1922 HMS Agincourt Refit

In 1922, taking advantage of the Washington Naval Treaty Part 2 Paragraph II. (e), the Royal Navy took the opportunity to convert a single Capital Ship to the status of Experimental Training Ship, by rendering it unfit for warlike service, but allowing it to be used as a test bed for new experimental weaponry. Since the negotiating parties had been unable to agree on the weaponry limitations for this one-off exemption, (how can we prohibit what we have not yet invented, the parties argued) the Experimental Training Ship exemption placed no restrictions on weaponry, even caliber, but were required to remove the conning tower and all side armour, and machinery that would permit speed in excess of 18 knots.


The Admiralty chose HMS Agincourt for this role. The belt armour and conning tower were removed, and bulges were added to provide buoyancy and stability. It was thought that no boilers would have to be removed, as the installation of the bulges and new main battery would add sufficient weight to slow the ship to less than 18 knots.


Finally the Agincourt’s 14 BL 12 inch Mk XIII guns in seven twin turrets were replaced by seven turrets that had been constructed for the first three N3 battleships whose hulls had been required to be scrapped by the treaty. This upgraded Agincourt’s main armament to 21 BL 18 inch guns in seven triple turrets.

In order to accommodate the much larger turret rings without expensively rebuilding Agincourt right down to the keel, the roller path was constructed on a reinforced section of deck cantilevered out from the barbette, while the main trunk and hoists were restricted by the smaller diameter of the original barbette for the 12 inch guns. The resulting hoist system was not able to operate the same rate of fire, but this was considered acceptable for an experimental ship that would not see actual combat.


Negotiating the much larger turrets on deck took some modifications in layout. While A, P, Y and Z turrets retained their original traverse, the rear overhang of B turret filled the entire space the conning tower had previously occupied. Q turret and barbette were lowered to the main deck to reduce topweight, and to allow P turret’s barrels to swing over top. Q and X turrets were in the same locations, but with their longer barrels they could not rest on centerline, they needed to be trained 10 degrees to port or starboard. Training Q and X turrets to opposite broadside took some choreography. After P turret trained to one side, Q turret had to elevate the guns to maximum to swing the barrels over the P gunhouse roof. A similar maneuver was performed with X turret and the aft deckhouse.


All this chicanery produced a dreadnought that was capable of firing a 21 gun broadside, each barrel throwing a 2916 pound shell, for a total broadside of 61,236 lbs. In comparison, the next most powerful broadside in existence at the time belonged to the US Standard battleships of the Tennessee, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania classes at 18,000 lbs. The later Yamato class fired a broadside of only 28,971 lbs. The only competitor that approached Agincourt was the 57,942 lb. broadside of the Japanese battleship Hyuga, when she was fitted with the 6 turrets made surplus by the carrier conversion of Yamato sister Shinano and the cancellation of an unnamed 4th ship.


Apparently Agincourt’s decks became quite lively when firing full broadsides. One waggish officer remarked that when a full broadside was fired the resulting sheet of flame was big enough to create the impression that Krakatoa had blown up.
 
Agincourts beam was 89 feet, N3s was 106.
I'm sure the opium they are on is of very high quality, but the fears of agincourt breaking her back or capsizing when firing a full broadside may become a reality ITTL
Agincourt as a depot supply ship is more plausible,as it was actually considered and potentially more interesting.
Unless your definition of interesting is a very big explosion.
 
Agincourts beam was 89 feet, N3s was 106.
I'm sure the opium they are on is of very high quality, but the fears of agincourt breaking her back or capsizing when firing a full broadside may become a reality ITTL
Agincourt as a depot supply ship is more plausible,as it was actually considered and potentially more interesting.
Unless your definition of interesting is a very big explosion.
Exactly. There's no way to fit so many large guns on such a hull. The 18"/40 weighed three times as much as the 12"/45.
 

Ramontxo

Donor
After another generation of Sea Lords enjoy another dose of the same wonderful Afghan tea ,the Agincourt is taken out of Artic Canada (where she had been hidden after the nineteenth hundred try to fit the first of the 18 inch turrets) and fitted with seven triple eleven inch German turrets (autorished by the treasury after being guaranteed a share of the tea). Twenty one shells a minute will deplete the magazines before the first straddle, the hull was designed for twenty two knots and is several decades old so it will only be able to catch merchant cruisers and anyway even if restored with its original armour it's torpedo protection would be laughable but what a tea!
 
