Keynes' Cruisers Volume 2

[AlanJWhite]

You see what I mean about us Brits doing understatements so well.........

Perhaps ..
but I really do think the "cleanup" is more complicated that many here seem to believe and won't be 100%

The immediate problem is to police the battle area, killing Japanese cripples and saving lives.
That will use up most of the remaining Allied torpedoes and delay any surface pursuit or even recon.

The long term elephant in the room is of course protecting the landings.
IMHO that will take up USS Washington and KGV
and some of the CVs from force Q + their escorts

The next biggest problem (the hippo in the room?) is safeguarding Lee's damaged ships as they retreat
IMHO those combat ineffective 3 BBs and several cruisers will take up all Lee's surviving escorts
& probably one or two of the RN CVs even if only for ASW and CAP vs land based planes.

That leaves only TF-16 as an offensive weapon with 3 CVs but without heavy ships they can't press too far forward
AND the real restriction on their freedom of action is logistics (isn't it always iRL?)

Although TF-16 are already partially resupplied with fuel, torps and bombs etc are still getting low.
Worse even if force Q can unrep quickly for some fuel they also have very limited "ship killing" ammunition
and can't resupply these at all from USN sources.
Therefore Force Q simply cannot remain on station at the landings for very long.

TF-16 have 1 day at most, probably only one strike cycle before they need to back off and take over guard of the landings.
That isn't enough in numbers or time to bring down any of the 3 big Japanese BBs
(even assuming they are found to be in range)

IMHO their targets should be Shokaku, Hyuga, Hei and Ryujo though I doubt the USN will agree.
(not necessarily in that order ... it depends upon how the recon by the Catalinas and Sunderlands work out)
Personally I don't think they will manage even that much

For the sub lines - well ... reorientation to catch the several retreating groups is a problem
(helped by ASV radar spotters tonight but until Zuikaku and Ryugo are dealt with that will not be so simple in daylight)
Torpedoes are also a problem: numbers in the T Class RN Boats, reliability in the USN Fleet boats.
However if the Big 3 should stumble across a boat or two they may take more damage
(just don't count on it)

Unfortunately I think the land based planes are played out for ship strikes
and all others are needed to maintain the suppression of Japanese airfields

In that same period I expect that SoDak, Lexington and perhaps one other BB to founder or get picked off.

The cleanup certainly will favor the Allies but not by much in absolute terms

Aside: edited later for both a lot of grammar and a bit more sense

 

[Driftless]

The long term elephant in the room is of course protecting the landings.
IMHO that will take up USS Washington, KGV and some of the CVs from force Q + their escorts

Would you see the Japanese BB's reversing course late-night and making a push back towards the beachhead?
(in part, thinking of Kurita's historic movements in the Sibuyan Sea as a parallel)

 

[Alanith]

I'm both new to this forum and not a WWII expert, so can someone tell me why people hate the Alaska ships?

Calbear also has a well known... disdain for the class.

 

[Crowbar Six]

The Alaska's hull form was a scaled down replica of the Iowa iirc, unfortunately they were nowhere near as efficient and went through fuel much faster than they should have. They would have been quite good for shore bombardment but the USN had a lot of old battleships which were more than adequate for the task.

 

[Curtain Jerker]

This actually seems more likely than the insanely proud IJN officer class deciding to run the gauntlet of submarine lines - two (2) - airstrike/s with whatever ship killing ammo the allied force still has, land based air strikes, possible storms at sea finishing off cripples...all to be told 'you may use the garden' and handed a knife.

All this makes sense to me if you put yourself in Yamamoto's shoes. Not to mention there's a certain logic to him taking the battleships and using them as a way to get the crippled/smaller ships a few precious hours to get that much closer to the Home Islands while he goes down in a blaze of Bushido glory engaging the Allied battle line.

Many thanks to everyone who answered my question about the Alaska class too!

 

[GDIS Pathe]

I'm both new to this forum and not a WWII expert, so can someone tell me why people hate the Alaska ships?

Sums it up

The Alaska's, besides being the biggest construction error committed by the USN between the USS Vesuvius and the money pit known as the LCS (three lies in one acronym), were cursed with a number of remarkably bad design elements that effectively cursed them to failure.

1. Poor maneuverability. 808 feet long (80' LONGER than North Carolina class BB, 128' longer than a South Dakota BB and only 79' shorter than an Iowa class) 34,000 tons, ONE rudder (it is a good thing they operated in the Pacific, it is questionable if they could have completed a 360 degree turn in the Gulf of Mexico)

2. No proper flag quarters. As big as a battleship, and no flag quarters, meaning that if assigned to a SAG the force flag would have to be on a CA or CL.

3. Drew almost 32 feet of water at max (mean was 27'), this limited the ports it could use (Des Moines drew 22'). The USS Washington drew 34' 9".

4. Fuel hog compared to a CA. Six boilers instead of four.

5. Complement (wartime) was over 2,200. Des Moines class was 1,799 (wartime), North Carolina class complement was ~2,000 (wartime).

