Foreign Military Sales of Obsolescent Cruisers

The principal light cruisers of the U.S. Navy in the twenties and early thirties were the Omaha class, ten ships of post World War (not yet One) design:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omaha-class_cruiser

Seeing how quickly they became obsolescent, suppose (as among other things a jobs program) the Navy ordered seven more Brooklyn class cruisers, keeping the same total cruiser tonnage but having more effective ships, and sold the Omaha class cruisers to foreign navies.

Who would get them?

Well, presumably the ABC South American powers (Argentina, Brazil, Chile) would get two each. Suppose the Netherlands got two, to help defend against Japanese power? (This would counteract accusations of bolstering colonialism.) And perhaps Canada would get the last two?

Or would there be other recipients? Turkey, say Or, God help us, the Philippine Field Marshal considers that the new nation's amour propre demands a distinguished flagship and he requires one? Brave Little China (which was losing its seaports, but that's another story)?

And if or when the destroyers-for-bases deal comes up, will this make the transaction more acceptable?
 
The principal light cruisers of the U.S. Navy in the twenties and early thirties were the Omaha class, ten ships of post World War (not yet One) design:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omaha-class_cruiser

Seeing how quickly they became obsolescent, suppose (as among other things a jobs program) the Navy ordered seven more Brooklyn class cruisers, keeping the same total cruiser tonnage but having more effective ships, and sold the Omaha class cruisers to foreign navies.

Who would get them?

Well, presumably the ABC South American powers (Argentina, Brazil, Chile) would get two each. Suppose the Netherlands got two, to help defend against Japanese power? (This would counteract accusations of bolstering colonialism.) And perhaps Canada would get the last two?

Or would there be other recipients? Turkey, say Or, God help us, the Philippine Field Marshal considers that the new nation's amour propre demands a distinguished flagship and he requires one? Brave Little China (which was losing its seaports, but that's another story)?

And if or when the destroyers-for-bases deal comes up, will this make the transaction more acceptable?

They were obsolete but under the terms of the 1930 London Naval Treaty they could not be replaced until they reached 20 years of age, i.e. 1943-45. The treaty specifically forbade the signatories from selling under age ships and building a new ones to replace them.

However, if they did put them up for sale the most likely customers would be Brazil and Chile who had several cruisers built before the First World War to replace and to counter the 3 cruisers that Argentina bought between the world wars.
 
RCN was solely and exclusively buying from the UK in the pre ww1.

No one in South America had an appetite to buy ships in the 30s . I suppose the US could have given them away but why would they?

The dutch could and did build all the cruisers they wanted and didnt look at buying in order to maintain capability themselves. Same with Spain although they purchased designs.

China would have tsken them if you were given away but would not hqve spent on them as they would be quickly destroyed by Japan.

Not sure when you are tskkin about selling but the Philipine Navy would have been considered part of the US navy for arms treaties.

Essentially I cant see a market to sell them.
 
No one in South America had an appetite to buy ships in the 30s. I suppose the US could have given them away but why would they?

I think it wasn't so much a lack of appetite as a lack of cash. Many of them had cruisers built between the middle 1890s and 1914 that were run on into the 1930s probably for lack of the money to buy anything better.

The only South American nation that bought new cruisers between the wars was Argentina, which bought 2 cruisers from Italy in the 1920s and the La Argentina in the 1930s. IIRC the Argentines also bought 12 destroyers, several submarines and had their 2 dreadnoughts modernised. But IIRC Argentina was at that time the 10th richest nation in the world.

Brazil and Chile weren't so fortunate and could only afford to buy new submarines and destroyers, in smaller numbers than Argentina did. Therefore they might have accepted 3 Omahas each had they been available at nominal prices.

Having said that the USA had to scrap scores of relatively new Flush Deck destroyers in the first half of the 1930s to comply with the terms of the 1930 London Naval Treaty. None of them found their way into the South American navies. However, whether the Treaty forbade disposal by sale to a foreign navy, the South American navies weren't interested or they weren't for sale in the first place, I don't know.
 
If the USA were even considering such a selling, which was unwise to start with, given the mere fact the USN lacked behind in cruisers capable of dealing with destroyers, as well as ones with a high rate of fire of the main guns. The focus on the heavy cruiser was the main reason why the old Omaha class was still useful to start with, as the 8 inch gunners were mostly political choices, rather than pracitcal ones. In WW2 the heavy cruisers of the USN did not perform well in the first year of war, simply because they were not build for the sorts of warfare they had to operate in.

If a sale was to be made however, the USA would exclude colonial European and Asian powers, leaving little choices left for potential buyers. Gerneally speaking, the Omaha class still had good potential in modern naval warfare, as it combined high speed with a good mixture of guns and torpedoes. (although the quality of the torpedoes was seriously debatable). This would leave only Chile, Brasil and to a lesser sence Argetnina as potential purchasers in Latin America, as most other nations with a cruiser force, were either European and Colonial, or Japan, which certainly was excluded for this sale. Both Brasil adn Chile, lacked the budget for this, as they already had made a lot of their military budget free for maintaining their expensive battleship forces. Argentina already had bought new cruisers abroad and did not want to purchase more, given the already spent budget available for this.

Were there more options? Yes there were. Why not reclassifying the Omaha class cruisers as something else, perhaps even reconstructing them a bit. There had been schemes to make them Anti Aircraft ships, with all, but the two turreted 6 inch guns removed and eight 3 inch FLAK guns added, as well as a lot of light FLAK. Simply rerating them as Anti Aircraft ships made sense, making tonnage available again, though this might be countered by the London Naval Treaty, as this would rerate them back into the cruisertype again.
 
whether the Treaty forbade disposal by sale to a foreign navy,........... I don't know.
They are banned by treaty (from WNT onwards)

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Article XVIII[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Each of the Contracting Powers undertakes not to dispose by gift, sale or any mode of transfer of any vessel of war in such a manner that such vessel may become a vessel of war in the navy of any foreign Power.[/FONT]

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-089_Washington_Naval_Limitation_Treaty_1922.htm
 
Top