has its goofs, and Manila Bay is one of them--partially compenstaed for by its exceptionally long cruising range. It woould make an excellent commerce raider or raider hunter. (If its true bunkerage came to light, with its 12000 mile range, it could make Britian a bit uneasy in this regard)
As far as US entry into the Great War, unless the American fleet is employed in a different manner than historical, I don't expect any changes. The historical USA was a nation that no one wanted coming in on the other side, a few more powerful battleships aren't going to change this.
Incidently I didn't expect quite the amount of responce--this is great!
 
BB vs ACC

? Can a battleship race just before GW1 nix the devolopment of the Aircraft carrier? If not totally cancel it, ?would the larger amounts of resouces put towards BBs delay the ACC? Entering GW2 with that converted Criuser Lanley, type carriers, fllying GW1 Biplanes, by all particapants. :confused: :eek:
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
DuQuense said:
? Can a battleship race just before GW1 nix the devolopment of the Aircraft carrier? If not totally cancel it, ?would the larger amounts of resouces put towards BBs delay the ACC? Entering GW2 with that converted Criuser Lanley, type carriers, fllying GW1 Biplanes, by all particapants. :confused: :eek:

There was a treaty in 1935 which limited Carrier development but Japan was not signatory and I have heard it said that this was one reason she entered the war so relatively strong in Carriers. What you suggest is an interesting AH scenario but you would have to somehow change both the results of Mitchell's famous bombing and the Fleet exercises of 1930 (31??) both of which were widely known.

(Earlier treaties maybe?? given in the atmosphere that carriers were worthless anyhow, I can see many powers being strongly tempted to forego ACC entirely for a few more dreadnought tons. And some small nations might not sign. Think of the Enrico Dandolo and the Garabaldi and their drubbing of the mighty British battleships at the Battle of Malta. ;) )

In OTL Even Britain, which had strategic considerations pushing her strongly to the battleships, had some Carrier development.

OTOH we are talking about military matters here so quite possibly the application of observed data and common sense is an oxymoron from the beginning :D
 
slower not non

I was simply thinking that with more money poured into BBs there would be less money for ACCs. I like the Idea that the Great Powers would be so focused on their super battleships that they would overlook a lesser power spending It's all, on devolping ACC. :D :p
 
OTOH, it's possible that the building of the super-battleships could lead to the first big carriers being even bigger for several reasons. (I hadn't even considered aircraft carriers when I first posted this)
The Great War will still show the need for aerial reconasance, so there will still be the need to bring the planes with the fleet.
If Jackie Fisher is still in business, I can see Furious being built with 20" single turrets, and then converted to carry planes AND keep up with the fleet. A ship that can carry 2 20" guns and make 30+ knots will make one big carrier once converted.
Now move to 1922--the carrier is seen as a needed part of the fleet--scouting and such. Washington is signed, and there's all these hulls half built waiting to be made into something. 50,000 ton Lexington, anyone?
Just one way things could go.
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Mitchell

Depending on whether the Great War goes as historical, it may or may not be appropriate to assume that Mitchell will get his bombing run. For a start he was not exactly Mr Popular (didn't he also have some discipline trouble not long after ?), and second unless there is a spare modern (ish) battleship available he isn't going to prove anything to satisfaction. Actually OTL he didn't prove all that much either, though it looked to observers. The Ostfriesland was stationary, her ports and hatches open, no damage control etc.

Therefore I think it is quite possible to eradicate this instance from history

Grey Wolf

NapoleonXIV said:
There was a treaty in 1935 which limited Carrier development but Japan was not signatory and I have heard it said that this was one reason she entered the war so relatively strong in Carriers. What you suggest is an interesting AH scenario but you would have to somehow change both the results of Mitchell's famous bombing and the Fleet exercises of 1930 (31??) both of which were widely known.

(Earlier treaties maybe?? given in the atmosphere that carriers were worthless anyhow, I can see many powers being strongly tempted to forego ACC entirely for a few more dreadnought tons. And some small nations might not sign. Think of the Enrico Dandolo and the Garabaldi and their drubbing of the mighty British battleships at the Battle of Malta. ;) )

In OTL Even Britain, which had strategic considerations pushing her strongly to the battleships, had some Carrier development.

OTOH we are talking about military matters here so quite possibly the application of observed data and common sense is an oxymoron from the beginning :D
 
Top