Best British battlefleet for ww1

Well, if you follow that logic through, you might as well let Fisher build the 20" gun Incomparable he always wanted to build.
I question that, a 20" would require massive spending and development unlike using the standard battleship guns like I class that might actually be cheaper than designing smaller bespoke guns and mounts for your super ACs.....
 

Deleted member 94680

It was suggested I get rid of the aft deckhouse (secondary steer and fire control, and move the q turret aft. It still turns out that hull lateral load drops below unity and/or block coeff goes up and I lose a knot or 2 or shorten the cruise range or a combo of all attributes. What do I give up?

What happens if you delete the aft deckhouse, but keep Q turret where it is?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jsb
It was suggested I get rid of the aft deckhouse (secondary steer and fire control, and move the q turret aft. It still turns out that hull lateral load drops below unity and/or block coeff goes up and I lose a knot or 2 or shorten the cruise range or a combo of all attritbutes. What do I give up?

We know what the United States Navy would have said!
 
No. The damned thing was 17,000 tons, and so what the Germans ended up with was a badly undergunned battlecruiser.
So what do you build?

Minotaur class (14,000t) Scharnhorst class (13000t)? Even a 9.2" AC "dreadnought" ie 9.2"x8/10 guns is going to be 15,000t or more why not add a couple of 1000t and get a far better ship?
 

Deleted member 94680

I question that, a 20" would require massive spending and development unlike using the standard battleship guns like I class that might actually be cheaper than designing smaller bespoke guns and mounts for your super ACs.....

I don’t think he was being serious about building Incomparable, fwiw
 
  • Like
Reactions: jsb
I question that, a 20" would require massive spending and development unlike using the standard battleship guns like I class that might actually be cheaper than designing smaller bespoke guns and mounts for your super ACs.....

The point is - with respect - that there is always the danger that the Germans are going to come up with a bigger gun for their cruiser. It becomes a vicious cycle.

I don't want to be too hard on Fisher. He was not wrong on thinking that torpedoes were starting to reduce the comparative value of big gun capital ships. But he was ahead of his time, and this caused him to overestimate the value of speed and underestimate the value of armor in the short term, especially given the limitations of available technology in 1904-10. (Now, his Baltic Project, on the other hand...)
 
We know what the United States Navy would have said!

Exactly. And hindsight shows us they were mistaken. The RN emphasized some speed, seakeeping and good ship handling qualities even when they built in 1912 at some costs in guns and armor. Post WW I the RN had the speed gauge on the USN and that hurt. It gave the RN the ability to outmaneuver and to dictate initiative and engagement ranges. The old "weather gauge" argument.

Exactly. The issue is that any ship foisted with Sub-Capital Caliber guns to "force them in their lane" is countered by taking the same ship and giving it Capital Caliber guns.

So, you might as well start with Capital Caliber guns. Yes, this can lead to them be "taken as" fully blown Capital Ships, but that's not something you solve by hobbling your ships. That's something you solve by posting a bosun with a Cat o' Nine next to every admiral, with orders to go to town whenever the Admiral starts using their Battlecruisers like Battleships.

You don't solve doctrinal issues by methods of build strategy. You fix the doctrine.

You replace the admiral. Hard to do in a seniority system and in mid battle, but it can be done (Coral Sea, Fitch took over air ops after Fletcher botched the Tulagi raid.). I would have arranged an "accident", not necessarily for Beatty, but for those on his staff who gave him the bad advice about ammunition handling. Some of those blokes remind me of Marc Mitscher, Miles Browning, and the coterie of "geniuses" who hamstrunged Fletcher and Spruance at Midway. Murphy, those guys were idiots! (The Browning Brigade, not Beatty's Boys.). I'll let someone more qualified and informed discuss the botched signaling procedures, and mangled orders and mishandling of the battle cruiser merge at Jutland, other than me!
 
The point is - with respect - that there is always the danger that the Germans are going to come up with a bigger gun for their cruiser. It becomes a vicious cycle.
The only way to deal with that is simply to go for the extremes,
- disposable and cheap with CLs with hand loaded (therefore 6"ish) guns
- something with the standard battleship guns as that's the largest you can build

I don't think any medium compromise is worth trying, as soon as you go for turrets/director firing it will not be cheap and if its less than the full BB guns it will still potentially be outclassed.
 
The only way to deal with that is simply to go for the extremes,
- disposable and cheap with CLs with hand loaded (therefore 6"ish) guns
- something with the standard battleship guns as that's the largest you can build

I don't think any medium compromise is worth trying, as soon as you go for turrets/director firing it will not be cheap and if its less than the full BB guns it will still potentially be outclassed.

I would choose Option "A."
 