6. Throw weight. While the 12"/50 Mark 8 was a spectacular design, it was also the most expensive gun tube produced by the U.S. during WW II as $1.5M per tube. An Alaska could put out 21,150 pound of HE throw per minute. A Des Moines could put out 23,400 pound of HE per minute. For shore bombardment the 8"/55 RF was a better gun.

Ships were a white elephant.

Several options actually

1. Sneak in BuShips. Find ALL the plans for the Alaska Class. Burn them. Flush the ashes into the DC sewer system. Wait for your Silver Star to come in the mail.

2. Sneak in BuShips. Find ALL the plans for the Alaska Class. Burn them. Flush them down the toilet. Replace them with plans for a North Carolina class BB with only two main gun turrets. That will save around 4,000 tons standard load. You now have a 30+ knot fast BB that will cost LESS than the Alaska class per hull. Don't worry about getting caught. Any project manager idiotic enough to oversee the CB program will never notice the change.

3. Sneak in BuShips. Find ALL the plans for the Alaska Class. Burn them. Flush them down the toilet. Enter budget office, transfer funding and materials from CB project to (choose one):

A) Expedited construction of BB 65 & 66

OR​

B) Construction of 18 additional Oakland sub-class CLAA

OR
​

C) Expedited construction of CV 45 and 46 (IMO this is the best option, followed by Item "B")

Once this has been completed, locate all the planners who actually thought that an 882 foot long, 30,000 ton warship with ONE rudder and the underwater protection of a 14,000 ton CA was good idea. Have them transferred to Adak, Alaska to complete a comprehensive report on the mating and social habits of the Aleutians penguin population (yes, I know there are no penguins in the Arctic, that's rather the point). In 1943 send these same personnel on a comprehensive survey of all latrines in the South Pacific. When they finish send the on a survey mission to locate the New Guinea snipe. Do NOT allow them to return without live samples before the end of the War.

The primary difficulty with this solution is cost. The Alaska's were extremely manpower intensive (~2,200 total), close to that of a full on battleship (North Carolina class was 2,350 if used as a flagship 1,800-2,000 without flag, South Dakota class 2,350 total. The manning was so damned expensive to operate that the Navy parked them whenever possible, and scrapped them/ gave them away as museum pieces as soon as Congress would allow it, parking all the fast BB except the Iowas in 1947 and deleting them for the Navy List in 1960. The Boston class CAG manning was 1,142, Albany class CAG had a manning of 1,222, Galveston class CLG was 1,395 and the Providence class was 1,120.

There is also the other operating costs. The CAG & CLG could be maintained in engineering parts by scavenging the remaining Baltimore and Cleveland class hulls and they all used less fuel than the larger hulls.

 

[Not James Stockdale]

A 2/3rd volume-scaled Iowa (45,000 tons to 30,000 tons) would have been a much better platform for the excellent 12"/50 Mark 8. An American version of the Scharnhorst, which was a legitimate battleship (the term battlecruiser became deprecated after the introduction of fast battleships), would have been far more interesting.

 

[Zheng He]

But without the Alaska class, we would not have gotten this charming AH classic:

https://www.amazon.com/Alaska-CB-1-...1543976479&sr=8-19&keywords=alternate+history

 

[terv]

another point is that task force 16 air groups are better suited to both air cover and fly ground attack flights for the marines then the british carrier forces.

 

[fester]

Southern Makassar Strait 0230 January 3, 1943

RFA Olwen continued to plod. A pair of destroyers were topped enough. Another pair was in line. Before the ballet of bosun lines and fuel hoses was restarted coffee and tea was passed out to the tired deck hands.

 

[RyderWest]

Little to no air units, damaged battleships ranging from moderate to severe, loss of destroyers, two submarine lines full of angry torpedoes and three American carriers biting at the chance to launch their attacks....

Its either run or die for the Japanese... and I think they rather fight and die than run.

 

[terv]

fester, I am assuming that adding more ammo to the supply list may happen if thr supply lines do not have to sneak ships past the Japanese air cover.

 

[AtlanticCanuck]

If the two Yamato class ships get away will that make the Americans think that they might need the Montana class BBs after all? After all, they survived air attacks (assuming they do), wrecked a South Dakota class BB and heavily damaged a KGV class BB. The Iowas aren't much better protected than the South Dakotas I think and probably not as protected as a KGV, so an Iowa clearly can't handle a Yamato. They are so tough they survived air attacks also. (Again, assuming they do survive.) So the Big Gun lobby in the American Navy will have points to argue for the Montana's again. Or would they re-design and up-armour the third pair of Iowa's (Illinois and Kentucky) ?

 

[RyderWest]

If the two Yamato class ships get away will that make the Americans think that they might need the Montana class BBs after all? After all, they survived air attacks (assuming they do), wrecked a South Dakota class BB and heavily damaged a KGV class BB. The Iowas aren't much better protected than the South Dakotas I think and probably not as protected as a KGV, so an Iowa clearly can't handle a Yamato. They are so tough they survived air attacks also. (Again, assuming they do survive.) So the Big Gun lobby in the American Navy will have points to argue for the Montana's again. Or would they re-design and up-armour the third pair of Iowa's (Illinois and Kentucky) ?

