Alternate warships of nations

The Dutch and the Germans were quite close. The Dutch bought German machinery for their ships pre WW1. They had 4 torpedo boats building at Vulcan in 1914. The design for the Java class CL was by Germaniawerft. They were benvolently neutral towards the German Pacific Fleet by passing on messages and when the war was over they gave the Kaiser asylum and wouldn't give him up. The Germans also hid their submarine design work in the Dutch company IvS (Ingenieurskantoor voor Scheepsbouw) after the war.

The favored pre-WW1 battleship design appears to be either the Blohm & Voss design at 26 000 tons and 8 350mm in twin turrets and possibly 23 knots speed or a similar Germaniawerft one. The Germaniawerft design is more likely as there as already a close working relationship with the Dutch navy. These ships are basically flush deck diet-Badens. Vickers had given up on supplying their own armament and had adapted their design to take Krupps as preferred by the Dutch. Dutch yards didn't want the work because of the risks involved.

It was hoped to order in October 1914, lay down in Dec 1914 and deliver in early 1917. B&V guaranteed to deliver the first ship in 27 months and that Dutch yards could probably assist with the construction. Krupps also reserved the right to subcontract B&V and also deliver in 27 months. B&V were about to start building the Ersatz Victoria Louise (Mackensen) and the design for the Dutch probably included the same size guns (350 mm or 13.8") and turrets as the German ship. This will be the largest foreign sale of naval equipment to date (5 battleships) and will cause the British no end of worries with German yards having double the number of ships under construction in their yards than the normal HSF program making an impact on the balance of fleets over the next few years had WW1 not broken out.
 
The German shipyards and naval couldn't do 5 battleships at once in addition to the hsf programme.

If they got a Dutch order for 5 battleships they would either scale back the hsf or refuse the order or suggest going 2 battleships at once then 2 battleships then 1 battleship,
 

McPherson

Banned
Let us be practical.
--The British could build from keel to fighting top all British and would sell to anybody but France, Russia, Germany or the United States.
--The French could build from keel to artillery and they would supply proprietary range finders, engines, and fire control. They had a choice of boilers and steam engines. Their turbines were "questionable"
--The Germans could build and sell a German warship to very few "select" customers.
--The Americans have several shipyards that could build anything to customer spec and deliver. Cramp and Sons, Union Iron Works, and the federal shipyards at New York, San Francisco, and Philadelphia could so build. I do not know if Bethlehem Steel could build to spec. They could and did supply Wellin Block breech loading naval guns in 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 inch guns in 40 and 45 calibers.

This was actually done for the Russians. American ships were delivered with French style boilers, American engines, guns and mixed British and French naval range finders and directors. The Argentinians ordered all US tech in battleship form. Whether the Dutch could order 5 dreadnoughts out of US yards to counter the ships the British sold the Japanese, depends in large part on American and Dutch politics and how much cash the Dutch have. American yards were very good, but they were "expensive".

It is likely the Dutch, by preferences, would order German guns and directors and range finders. Everything else would be made in America.
==================================================================

In the meantime...

View attachment 552679
Something to chew on while I watch the CD-2 mission work the trip to the ISS.

1590953236069.png

As a grins and giggles 1898 exercise, it is "interesting" in a weird what would they be thinking PoD way, if Endicott recommended Krupp instead of Vickers?
 
Let us be practical.
--The British could build from keel to fighting top all British and would sell to anybody but France, Russia, Germany or the United States.
--The French could build from keel to artillery and they would supply proprietary range finders, engines, and fire control. They had a choice of boilers and steam engines. Their turbines were "questionable"
--The Germans could build and sell a German warship to very few "select" customers.
--The Americans have several shipyards that could build anything to customer spec and deliver. Cramp and Sons, Union Iron Works, and the federal shipyards at New York, San Francisco, and Philadelphia could so build. I do not know if Bethlehem Steel could build to spec. They could and did supply Wellin Block breech loading naval guns in 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 inch guns in 40 and 45 calibers.

This was actually done for the Russians. American ships were delivered with French style boilers, American engines, guns and mixed British and French naval range finders and directors. The Argentinians ordered all US tech in battleship form. Whether the Dutch could order 5 dreadnoughts out of US yards to counter the ships the British sold the Japanese, depends in large part on American and Dutch politics and how much cash the Dutch have. American yards were very good, but they were "expensive".

