Alaska Class vs. Des Moines Class for the Postwar World?

It didn't help that British industry, public and private, had a habit of delivering the ships late and over cost. The refit of Victorious takes a lot of flack for taking 8 years and costing £20 million, but it cost £37.5 million to complete Hermes in 1959. Ark Royal completed in 1955 cost £21 million and the other 3 Centaur class completed about 5 years earlier cost about £10 million each. Hermes did have more advanced electronics than her sisters, but I can't believe that in combination with inflation was the cause of the trebling of the cost in such a short time.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
How did they manage to scale up a Baltimore-class cruiser and somehow get rid of the flag quarters? (I assume that the Baltimores, being CAs, had them)
The decision to include flag space has to be made during construction. Not all CA (or BB for that matter) are designed with the additional "office" space needed for flag quarters. The space has to reallocated from things like CO & XO "in port" accommodations, and officer's wardrooms. None of that impacts the fighting capability of a ship, but does make it feel even more crowded. Flag space is also relatively costly since extra communication gear is needed.

The faiure to add the space is just another example of how the CB design was poorly thought out and why they were mothballed after barely being broken in.
 

Delta Force

Banned
A couple of other factors for a postwar naval environment. First, guns, or rather, the ammunition for them. The Des Moines class use the same ammo as the Baltimores that formed the backbone of the US Navy's cruisers postwar, while the Alaskas need specially built 12" ammo. You get one guess as to which option is cheaper.

The Des Moines class were intended to use super heavy 8" shells, which were a limited procurement item (although they were also used on older cruisers).

The second is the primary opponent: the Sverdlov class cruisers. Fast, with long range and heavy surface and AA armament, these ships were a significant worry for NATO in the 1950s, though moreso for the Brits than the US Navy. For this job, a Des Moines, with its lesser operational and construction costs, is a far more suitable ship for the job than the Alaska class, and is still quite capable of clobbering a Sverdlov in a fight.

The Soviets were also considering more powerful Stalingrad class battlecruisers, and the Alaska and Iowa class would have been the only ships with the speed, firepower, and armor to match them.
 

Delta Force

Banned
The decision to include flag space has to be made during construction. Not all CA (or BB for that matter) are designed with the additional "office" space needed for flag quarters. The space has to reallocated from things like CO & XO "in port" accommodations, and officer's wardrooms. None of that impacts the fighting capability of a ship, but does make it feel even more crowded. Flag space is also relatively costly since extra communication gear is needed.

The faiure to add the space is just another example of how the CB design was poorly thought out and why they were mothballed after barely being broken in.

Admirals have commanded fleets from light cruisers. If a light cruiser has the room for it surely a heavy cruiser, battlecruiser, or battleship can find the room?
 
The Des Moines class were intended to use super heavy 8" shells, which were a limited procurement item (although they were also used on older cruisers).



The Soviets were also considering more powerful Stalingrad class battlecruisers, and the Alaska and Iowa class would have been the only ships with the speed, firepower, and armor to match them.
As were the Baltimores, of which the US Navy still has fifteen of in 1955. I seriously doubt the US had any shortage of 8" super-heavy.

As for the Stalingrads, I'd much rather take an Iowa - or even better, a flight of Skywarriors - against them than an Alaska. Besides, the Soviets only laid down three, they didn't start them until the early 1950s, and they encountered serious delays before being cancelled. I doubt anyone was overly worried about them.
 
Unfortunately, there were still a lot of big gun sailors in the RN in the 50's hence the diversion of all that money away from the FAA.
It would not have mattered as much if the Tiger class had been completed on time and at cost.

At the time their completion was authorised in 1954 it was estimated that each ship would cost 3 years to complete at a cost of £6 million per ship against 5 years at a cost of £12 million for a new cruiser of similar size and armament.

They actually took an average of 6 years to build at an average cost £14.1 million or 135% more than their estimated cost in 1954, when prices had increased by 20%, so they should have cost about £7.2 million each. If they had been completed on time in 1957 their cost should have been £6.72 million after allowing for the 12% increase in prices.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Admirals have commanded fleets from light cruisers. If a light cruiser has the room for it surely a heavy cruiser, battlecruiser, or battleship can find the room?
Some light cruiser were constructed with Flag Quarters, many were not.

The simple fact is that the CB were POORLY thought out. They lacked basic defensive features that would be expected on a 32K ton design, including torpedo bulges, and armor capable of handling even late war 8" AP rounds.

All the ear-rings and lipstick ever made won't make a pig anything but a pig.

The Des Moines class were intended to use super heavy 8" shells, which were a limited procurement item (although they were also used on older cruisers).



The Soviets were also considering more powerful Stalingrad class battlecruisers, and the Alaska and Iowa class would have been the only ships with the speed, firepower, and armor to match them.
Exactly how many 12" Mark 18 and Common Mark 19 shells for the new 12/50 Mark 8 gun do you suppose were procured? In addition to being a new gun, it used a new shell in order to achieve its exceptional performance (for caliber) The Navy only made a TOTAL of 30 12"/50 Mark 8 barrels, unlike the literal hundreds of 8" guns produced.

If the U.S. wanted to fight a Soviet BC, the answer wasn't to go out with a peer (bad stuff can happen when you fight an equal, especially when the CB can't handle 12" gunfire, HMS Queen Mary ring any bells?), it was to go out with a Iowa. Finish the last two BB-61 class ships; if the need is that great, build a couple more (or, much more economically, keep the BB-55 & BB-57 classes in service). The Soviets want to fight on a day when it is impossible to fly, let them come in and fight the heavies while the carriers do exactly what they should do, fall back with their DD screen and let the big dogs fight.
 
Last edited:
Top