A few thoughts on different responses to HMS Dreadnought.

So, I was once again reading naval wiki pages, and was struck by the idea for this post.

What could other nations have done in response to the game changing of/by HMS Dreadnought?

For myself, I would try and think of German specific things to change (for the same reason that I almost exclusively played HoI as 1936 Germany --- for the challange and level of control), but I am also interested in what others might come up with, either for Germany or any other nations.


Any thoughts?

Either build them or don't.

Keep in mind, the British were not the only ones working on all big gun ships. The Japanese were working on them and so was the US (initial designs for the South Carolina class were approved in 1905) so even if the British had not for whatever reason built HMS Dreadnought, somebody else would have built something along similar lines and the race would have been on.

Only a few things could be done

Ignore: keep building mixed battery ships

Change: new ships laid down would be all big gun, and with turbines.

No nation picked 'Ignore' with new ships


The real question, How many to build, that your nation would not be left behind?

Even Spain was building, even though they really couldn't afford the small(15,000T) design they settled for.

Build torpedo boats/ships. all sizes & classes, surface & submersible, & build torpedos that make the Japanese Long Lance look ordinary. & while you are at it see what can be done with these new fangled flying machines.

Zheng He said:

Either build them or don't.

Keep in mind, the British were not the only ones working on all big gun ships. The Japanese were working on them and so was the US (initial designs for the South Carolina class were approved in 1905) so even if the British had not for whatever reason built HMS Dreadnought, somebody else would have built something along similar lines and the race would have been on.

Click to expand...

Essentially this. Dreadnought rendered all of the pre-dreadnought battleships into at best secondline warships. They certainly had their uses and could be valuable in secondary theaters and as expendable ships, but they could no longer stand in the battleline. As the Russians showed there were tactics and methods that could be used to compensate for this, but that's not practical, or worthwhile, on the scale of a whole fleet. It's only a stopgap measure to maintain a residual effectiveness of pre-dreads until your own dreadnoughts come into commission. The only option if you want a fleet can stand against an enemies dreadnoughts is dreadnoughts of your own.

Carl Schwamberger said:

Build torpedo boats/ships. all sizes & classes, surface & submersible, & build torpedos that make the Japanese Long Lance look ordinary. & while you are at it see what can be done with these new fangled flying machines.

Click to expand...

That's an excellent strategy for denying control of the sea to the enemy, but not for controling it yourself. Basically what you described was the Jeune Ecole, which was the centre of French naval strategy from about the 1880's through the 1890's. The basic problem as I see it is that the torpedo boats you need to counter the enemy's battleships are limited to relatively short range, and in some cases unfit for non-coastal waters, so you can defend a given zone of sea near your own territory but not take the fight to the enemy. That restricts you to a sea denial strategy. Further, to raid enemy shipping you'll need cruisers and planety of them. Those cruisers are going to be extraordinarily vulnerable to the enemy's battlecruisers. Hunting down and destryoing cruisers was the original purpose of the battlecruiser and something it did very well. The other option you mention is submarines. This is, I think, the most viable option at the time in question. Though the submarine technology is only just there and you'll be at the bleeding edge of development. There's also two world wars that show us it's a strategy that can be beaten, even with the technology at the time. The British had a lot of advanced anti-submarine equipement coming either coming online or finishing development in 1918. However, those same wars also show us just how effective submarine tactics can be.

Finally, none of the above gets into the prestige factors of having dreadnought battleships. Suffice to say they were substantial.

At this time there was no technology that could reliably beat a dreadnought, other than another dreadnought.

Airplanes, of course, are out of the running at this point (and for at least two decades to come).

Destroyers and torpedo boats might, with luck, sink a dreadnought, but their lack of endurance and sea-keeping ability, and fragility to enemy fire, not to mention the short range and unreliability of their torpedos, prevents them from being truly effective counters.

Submarines are slow, unreliable, myopic, possess fairly low endurance, and likewise have pretty primitive torpedos at this point.

The only real counter to a dreadnought is another dreadnought.

Of course, dreadnoughts have limitations. They're not generally very useful for blockade, commerce warfare, minelaying, patrolling, convoy escort, operations in shallow or narrow waters, or raiding. If one's naval effort hinges on any of these, dreadnoughts could be just irrelevant.

The thing is, Dreadnought had its issues. Poor armour scheme for a ship of its class, adoption of turbines before the technology was sufficiently mature, and, most importantly, the over zealous deletion of secondary armament. There was a reason she spent the war as distant cover for the harwich force.

I think the Germans had the right of it. Wait and see, then respond based on British issues.

You say turbines weren't mature, but how much was learned from the construction and operation of Dreadnought? The ship was as much an experiment as a benchmark, and should really be treated as such, a stunning achievement, but still at testbed.

Carl Schwamberger said:

build torpedos that make the Japanese Long Lance look ordinary. & while you are at it see what can be done with these new fangled flying machines.

Click to expand...

In 1906 this is ASB tech the oxygen was hard to use in late 1930s !

Voice of The Empire said:

The thing is, Dreadnought had its issues. Poor armour scheme for a ship of its class, adoption of turbines before the technology was sufficiently mature, and, most importantly, the over zealous deletion of secondary armament. There was a reason she spent the war as distant cover for the harwich force.