It is likely the Dutch, by preferences, would order German guns and directors and range finders. Everything else would be made in America.
==================================================================

In the meantime...



View attachment 552965
As a grins and giggles 1898 exercise, it is "interesting" in a weird what would they be thinking PoD way, if Endicott recommended Krupp instead of Vickers?
My good sir you forgot the shipyards at Newport News and Quincy both of which were capable of building capital ships in this time period.
 
Don't know if anyone else has mentioned this one, but I would've loved to have seen HMS Incomparable built. True, it would've essentially had paper for armour (like the F, G & C) and only lasted for 10 years (per Jackie Fisher himself), but man it would've been a sight to behold! :)
 
My good sir you forgot the shipyards at Newport News and Quincy both of which were capable of building capital ships in this time period.

Here's a full list of shipyards that built battlecruisers, battleships, and aircraft carriers for the USN (as well as the ships built at those yards).

USS Bennington (CV-20)
USS Bonhomme Richard (CV-31)
USS Kearsarge (CV-33)
USS Oriskany (CV-34)
USS Reprisal (CV-35) - cancelled
USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CV-42)
USS Saratoga (CV-60)
USS Independence (CV-62)
USS Constellation (CV-64)
USS Florida (BB-30)
USS New York (BB-34)
USS Arizona (BB-39)
USS New Mexico (BB-40)
USS Tennessee (BB-43)
USS South Dakota (BB-49) - cancelled
USS Indiana (BB-50) - cancelled
USS North Carolina (BB-55)
USS Iowa (BB-61)
USS Missouri (BB-63)
USS Maine (BB-69)
USS New Hampshire (BB-70)
USS Wasp (CV-07)
USS Lexington (CV-16)
USS Bunker Hill (CV-17)
USS Wasp (CV-18)
USS Hancock (CV-19)
USS Philippine Sea (CV-47)
USS North Dakota (BB-29)
USS Nevada (BB-36)
USS Massachusetts (BB-54) - cancelled
USS Massachusetts (BB-59)
USS Lexington (CC-01/CV-02)
USS California (BB-44)
USS Montana (BB-51) - cancelled
USS Saipan (CVL-48)
USS Wright (CVL-49)
USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63)
USS Michigan (BB-27)
USS Utah (BB-31)
USS Arkansas (BB-33)
USS Oklahoma (BB-37)
USS Idaho (BB-42)
USS Colorado (BB-45)
USS Washington (BB-47) - cancelled
USS South Dakota (BB-57)
USS Saratoga (CC-03/CV-03)
USS Ranger (CV-04)
USS Yorktown (CV-05)
USS Enterprise (CV-06)
USS Hornet (CV-08)
USS Essex (CV-09)
USS Yorktown (CV-10)
USS Intrepid (CV-11)
USS Hornet (CV-12)
USS Franklin (CV-13)
USS Ticonderoga (CV-14)
USS Randolph (CV-15)
USS Boxer (CV-21)
USS Leyte (CV-32)
USS Midway (CV-41)
USS Coral Sea (CV-43)
USS Iwo Jima (CV-46)
USS United States (CVA-58) - cancelled
USS Forrestal (CV-59)
USS Ranger (CV-61)
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
USS America (CV-66)
USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67)
USS Nimitz (CVN-68)
USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69)
USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70)
USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71)
USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72)
USS George Washington (CVN-73)
USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74)
USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75)
USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76)
USS George H. W. Bush (CVN-77)
USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78)
USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) - fitting out
USS Enterprise (CVN-80) - under construction
USS Doris Miller (CVN-81) - planned for construction
USS Delaware (BB-28)
USS Texas (BB-35)
USS Pennsylvania (BB-38)
USS Mississippi (BB-41)
USS Maryland (BB-46)
USS West Virginia (BB-48)
USS Iowa (BB-53) - cancelled
USS Indiana (BB-58)
USS Constellation (CC-02) - cancelled
USS Ranger (CC-04) - cancelled
USS Alaska (CB-01)
USS Guam (CB-02)
USS Hawaii (CB-03) - cancelled
USS Shangri-La (CV-38)
USS Lake Champlain (CV-39)
USS Tarawa (CV-40)
USS North Carolina (BB-52) - cancelled
USS Alabama (BB-60)
USS Kentucky (BB-66)
USS Louisiana (BB-71)
USS Antietam (CV-36)
USS Princeton (CV-37)
USS Valley Forge (CV-45)
USS Washington (BB-56)
USS New Jersey (BB-62)
USS Wisconsin (BB-64)
USS Illinois (BB-65)
USS Montana (BB-67)
USS Ohio (BB-68)
USS Constitution (CC-05) - cancelled
USS United States (CC-06) - cancelled
USS South Carolina (BB-26)
USS Wyoming (BB-32)
 
