Revenge is best served Royally

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
What if the Revenge class only reached three ships before production was stopped? Royal Oak and Royal Sovereign join a renamed Revenge (Now Royal George) as the Royal class at Jutland. Of the five others planned, four have been laid down by the time First Sea Lord Jackie Fisher gets permission to finish them as 3x2 15in/42 battle cruisers.

With excess turrets on order he gets permission to lay down the nearly cancelled HMS Resistance too. So the Renown class stands at five by wars end: Renown (Fairfield), Repulse (Palmers), Ramllies (Beardmore), Resistance (HM Dockyard Devenport) and Resoluton (Palmers).

Washington Naval Treaty won't give any 15" gunned ships up, so what gives?

Given that only two can be refitted with surplus nine inch plate belts, what is the likely post-war refit? Since the Courageous class are more limited, can they get heavier, deeper and slower for a fast fleet of 30knots? More like a fast, light, battleship than a heavy battlecruiser. Given a target of 30 knots, how armoured could they get?

Add torpedo defence bulges out to 104ft on both classes? Any likely impacts in WW2 from the three extra Renown class? From bulging the Courageous class?
 
Last edited:
Well, Hood probably isn't built. With five instead of three fast capital ships, Britain has a ready answer to the German pocket battleships.

If the RN can't up-armor all of the Repulse class... maybe they don't up-armor any of them. Instead they rework them as raider-killers. With their speed, they'd be wasted escorting convoys, but they could be used for area patrols, perhaps by carrying several floatplanes for scouting. The armor they have is enough to stop cruiser shells, and they shouldn't ever face enemy battleships with 14"-16" guns.
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
Well, Hood probably isn't built. With five instead of three fast capital ships, Britain has a ready answer to the German pocket battleships.

If the RN can't up-armor all of the Repulse class... maybe they don't up-armor any of them. Instead they rework them as raider-killers. With their speed, they'd be wasted escorting convoys, but they could be used for area patrols, perhaps by carrying several floatplanes for scouting. The armor they have is enough to stop cruiser shells, and they shouldn't ever face enemy battleships with 14"-16" guns.
Ah yes, the mighty Hood.

No armour? That effectively stops them being capital ships. Not that they should be in the battle line in their current state, but they still count against it. Less battleships permitted. Unless they get some armour upgrade, they are not as resistant to 11in naval gun fire as you seem to think. Trying to make them scouting aircraft carriers is another misplaced role. Better to have fleet carriers.

There is an advantage in delaying a refit for thicker armour. Adding an eight to ten inch belt (to replace three to six inches at it's thickest) and a few more inches of deck armour (than one to two and a half inches) in an all or nothing scheme 1930-1936 would help preserve plate production at a critical time and respond to the Deutschland class swiftly. They would still be faster and with heavier weight of shot. Any other improvements would be more modern.

They could escort aircraft carriers while they put out a full search pattern of aircraft from a proper flight deck. Their new armour should keep them safe from the heaviest of cruisers (Admiral Hipper class) and their speed safe from battleships. The Bismarck class would still be trouble, but a softening up by aircraft and sheer weight of numbers should answer.

This puts a lot on the yards in the 1930s. Can you see Ramsay MacDonald financing these refits? In 1934 the Royals can have their replacements ordered. Same turrets?
15inTurret-after.jpg
Three battleships or four heavy battle-cruisers? I think the 35,000ton limit works in favour of three turret ships.

By 1937 limits are coming off and a 40,000t nine gun ship class looks likely. The Nelrod turret is already developed, but lessons learnt can be applied. Flash walls and greater separation between guns, mineral oil hydraulics, 25% faster train and off-set rollers. Maybe replace the slow and aging HMS Nelson and HMS Rodney with two more of this 30knot Lion class. This gives you the option to standardise on the 15in Greenboy shell. Two ordered Feb 1938, three more Sept 1938. The last UK battleships.

In 1941 when the first of class was completing trials the 16in gunned ships, instead of going into reserve, were sent to Colombo and Singapore along with the old Royal class, Hawkins class and the "experimental" aircraft carriers. This reinforced 8th Destroyer Flotilla, 4th Submarine Flotilla and the old C-class light cruisers of India Station and the forces withdrawn from Hong Kong when French Indo-China was occupied. In defending the Malacca strait and the coasts of Malaya, this force had a relatively static role where range and speed were not important.

