To be fair given the sheer projected costs of the prewar Dutch naval ambitions having all 3 canceled Admirals and a supporting force of say 6 or so light cruisers and three or four flotillas of destroyers and subs would be viable assuming the Dutch were willing to spend the cash postwar
Alternate warships of nations
- Thread starter zeppelinair
- Start date
Though they may not be able to support it after the end of the war as their economy had suffered significantly during the conflict.
I doubt the Dutch can support more than one decent-sized BB/BC with their low interwar budgets without having too few supporting forces. Not putting the submarines second behind the cruiser squadron in the 20's and 30's would be their best bet IMO, since it would mean more subs available and they would be better handled than OTL.
Although their spending was very low. It's not as if the OTL Dutch budget was the absolute best they could do. The Netherlands was committed to neutrality and had better things to spend money on in the eyes of the government.
Perhaps in a scenario with a mildly increased defense budget, or one where the east indies army received less funding, they could have afforded a larger fleet
Greece did in OTL right before WW1 contract with the Germans to build them a dreadnought ( Though strangely enough using US made 14 inch guns and turrets). In OTL a combination of factors meant it got only half built. If Greece was in better shape post war the Salamis might have been finished.
That is a valid point. Having all your major trading partners shooting at each other and restricting what you can trade will do that to your economy
Maybe assume more of a "guerilla submarine" policy for the DEI's. Build a small number of mobile submarine tenders to be moved around the DEI to various isolated inlets and refuel, resupply, and repair submarines. Assume the main bases are going to get hit hard very fast so operate off the assumption that the Submarines aren't going to basing out of the main ports. Similarly build a small fleet of converted flying boat tenders to operate along a similar policy providing recon for the submarines and preying on lone unarmed merchantmen.
Frankly in general if possible raising a large DEI army would be nice. In OTL for the population of the DEI's it was pretty tiny. If the dutch are smart they can buy a bunch of dirt cheap WW1 surplus in the 20's. Even a well equipped WW1 level force would be better then what they had. Purchase a bunch of US/French 37mm 'Trench Guns". They should work for most Japanese tanks even with their puny payload. And they can be theoretically operated from say light trucks to snipe landing craft.
Hmmmm so a bunch of highly mobile coastal subs and PT boats and minelayers with some DDs to back them up and seaplanes and land based air to Scout for them? That could work. Speaking of WWI surplus equipment I bet you could get a ton of heavier ex German artillery for both field work and coastal defenses.
PoD: In the early 2000s the Pentagon creates a containment project for all the bad apples in naval procurement
The Claude A. Swanson Class Littoral Single Class Combatant: (Alternatively called the Secretary of the Navy Class Littoral Through-Deck Pre-Dreadnought Underway Replenishment Landing Ship Tank)
Planned: 14
Completed: 1
Lost: 1
Cancelled: 13
The Claude A. Swanson Class was the product of a request for a single class solution to the Littoral Combat mission profile. The design made use of a unique trimaran hull form and stealth super structure. To provide shore bombardment capability it featured a forward turret sporting twin 12" guns, a secondary battery of two 8" guns, and a tertiary battery of two 5" AGS. For the purpose of combating coastal light ships it sported a quaternary battery of four 76mm guns, a quinary battery of six 57mm guns, and a senary battery of four 30mm Bushmaster auto-cannons. For air defence they featured two Phalanx CIWS and two Rolling Airframe Missile launchers. The ships also had an angled flight deck for the operation of six on board F35B Lightning II strike fighters, while they could take off as S-TOLs, these had to land as V-TOLs due to the hazards posed by the ship's king posts. It also featured a large pair of bow doors for the transportation of a Marine Tank Platoon. They were also the most protectected ships laid down by the US Navy since the Second World War.
