Best warships that should have been built

Another gaping hole in the USN inventory is shore bombardment. The fleet needs to come up with at least a 155mm armed design, although a 208mm would be better that can provide useful naval gunfire support, not just with the gee-wizz 100 mile deep strike but with conventional rounds as well. Ideally a variant of the CG(N)-X but with a much smaller VLS, say 96 compartments, four 155mm/208mm guns and space/weight saved for both rail guns and directed energy. Need at least one of these, ideally two+ for each 'Phib group.
There was a discussion a while back about cheap ways the USN could get shore bombardment capability without engaging in a boondoggle like the Zumwalts and a Carronade-style ship built of the Besson class LSV seemed like the cheapest and most effective.
 
Edit: Mid to late 40's those PB are useless, by 1944 5 KGV, 2-4 Lions, Vanguard, 2-3 Richelieus exist that can catch them and destroy them with ease, with more on the way, rather than 1939 where there were merely Hood, 2 Renown, 2 Dunkerques that could do it and will still be around, so 17+ PB killers as opposed to 5, not good odds
The large surface raider appears to be a 1920s to 1930s solution when submarines are still mostly blind, mostly slow and mostly vulnerable, before radar one needs a flock of aircraft to scout at any distance, speed to outrun or bigger guns to outfight Cruisers, and tonnage for habitability, fuel, stores and workshops to be independent. Now I believe these ships became political weapons at bottom, but again are a case of Germany getting the right ship after its useful era past. These are in my mind what the Imperial Navy needed, perhaps useful post-war and in the interim years before 1939.

In theory a very fast heavy cruiser, say 10 to 15,000 tons, might slip in and extend this life for the mission, but I think it becomes the surface component to the U-boat war, and still vulnerable to any opposing surface fleet since the biggest issue is that Germany must break out of the North Sea to ever contest any enemy. That should have circled them back to a cruiser submarine, far faster in transit or stalking, far better underwater when evading or transiting near any air cover, and able to stay out on station once it got out on the shipping lanes. Its biggest weakness being finding targets.

Germany should have been earlier to pursue RDF and hunting for radio chatter, an antenna is easier than getting an airplane on a sub and Germany should have seen the value radar has for a submarine searching the expanse of ocean at night too. And I wonder why no one thought about jamming radios on target shipping, that seems to be a necessity for some lone hunter to delay the hounds. Germany's geography almost mandates that submarines are its only hope getting out beyond the British Isles, its surface Navy is best used as the bogeyman to tie down the RN on big ships and ignore escorts. If I were to reform the KM or either era I would get them to admit the capital ships are a bluff and pursue mine warfare, submarines and aviation to actually fight a winnable naval war versus the only opponent that matters, the RN, strangle the coastal trade, sink ships at anchor, blockade from the Western sea lanes. A decisive battle is propaganda to lull the British into opposing the wrong thing. Nazi Germany did not have the time or I believe leadership to do just that, so perhaps it is moot, but grist for our ATL mills.

So for my ATL thinking, I want a Cruiser that can go hunting on the open ocean, faster than anything afloat, only better armed than the average AMC or likely trade protection cruiser, likely biased to several scout airplanes. Maybe a sort of Tone-class looking thing, less guns, maybe a light torpedo optimized for anti-ship kills, using more tonnage for endurance, and the earliest Radar and ESM outfit technology permits. Still a dead end but between 1919 and 1939 it has promise and can be paraded as Germany's foreign station cruiser. It might leverage into a supporting role for a better U-boat campaign after that, but then I think it needs to consider AA warfare and radar to warn against aircraft. It will pursue a dangerously exposed mission but Germany has the deck stacked against her anyway.
 
There was a discussion a while back about cheap ways the USN could get shore bombardment capability without engaging in a boondoggle like the Zumwalts and a Carronade-style ship built of the Besson class LSV seemed like the cheapest and most effective.
I was of the opinion that something as large as a Newport-class LST would have been better in terms of seakeeping, habitability, and endurance than a significantly smaller and significantly slower LSV hull. You would probably end up stuck with AGS turrets fore and aft and a landing pad on the fantail, although I personally think that a more conventional set of twin 6-inch low-angle automatics (unlike the 6"/47DP Mark 16 and the 6"/50 QF Mark V) would have been better value than the AGS. The MCLWG could have been another good alternative to the AGS, with US-standard 260 lbs HC and an option to develop a 10-caliber guided round.
 