British large slips were devoted solely to building fleet carriers and the four 27,000t Illustrious-class, laid down in 1937 were only the start. Four 35,000t Implacable class took up the largest slips when war was declared in September 1939 along with the first ten 10,000t "Convoy Carriers" designed to ferry troops, vehicles (RoRo) and aircraft while patrolling ahead of convoys for awaiting submarines.
 
Last edited:
No armour? That effectively stops them being capital ships. Not that they should be in the battle line in their current state, but they still count against it. Less battleships permitted. Unless they get some armour upgrade, they are not as resistant to 11in naval gun fire as you seem to think. Trying to make them scouting aircraft carriers is another misplaced role. Better to have fleet carriers.

Yabbut in the 1920s, the fleet carrier doesn't exist yet; and when it does, it's for use with the fleet. It's certainly not practical to have one with every Repulse. Escort carriers were really the best idea for trade protection, but no one believed that until 1941. My idea was to optimize the ship for the anti-raider role as it would be seen in the 1920s and early 1930s. For that, a few scouting aircraft makes a great improvement fairly cheap. IMO.
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
Yabbut in the 1920s, the fleet carrier doesn't exist yet; and when it does, it's for use with the fleet. It's certainly not practical to have one with every Repulse. Escort carriers were really the best idea for trade protection, but no one believed that until 1941. My idea was to optimize the ship for the anti-raider role as it would be seen in the 1920s and early 1930s. For that, a few scouting aircraft makes a great improvement fairly cheap. IMO.
How about pairs of Repulses each with a carrier (and a few ASW destroyers) ? Six BCs, three CVs. The Outrageous class exist in the 1920s. Raider hunting flotillas (2x BC, 1x CV, 3x DD).
 
Washington Naval Treaty won't give any 15" gunned ships up, so what gives?
OTL,
On the completion of the two new ships to be constructed and the scrapping of the Thunderer, KingGeorgeV, Ajax and Centurion, as provided in Article II, the total tonnage to be retained by the British Empire will be 558,950 tons.

Revenge 25,750
Resolution 25,750
Ramillies 25,750
Malaya 27,500
Valiant 27,500
Barham 27,500
Queen Elizabeth 27,500
Warspite 27,500
Benbow 25,000
Emperor of India 25,000
Iron Duke 25,000
Marlborough 25,000
Hood 41,200
Renown 26,500
Repulse 26,500
Tiger 28,500
Thunderer 22,500
King George V 23,000
Ajax 23,000
Centurion 23,000
Total tonnage 580,450
v
ITTL
Revenge 25,750
Resolution 25,750
Ramillies 25,750
Malaya 27,500
Valiant 27,500
Barham 27,500
Queen Elizabeth 27,500
Warspite 27,500
Benbow 25,000
Emperor of India 25,000
Iron Duke 25,000
Marlborough 25,000
Renown 26,500
Repulse 26,500
Royal Sovereign 26,500
Royal Oak 26,500
Resistance 26,500
Tiger 28,500
Thunderer 22,500
King George V 23,000
Ajax 23,000
Centurion 23,000
Total tonnage 580,450 - 13200 and same number of ships.

GB then builds three N&R to match Colorado class and N&M at 35,000t/16" for scraping Thunderer, King George V, Ajax and Centurion.

Come LNT cuts them down to 15 ships, I think one of the 15" ships become the training ship probably a slow R class? I don't think this hurts any of the treaties or really upsets the balance of power much? RN might try and demand an extra ship due to the weakness of its fast 15" ships especially if not yet rebuilt?

I think all 5 Repulse get rebuilt with stronger belts/decks as otherwise they are far to weak in 20s/30s and they also get into the full late 30s rebuild order like OTL with the QEs.

Come WWII RN has two more fast ships but no Hood and the potential to refit the training ship into a front line unit (well ok a second class R).....?

I don't see that much change apart from the lack of a strong fast unit ie Hood makes RN even more nervous about new fast european BBs but they can try and counter with two Repulse together or a KVG+Repulse combo?
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
Tiger 28,500
Thunderer 22,500
(51,000)
plus
In date order of class:

Ajax 23,000
Centurion 23,000
King George V 23,000
(69,000)

Marlborough 25,000
Benbow 25,000
Emperor of India 25,000
Iron Duke 25,000
(100,000)

Malaya
27,500
Valiant 27,500
Barham 27,500
Warspite 27,500
Queen Elizabeth 27,500
(137,500)

Royal Sovereign
25,750
Royal Oak 25,750
Royal George 25,750

(77,250)

Repulse 26,500
Resolution 26,500
Ramillies 26,500

Resistance 26,500
Renown 26,500
(132,500)

Total : 567,250
(580,450 - 13,200)

A few names out, but the total is right.