Last edited:
The best you could hope for is replacing the twin 12" turrets for single 15" so this is only 1 less gun than the QE's and 18" were not permitted by the WNT.
 
While I too would love to see Agincourt given a better life, I don't think that's the way to do it. One interesting discussion I saw had her lengthened, switched to oil-firing, and possibly an engine replacement (It's been a while) to make in the neighborhood of 27 knots. Springsharp seemed to indicate it could be done.

Aside from the fact that it would be an egregious treaty violation, it gave a fast ship that could clobber panzerschiff with ease.

I agree with some of the others, putting 50% more of a heavier gun will either break her back, or see her pull a Mary Rose as soon as she's away from support.
 
While I too would love to see Agincourt given a better life, I don't think that's the way to do it. One interesting discussion I saw had her lengthened, switched to oil-firing, and possibly an engine replacement (It's been a while) to make in the neighborhood of 27 knots. Springsharp seemed to indicate it could be done.
They could have pulled the middle two turrets and converted to oil fire to get 27 knots on the existing hull. Warship hulls generally cannot be lengthened easily because they vary constantly in beam. You could theoretically split the ship at the widest beam but your plug would have to follow the same curvature as the rest of the hull to prevent drag spots.
 

Deleted member 94680

In 1922, taking advantage of the Washington Naval Treaty Part 2 Paragraph II. (e), the Royal Navy took the opportunity to convert a single Capital Ship to the status of Experimental Training Ship, by rendering it unfit for warlike service, but allowing it to be used as a test bed for new experimental weaponry. Since the negotiating parties had been unable to agree on the weaponry limitations for this one-off exemption, (how can we prohibit what we have not yet invented, the parties argued) the Experimental Training Ship exemption placed no restrictions on weaponry, even caliber, but were required to remove the conning tower and all side armour, and machinery that would permit speed in excess of 18 knots.

I understand this is your PoD, but I really don’t think you could see this happening. It effectively allows each Great Power to (re)build a “single vessel class” battleship completely outside of the constraints of the Treaty. All the constraints you’ve listed could easily be built for in preparation of the day the treaty is cast aside and hey presto! A super battleship ready to go that would render 95%(?) of the enemy’s battle line obsolete.
 
They could have pulled the middle two turrets and converted to oil fire to get 27 knots on the existing hull. Warship hulls generally cannot be lengthened easily because they vary constantly in beam. You could theoretically split the ship at the widest beam but your plug would have to follow the same curvature as the rest of the hull to prevent drag spots.

While you are correct as a rule, in that case we had figured on an Italian style nose job
.
 
They could have pulled the middle two turrets and converted to oil fire to get 27 knots on the existing hull. Warship hulls generally cannot be lengthened easily because they vary constantly in beam. You could theoretically split the ship at the widest beam but your plug would have to follow the same curvature as the rest of the hull to prevent drag spots.
While you are correct as a rule, in that case we had figured on an Italian style nose job
.
Same with the likes of the Kongos, though only a few metres.
While I too would love to see Agincourt given a better life, I don't think that's the way to do it. One interesting discussion I saw had her lengthened, switched to oil-firing, and possibly an engine replacement (It's been a while) to make in the neighborhood of 27 knots. Springsharp seemed to indicate it could be done.

Aside from the fact that it would be an egregious treaty violation, it gave a fast ship that could clobber panzerschiff with ease.

I agree with some of the others, putting 50% more of a heavier gun will either break her back, or see her pull a Mary Rose as soon as she's away from support.
Agincourt-BC_oil.jpg



Agincourt-BC_17.jpg

Something along the lines of this maybe. At the same time I'd take something like Tiger instead

http://www.wolfsshipyard.com/Misc/NeverWeres/royal.htm
 
While you are correct as a rule, in that case we had figured on an Italian style nose job
.

In the case of the Conte di Cavour class battleships, the new bow was simply built over the existing one.

The Imperial Japanese Navy also lengthened their ships at the stern, which helped with buoyancy and fineness.