Last edited:
Pulling off Iowa's B turret and removing the entire barbette could help with the bow weight driving issue. That would probably be about 3,000 tons of weight. You would then have a large open area on the foredeck. The best option would probably be the 8 x 8 VLS that went on the Spruances, but quite a few ABLs could be fitted there.
You might as well build a new ship if you're removing the barbette. IIRC, all the proposals that were floated all involved installing systems within the confines of the barbette because of the amount of money and work involved in removing one
 
What are some cool warships of the steel era (1859-present) that should have been built?

HMS Lion
Cool but why not go better, I'm surprised its not listed by page 6 but why not Ark Royals (91) two sisters built at the same time?

WNT/LNT allowed
The total tonnage for aircraft-carriers of each of the Contracting Powers shall not exceed in standard displacement: for the British Empire, 135,000 tons
With only C&G (posibbly dibatable they existed in 1921 just not as CVs) counted as none experimental they can build 3 27,000t aircraft carriers to replace them.....
 
Yes it would have to change, Part 2D of the AGNA said Germany was limited in what she could build by categories (ie 35% BB, 35% CV, 35%CA etc.), and that this would apply to a future Naval Limitation Treaty. Article 4 of the 2LNT signed 10 months later defined Panzerschiffe as a category, with an allowance of 0, ergo Germany could not build any new ones without violating the treaty except with the consent of the UK, who would say no, as 35% of 0 is 0

Edit: Mid to late 40's those PB are useless, by 1944 5 KGV, 2-4 Lions, Vanguard, 2-3 Richelieus exist that can catch them and destroy them with ease, with more on the way, rather than 1939 where there were merely Hood, 2 Renown, 2 Dunkerques that could do it and will still be around, so 17+ PB killers as opposed to 5, not good odds

Edit: Also getting rid of Hitler isn't necessarily going to make things better for Germany, no one else is going to get the concessions he did at the same time to be able to get the same correlation of forces he managed

Getting rid of Hitler is the most important first step , since it avoids war altogether.
 
Yes, and without war a balanced fleet is the way to go as it has the most growth potential for the future
The only naval mission for the fleet from REICHMARINE on, was the interdiction of the "transatlantic life line." to support . As long as this remains in place the navy has fulfilled its mission.
 
The only naval mission for the fleet from REICHMARINE on, was the interdiction of the "transatlantic life line." to support . As long as this remains in place the navy has fulfilled its mission.
Uh control of the Baltic? Defense of the Coasts? Show the Flag? Support German interests abroad?

Commerce Interdiction is only a mission if you are fighting the UK. If you are not planning on war with the UK, it is not a mission. Since you don't have Hitler in charge why are you planning to fight the UK?
 
Uh control of the Baltic? Defense of the Coasts? Show the Flag? Support German interests abroad?

Commerce Interdiction is only a mission if you are fighting the UK. If you are not planning on war with the UK, it is not a mission. Since you don't have Hitler in charge why are you planning to fight the UK?
Cutting the transatlantic CONVOY life line WAS the KM's most important mission- by far. Having said that -the 3 PBB [AGS/Sch/Deu] were only accepted for construction by the Reichstag ; if they could also be also used as "Panzer Kreuzers" to interdict any Franco-Polish blockade of Germany in the Baltic Sea.

The Reichswehr concluded in the late 1920s that war was coming to Germany & Europe with or without Hitler. The strategic thinking concluded the Reichswehr was so enfeebled by the ToV, that if POLAND launched an invasion of Germany [AKA 1920 war with Russia] , the Reichswehr would run out of supplies after a couple of weeks and be forced to lay down its 'arms' and surrender with in a few more weeks of that time. So in the late 1920s a rearmament was begun to draw in all the secret programs from post WW-1 . This was followed by a second program begun in the early 1930s , which planned for a RM fleet of one CV plus 6 surface raiders & 6 light Kreuzers . This plan also included more GTB and 16 U-Boats. All these plans were underway when Hitler seized power and the ship building plans morphed out of control into the historical fleet built through the late 1930s and early 1940s.