On the completion of the two new ships to be constructed and the scrapping of the Thunderer, KingGeorgeV, Ajax and Centurion, as provided in Article II, the total tonnage to be retained by the British Empire will be 558,950 tons.
475,750‬ tons? 83,200 for refit and growth?

The two new ships will be 35,000 tons each or repeat Renowns with the whole class going up (4,280t) in weight?
Nelson and Rodney as nine gun ships is either slow or poorly armoured.
 
Last edited:
Tiger 28,500
Thunderer 22,500
(51,000)
plus
In date order of class:

Ajax 23,000
Centurion 23,000
King George V 23,000
(69,000)

Marlborough 25,000
Benbow 25,000
Emperor of India 25,000
Iron Duke 25,000
(100,000)

Malaya
27,500
Valiant 27,500
Barham 27,500
Warspite 27,500
Queen Elizabeth 27,500
(137,500)

Royal Sovereign
25,750
Royal Oak 25,750
Royal George 25,750

(77,250)

Repulse 26,500
Resolution 26,500
Ramillies 26,500

Resistance 26,500
Renown 26,500
(132,500)

Total : 567,250
(580,450 - 13,200)

A few names out, but the total is right.


475,750‬ tons? 83,200 for refit and growth?

The Hoods were laid down in response to the Mackensens so unless they are not laid down ITTL I cannot see the 4 Hoods not being laid down ITTL

It might be a case that they are less further along in construction and either never finished or some / all become CVs but do not end up as a 46,000 ton dent in that total Battleship tonnage



So the 83,000 tons would probably be used up in having 2 or even 3 x Nelrods to match the other navies 16" gun ships
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
Well there are fans of ATL Hood class CVs. Aren't the Iron Duke class (and maybe Tiger) going to offer the chance of "completing" some triple 16in ships? (128,000 tons) Three and some refitting or four and less refitting from the 83,000 tons? Or are the RN stuck with the Iron Dukes for the holiday (like visiting cousins)?

Slow build is better than no build. The other three Admiral class would have been more armoured on deck, but a knot slower. Worth it. How does that get past the treasury and treaty negotiators?

As you are seeking to apply the lessons of WW1 Hood, laid down at the time of Jutland, shouldn't have been finished. Better to complete her three sisters as 41,000t 3x3 16in gun fast battleships. Slowly. It's the treaty. They would be cancelled.

Maybe one instead of Hood?
 
Last edited:
475,750‬ tons? 83,200 for refit and growth?

The two new ships will be 35,000 tons each or repeat Renowns with the whole class going up (4,280t) in weight?
Nelson and Rodney as nine gun ships is either slow or poorly armoured.
So the 83,000 tons would probably be used up in having 2 or even 3 x Nelrods to match the other navies 16" gun ships
Well there are fans of ATL Hood class CVs. Aren't the Iron Duke class (and maybe Tiger) going to offer the chance of "completing" some triple 16in ships? (128,000 tons) Three and some refitting or four and less refitting from the 83,000 tons? Or are the RN stuck with the Iron Dukes for the holiday (like visiting cousins)?
I don't think you need to worry about tonnage the WNT start tonnages are simply what was in service and don't reflect any thing else only the desire to go towards 15 ships each for the RN/USN of 35,000t by the end of the treaty build period ships P and Q laid down in 1939 and in service in 1942 (cancelled by LNT).

Without Hood RN will demand 3 Nelsons or a cut to the other nations post Jutland 16" ships (US would agree/IJN would not historically).....?
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
The aim of this POD was a faster fleet. The Royals were stuck in a slow design, so halting production to expedite wartime completion as BCs really suits future refits. It doesn't even take much of a crystal ball to see it coming. Were the Renown class more useful than R-class battleships? By Jutland? No, but only three will be ready. By 1939? Yes, they aren't battleships, but anything else is in trouble and if you up armour them enough they can gang up on a battleship. By 1945 they are more fast battleship than you need, but the top end of severe weather Aircraft Carrier escort. Ditch the rear turret for helicopter flight deck and hanger?
 
Top