Best British battlefleet for ww1

[Hood]

As it says on the tin, starting from Dreadnought being ordered in 1905, what would you build to counter the Germans?
Some of my favourite designs are the "fusion"

Triple turrets were obviously risky but nonetheless would've been a hybrid between a battlecruiser and battleship, a proto fast battleship. Obviously problems involved in getting fast battleshipsto work that early on too.
Another favourite is design Y, basically mini Hoods in place of the Revenge class
https://warshipprojects.com/2017/07/03/washington-cherrytrees-2/

 

[Alanith]

I'd have pushed to stay out of the war and ensured the Empire survived a bit longer, tbh.

 

[RodentRevolution]

I find it interesting that the X4 design had its triples on the wings. I would have thought having them on the centre line made more sense as it is my understanding that these turrets require less overall displacement for the same size and protection of turret and barbette and would also of course have the greatest fields of fire.

 

[Hood]

I find it interesting that the X4 design had its triples on the wings. I would have thought having them on the centre line made more sense as it is my understanding that these turrets require less overall displacement for the same size and protection of turret and barbette and would also of course have the greatest fields of fire.

Length may have been a factor, not willing to go even bigger on what was already a large ship, but I suspect part of it was just the fact it stemmed from Invincibles design and they kept along those lines, in many ways looks like an upscaled version

 

[RodentRevolution]

Length may have been a factor, not willing to go even bigger on what was already a large ship, but I suspect part of it was just the fact it stemmed from Invincibles design and they kept along those lines, in many ways looks like an upscaled version

Sorry I realise I was unclear. The overall layout makes sense to me. My point is that to best exploit the available tonnage having the A and Y turrets be the triples rather than the wing turrets would seem to make more sense. The wing turrets would then be the twins.

 

[Hood]

Sorry I realise I was unclear. The overall layout makes sense to me. My point is that to best exploit the available tonnage having the A and Y turrets be the triples rather than the wing turrets would seem to make more sense. The wing turrets would then be the twins.

Probably a similar thing with the Pensacolas then, bow too narrow for it, probably saw the mid ships area with the most width in the ship anyway as the best place for the triples. Putting triples forward would mean having to increase the beam which would mean it'd either be huge to get both the extra space for more powerful engines and to improve the length to beam ratio.

 

[naraic]

I'm just gonna throw out a few ideas.

As HMS Lord Nelson and HMS Agemmenon were laid down after HMS Dreadnought was ordered in May 1905 I am fond of the idea of cancelling the last two preadreadnoughts and starting the Dreadnought age with three dreadnoughts.

The Australian and New Zealand governments purchase of Indefactigible class Battlecruisers never really felt right to me from the sense of serving British interests. Unless there was a reason other than expense (no free gunpits able to produce 13.5 inch guns) ordering Lion classes instead of Indefactigible would be a very good thing.

Of course I am also a supporter of the fast Iron Duke design that was proposed and the repeat of the Queen Elizabeth class instead of Revenge classes but I do understand why these werent done this way.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

Of course I am also a supporter of the fast Iron Duke design that was proposed and the repeat of the Queen Elizabeth class instead of Revenge classes but I do understand why these weren't done this way.

I’m in favour of anything that produces more QEs, so this gets my vote.

I'd have pushed to stay out of the war and ensured the Empire survived a bit longer, tbh.

Heh

 

[History_Man68]

I'd have pushed to stay out of the war and ensured the Empire survived a bit longer, tbh.

Preserving the wealth that Britain had accumulated over 1814-1914 would be more important. Yes, the Empire did contribute to this but it was doomed anyway as Britain moved closer to becoming a democracy.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

The Australian and New Zealand governments purchase of Indefactigible class Battlecruisers never really felt right to me from the sense of serving British interests. Unless there was a reason other than expense (no free gunpits able to produce 13.5 inch guns) ordering Lion classes instead of Indefactigible would be a very good thing.

Smaller cheaper ships the dominions could afford to buy (more or less) are better than larger more capable and expensive ships they can't.

 

[HMS Audacious]

Carriers built and sooner

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

As it says on the tin, starting from Dreadnought being ordered in 1905, what would you build to counter the Germans?
Some of my favourite designs are the "fusion"
View attachment 470779
Triple turrets were obviously risky but nonetheless would've been a hybrid between a battlecruiser and battleship, a proto fast battleship. Obviously problems involved in getting fast battleshipsto work that early on too.
Another favourite is design Y, basically mini Hoods in place of the Revenge class
https://warshipprojects.com/2017/07/03/washington-cherrytrees-2/

Is this thread only about capital ships? Or does it include all types of warships and auxiliaries? @HMS queen Elizabeth has mentioned aircraft carriers. May we also include shore based naval aviation?

Is money no object?