Let us be practical.
--The British could build from keel to fighting top all British and would sell to anybody but France, Russia, Germany or the United States.
--The French could build from keel to artillery and they would supply proprietary range finders, engines, and fire control. They had a choice of boilers and steam engines. Their turbines were "questionable"
--The Germans could build and sell a German warship to very few "select" customers.
--The Americans have several shipyards that could build anything to customer spec and deliver. Cramp and Sons, Union Iron Works, and the federal shipyards at New York, San Francisco, and Philadelphia could so build. I do not know if Bethlehem Steel could build to spec. They could and did supply Wellin Block breech loading naval guns in 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 inch guns in 40 and 45 calibers.

This was actually done for the Russians. American ships were delivered with French style boilers, American engines, guns and mixed British and French naval range finders and directors. The Argentinians ordered all US tech in battleship form. Whether the Dutch could order 5 dreadnoughts out of US yards to counter the ships the British sold the Japanese, depends in large part on American and Dutch politics and how much cash the Dutch have. American yards were very good, but they were "expensive".

It is likely the Dutch, by preferences, would order German guns and directors and range finders. Everything else would be made in America.
==================================================================

In the meantime...



View attachment 552965
As a grins and giggles 1898 exercise, it is "interesting" in a weird what would they be thinking PoD way, if Endicott recommended Krupp instead of Vickers?

The Brits would likely sell to the French in that period. The Entente was already relatively firm and a French Battleship is pretty much guranteed to be arrayed against the Germans.
 

McPherson

Banned
My good sir you forgot the shipyards at Newport News and Quincy both of which were capable of building capital ships in this time period.
1. Quincy is Bethlehem Steel. First unit is 1906. USS New Jersey in 1906. Guess how fouled up she was?
2. Newport News Shipbuilding. First bolo is USS Kearsarge in 1896. Overpriced, over long to build and overweight.

Here's a full list of shipyards that built battlecruisers, battleships, and aircraft carriers for the USN (as well as the ships built at those yards).