The construction of an enlarged ' raider fleet' would consume all the big ship construction tonnage [2 BB/2 BC/2 CV &5 CA etc] to build ~ 24 hulls from 15000 tons UP [ Koop & Schmolke ]. To complete even 15 PBBs by wartime, would also consume ALL the light tonnage ~ Zerstroer tonnage - up to 1939. This however means that all historically warships built with tonnage from M-Boot down; could still be completed.

Further such a programme would require scavenging turrets and all equipment from the existing RM fleet [5 K cruisers and 3 Graf SPEE PBBs] , prewar. The large U-Boat fleet was always envisaged as the main construction effort and ALL other construction would have to dovetail to support this programme . To that end BB/CV were NEVER considers , instead a program for a dozen surface raiders was proposed in the mid 1930s.. However there is no reason the PBBs & K Class Cruisers hulls could not be rebuilt as CVE/CVL in the late 1930s.
 
Last edited:
It's really a crying shame the CGBL was never more than a design study. An updated version would've been a very good fit for the post-Zumwalt navy instead of the Flight III Burkes.
 
Cutting the transatlantic CONVOY life line WAS the KM's most important mission- by far. Having said that -the 3 PBB [AGS/Sch/Deu] were only accepted for construction by the Reichstag ; if they could also be also used as "Panzer Kreuzers" to interdict any Franco-Polish blockade of Germany of the 1930s.

The construction of an enlarged ' raider fleet' would consume all the big ship construction tonnage [2 BB/2 BC/2 CV &5 CA etc] to build ~ 24 hulls from 15000 tons UP [ Koop & Schmolke ]. To complete even 15 PBBs by wartime, would also consume ALL the light tonnage ~ Zerstroer tonnage - up to 1939. This however means that all historically warships built with tonnage from M-Boot down; could still be completed.

Further such a programme would require scavenging turrets and all equipment from the existing RM fleet [5 K cruisers and 3 Graf SPEE PBBs] , prewar. The large U-Boat fleet was always envisaged as the main construction effort and ALL other construction would have to dovetail to support this programme . To that end BB/CV were NEVER considers , instead a program for a dozen surface raiders was proposed in the mid 1930s.. However there is no reason the PBBs & K Class Cruisers hulls could not be rebuilt as CVE/CVL in the late 1930s.
Again such a role is only useful against the UK. Otherwise there is no convoy lifeline to cut, thus that is not a mission.

And that program was abandoned for a reason. It means you have been waving a red flag at Britain and been saying "we are planning on fighting you", which means they are less likely to acquiesce to your diplomatic moves in Europe, and them not doing so cripples your ability to fight them anyways. It also means they are more likely to open the taps for rearmament early

Such a fleet also has less growth potential than a balanced fleet. A balanced fleet can easily evolve in any direction it wishes, a Raider fleet has to start from scratch at anything but large cruisers and subs, which hurts your long term prospects. Said Raiders are also of marginal use past the mid 40's being too slow to run and too weak to fight the new generation of capital ships everybody knows is coming
 
Again such a role is only useful against the UK. Otherwise there is no convoy lifeline to cut, thus that is not a mission.

And that program was abandoned for a reason. It means you have been waving a red flag at Britain and been saying "we are planning on fighting you", which means they are less likely to acquiesce to your diplomatic moves in Europe, and them not doing so cripples your ability to fight them anyways. It also means they are more likely to open the taps for rearmament early

Such a fleet also has less growth potential than a balanced fleet. A balanced fleet can easily evolve in any direction it wishes, a Raider fleet has to start from scratch at anything but large cruisers and subs, which hurts your long term prospects. Said Raiders are also of marginal use past the mid 40's being too slow to run and too weak to fight the new generation of capital ships everybody knows is coming
The preparation's for this war in the late 1920s established a 15 year three phased expansion program, which followed certain strategic premise. Germanys neighbour's would not sit idly by and just let her rearm with out response. First expansion phase would be to build a defensive force to resist and halt a Franco-Polish invasion. The second phase expected a defensive -offensive force to counter attack and/or mount counter stroke against the above invaders ; drive them out of Germany and seize terrain for the post war politics. The third phase planned for a fully mechanized Wehrmacht capable of mounting either a pre-emptive or preventative war with Germanys hostile neighbour's. Further any military action HAD to assume it would explode into a 'wider European war with a good [later reasonable] chance of success.

Any German Fleet cannot be built in a few years , but more like decades.