Sorry to dredge this back up, but if Tiger went to oil firing, would she be able to shed one of her funnels? There would be more internal space as well as oil takes up less room
 

Deleted member 94680

Fisher was completely serious about Incomparable, so much so that he went to Elswick who produced a preliminary design for the gun alongside single and two gun turrets.
But it's got a Wiki page! It's got to be serious!

Ah, right, my bad. I meant Athelstane wasn't being serious when he said to build Incomparable. I’m fully aware Fisher was being serious about it, but it’s a batshit crazy idea and I assumed Athelstane was being sarcastic.
 
You lay a ship down someone is going to try and trump it. Going 12" was purposely intended to short circuit the first round.

Judging by the USN results for the near contemporary Standards, dispersion was a problem that needed to be solved by a time delay system. The Austro Hungarians had their own problems and attempted a similar fix. Italians? The same. Afaik the RN preferred twins to minimize dispersion and their suppliers built to that spec, for the RN and for "foreign customers".

I also had my eye on the USN shared cradles. By the time of the 15" the RN wanted all sorts of fancy stuff like loading on any angle (Which they dropped on the MkIIs as unnecessary because of shell travel time). Loads of fun on a 1910 triple.
 
Not really, given potential blast effects to the superstructure, and that the chance of actually firing straight ahead of actually happening were unlikely, chances are it's still just around 4 guns at most cases.
They are only 12” guns. If a captain needed all available ahead fire I’m sure they would risk ‘potential’ damage to the superstructure. The problem occurs with larger guns. With the 6 16” firing directly forward on Nelson witnesses on the messdeck below reported seeing a red flash. This was later ruled as overpressure in their eyeballs, not flash penetration.
 
I also had my eye on the USN shared cradles. By the time of the 15" the RN wanted all sorts of fancy stuff like loading on any angle (Which they dropped on the MkIIs as unnecessary because of shell travel time). Loads of fun on a 1910 triple.

I agree wholeheartedly. Why that was "fun" is somewhat explained here. One mechanical casualty and the whole gun-house goes TUGATS. The UK was smart to go separate slides and pits when they did. The USN caught on after the Pennsylvanias.
 
Can Uncle play?

Ersatz Pennsylvania, US battleship laid down 1912
Displacement:
32,525 t light; 34,446 t standard; 35,623 t normal; 36,564 t full load
Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(737.08 ft / 721.78 ft) x 104.99 ft x (27.89 / 28.49 ft)
(224.66 m / 220.00 m) x 32.00 m x (8.50 / 8.68 m)
Armament:
9 - 15.75" / 400 mm 45.0 cal guns - 1,969.41lbs / 893.31kg shells, 100 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1912 Model
2 x 3-gun mounts on centreline, forward deck forward
1 raised mount - superfiring
1 x Triple mount on centreline, aft deck centre
12 - 5.91" / 150 mm 45.0 cal guns - 103.86lbs / 47.11kg shells, 250 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1912 Model
4 x 2-gun mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
2 x 2-gun mounts on sides amidships
2 raised mounts
12 - 3.94" / 100 mm 45.0 cal guns - 30.77lbs / 13.96kg shells, 250 per gun
Quick firing guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1912 Model
4 x 2-gun mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline, evenly spread
2 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 19,340 lbs / 8,773 kg
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 11.8" / 300 mm 252.62 ft / 77.00 m 12.30 ft / 3.75 m
Ends: 3.94" / 100 mm 469.13 ft / 142.99 m 12.30 ft / 3.75 m
Upper: 3.94" / 100 mm 252.62 ft / 77.00 m 8.01 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 54 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces
- Torpedo Bulkhead - Strengthened structural bulkheads:
2.95" / 75 mm 252.62 ft / 77.00 m 26.18 ft / 7.98 m
Beam between torpedo bulkheads 104.99 ft / 32.00 m
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 13.8" / 350 mm 7.87" / 200 mm 7.87" / 200 mm
2nd: 3.94" / 100 mm 3.94" / 100 mm 3.94" / 100 mm
3rd: 4.13" / 105 mm 4.13" / 105 mm 4.13" / 105 mm
- Armoured deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 2.95" / 75 mm
Forecastle: 2.95" / 75 mm Quarter deck: 2.95" / 75 mm
- Conning towers: Forward 10.04" / 255 mm, Aft 4.92" / 125 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 82,692 shp / 61,688 Kw = 26.00 kts
Range 6,000nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,118 tons
Complement:
1,296 - 1,685
Cost:
£3.406 million / $13.623 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 3,780 tons, 10.6 %
- Guns: 3,780 tons, 10.6 %
Armour: 10,373 tons, 29.1 %
- Belts: 3,102 tons, 8.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 723 tons, 2.0 %
- Armament: 3,184 tons, 8.9 %
- Armour Deck: 3,015 tons, 8.5 %
- Conning Towers: 349 tons, 1.0 %
Machinery: 3,297 tons, 9.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 15,074 tons, 42.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,098 tons, 8.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
49,566 lbs / 22,483 Kg = 25.4 x 15.7 " / 400 mm shells or 7.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.12
Metacentric height 6.6 ft / 2.0 m
Roll period: 17.1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 67 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.87
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.34
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck,
an extended bulbous bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.590 / 0.593
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.88 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 26.87 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.00 degrees
Stern overhang: -16.40 ft / -5.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 25.00 %, 32.81 ft / 10.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Forward deck: 20.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Aft deck: 15.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Quarter deck: 40.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Average freeboard: 23.95 ft / 7.30 m
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 76.4 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 185.3 %
Waterplane Area: 54,907 Square feet or 5,101 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 104 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 232 lbs/sq ft or 1,132 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.00
- Longitudinal: 1.67
- Overall: 1.05
Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Excellent accommodation and workspace room
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily
Technically that is a battlecruiser, not a battleship. I pushed US graving dock capacity to max (kind of a Tillman here for 1912). Thinnish armor and kind of a long "Standard". Not too good at taking shellfire. But that sure would have given a Kongo heartburn.