With Agincourt, you don't really need 27kn- that's faster than the line battleships, but still too slow to keep up with postwar battlecruisers. Better to switch to oil firing so you can remove the forward funnel and build a better superstructure and have a director for all those guns.

Agincourt also definitely lacks the structural strength for 21x18". She was actually built with less compartmentalization and bracing than contemporary British ships due to Brazilian requirements for large rooms. Also, look at the example of HMS Furious- her half-sisters Courageous and Glorious could fire their 4x 15" guns without problems but the single 18" on Furious caused a hail of rivets to fly every time it was fired. 21 of those on Agincourt would rip her apart, before you even figure the blast effect of that many big guns that close together mangling everything topside.

Therein lies the problem- Agincourt is a ship that is really, really difficult to rebuild into a better one.
 
The first broadside would have snapped the ship in two.
21 18 inchers?
At best maybe one or two single turrets carrying an 18 incher or a pair of 16 inch turrets.
As a gun test platform.

If you want to build a ship with some heavy guns and not make it a super expensive Battleship which will bankrupt the empire, build a moinitor...like the did OTL
 
Yeah nah you're not gonna fit 21 18in guns on a ~30k tonne displacement, not working ones anyway.

I understand this is your PoD, but I really don’t think you could see this happening. It effectively allows each Great Power to (re)build a “single vessel class” battleship completely outside of the constraints of the Treaty. All the constraints you’ve listed could easily be built for in preparation of the day the treaty is cast aside and hey presto! A super battleship ready to go that would render 95%(?) of the enemy’s battle line obsolete.
Although it's only a single ship, and given the long lead in construction times of even a more normal battleship the effects of a single super ship would be rather limited all things considered.

Far more concerning would be the practical experiences gained for the single experimental vessel and the infrastructure expansions needed to handle that vessel, which would go a long way in maintaining institutional knowledge and skills.
 
With Agincourt, you don't really need 27kn- that's faster than the line battleships, but still too slow to keep up with postwar battlecruisers. Better to switch to oil firing so you can remove the forward funnel and build a better superstructure and have a director for all those guns.

Right, it was more of a question of "Can we" rather than "Should we". 27 knots was as fast as we could reasonably get, preferably retaining all main guns, and obviously completely changing the secondaries. We figured it COULD be done, but you'd be left with something that as you noted, it really neither fish nor fowl. Too fast (and honestly, too weak) to hang out with the battleships, and too slow to be with the battlecruisers.

That said, she'd still be suitable for chasing down raiders, and bullying the Italian rebuilds.
 
DNC must have been knocking back the lead chip lattes when he signed off on that one lol
It was designed to a Brazilian order.
It had been sold to the Ottoman Empire when Churchill decided to take it. Having annoyed the Ottomans, he then decided to annoy the French by namimg a capital ship after a British victory over the French, at the start of a war in which Britain was allied with France.
I can imagine the dialogue.
"But Winston, this may start a war with Turkey"
"Shut up Jackie, we need to show the French we are on their side in this war"
"And how shall we name it?"
"Agincourt, of course! Crecy is already taken."
 
I am aware my proposed rebuild above is in Space Battleship Yamato territory. I think the ship would be fortunate to only break in half on firing a broadside. But since I am not a naval architect, and am too lazy to learn Springsharp to answer just this question, I am curious to know where the point of failure would be.

Would Agincourt remain sitting on the bottom of the drydock as it was refilled? Would she capsize dockside from the topweight? I can’t find a weight for those turrets because none were actually built. Would firing a broadside at 40 degree maximum elevation drive the ship bodily to the sea floor? Would firing a broadside at -5 degree maximum depression cause the ship to fly, like the rocket launcher guy in Team Fortress 2? Would the concussion set off all the fuses in the magazines? Would the concussion and blast reduce the crew to hamburger?
 
The turrets physically fit on the deck in the way I described. Here is an image I mashed up in Photoshop from a Ship Bucket drawing. To scale. Original credit for the drawing goes to Jabba, as remains on the image. Cutting and pasting are my own.
Agincourt 1922.jpg
 
This is just setting the stage for the ATL: Who would win, Agincourt with 7 N3 turrets vs. Hyuga with 6 Yamato turrets?
 
Top