 

[NHBL]

I wonder of the Lord Nelsons could have been modified on the ways to replace the 4 twin 9.2" turrets with 4 single 12" turrets, and the single 9.2" mounts removed, perhaps replaced with lighter guns. That gives the Royal Navy an extra pair of pseudo-dreadnoughts (6 12" guns on either broadside.)
The 9.2" guns can go to France on railway mountings, or the turrets can go into monitors.

 

[naraic]

Smaller cheaper ships the dominions could afford to buy (more or less) are better than larger more capable and expensive ships they can't.

That is of course a decent point.

I will have to look in depth for reasons but the £89,000 difference in cost between HMAS Australia and HMS Lion would be unlikely to break the bank.

That said Australia cost a lot more than either New Zealand or Indefactigible.

In general though I would look at seeing if I could sell Indefactigible or an invincible to Australia and New Zealand and use that to fund the construction of a new Lion class making of the difference elsewhere if need be. There is enough of a qualitative difference between the Indefactigible and the Lion class that an increased focus on Lion class ships is something that I think would be very good for the Battlecruiser Force.

 

[NHBL]

Another way to boost the fleet would be to let Canada build real warships, though that's probably politically impractical. After all, why should Canadian money be spent in Canada? It's better spent in Britain giving deserving British industrialists more profit--why let Canadian money be used to give jobs to Canadians? (exaggeration, perhaps, but the British armament companies did NOT want warships built in overseas, and had the pull to make it difficult.)

Lion with 6 13.5" turrets, and the displacement saved used for armor might be a good plan, too...

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

That is of course a decent point.

I will have to look in depth for reasons but the £89,000 difference in cost between HMAS Australia and HMS Lion would be unlikely to break the bank.

That said Australia cost a lot more than either New Zealand or Indefactigible.

In general though I would look at seeing if I could sell Indefactigible or an invincible to Australia and New Zealand and use that to fund the construction of a new Lion class making of the difference elsewhere if need be. There is enough of a qualitative difference between the Indefactigible and the Lion class that an increased focus on Lion class ships is something that I think would be very good for the Battlecruiser Force.

Two things to remember.
One Australia was attempting to build its own navy from scratch so had to buy more than just HMAS Australia.
Two New Zealand had just bought the Royal Navy the King Edward VII class Battleship HMS New Zealand (later Zealandia) when they decided to buy them a Battlecruiser.

Both of these points limit the amount of money the Dominions can afford to spend.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Another way to boost the fleet would be to let Canada build real warships, though that's probably politically impractical. After all, why should Canadian money be spent in Canada? It's better spent in Britain giving deserving British industrialists more profit--why let Canadian money be used to give jobs to Canadians? (exaggeration, perhaps, but the British armament companies did NOT want warships built in overseas, and had the pull to make it difficult.)

Lion with 6 13.5" turrets, and the displacement saved used for armor might be a good plan, too...

Unless the Canadian shipyards were owned by British armament companies.

Whether the profits came from a shipyard in Canada or the UK wasn't that important to the board of directors and where the dividends came from didn't matter that much to the share holders.

There is a precedent for this with the SECN company formed in Spain which IIRC was partly owned by Vickers, Armstrongs and John Brown. Furthermore, IOTL Vickers did own a shipyard in Canada.

 

[RodentRevolution]

Another way to boost the fleet would be to let Canada build real warships, though that's probably politically impractical. After all, why should Canadian money be spent in Canada? It's better spent in Britain giving deserving British industrialists more profit--why let Canadian money be used to give jobs to Canadians? (exaggeration, perhaps, but the British armament companies did NOT want warships built in overseas, and had the pull to make it difficult.)

Lion with 6 13.5" turrets, and the displacement saved used for armor might be a good plan, too...

I am not sure that was the reason the Canadians decided the cost of building their own shipyards and armaments and armour rolling plant was not worth it.

 

[naraic]

Two things to remember.
One Australia was attempting to build its own navy from scratch so had to buy more than just HMAS Australia.

HMAS Australia cost £2,000,000.
HMS Lion £2,086,000
HMS Princess Royal £2,089,000

I don't see the cost difference between Australia and the Lions having an impact on the order.

 

[jsb]

The Australian and New Zealand governments purchase of Indefactigible class Battlecruisers never really felt right to me from the sense of serving British interests. Unless there was a reason other than expense (no free gunpits able to produce 13.5 inch guns) ordering Lion classes instead of Indefactigible would be a very good thing.

Smaller cheaper ships the dominions could afford to buy (more or less) are better than larger more capable and expensive ships they can't.

HMAS Australia cost £2,000,000.
HMS Lion £2,086,000
HMS Princess Royal £2,089,000

I don't see the cost difference between Australia and the Lions having an impact on the order.

I think that the smaller ships could actually dock in AUS might also help?

The numbers look questionable....how do you make a ship with 12" and 18,800 t normal cost the same as one with 13.5" and 26,690 t just the steel should add a lot?
(the earlier I class cost 1.7M on Wiki?)