Of course there is a British version.

Ersatz Hood, UK battleship laid down 1912
Displacement:
32,803 t light; 34,779 t standard; 35,623 t normal; 36,298 t full load
Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(735.55 ft / 721.78 ft) x 104.99 ft x (27.89 / 28.32 ft)
(224.20 m / 220.00 m) x 32.00 m x (8.50 / 8.63 m)
Armament:
9 - 15.98" / 406 mm 45.0 cal guns - 2,059.37lbs / 934.11kg shells, 100 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1912 Model
2 x 3-gun mounts on centreline, forward deck forward
1 raised mount - superfiring
1 x Triple mount on centreline, aft deck centre
12 - 5.98" / 152 mm 45.0 cal guns - 108.07lbs / 49.02kg shells, 250 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1912 Model
4 x 2-gun mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
2 x 2-gun mounts on sides amidships
2 raised mounts
12 - 4.02" / 102 mm 45.0 cal guns - 32.66lbs / 14.81kg shells, 250 per gun
Quick firing guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1912 Model
4 x 2-gun mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline, evenly spread
2 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 20,223 lbs / 9,173 kg
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 11.8" / 300 mm 252.62 ft / 77.00 m 12.30 ft / 3.75 m
Ends: 3.94" / 100 mm 469.13 ft / 142.99 m 12.30 ft / 3.75 m
Upper: 3.94" / 100 mm 252.62 ft / 77.00 m 8.01 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 54 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces
- Torpedo Bulkhead - Strengthened structural bulkheads:
2.95" / 75 mm 252.62 ft / 77.00 m 26.18 ft / 7.98 m
Beam between torpedo bulkheads 104.99 ft / 32.00 m
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 13.8" / 350 mm 7.87" / 200 mm 7.87" / 200 mm
2nd: 3.94" / 100 mm 3.94" / 100 mm 3.94" / 100 mm
3rd: 4.13" / 105 mm 4.13" / 105 mm 4.13" / 105 mm
- Armoured deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 2.95" / 75 mm
Forecastle: 2.95" / 75 mm Quarter deck: 2.95" / 75 mm
- Conning towers: Forward 10.04" / 255 mm, Aft 4.92" / 125 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 4 shafts, 82,692 shp / 61,688 Kw = 26.00 kts
Range 4,000nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1,519 tons
Complement:
1,296 - 1,685
Cost:
£3.498 million / $13.990 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 3,932 tons, 11.0 %
- Guns: 3,932 tons, 11.0 %
Armour: 10,444 tons, 29.3 %
- Belts: 3,104 tons, 8.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 723 tons, 2.0 %
- Armament: 3,250 tons, 9.1 %
- Armour Deck: 3,018 tons, 8.5 %
- Conning Towers: 349 tons, 1.0 %
Machinery: 3,297 tons, 9.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 15,130 tons, 42.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,820 tons, 7.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
48,307 lbs / 21,912 Kg = 23.7 x 16.0 " / 406 mm shells or 7.0 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.12
Metacentric height 6.6 ft / 2.0 m
Roll period: 17.1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 63 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.89
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.26
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has raised forecastle, low quarterdeck ,
an extended bulbous bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.590 / 0.592
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.88 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 26.87 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 25.00 %, 29.53 ft / 9.00 m, 29.53 ft / 9.00 m
- Forward deck: 20.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Aft deck: 25.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Quarter deck: 30.00 %, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Average freeboard: 22.64 ft / 6.90 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 78.4 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 185.3 %
Waterplane Area: 54,907 Square feet or 5,101 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 102 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 236 lbs/sq ft or 1,152 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.00
- Longitudinal: 1.58
- Overall: 1.05
Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Excellent accommodation and workspace room
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

A bit different. Early G3?
 
Last edited:
Top