I think the Germans had the right of it. Wait and see, then respond based on British issues.

Click to expand...

The first later German dreadnoughts are worse in many respects Hex mounts and reciprocating engines etc.

Some nations continued producing semi-dreadnought battleships for a few years after Dreadnought. Some did so due to insufficient heavy gun production capacity, but a few thought that battles would take place at ranges in which the rapid fire of intermediate guns would overwhelm ships equipped with heavy guns.

Without realising that fire-control, not brilliant anyway at the time, would be much harder when having to spot for two or three different weights of shell.

Delta Force said:

Some nations continued producing semi-dreadnought battleships for a few years after Dreadnought. Some did so due to insufficient heavy gun production capacity, but a few thought that battles would take place at ranges in which the rapid fire of intermediate guns would overwhelm ships equipped with heavy guns.

Click to expand...

Even the British completed their last couple pre-dreds (Lord Nelson class I believe) after they produced the big guy...

MattII said:

Without realising that fire-control, not brilliant anyway at the time, would be much harder when having to spot for two or three different weights of shell.

Click to expand...

I've heard that the fire control wasn't that much of an issue, and that shots could be distinguished. In any case, the intermediate weaponry lost its rapid fire advantage, so capital ships just carried a heavy battery supported by 5 inch or 6 inch guns that would damage unarmored areas.

Zheng He said:

Even the British completed their last couple pre-dreds (Lord Nelson class I believe) after they produced the big guy...

Click to expand...

There were some areas of advantage for the older types, although nothing was due to anything inherent in the approaches. One major area was armor. The final pre-dreadnought and semi-dreadnought ships tended to have heavier armor than their dreadnought counterparts. This also applied to armored cruisers relative to their battlecruiser counterparts.

Delta Force said:

I've heard that the fire control wasn't that much of an issue, and that shots could be distinguished. In any case, the intermediate weaponry lost its rapid fire advantage, so capital ships just carried a heavy battery supported by 5 inch or 6 inch guns that would damage unarmored areas.

Click to expand...

Fire Control did prove an issue for the Deutschland class at Jutland (they being the only pre-dreadnougths present). As was suspected prior to HMS Dreadnought and born out in experience combat ranges were much longer than the pre-dreanought era warships had been designed for. Therefore the ability to put large numbers of large calibre shells out to long range was the decisive factor.

Ladder firing took a while to catch on but it merely magnified the advantage in having more big guns and subsequent to Dreadnought herself dreadnoughts were not under equipped with quick fire weapons of their own had the pre-dreadnought somehow survived as a viable combatant to come close enough to use them.

What I have in mind for an alternative path for the Germans to follow would go something like this:

The Kaiser and Tirpitz have a mutual screaming fit and, after collecting their wits, start planning a German response to the upping of the stakes by the UK with HMS Dreadnought.

Historically, they at first decided to keep going with the 11” gunned ships, but what if they instead set out upon the path of deliberately making their own ships much better, thus forcing the UK to either build ships equal to but not greater than Germanys, but in more than twice the numbers, or quickly going bankrupt trying to build better and more both at the same time.

To do this, how about a German naval law that sets the HMS Dreadnought as “below par” for all future German battleship construction, say by requiring all new construction to have improvements in three areas, these being:

1. All centerline main armament.
2. Guns bigger than 12”.
3. Speed greater than 21kts.

Historically, Germany waited until 20 Aug 1913, to lay down a class that included 2 of the 3 major areas of improvement from HMS Dreadnought to something that would outclass it. What this means is, that Germany waited almost 7 years after the Dreadnought entered service to even lay down a ship that outclassed her, and even then, only had 2 of the 3 listed above, as the Bayern class still didn’t have a speed greater than 21kts.

Instead, what if they had taken 3 years to appraise themselves of the new situation, and then laid down a class with:

8x15” guns all on the centerline, 24kts top speed, in December 1909?

Voice of The Empire said:

The thing is, Dreadnought had its issues. Poor armour scheme for a ship of its class, adoption of turbines before the technology was sufficiently mature, and, most importantly, the over zealous deletion of secondary armament. There was a reason she spent the war as distant cover for the harwich force.

I think the Germans had the right of it. Wait and see, then respond based on British issues.

Click to expand...

I thought Dreadnought spent the war as distant cover for being ten years out of date in a period where that meant half again the shell weight, several knots of speed and thousands of tonnes of armour.

Shadow Master said:

What I have in mind for an alternative path for the Germans to follow would go something like this:

The Kaiser and Tirpitz have a mutual screaming fit and, after collecting their wits, start planning a German response to the upping of the stakes by the UK with HMS Dreadnought.

Historically, they at first decided to keep going with the 11” gunned ships, but what if they instead set out upon the path of deliberately making their own ships much better, thus forcing the UK to either build ships equal to but not greater than Germanys, but in more than twice the numbers, or quickly going bankrupt trying to build better and more both at the same time.