Dont forget the reports that would be flooding in about the huge shells flying in their direction.....

 

[Driftless]

If the two Yamato class ships get away will that make the Americans think that they might need the Montana class BBs after all? After all, they survived air attacks (assuming they do), wrecked a South Dakota class BB and heavily damaged a KGV class BB. The Iowas aren't much better protected than the South Dakotas I think and probably not as protected as a KGV, so an Iowa clearly can't handle a Yamato. They are so tough they survived air attacks also. (Again, assuming they do survive.) So the Big Gun lobby in the American Navy will have points to argue for the Montana's again. Or would they re-design and up-armour the third pair of Iowa's (Illinois and Kentucky) ?

Paging Barnes-Wallis, paging Barnes-Wallis......

 

[CalBear]

If the two Yamato class ships get away will that make the Americans think that they might need the Montana class BBs after all? After all, they survived air attacks (assuming they do), wrecked a South Dakota class BB and heavily damaged a KGV class BB. The Iowas aren't much better protected than the South Dakotas I think and probably not as protected as a KGV, so an Iowa clearly can't handle a Yamato. They are so tough they survived air attacks also. (Again, assuming they do survive.) So the Big Gun lobby in the American Navy will have points to argue for the Montana's again. Or would they re-design and up-armour the third pair of Iowa's (Illinois and Kentucky) ?

The Iowa class had better protection than the South Dakota class, and better protection than the KGV overall, although the KGV was actually overbalanced for a 14" design.More importantly the Iowa (and the SDs) had a separate armored citadel inside the hull that protected the machinery spaces and magazines resulting in a design that was remarkably resilient.

There is, however, a little discussed reality about battleship vs battleship combat, namely that it is almost impossible for one (or more) full-on BB to sink another. Washington managed to tear Kirishima to pieces, but the Kirishima was a BC with delusions of grandeur While Bismarck was pounded into scrap by a combination of numerous RN warships she was pounded into FLOATING scrap, not sinking until being torpedoed AND having her scuttling charges detonated.

 

[historyfelon]

The Iowa class had better protection than the South Dakota class, and better protection than the KGV overall, although the KGV was actually overbalanced for a 14" design.More importantly the Iowa (and the SDs) had a separate armored citadel inside the hull that protected the machinery spaces and magazines resulting in a design that was remarkably resilient.

There is, however, a little discussed reality about battleship vs battleship combat, namely that it is almost impossible for one (or more) full-on BB to sink another. Washington managed to tear Kirishima to pieces, but the Kirishima was a BC with delusions of grandeur While Bismarck was pounded into scrap by a combination of numerous RN warships she was pounded into FLOATING scrap, not sinking until being torpedoed AND having her scuttling charges detonated.

BISMARCK, the Rasputin of warships.

 

[sloreck]

The Yamato and Mushashi can reverse course and go for the landing areas. Any destroyers that might accompany them will, at this point, run out of fuel long before they could reach any Japanese port, and any cruisers would probably be fuel restricted in terms of speed. I will assume that the battleships will have enough fuel to reach a port should they survive the attack and not have fuel tanks damaged - so that the attack would not be a guarantee suicide run. Yamamoto is not a maniac, he should realize that the odds of the two battleships making it to the landing area and making any real difference is, at this point, nil. If he turns to the landing area, he will be exposed to at least two or three full air strikes from carriers plus whatever land based air can do. He has to know there are submarines in the area. He has no effective protection against the submarines, and only the AA on his ships with no air support against any air strikes. After all of that, he then would have to face the Allied battleships and deal with the pesky cruisers and destroyers without much if any screen of his own. His ships are not invulnerable, and even if the armoe keeps them from sinking, if everything above the main deck except the big guns is trashed (including rangefinders), any attacks on supply ships, which will run away if they have not already are likely to be less than sterling, and he does not have much HE to attack land targets.

OTOH if the ships return to Japan, they are still the core of a fleet which has to be factored in by the Allies. IMHO he would be more likely to save what he could to fight again in the future rather than throwing it away here in a suicide run. If he needs to make a maximal apology to the Emperor, so be it.

 

[RyderWest]

Someone needs to tabulate all the casualties after this...

After the inevitable FAA and USN carrier strike, of course.

 

[Butchpfd]

There is another possibility for the creation of the Alaskas. The General Board that came up with all the good to excellent WW II ship designs somehow came up with the Alaskas. really,why,?? Perhaps it was by design, of the Board members, to localize damage by placing the worst of the ship design and plans people into one pigenhole. Remember this is pre-war, and there were no facilaties for personnel to inspect penguins at Adak, Alaska outside those for the LT. JG and 2 Ensigns who were already there having overstepped bounds with Admirals daughters.

What safer place to put those people but an improbable project like the Alaska's. How was anyone to know that all of a sudden Congress pinch pennier of pinch penniers would suddenly throw all the money in the world at the Navy in the Two Ocean Navy Bill! By then all that BuShip could do was drag their feet and hope they never made it to sea..

Thoughts??