Pocket battleships for minor navies

AdA

David S Poepoe said:
Part of the WNT was to keep the sale of preowned battleships illegal. HMAS Australia was scuttled under the terms of the WNT. There would be only two ways to deal with her, since she was not Britain's to give away, but the US refused to recognize that. The Chileans buy her from the Australians or, at the insistance of the US, she is counted as part of Britain's total permitted tonnage and she is scrapped.
Click to expand...

I PODed a revised treaty with ABC in it. I'm now running two parallel tracks with it.
 

AdA

Elfwine said:
Okay, so let's straighten this out.

ABC being in the WNT aside, what has changed, and why?
Click to expand...

I explained it on post 81. I took Blondie sugestion that it was easier to bring the ABC countries into the treaty than modifying the treaty to cater for them. I awarded them 60000t each, on the basis that Argentina allready had two ships totalling 56000t.
From here I considered two paths. My original one, with Brasil buying two improved PB and restarting the ABC naval race, and an alternative sugestion, that it would be a better deal for them to buy used ships.
I revised and expanded my original guidelines for a TL, and set up guidelines for another one.

We have debated alternate large navies a lot. I felt there was interest in discussing alternate smaller ones. I called it, to follow a recent forum trend, buid your own ABC navies.
 

AdA

David S Poepoe said:
And how does this all tie into arms limitation?
Click to expand...

You bring in the people who were small players in the pre WW1 dreadnough race, in the interest of controlling any future South American race at a time the ABC countries were the BRIC of their day, and there was no telling how big their economies would get in a post WW1, pre crash world.
If people find it useful, we can bring in all countries operating or building Dreadnoughts.
 

David S Poepoe

Banned
AdA said:
You bring in the people who were small players in the pre WW1 dreadnough race, in the interest of controlling any future South American race at a time the ABC countries were the BRIC of their day, and there was no telling how big their economies would get in a post WW1, pre crash world.
If people find it useful, we can bring in all countries operating or building Dreadnoughts.
Click to expand...

At most that would include Spain. The Soviet Union is left to itself.
 

Guilherme Loureiro

David S Poepoe said:
Wouldn't the Brasilians use another name besides Sao Paulo? I can see the Rio de Janeiro being brought up again, but would consider another state's name being used. Also, I would wonder if the British would really produce a ship mounting its armament in twin turrets.
Click to expand...

My guess is those ships would be named Riachuelo and Humaitá.
 

David S Poepoe

Banned
I should mention that if anyone is able to get a copy of the Warship 2008 there is a very interesting article titled: Diminishing Returns: Small Battleship Designs, 1919-1953 by Stephen McLaughlin. It examines several designs, including the 23,000 Italian design of 1928-29. The best of the plans was Sir George Thurston's 1926 Design 892, which is a whittled down version of the Nelson mounting six 16in in forward mounted triple turrets.
 

AdA

David S Poepoe said:
I should mention that if anyone is able to get a copy of the Warship 2008 there is a very interesting article titled: Diminishing Returns: Small Battleship Designs, 1919-1953 by Stephen McLaughlin. It examines several designs, including the 23,000 Italian design of 1928-29. The best of the plans was Sir George Thurston's 1926 Design 892, which is a whittled down version of the Nelson mounting six 16in in forward mounted triple turrets.
Click to expand...

Now I'll have to start a hunt for that issue...
 

AdA

Possible model

"Sir George Thurston’s 1926 design had 6 x 16-inch guns in two triple turrets as its main armament, 8 x 6-inch guns in four twin turrets as its secondary armament, and 4 x 4.7-inch AA guns in single mounts. Its tonnage was predicted to be 26,500-tons"

http://wargamingmiscellany.blogspot.pt/2011/09/building-small-battleships-some-1920s.html


Scale this down to 12'' weapons, make it c18000t, and here's a possible improved PB design. This could have been an influence on the later french BB.

smallbattleship 1926 design.jpg
 

AdA

Brasil, btw WW1 and WW2

Laid down 3 DD, not completed until 1943
Bought 4 SSK

As can be seen, there was no OTL response to the Argentinian build up, and only a limited response from Chile. Brasil was clearly in a very exposed regional naval position. The two OTL Dreadnoughts (Minas Gerais and São Paulo) were older than its regional rivals and not modernized, its cruisers were small and very old, the same being true for the destroyers.

I have revised my posts #92 and #99. I am now retainning São Paulo along with Minas Gerais, since I'm considering bringing this closer to OTL origins. I updated the general arrangment of the (now single) Brasilian ship to be closer the 1926 British study that I really liked.
 
Last edited:

AdA

eltf177 said:
Close - 16-inch main battery, a quad 180 aft and the small guns are actually twin 57mm's. IIRC it was more of a raider than a true battleship.
Click to expand...

On what displacement? The big guns might lead to a very unbalanced design...
 

AdA

eltf177 said:
Close - 16-inch main battery, a quad 180 aft and the small guns are actually twin 57mm's. IIRC it was more of a raider than a true battleship.
Click to expand...

Alternative design for the post war Stalingrad class BC? Were those 16'' a left over from the soviet Soyuz work or just a paper project?
 

Johnestauffer

That Russian battleship was one of many design proposals.
The 180mm guns were rapid fire and were intented to cause damage to the superstructure of any capital ship (damaging radars, fire control equipment, etc) while the main battery could do structural damage
The 180mm guns had an extremely long range.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top