USS Bennington (CV-20)
USS Bonhomme Richard (CV-31)
USS Kearsarge (CV-33)
USS Oriskany (CV-34)
USS Reprisal (CV-35) - cancelled
USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CV-42)
USS Saratoga (CV-60)
USS Independence (CV-62)
USS Constellation (CV-64)
USS Florida (BB-30)
USS New York (BB-34)
USS Arizona (BB-39)
USS New Mexico (BB-40)
USS Tennessee (BB-43)
USS South Dakota (BB-49) - cancelled
USS Indiana (BB-50) - cancelled
USS North Carolina (BB-55)
USS Iowa (BB-61)
USS Missouri (BB-63)
USS Maine (BB-69)
USS New Hampshire (BB-70)
USS Wasp (CV-07)
USS Lexington (CV-16)
USS Bunker Hill (CV-17)
USS Wasp (CV-18)
USS Hancock (CV-19)
USS Philippine Sea (CV-47)
USS North Dakota (BB-29)
USS Nevada (BB-36)
USS Massachusetts (BB-54) - cancelled
USS Massachusetts (BB-59)
USS Lexington (CC-01/CV-02)
USS California (BB-44)
USS Montana (BB-51) - cancelled
USS Saipan (CVL-48)
USS Wright (CVL-49)
USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63)
USS Michigan (BB-27)
USS Utah (BB-31)
USS Arkansas (BB-33)
USS Oklahoma (BB-37)
USS Idaho (BB-42)
USS Colorado (BB-45)
USS Washington (BB-47) - cancelled
USS South Dakota (BB-57)
USS Saratoga (CC-03/CV-03)
USS Ranger (CV-04)
USS Yorktown (CV-05)
USS Enterprise (CV-06)
USS Hornet (CV-08)
USS Essex (CV-09)
USS Yorktown (CV-10)
USS Intrepid (CV-11)
USS Hornet (CV-12)
USS Franklin (CV-13)
USS Ticonderoga (CV-14)
USS Randolph (CV-15)
USS Boxer (CV-21)
USS Leyte (CV-32)
USS Midway (CV-41)
USS Coral Sea (CV-43)
USS Iwo Jima (CV-46)
USS United States (CVA-58) - cancelled
USS Forrestal (CV-59)
USS Ranger (CV-61)
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
USS America (CV-66)
USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67)
USS Nimitz (CVN-68)
USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69)
USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70)
USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71)
USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72)
USS George Washington (CVN-73)
USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74)
USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75)
USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76)
USS George H. W. Bush (CVN-77)
USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78)
USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) - fitting out
USS Enterprise (CVN-80) - under construction
USS Doris Miller (CVN-81) - planned for construction
USS Delaware (BB-28)
USS Texas (BB-35)
USS Pennsylvania (BB-38)
USS Mississippi (BB-41)
USS Maryland (BB-46)
USS West Virginia (BB-48)
USS Iowa (BB-53) - cancelled
USS Indiana (BB-58)
USS Constellation (CC-02) - cancelled
USS Ranger (CC-04) - cancelled
USS Alaska (CB-01)
USS Guam (CB-02)
USS Hawaii (CB-03) - cancelled
USS Shangri-La (CV-38)
USS Lake Champlain (CV-39)
USS Tarawa (CV-40)
USS North Carolina (BB-52) - cancelled
USS Alabama (BB-60)
USS Kentucky (BB-66)
USS Louisiana (BB-71)
USS Antietam (CV-36)
USS Princeton (CV-37)
USS Valley Forge (CV-45)
USS Washington (BB-56)
USS New Jersey (BB-62)
USS Wisconsin (BB-64)
USS Illinois (BB-65)
USS Montana (BB-67)
USS Ohio (BB-68)
USS Constitution (CC-05) - cancelled
USS United States (CC-06) - cancelled
USS South Carolina (BB-26)
USS Wyoming (BB-32)

Union Iron Works built USS Oregon.
Cramp and Sons built USS Indiana and

 

McPherson

Banned
The Brits would likely sell to the French in that period. The Entente was already relatively firm and a French Battleship is pretty much guranteed to be arrayed against the Germans.

The British historically never sold anything naval to France during that Pre WWI or interwar periods. I might speculate that they never would. Example: the British, post WW II, actually loaned in 1946 and then sold the Marine National an aircraft carrier. (HMS Colossus.) in 1951; but when it came time for Foche and Clemenceau to be built and for vendors to provide subunits, the French turned to the Americans for foreign help; and still do. I can only go by the RTL history.
 
The British historically never sold anything naval to France during that Pre WWI or interwar periods. I might speculate that they never would. Example: the British, post WW II, actually loaned in 1946 and then sold the Marine National an aircraft carrier. (HMS Colossus.) in 1951; but when it came time for Foche and Clemenceau to be built and for vendors to provide subunits, the French turned to the Americans for foreign help; and still do. I can only go by the RTL history.

At least during that period the fault was probably more on the French's side more then anything else. They quite logically considering their situation put a lot more resources into their Army then their Navy. And when they put money into their Navy they wanted to support domestic industry. If the French had had the interest and the political support for purcashing a foreign built BB the Brits would probably have easily agreed.
 
At least during that period the fault was probably more on the French's side more then anything else. They quite logically considering their situation put a lot more resources into their Army then their Navy. And when they put money into their Navy they wanted to support domestic industry. If the French had had the interest and the political support for purcashing a foreign built BB the Brits would probably have easily agreed.
Mind you given how terrible the French Dreadnoughts designs where they'd have been much better off licensing the RN's or various UK firms designs(and at the very least buying the engines directly from the UK since French engines where behind pretty much everyone bar the Russians) and for that matter shooting whoever thought building the full run of Dantons was a good idea. Oh course the French would have needed dockyard expansions to build and then service decent capital ships but they were going to need to do so anyway.
 