Parallel with all this rearmament - would be the expansion of a German economic empire/alliance through out eastern Europe the Baltics and the Balkans. This was begun in the wake of the great depression with Reich-Bank backed credit bills plus bilateral trade arrangements etc.
 
Last edited:
The preparation's for this war in the late 1920s established a 15 year three phased expansion program, which followed certain strategic premise. Germanys neighbour's would not sit idly by and just let her rearm with out response. First expansion phase would be to build a defensive force to resist and halt a Franco-Polish invasion. The second phase expected a defensive -offensive force to counter attack and/or mount counter stroke against the above invaders ; drive them out of Germany and seize terrain for the post war politics. The third phase planned for a fully mechanized Wehrmacht capable of mounting either a pre-emptive or preventative war with Germanys hostile neighbour's. Further any military action HAD to assume it would explode into a 'wider European war with a good [later reasonable] chance of success.

Any German Fleet cannot be built in a few years , but more like decades.

Parallel with all this rearmament - would be the expansion of a German economic empire/alliance through out eastern Europe the Baltics and the Balkans. This was begun in the wake of the great depression with Reich-Bank backed credit bills plus bilateral trade arrangements etc.
Of course her neighbors would not sit idly by, which is why it pays to not go out of the way to antagonize anyone they did not have to with her buildup. A Balanced fleet does not really antagonize anyone more than rearming in general and in any scenario short of war with the UK is more useful for Germany. Balanced fleet means France can't blockade her, as Germany essentially did build to effective equality with France OTL in modern units by 1940 (2 15" BB, 2 11" BB, 3 PB, 3 CA vs. 1 1 15" BB, 2 13" BB, 1 CV, 7 CA). Balanced fleet is also useful for coalition warfare or fighting the Soviets

Yes any German fleet will take decades to build, which is why you want flexibility in your build program as strategic and technological circumstances change. You don't want to go all in on vessels super optimized for one particular strategic and technical environment like your raider fleet is

Again this expansion would go better without unnecessarily aggravating the UK
 
Last edited:
From the German POV , it really doesn't matter what the RN does. As such they were not a factor in the German war calculus.
 
From the German POV , it really doesn't matter what the RN does. As such they were not a factor in the German war calculus.
So if they aren't a factor then they shouldn't build a fleet to fight them, and instead build a fleet to fight people who are a factor. That has been the point I have been trying to make to you
 
So if they aren't a factor then they shouldn't build a fleet to fight them, and instead build a fleet to fight people who are a factor. That has been the point I have been trying to make to you
The point your making is obvious but the fact is the first post war lesson discussed in Weimar republic - was how to prevent a transatlantic alliance, since that was instrumental in loosing WW-I for them. Further any german action had to assume breaking out into a European wide war....so action against RN would eventually happen and steps had to be taken in preparation. For example any invasion of France had to secure the "low lands" so the KM & LW could initate action against the UK from that launch off point.
 
The point your making is obvious but the fact is the first post war lesson discussed in Weimar republic - was how to prevent a transatlantic alliance, since that was instrumental in loosing WW-I for them. Further any german action had to assume breaking out into a European wide war....so action against RN would eventually happen and steps had to be taken in preparation. For example any invasion of France had to secure the "low lands" so the KM & LW could initate action against the UK from that launch off point.
Yet you said the RN was not a factor before this, now you are saying steps have to be taken?

One should take actions to counter the RN that don't make fighting them more likely, because at the end of the day keeping Britain from sending a dozen divisions to support France on land is more important than having an effective fleet for long term commerce raiding against them. Therefore one should take reasonable precautions, such as a balanced or defensive fleet that can keep the RN away from your coasts reliably and doesn't provoke them

Preventing a transatlantic alliance is easy, no U-Boats, no commerce raiding, fight a defensive war at sea, US finds it difficult to get a causus belli that will fly
 
What are some cool warships of the steel era (1859-present) that should have been built?

...
HMS Lion
...
I'm less peeved about Lion never being built than I am about Vanguard getting scrapped.

Britain's last and greatest battleship, one of the most aesthetically pleasing ever built, was sent to the breaking yards without having so much as fired a shot in anger. Today what was once the world's foremost naval power is left with zero (0) preserved capital ships from the modern era. It's almost as obscene as the scrapping of Warspite and Enterprise.
 
Top