Best British battlefleet for ww1

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: After 1900' started by Hood, Jul 7, 2019.

  1. Hood Flagship of The Royal Navy

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2016
    Location:
    Scapa Flow
    As it says on the tin, starting from Dreadnought being ordered in 1905, what would you build to counter the Germans?
    Some of my favourite designs are the "fusion"
    designx4fusion.png
    Triple turrets were obviously risky but nonetheless would've been a hybrid between a battlecruiser and battleship, a proto fast battleship. Obviously problems involved in getting fast battleshipsto work that early on too.
    Another favourite is design Y, basically mini Hoods in place of the Revenge class
    https://warshipprojects.com/2017/07/03/washington-cherrytrees-2/
     
    jsb likes this.
  2. Alanith Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2013
    I'd have pushed to stay out of the war and ensured the Empire survived a bit longer, tbh.
     
  3. RodentRevolution Chewer of Wires

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2015
    I find it interesting that the X4 design had its triples on the wings. I would have thought having them on the centre line made more sense as it is my understanding that these turrets require less overall displacement for the same size and protection of turret and barbette and would also of course have the greatest fields of fire.
     
    jsb and Derwit like this.
  4. Hood Flagship of The Royal Navy

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2016
    Location:
    Scapa Flow
    Length may have been a factor, not willing to go even bigger on what was already a large ship, but I suspect part of it was just the fact it stemmed from Invincibles design and they kept along those lines, in many ways looks like an upscaled version
     
    Butchpfd likes this.
  5. RodentRevolution Chewer of Wires

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2015
    Sorry I realise I was unclear. The overall layout makes sense to me. My point is that to best exploit the available tonnage having the A and Y turrets be the triples rather than the wing turrets would seem to make more sense. The wing turrets would then be the twins.
     
  6. Hood Flagship of The Royal Navy

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2016
    Location:
    Scapa Flow
    Probably a similar thing with the Pensacolas then, bow too narrow for it, probably saw the mid ships area with the most width in the ship anyway as the best place for the triples. Putting triples forward would mean having to increase the beam which would mean it'd either be huge to get both the extra space for more powerful engines and to improve the length to beam ratio.
     
    Butchpfd, Derwit and RodentRevolution like this.
  7. naraic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    I'm just gonna throw out a few ideas.

    As HMS Lord Nelson and HMS Agemmenon were laid down after HMS Dreadnought was ordered in May 1905 I am fond of the idea of cancelling the last two preadreadnoughts and starting the Dreadnought age with three dreadnoughts.

    The Australian and New Zealand governments purchase of Indefactigible class Battlecruisers never really felt right to me from the sense of serving British interests. Unless there was a reason other than expense (no free gunpits able to produce 13.5 inch guns) ordering Lion classes instead of Indefactigible would be a very good thing.

    Of course I am also a supporter of the fast Iron Duke design that was proposed and the repeat of the Queen Elizabeth class instead of Revenge classes but I do understand why these werent done this way.
     
    TeePee, Goldkingy, Butchpfd and 4 others like this.
  8. Stenz Don't judge the past by the standards of today... Monthly Donor

    Joined:
    May 18, 2016
    Location:
    Leafy Southern Blighty
    I’m in favour of anything that produces more QEs, so this gets my vote.

    Heh
     
    CultBoy, WaterproofPotatoes and jsb like this.
  9. History_Man68 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Preserving the wealth that Britain had accumulated over 1814-1914 would be more important. Yes, the Empire did contribute to this but it was doomed anyway as Britain moved closer to becoming a democracy.
     
    Athelstane and jsb like this.
  10. Peg Leg Pom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Smaller cheaper ships the dominions could afford to buy (more or less) are better than larger more capable and expensive ships they can't.
     
    jsb likes this.
  11. HMS queen Elizabeth Admiral vasieo Ignite the inferno.

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2018
    Carriers built and sooner
     
  12. NOMISYRRUC He isn't the best, but he is in the top one...

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Is this thread only about capital ships? Or does it include all types of warships and auxiliaries? @HMS queen Elizabeth has mentioned aircraft carriers. May we also include shore based naval aviation?

    Is money no object?
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2019
    Derwit and jsb like this.
  13. NHBL Long Time Member, CMII

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    I wonder of the Lord Nelsons could have been modified on the ways to replace the 4 twin 9.2" turrets with 4 single 12" turrets, and the single 9.2" mounts removed, perhaps replaced with lighter guns. That gives the Royal Navy an extra pair of pseudo-dreadnoughts (6 12" guns on either broadside.)
    The 9.2" guns can go to France on railway mountings, or the turrets can go into monitors.
     
  14. naraic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    That is of course a decent point.

    I will have to look in depth for reasons but the £89,000 difference in cost between HMAS Australia and HMS Lion would be unlikely to break the bank.

    That said Australia cost a lot more than either New Zealand or Indefactigible.

    In general though I would look at seeing if I could sell Indefactigible or an invincible to Australia and New Zealand and use that to fund the construction of a new Lion class making of the difference elsewhere if need be. There is enough of a qualitative difference between the Indefactigible and the Lion class that an increased focus on Lion class ships is something that I think would be very good for the Battlecruiser Force.
     
    Butchpfd likes this.
  15. NHBL Long Time Member, CMII

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Another way to boost the fleet would be to let Canada build real warships, though that's probably politically impractical. After all, why should Canadian money be spent in Canada? It's better spent in Britain giving deserving British industrialists more profit--why let Canadian money be used to give jobs to Canadians? (exaggeration, perhaps, but the British armament companies did NOT want warships built in overseas, and had the pull to make it difficult.)

    Lion with 6 13.5" turrets, and the displacement saved used for armor might be a good plan, too...
     
  16. Peg Leg Pom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Two things to remember.
    One Australia was attempting to build its own navy from scratch so had to buy more than just HMAS Australia.
    Two New Zealand had just bought the Royal Navy the King Edward VII class Battleship HMS New Zealand (later Zealandia) when they decided to buy them a Battlecruiser.

    Both of these points limit the amount of money the Dominions can afford to spend.
     
  17. NOMISYRRUC He isn't the best, but he is in the top one...

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Unless the Canadian shipyards were owned by British armament companies.

    Whether the profits came from a shipyard in Canada or the UK wasn't that important to the board of directors and where the dividends came from didn't matter that much to the share holders.

    There is a precedent for this with the SECN company formed in Spain which IIRC was partly owned by Vickers, Armstrongs and John Brown. Furthermore, IOTL Vickers did own a shipyard in Canada.
     
    Butchpfd and Dorknought like this.
  18. RodentRevolution Chewer of Wires

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2015
    I am not sure that was the reason the Canadians decided the cost of building their own shipyards and armaments and armour rolling plant was not worth it.
     
    Thoresby likes this.
  19. naraic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    HMAS Australia cost £2,000,000.
    HMS Lion £2,086,000
    HMS Princess Royal £2,089,000

    I don't see the cost difference between Australia and the Lions having an impact on the order.
     
  20. jsb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2013
    I think that the smaller ships could actually dock in AUS might also help?

    The numbers look questionable....how do you make a ship with 12" and 18,800 t normal cost the same as one with 13.5" and 26,690 t just the steel should add a lot?
    (the earlier I class cost 1.7M on Wiki?)
     
    TeePee likes this.