The German shipyards and naval couldn't do 5 battleships at once in addition to the hsf programme.

If they got a Dutch order for 5 battleships they would either scale back the hsf or refuse the order or suggest going 2 battleships at once then 2 battleships then 1 battleship,
Between 1907 and 1911 German yards were laying down 4 to 5 large ships per year and they were also building large liners like Imperiator, Bismarck and Vaterland. The BB and BC tempo from 1914 to 1917 was to be 3,2,3,2 and the 3 per year after 1918. They have capacity to build the 5 Dutch ships.

There would be no impact to the HSF plan dictated by the Naval Law. They would never scale back the HSF either. One of the benefits of the Naval Law was to build German industry to compete with GB, the Dutch order would be celebrated as a crowning achievement. Before the war when Tirpitz was queried on why German companies were supplying Russian ships, machinery and technical know how, he replied that the Russians would only go elsewhere if Germany knocked back export opportunities.
 
--The Americans have several shipyards that could build anything to customer spec and deliver. Cramp and Sons, Union Iron Works, and the federal shipyards at New York, San Francisco, and Philadelphia could so build. I do not know if Bethlehem Steel could build to spec. They could and did supply Wellin Block breech loading naval guns in 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 inch guns in 40 and 45 calibers.

This was actually done for the Russians. American ships were delivered with French style boilers, American engines, guns and mixed British and French naval range finders and directors. The Argentinians ordered all US tech in battleship form. Whether the Dutch could order 5 dreadnoughts out of US yards to counter the ships the British sold the Japanese, depends in large part on American and Dutch politics and how much cash the Dutch have. American yards were very good, but they were "expensive".

It is likely the Dutch, by preferences, would order German guns and directors and range finders. Everything else would be made in America.
The first US Battleships were very expensive - £110 to £120 per ton (BB1-3). GB built battleships were about £67 per ton at this time.

With more orders US ships came down to £77 by the turn of the century and then about £86 per ton for the pre-Dreadnoughts and then about £80 until the Pennsylvania (£91) and Arizona (£104) where perhaps wartime inflation was taking affect.

British built Dreadnoughts were typically £74 per ton and then £87 by early war.

For the Argentine Battleships, the US yards were the lowest bidder but the ships couldn't be built for the specification and so had to be larger but the Argentine's refused to pay for the escalation. The guns had defective breech blocks and they had to be replaced with standard USN types, again Argentina refused to pay.

Tirpitz was happy to use Bethlehem supplied armour for the Greek Salamis as he wanted to break the Krupp-Dillinger price fixing for plate to the German Navy. US Navy Secretary Daniels was having similar problems with US supply in the lead up to WW1. This was partly why he was investing in alternative capacity in the Navy Yards to build battleships. The Private yards were also struggling with competing with the Navy Shipyards because they were having to wear cost overflows and operate in a commercial environment unlike the Navy Yards. The private yards at the time also pointed out that their ships were finished faster and had fewer defects.

There is really zero chance of US being involved with the Dutch order, especially with the advertised problems with the Argentine battleships, long over due and suffering engineering problems.
 
WI the Dutch, build subs in place of De Ruyter and one of the Tromps? Would that be enough for 4-6 more, and would that make a huge difference given the historic non-productivity of the ABDA surface fleet?

Cancelling De Ruyter and Tromp would pay for at least 6 subs. If not 10. Thing is, intra-service warfare forced the Koninklijke Marine to go for the De Ruyter. After that the gun-lobby won the interservice fight and submarines were back at the end of the line.

The ABDA surface fleet would have been useful had it ran to survive to fight at a later day as the Americans wanted (Hart.). Based on the way that Conrad Emil Lambert Helfrich managed the Dutch war, I cannot say in all fairness that even a full additional squadron of Dutch subs would make any significant difference. Not because the Dutch navy did not know how to use their assets well, but because Helfrich, Wavell, and Hart worked ill together. Doorman was caught in the squeeze of ABDA military politics. Coalition warfare would be difficult under the best of conditions.

