The rather minuscule risk provided by aircraft and their required stores aboard a warship are doubly or triply outweighed by the advantage of carrying your own spotting aircraft, especially in protected hangers.
Ok , I must admit that I was thinking on a guadalcanal like escenario, maybe I overestimated the lessons that can be pick out or not the correct ones but, even without that, am still really concern with the issue of anything regarding armour, torpedo tubes or AA that can realistically be fitted with added weight of planes, cranes and catapults, that's why strongly support a medium point: planes? ok, a limit of two in peace time and one in wartime, so that there's enough space left for either of the other stated issues.
After the Treaty was signed, it remained a fact that the Royal Navy needed new ocean-going cruisers, and so the 1923 programme included ships that followed the obvious Washington template. The four ‘Londons’ displaced 10,000 tons, had large, high hulls for seaworthiness, long range and a design speed of 32½ knots. Armament consisted of eight 8” guns and six 21” torpedo tubes, with an anti-aircraft battery of four 4” guns and four of the new 1” automatic cannons.
Pegasus was an ‘aviation cruiser’, intended to address the problems seen in Cavendish. She was 702’ long and carried eight 8” guns in the same turrets as the ‘Londons’. A 380’ flight deck lay in between, with room for up to 26 aircraft below. There was 3” side protection over machinery and magazines, with a 1.5” lower deck. Money was saved by using part of the machinery of the scrapped HMS Courageous, and she achieved 29.9 knots at 19,210 tons when on trials in 1927.
In the end, the 1924 Programme included an slightly improved ‘Nelson’, with a 2’ wide strake of 12” armour added below the belt, better splinter protection for the secondary turrets and hoists, and slightly improved machinery delivering an extra 1,000 horsepower. HMS Trafalgar was laid down in October 1924 and completed in August 1927.
By the end of 1924, they had gone back to first principles. Ships such as Howe were close to being ‘fast battleships’, but the battlecruiser had originally been created as a powerful form of cruiser, not as a fast form of battleship. The work done on the ‘Londons’ had created new lightweight hull designs and the ‘E-class’ cruisers had shown that using highly forced destroyer-type machinery in a large ship was quite safe and practical.
In the New Year, the experimental destroyer Amazon ran trials with machinery using 300-psi superheated steam, showing that further improvements were possible.
We can probably be sure that one more 8" cruiser will be built using the turrets from Pegasus but that may be it for RN heavy cruisers as the costs of running a CA looks like it will equal the costs of a LBC. 13.5" guns will be plenty powerful enough to do almost everything they need to do.
Meanwhile, it became ever clearer that the new, large cruisers would not be cheap to build or to operate. Admiral Jellicoe’s 1919 review of the Empire’s naval defence needs had concluded that the RN needed at least 70 cruisers. Some of these could be smaller or older types, and a few roles could probably be carried out by aircraft, but the thought of building and manning even 20 ships such as London or Pegasus had the Treasury in a lather, when each one cost about a third as much as a battleship to build, and half as much to run.
And? Cruisers only carried one floatplane usually. The function going further (I assume you mean ASW, etc) is merely logical advancement as weaponry makes it practical. There’s nothing quantum leap like in the advancement of shipborne aircraft, it’s all been steady and predictable as the technology advanced with time.
I don’t understand your assertion that not having the ability to deploy an aircraft is somehow an advantage. I can understand the facilities can be viewed as weight and space penalties, but a vessel with the ability to carry, launch and recover an aircraft is always better suited to scouting and trade protection than one without.
The rather minuscule risk provided by aircraft and their required stores aboard a warship are doubly or triply outweighed by the advantage of carrying your own spotting aircraft, especially in protected hangers.
I might be a bit behind but... spotter aircraft were used for spotting, search and rescue, ASW, recon, and transport. Some even acted as CAP.
A degree of familiarity with the crew of the ship they worked with was a good thing because of teamwork, so carrier based spotters are not the immediate solution they might seem.
You need to veiw the aircraft as a part of a weapons system Charles, it's no good spending the saved tonnage from taking out the aviation facilities on armour or guns when the cruiser fails in it's main role as it didn't find the enemy due to them not coming into visual range.
Generally speaking you mitigate the risk factors of aircraft stowage by draining the aircraft and fuel systems before action and/or launching the aircraft if you have time so risk is minimized.
