If they could draw Hipper away from the rest of the HSF though they'd wipe out his Battlecruisers.
Australia and New Zealand never serve in the Pacific because there is no where to dock them. Australian people complain/ask about the lack of the Fleet Unit they paid for.Have Vickers build Kongos for OZ and NZ in 13.5"
Better armor, Guns, and not that much more money, and Vickers is all set to build more
Design Y for Leopard?For the Queen Elizabeths, what if instead of deciding that a 25kn top speed was good enough, the Royal Navy decided to try making their battleships faster, but also hedging their bets by building a battlecruiser as well? Thus, build 3x Queen Elizabeths, (QE, Warspite, Valiant), plus a fourth funded by Malaya (Malaya) and instead of Barham, a scaled up Tiger (Leopard) armed with 8 x 15" and a 30 kn top speed. She'd without a doubt be a big girl, something like 31 000 t standard, and around 800' long, but using all oil firing, she'd still be able to make her speed on direct-drive turbines with steam supplied by large-tube boilers.
ETA: And, instead of the Revenges, a repeat of the above, another 3x Queen Elizabeths and 1x Leopard.
Ah design Y if only that had been chosen instead of the Revenge class...Jutland and indeed WW2 would have been very different to say the very leastDesign Y for Leopard?
View attachment 470931
Let Germany out build you...So basically we're doing this with a degree of hindsight and with a POD of the ordering of HMS Dreadnought, and assuming that whatever changes won't really affect the beginnings of WWI... Well then.
-treat HMS Dreadnought as the huge experimental ship that she is, and not fucking rush building clones of her.
-actually spend some time digesting the lessons learned from her, also see previous point.
-realizing that the pandora's box as far as capital ship sizes (both hull & gun) are concerned, this requires a degree of hindsight, but honestly, what else do you expect from such a oneupmanship?.
The trick now is to preemptive the huge size increase, in a sense future-proof battleships.
-order development of both the 13.5in gun as well as 15in gun
-go for a series of standardized designs (much like what the USN will do within a decade)
-wait a few years for the research to bear fruit (see below for what should be built in those years)
-once resume building battleships, build the earlier classes with 4 triple 13.5in gun turrets...
-... with later classes having 4 twin 15in gun turrets, the triple 13.5in and twin 15in turrets being of the same diameter and similar weight, this means that earlier ships could be upgunned when there's enough guns and turrets available.
-stress deck armor, even only assuming the lessons of the Russo-Japan war.
-director firing and all that jazz
-only building battlecruisers with 12in guns, if nothing else to remind their captains that they are not fit for the damn battleline
While the whole few gap years in capital ship construction was going on...
-build more light cruisers and destroyer leaders
-build larger destroyers
-research more into anti submarine warfare
-fire sale older armored cruisers, they're just too manpower heavy to be useful enough
The problem with the Standards weren't that they were bad ships. They were, quite frankly, excellent battleships for the time they were built. Their problem was that they would suffer from block obsolescence as they aged. They were just too similar.Let Germany out build you...
I am not sure there is a way out of that trap. Dreadnaught reset the game and the RN had to build numbers.
The RN had been doing serial builds for literal decades if not centuries. The RN had been through the "standards" in the 18th Century and instead settled on a batch of 5 or so. Follow up with a cheaper inadequate batch. Then a new improved batch with lessons learnt and costs brought down by technological progress.
The USN standards were not a good thing and the WNT pulled them out of the fire.
Well that and they put the main guns way to close together in the turrets slowing down their rate of fire and massively reducing accuracy.The problem with the Standards weren't that they were bad ships. They were, quite frankly, excellent battleships for the time they were built. Their problem was that they would suffer from block obsolescence as they aged. They were just too similar.
It's not gonna happen...Let Germany out build you...
The Dreadnought escalated the race to the extent where it became a milder version of the clusterfuck akin to the 1880s, where without hindsight you could no longer assume that each class wouldn't be utterly outclassed within a half decade or so. (you could probably pit a Majestic class against a King Edward VII class and it wouldn't be too bad a match, now try that with HMS Dreadnought vs one of the QE class). My plan will leave the RN with a battleline that's superior in quality, and while the number of hulls might be lower than OTL, the weight of broadside would not be, and with a bonus that said broadside would be more homogeneous. The most important thing will be that the post war fleet will have more ships that still have potential for upgrades/rebuilds, rather than hopelessly obsolete.I am not sure there is a way out of that trap. Dreadnaught reset the game and the RN had to build numbers.
The USN standards were pretty good all things considered, as it give the US a homogeneous battleline without having higher performance ships having their higher performance wasted. The WNT was a better deal for the UK than the USA, mostly because by that point only the US has the financial resources to keep on pouring into military spending (and while congress was always loath to spend money... unless events forced their hand).The RN had been doing serial builds for literal decades if not centuries. The RN had been through the "standards" in the 18th Century and instead settled on a batch of 5 or so. Follow up with a cheaper inadequate batch. Then a new improved batch with lessons learnt and costs brought down by technological progress.
The USN standards were not a good thing and the WNT pulled them out of the fire.
It will if you stop building Battleships for two or three years while you analyse Dreadnought's strengths and weaknesses and Germany goes all out. Sure Britain will catch up in another couple of years, but those are years Britain is unacceptably vulnerable at sea. The Sentiment of the public was "We want eight and we won't wait". If the navy opted out of the Dreadnought race for a time the outcry would be enormous and could topple the Government.It's not gonna happen...
Eh?The USN standards were not a good thing and the WNT pulled them out of the fire.
It will if you stop building Battleships for two or three years while you analyse Dreadnought's strengths and weaknesses and Germany goes all out.
Burn the plans for the Indefatigable class and build more of the Lion class instead and give the blasted things better turret and barbet armor say 11" to 12" and a 10" beltWhat about the BC's?
If the goal is to avoid a building race with Dreadnought, that's one thing, but Fisher also wanted the Invincibles as the next thing to replace armored cruisers.What about the BC's?
Burn the plans for the Indefatigable class and build more of the Lion class instead and give the blasted things better turret and barbet armor say 11" to 12" and a 10" belt