Helfrich was a bloody dolt, that is for sure. A fully committed navalist and a firm believer of the doctrine of Anarchy at Sea. When he became CZM (Commander Sea Forces) in 1940 he broke up a lot of command structures that were supposed to organize operations and centralized decision making so he could micromanage everything. If you combine that with Wavell's Singapore obsession and Hart's (understandable) defaitism you get the shambles that was ABDACOM. I do wonder what would have happened if there would not have been a centrally organized ABDACOM but more of a territorial divide with seperate command structures.
 
The Brits would likely sell to the French in that period. The Entente was already relatively firm and a French Battleship is pretty much guranteed to be arrayed against the Germans.
Coventry Ordnance Works were in a consortium with Ateliers et Chantiers de la Loire to build the Greek Battleship Vasilefs Konstantinos.

The British historically never sold anything naval to France during that Pre WWI or interwar periods. I might speculate that they never would. Example: the British, post WW II, actually loaned in 1946 and then sold the Marine National an aircraft carrier. (HMS Colossus.) in 1951; but when it came time for Foche and Clemenceau to be built and for vendors to provide subunits, the French turned to the Americans for foreign help; and still do. I can only go by the RTL history.
The French were going to buy surplus V&W class DD but then the Franc-Pound exchange collapsed. The British did supply plans and know how for the carrier Bearn.
 
Last edited:
At least during that period the fault was probably more on the French's side more then anything else. They quite logically considering their situation put a lot more resources into their Army then their Navy. And when they put money into their Navy they wanted to support domestic industry. If the French had had the interest and the political support for purcashing a foreign built BB the Brits would probably have easily agreed.

The French had spent more on their navy than Germany had and yet they fell behind. There was alot of corruption and inefficiency in French yards. The French 1912 Navy Law was to rectify the situation. No need for buying abroad. Very large dry docks were begun, big enough to hold Yamato size ships showing great forethought, today they hold super-carriers. The British and Germans are held down to about 40,000 ton ships by their infrastructure.

Mind you given how terrible the French Dreadnoughts designs where they'd have been much better off licensing the RN's or various UK firms designs(and at the very least buying the engines directly from the UK since French engines where behind pretty much everyone bar the Russians) and for that matter shooting whoever thought building the full run of Dantons was a good idea. Oh course the French would have needed dockyard expansions to build and then service decent capital ships but they were going to need to do so anyway.
The Dantons were dictated by law and were logically completed to form a uniform 6 ship squadron. In 1914, the USN split 1st class and 2nd class battleships at 17,000 tons so the Dantons were modern 1st rate while Michigan and South Carolina were 2nd rate. The French were on a good idea with the quad turret as a weight saving feature. Following the 4 Lyon's, the 1912 Naval Law stipulated 1 more ship laid down before 1918. This ship would be the start of a new squadron (now 2 4 ship divisons units not 6 ships) and with the infrastructure increases, this post-Lyon ship would probably be very large and well armed.
 

McPherson

Banned
The first US Battleships were very expensive - £110 to £120 per ton (BB1-3). GB built battleships were about £67 per ton at this time.

The US was at least a decade behind in general shipbuilding practice and this was their first attempt at steel battleships. Compared to contemporary Royal Sovereigns and Majestics I would expect 2x the initial costs.

With more orders US ships came down to £77 by the turn of the century and then about £86 per ton for the pre-Dreadnoughts and then about £80 until the Pennsylvania (£91) and Arizona (£104) where perhaps wartime inflation was taking affect.

Now some feelings are going to be hurt. (See below the Rivadavia and Sao Paulo, for the hurt feelings.) The Pennsylvanias were infinitely BETTER than the equivalent British or German ships sliding down the weighs at the same time. How do we know this?

-Pearl Harbor, refloated, refitted and returned to service.
-Aleutians... severe weather. Not a problem
-Surigao Strait. Sent her IJN opposite to its deserved reefing.
-Took the same kind of hit that killed HMS Prince of Wales in Buckner Bay, Okinawa.
-Atomic bomb test ABLE. Survived that air blast.
-Atomic bomb test BAKER. Survived that underwater one. The comparator, Prinz Eugen took serious hull and superstructure damage.