The big problem is a crew, a County had a complement of 700 against 1300 in a Nelson, add to that the higher operational tempo of cruisers they get expensive fast. I suspect a LBC will probably come in between the two i.e. 1000 crew and lower tempo than a cruiser but higher than a battleship. That means they will probably cost 3/4ths as much as a Nelwood to operate but will be considerably less capable. If the RN really wanted to prioritise "bang for buck" and getting the maximum amount of capability out of as little money as possible a 50,000 ton improved N3 becomes really attractive.
Meanwhile, it became ever clearer that the new, large cruisers would not be cheap to build or to operate. Admiral Jellicoe’s 1919 review of the Empire’s naval defence needs had concluded that the RN needed at least 70 cruisers. Some of these could be smaller or older types, and a few roles could probably be carried out by aircraft, but the thought of building and manning even 20 ships such as London or Pegasus had the Treasury in a lather, when each one cost about a third as much as a battleship to build, and half as much to run.
In addition, the overall Treaty restriction of 350,000 tons meant that the RN could never build enough 10,000-ton ships
In the background, battleship development was proceeding slowly, and the ideas proposed for a 1924 ship centred around a companion for Rodney, to allow the formation of a 28-knot division of two ships with 16” guns. Designers had concluded that nine 16” guns could be provided on a ship that looked much like a shortened ‘D-33’ battlecruiser, although protection was little better than that of Rodney.
In the end, the 1924 Programme included an slightly improved ‘Nelson’, with a 2’ wide strake of 12” armour added below the belt, better splinter protection for the secondary turrets and hoists, and slightly improved machinery delivering an extra 1,000 horsepower. HMS Trafalgar was laid down in October 1924 and completed in August 1927.
What the Royal Navy wanted was a ship capable of crushing any Treaty Cruiser it encountered. However, to do that meant using valuable battleship tonnage, and so to justify itself, such a ship must also be capable of other duties, including engaging enemy capital ships, even if perhaps only in a peripheral role. That was almost exactly Admiral Fisher’s original description of a battlecruiser, but the idea would need to be updated in light of the experiences of war.
To catch enemy cruisers, the ship would have to achieve a speed of over 30 knots. An equivalent of the mighty Furious or Howe, the two largest warships in the fleet, was clearly impossible, however a faster Panther could comfortably be built within the 23,000-ton limit. However, with 13.5” guns and armour protection that was inadequate against much more than 12” fire, Panther would be no match for a modern 15” or 16” gun ship, and the Admiralty wasn’t interested in building new second-rate battlecruisers using precious capital ship tonnage.
The next class, the ‘Renowns’, were effective modern ships, but their true Standard Displacement was 33,000 tons after improvements to their armour and underwater protection. However, if redesigned from the keel-up with lightweight machinery and a new hull form, it seemed possible that a ship like Renown might just possibly be built for around 23,000 tons.
Through the winter of 1924/25, design teams produced numerous concepts. The most basic, ‘1924-A’ was a relatively well-balanced ship with eight 13.5” guns in four turrets, adequately armoured against its own guns at battle ranges of 15-25,000 yards.
The ‘1924-B’ series attempted to do the same with 15” guns, but before long, the design ran into problems. It seemed the constraints of the 23,000-ton limit would have to be stretched, and new thinking on armour and armament would be needed before a design could close. In desperation, the anti-aircraft battery was provided by making use of the Treaty exemption that up to 3,000 tons could be added to a ship ‘for the purpose of improving means of defence against air attack’.
By the end of 1924, they had gone back to first principles. Ships such as Howe were close to being ‘fast battleships’, but the battlecruiser had originally been created as a powerful form of cruiser, not as a fast form of battleship.
Somewhat larger than her OTL namesake. The 6" guns are unnecessary and the 25-knot speed will be a handicap, but she sounds like a useful platform for learning about air operations with the fleet. Is she flush-decked like Argus or is an island structure included from the start?Hermes was intended to operate with a fleet, was armed with six 6” guns and could carry up to 40 planes, using the machinery of a cancelled ‘D-class’ cruiser for a speed of 25 knots.
Uggh. If the design is even marginally viable when commissioned (I pity the poor pilots trying to land on that deck in any sort of seaway, and it's not clear from the description where the bridge, masts, fire control etc all go) it's going to become very impractical very quickly once aircraft start to get bigger and heavier, landing speeds rise and catapult launches become standard. At best, she ends up as a proto-Tone carrying seaplanes for scouting; more likely she is eventually rebuilt with a flush deck or disarmed as an auxiliary. I foresee a future entry in the Big Book of Negative Examples.Pegasus was an ‘aviation cruiser’, intended to address the problems seen in Cavendish. She was 702’ long and carried eight 8” guns in the same turrets as the ‘Londons’. A 380’ flight deck lay in between, with room for up to 26 aircraft below. There was 3” side protection over machinery and magazines, with a 1.5” lower deck. Money was saved by using part of the machinery of the scrapped HMS Courageous, and she achieved 29.9 knots at 19,210 tons when on trials in 1927.