To do this, how about a German naval law that sets the HMS Dreadnought as “below par” for all future German battleship construction, say by requiring all new construction to have improvements in three areas, these being:

1. All centerline main armament.
2. Guns bigger than 12”.
3. Speed greater than 21kts.

Historically, Germany waited until 20 Aug 1913, to lay down a class that included 2 of the 3 major areas of improvement from HMS Dreadnought to something that would outclass it. What this means is, that Germany waited almost 7 years after the Dreadnought entered service to even lay down a ship that outclassed her, and even then, only had 2 of the 3 listed above, as the Bayern class still didn’t have a speed greater than 21kts.

Instead, what if they had taken 3 years to appraise themselves of the new situation, and then laid down a class with:

8x15” guns all on the centerline, 24kts top speed, in December 1909?

Click to expand...

Huge issue with developing the 380mm guns, the Brits and Germans both had to work up them and the next stops were 13.5" for the RN and 305mm (honestly they are better because they are German, repeat until you believe it) for the Germans.

Also there was the issue of the Kiel Canal which was not likely to be ready for such large ships any time soon, remember the Queen Elizabeths weighed in at about 27K tons and change standard load and failed to make their designed speed with 1913 know how.

The British looked at a design for a fast battleship after Invincible and rejected it for cost and they had a lot more money that the German Empire

Not building early dreadnoughts means that the RN can also stop (or rather slow down) and work on quality of ships/design more.

You need ships (even early dreads with problems) to win v Russia and France if GB doesn't fight (or just in the Baltic)

Not to mention you have no ships for William to cruise about on and that might mean that the Reichstag get other ideas of what to spend the cash on .

8x15” guns all on the centerline, 24kts top speed, in December 1909

Click to expand...

Will be huge and finished late and the cost after new docks etc will be astronomical !

RodentRevolution said:

Huge issue with developing the 380mm guns, the Brits and Germans both had to work up them and the next stops were 13.5" for the RN and 305mm (honestly they are better because they are German, repeat until you believe it) for the Germans.

Also there was the issue of the Kiel Canal which was not likely to be ready for such large ships any time soon, remember the Queen Elizabeths weighed in at about 27K tons and change standard load and failed to make their designed speed with 1913 know how.

The British looked at a design for a fast battleship after Invincible and rejected it for cost and they had a lot more money that the German Empire

Click to expand...

Something like German Guns/Best Guns.

Over on navweapons, I looked up these guns, but unfortunately, no development time seems to be mentioned, just that the design was a 1913 one, and that is was in service 3 years later.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_15-45_skc13.htm

What would be useful here would be a link to a website that supports the statement that Germany needed more than the historical 3 years to get these guns from the drawing board to 'in service', or one that lists the reasons that the Germans couldn't have designed these weapons 4 years earlier (as posited) in 1909, and thus had them in service by 1913.

Sorry if I took some liberties here.

jsb said:

Not building early dreadnoughts means that the RN can also stop (or rather slow down) and work on quality of ships/design more.

Click to expand...

Not a chance of that. Is Germay the only reason for the UK to build 'all-big-gun' BB's? Nope, once the HMS Dreadnought hit the water, all future ships are going to be measured agains her (or the ships that outclass her), and the UK just leveled the playing field for all nations, by reducing her fleet of first rate BB's to one. So no, there is no way that the UK could sit back and not build at a frantic pace to rebuild her previous lead. The HMS Dreadnought hereself is both a boon and bane to the RN.

jsb said:

You need ships (even early dreads with problems) to win v Russia and France if GB doesn't fight (or just in the Baltic).

Click to expand...

Huh?

jsb said:

Not to mention you have no ships for William to cruise about on and that might mean that the Reichstag get other ideas of what to spend the cash on .

Click to expand...

Mental image of the Kaiser in his bathtub, sadly singing "row, row, row your boat"...while playing with a little yellow Battleship and wistfully wishing he had not sold his fleet...

jsb said:

Will be huge and finished late and the cost after new docks etc will be astronomical!

Click to expand...

Huge, yes. Finnished late, why? Historically, the Germans would have had to do any needed infrastructure work anyway to build (and employ)these ships as they were historically built (from 20 Aug 1913 to 15 July 1916).

Have you, by any chance, a link to a website that has information on how long and how much it cost for the Germans to accomplish these infrastructure improvements?

Looking at the guns themselves, it really looks like when the Germans decided to do it, they simply did it.

So the question really becomes:
If they had decided to go the 15" gun route (and yes, this decision itself would take time for them to come to --- hence the posited Dec 1909 start date, giving them 3 full years after HMS Dreadnought hit the water), was there really anything to stop them from doing this? Links please.

For the infrastructure improvements, I would need to look at a website that tells me what all they had to do, and how long it actually took them to do it historically(and cost would be a nice bonus). Links please.

I was trying to finnish this post and my computer crashed (again).

Germany didn't build her Dreadnoughts with a 24kts max speed historically, so there isn't going t be any website that could tell us how long it would take or how much it would cost (or for that matter, if they even could) to achieve a better (24kts) speed than HMS Dreadnought.

OTOH, they did achieve faster speeds than 24kts, but only on their BC's
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Seydlitz

Just food for thought.