British built Dreadnoughts were typically £74 per ton and then £87 by early war.

That does not surprise me because that is rough cost equivalence about the time to be expected when the Standards are built.

For the Argentine Battleships, the US yards were the lowest bidder but the ships couldn't be built for the specification and so had to be larger but the Argentine's refused to pay for the escalation. The guns had defective breech blocks and they had to be replaced with standard USN types, again Argentina refused to pay.

The Argentines specified the guns, so that was actually their fault, not the American yards. They were almost impossible in their constant spec changes to the ships. The Russians, for all the trouble they gave with Retvizan, were nowhere near as difficult as customers.

Tirpitz was happy to use Bethlehem supplied armour for the Greek Salamis as he wanted to break the Krupp-Dillinger price fixing for plate to the German Navy. US Navy Secretary Daniels was having similar problems with US supply in the lead up to WW1. This was partly why he was investing in alternative capacity in the Navy Yards to build battleships. The Private yards were also struggling with competing with the Navy Shipyards because they were having to wear cost overflows and operate in a commercial environment unlike the Navy Yards. The private yards at the time also pointed out that their ships were finished faster and had fewer defects.

Newport News built the USS Pennsylvania.

There is really zero chance of US being involved with the Dutch order, especially with the advertised problems with the Argentine battleships, long over due and suffering engineering problems.

Actually, based on US track history with their ships, the Dutch probably should have bought American.

Because....

Minas_Geraes-class_battleships.jpg


That is garbage (^^^).

This...

Rivadavia-class_battleships.jpg


is not. (^^^)

It helped that the Argentines had caught the British in an irregularity in another arms contract. (Livermore, Seward W. "Battleship Diplomacy in South America: 1905–1925." The Journal of Modern History 16, no. 1 (1944): 31–44)

I mention that before being handed over to the Argentines, the Board of Inspection and Survey ran trials on the Rivadavia and found it to be acceptable for US service. I note in passing that the turbines (Curtis) were garbage and had to be replaced during trials and after Argentine acceptance (US did the work.). The guns were really not that big a problem as it turns out. The breeches were replaced.

Greek Battleship Vasilefs Konstantinos.
Refused by the Greeks oddly enough due to a contract dispute with the French and never completed as a Bretagne clone. They bought Kilkis and Lemnos instead. That would be the USS Mississippi and USS Idaho (pre-dreadnoughts).
 
Last edited:
The Pennsylvanias were infinitely BETTER than the equivalent British or German ships sliding down the weighs at the same time. How do we know this?

-Pearl Harbor, refloated, refitted and returned to service.
The Pennsylvanias...
this?
US-Arizona-Wreck.jpg


or this?
USS-Pennsylvania-in-Dry-Dock.jpg

refloated? It was already in the drydock.

-Aleutians... severe weather. Not a problem
  • The only battleship to ever be sunk in a storm was São Paulo - without a crew
-Surigao Strait. Sent her IJN opposite to its deserved reefing.
  • 6 to 1 odds not really an achievement. Pennsylvania didn't really contribute.
-Took the same kind of hit that killed HMS Prince of Wales in Buckner Bay, Okinawa.
  • Not really the same conditions.
-Atomic bomb test ABLE. Survived that air blast.
  • Most ships survived air blast
-Atomic bomb test BAKER. Survived that underwater one. The comparator, Prinz Eugen took serious hull and superstructure damage.
  • PE was built for speed and half the size.
 
Refused by the Greeks oddly enough due to a contract dispute with the French and never completed as a Bretagne clone. They bought Kilkis and Lemnos instead. That would be the USS Mississippi and USS Idaho (pre-dreadnoughts).
No they bought Kilkis and Lemnos because they were really absolutely fucking desperate, there was no 'instead'. They ordered Vasilefs Konstantinos because the French loaned them the money. The contract dispute didn't occur till ten years later. Interestingly the Greeks went off Rivadavia and Moreno because of doubts about reliability and just when they could be delivered. The Russians were going to give them the money.
The USN were worried that if Argentina was going to sell them then the US government would purchase them. Imagine them replacing Tennessee and California? The Big 5 to to the Big 3 and sidekicks.
 
Last edited:
Top