If the Treasury (or the Admiralty) thinks that even a smallish CV with 20-30 aircraft costs as little to run as half a battleship, they are in for a rude surprise when the bills come in. Aircraft need expensive fuel and lots of maintenance and spares.Meanwhile, it became ever clearer that the new, large cruisers would not be cheap to build or to operate. Admiral Jellicoe’s 1919 review of the Empire’s naval defence needs had concluded that the RN needed at least 70 cruisers. Some of these could be smaller or older types, and a few roles could probably be carried out by aircraft, but the thought of building and manning even 20 ships such as London or Pegasus had the Treasury in a lather, when each one cost about a third as much as a battleship to build, and half as much to run.
I'm surprised they spent money even minimally refitting the Orions. Do we have a list of which older ships are still operational and which ones were disposed of to free up Treaty tonnage space for Trafalgar?In recent years, several ‘Orion’ and ‘King George V’ class battleships had been operated with oil-firing and reduced crews, showing that capital ships could be operated relatively economically. Although these old ships were slow, they could bring a level of firepower to colonial stations that could never be answered by cruisers.
In the New Year, the experimental destroyer Amazon ran trials with machinery using 300-psi superheated steam, showing that further improvements were possible.
Pegasus was an ‘aviation cruiser’, intended to address the problems seen in Cavendish. She was 702’ long and carried eight 8” guns in the same turrets as the ‘Londons’. A 380’ flight deck lay in between, with room for up to 26 aircraft below. There was 3” side protection over machinery and magazines, with a 1.5” lower deck. Money was saved by using part of the machinery of the scrapped HMS Courageous, and she achieved 29.9 knots at 19,210 tons when on trials in 1927.
Well it's fast and has a good hull so once it's been rebuilt it might be a good carrier and will teach the RN some important lessons. As built she's....... a learning experience.
Uggh. If the design is even marginally viable when commissioned (I pity the poor pilots trying to land on that deck in any sort of seaway, and it's not clear from the description where the bridge, masts, fire control etc all go) it's going to become very impractical very quickly once aircraft start to get bigger and heavier, landing speeds rise and catapult launches become standard. At best, she ends up as a proto-Tone carrying seaplanes for scouting; more likely she is eventually rebuilt with a flush deck or disarmed as an auxiliary. I foresee a future entry in the Big Book of Negative Examples.
True. I was just listing incidents off the top of my head. You are right that when something goes wrong everything else tends to too.I wouldn’t say any of those were condemned purely due to their aviation facilities. They all took damage that would be considered severe without the aircraft related fires and explosions. None of them would have avoided their fates if they weren’t carrying aircraft.
Sorry, I have to ask:
Does anybody knows, finances apart, which reasons in OTL had the Treasury to cut down so much the defensive arm of the empire?, how they envisioned to protect the sea lanes if they didn't let space for sufficient margin of ships?, an curious now, how much it cost to build and run a County?
Merely stretches toUnfortunately for all of them, the British would then choose to show that they were no strangers to bending the rules.
I’m going to be slightly disappointed, I’m not going to lie...It seemed the constraints of the 23,000-ton limit would have to be stretched, and new thinking on armour and armament would be needed before a design could close. In desperation, the anti-aircraft battery was provided by making use of the Treaty exemption that up to 3,000 tons could be added to a ship ‘for the purpose of improving means of defence against air attack’.
The question I have about Pegasus is what is it for? If it is just an Tone that carrier that carries 8-10 scout/fighter aircraft I could see it being useful, but it can't do much more. As a fleet carrier, it is crippled by the lack of hangar space. The bigger question is why isn't the flight deck bigger? The ship is 702 feet long, but the flight deck is a little over half that. Why not at least extend the flight deck over the forward or aft turrets sort of like the OTL Kaga? It would be easier over the after turrets to avoid too little bow free board, but it would increase flight deck length by about 40%, providing a much more useful deck.
Pegasus was an ‘aviation cruiser’
Of course after a few years of operations will learn that a.) her layout makes her a bad carrier and b.) ships filled with bombs and avgas can never be safely sent into gun range of any foe.