Owing to a troubled development period, cost overruns, and delays, in 2017 the class was slashed from 14 ships down to the one ship that had already been launched. The other two hulls on the slips were sold to Carnival Corporation & plc for conversion into cruise ships. USS Claude A. Swanson was commissioned in December of 2019, and assigned to the Sixth Fleet. On the 4th of August 2020 it was in Beirut for a port call, and attempted to assist in quenching a fire in a port-side warehouse, unknown at the time to contain large quantities of ammonium nitrate. Being almost directly atop the epicentre of the 2020 Beirut Explosion resulted in the ship's total loss.
The Claude A. Swanson Class Littoral Single Class Combatant: (Alternatively called the Secretary of the Navy Class Littoral Through-Deck Pre-Dreadnought Underway Replenishment Landing Ship Tank)
Planned: 14
Completed: 1
Lost: 1
Cancelled: 13
The Claude A. Swanson Class was the product of a request for a single class solution to the Littoral Combat mission profile. The design made use of a unique trimaran hull form and stealth super structure. To provide shore bombardment capability it featured a forward turret sporting twin 12" guns, a secondary battery of two 8" guns, and a tertiary battery of two 5" AGS. For the purpose of combating coastal light ships it sported a quaternary battery of four 76mm guns, a quinary battery of six 57mm guns, and a senary battery of four 30mm Bushmaster auto-cannons. For air defence they featured two Phalanx CIWS and two Rolling Airframe Missile launchers. The ships also had an angled flight deck for the operation of six on board F35B Lightning II strike fighters, while they could take off as S-TOLs, these had to land as V-TOLs due to the hazards posed by the ship's king posts. It also featured a large pair of bow doors for the transportation of a Marine Tank Platoon. They were also the most protectected ships laid down by the US Navy since the Second World War.
Owing to a troubled development period, cost overruns, and delays, in 2017 the class was slashed from 14 ships down to the one ship that had already been launched. The other two hulls on the slips were sold to Carnival Corporation & plc for conversion into cruise ships. USS Claude A. Swanson was commissioned in December of 2019, and assigned to the Sixth Fleet. On the 4th of August 2020 it was in Beirut for a port call, and attempted to assist in quenching a fire in a port-side warehouse, unknown at the time to contain large quantities of ammonium nitrate. Being almost directly atop the epicentre of the 2020 Beirut Explosion resulted in the ship's total loss.
By 1906 the Federal Republic of America realized that their Navy needed some attention. Their last class of Battleships The Gettysburg Class had been launched almost a decade earlier and their 10 inch guns were no longer competitive with the other Navies of the New World much less the old world powers Britain and France. The Federal Navy had been a primaraly a defensive force for the last 70 years by this point so the new class of battle ship was designed with all of its heavy guns forward. The eight ships of the Federal Class would carry a main battery of six 13inch guns in two triple turrets a design borrowed from their Allies to the south the Commonwealth of American States. Their seconddayr battery consisted of six 8 inch guns in three twin turrets one of which provedied covered the ships stern. Their thrid battery and forut battery cosisted of twelve 7 inch guns in and ten 3 inch guns respectively all in casemate
A Nelson/Richelieu style pre-Dreadnought? Very interesting if nothing else.
On that note, did anybody in the 1890-1905 naval community ever consider that kind of layout?
Not exactly but I suppose HMS Victoria and HMS Sans Peril come close?
HMS Victoria, and IRS (?) Nicholas I (did/does Russia have a prefix ?) Along with HMS Nelson. I've been refining this design for near 8 years now she started as a CSS Virginia way back in the day lol.
Yeah it is but I've talked with people and it's not unseeable. As to the bow yeah but I've tried to give a similar bow ratio with Nelson to fix that. It's always a work in progress. And earlier version is posted to wolfshipyard form if anyone here is on that board.
http://www.wolfsshipyard.com/yards/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4092
I know thats a design for a terrible ship. But it still sounds incredibly bad ass and I want to see a real one.
Driftless
Donor
^^^^Here's a FB link to a ship of similar configuration (part of the What If Modellers group): https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbi...-o_zaV3IjCm1NAqPr7iV2Fmvuq2BvE8q0&__tn__=EH-R