Switch Interwar French/Italian Battleship Plans

WI the French and Italian navies switched the manner in which they modernized their battlefleets in the interwar years?

In OTL Italy spent a lot of time upgrading her old battleship classes until they emerged as faster battleships with low, sleek profiles and upgraded weaponry, while France put in "bare" modernizations for her old battleships and built two brand-new battleships/battlecruisers (Strasbourg class).

What effect on the naval campaigns of WW2 (assuming it happens on schedule) would a modernized group of French battleships (Courbet and Bretagne classes) and an old, clunky Italian battlefleet possessing two new battlecruisers have?

I suppose you really have to answer two questions first:

1. How do the French battleships get modified? My stab at it is that the Courbet class mostly gets upgraded guns (cramped 13" twins in place of 12", with side turrets removed?) and machinery while the Bretagne class either gets new machinery and new 13" guns or loses the middle 13.4" turret, gets new 13" guns, and gets some seriously nice speed put in in place of the missing middle turret.

2. What do the Italian battleships that were unmodified look like, and what do the new BCs look like? The now unmodified Italian battleships have probably the same rough statistics as the old French battleships, and this Italian 1933 BC design leaves us with a slower and weaker ship than the Strasbourgs:

26,500 tons
8-13.4" in four twins fore and aft
12-6" in six twins, three on each broadside
29 knots
250mm belt, three separated 50mm decks

I hope to get some good stuff from my fellow Battleship Brothers, but anyone's thoughts are welcome!
 
Realisitically modernization of the warships are dependent upon economics and the 'standing' that navies have in the national budgets of their respective navies.

I guess you are also ignoring the fact that the French Navy's fate was decided by the defeat of French Army.

However, regarding theoretical rebuilds. For the French I guess it wouldn't be too wrong to consider that they may rebuild their Bretagne class battleships strictly mounting 8-13.4in guns. The Q turrets will be removed and their secondary guns replaced with new guns mounted in dual or triple turrets. New engines and boilers with allow greater speed and range. Fewer main armament turrets will open up deck space for anti-aircraft guns and free up tonnage for additional armour and better living quarters. The ships will receive the usual anti-torpedo bulges.

Specifically I doubt that the Courbets will receive larger guns than 12in. There would be just too much reconstruction money tossed away. Better to same the money and effort for a new warship. At best the wing turrets are removed and much of what is mentioned above for the Bretagne is reproduced.

For the Italians one can still expect that the Cavours and the Dorias will have their Q turrets removed and be reengined and reboilered also. But their reconstruction just won't be as radical and overall as IOTL.

Any modern Italian equivalent to the Dunkerques probably won't mount 13in guns, but probably 15in.
 
Realisitically modernization of the warships are dependent upon economics and the 'standing' that navies have in the national budgets of their respective navies.

I guess you are also ignoring the fact that the French Navy's fate was decided by the defeat of French Army.

I understand that, and I'm not sure where you are going with this. :confused::confused:

However, regarding theoretical rebuilds. For the French I guess it wouldn't be too wrong to consider that they may rebuild their Bretagne class battleships strictly mounting 8-13.4in guns. The Q turrets will be removed and their secondary guns replaced with new guns mounted in dual or triple turrets. New engines and boilers with allow greater speed and range. Fewer main armament turrets will open up deck space for anti-aircraft guns and free up tonnage for additional armour and better living quarters. The ships will receive the usual anti-torpedo bulges.

Specifically I doubt that the Courbets will receive larger guns than 12in. There would be just too much reconstruction money tossed away. Better to same the money and effort for a new warship. At best the wing turrets are removed and much of what is mentioned above for the Bretagne is reproduced.

Thanks for the comments, and it is pretty much what I expected...the Courbet's are pretty old.

For the Italians one can still expect that the Cavours and the Dorias will have their Q turrets removed and be reengined and reboilered also. But their reconstruction just won't be as radical and overall as IOTL.

Assuming that they don't get Q turrets removed and engines significantly upgraded, and that the extra funds go somewhere else, how much less valuable does that make them come WW2?

Any modern Italian equivalent to the Dunkerques probably won't mount 13in guns, but probably 15in.

I'm going off of the actual counter the Italians planned for Dunkerque, a 1933 design which was eventually cancelled in favor of the Vittorio Venetos. Would these ships have proven particularly useful against the British?
 
I'm going off of the actual counter the Italians planned for Dunkerque, a 1933 design which was eventually cancelled in favor of the Vittorio Venetos. Would these ships have proven particularly useful against the British?

I'm aware of the design you are alluding to, tho I think its more likely to look at the Battleship Project 1928/29. This mounted 6-15in guns. If the Italians expect that they will be fighting the British there is no logical reason to build a ship with 13in guns when the British mount 15in guns.
 
I'm aware of the design you are alluding to, tho I think its more likely to look at the Battleship Project 1928/29. This mounted 6-15in guns. If the Italians expect that they will be fighting the British there is no logical reason to build a ship with 13in guns when the British mount 15in guns.

Hmmmm...I still think they will be looking to counter the French. The RM would certainly consider these 13.4" armed BCs to be great cruiser-killers, wouldn't they?

What other details do you have of this 28/29 battleship design?

EDIT: When I said against the British, I meant in an otherwise-OTL Mediterranean Theater.
 
I'm no crazy naval expert, but IIRC the French Battlefleet wasn't really in the position to be upgraded following the First World War whereas the Italian Battlefleet was. This was all due to pre-WWI building where the Italians ensured they had a relatively modern fleet instead of the French navy's grab-bag of different designs and classes.

Anyways assuming that this all happens. The Italian BC's will not be analogues of the French vessels produced in OTL. They're going to be looking at challenging the RN NOT taking on the Kriegsmarine and as a result their design goals will be different. (The Strasbourg class being designed in OTL to counter the new pocket battleships fielded by the KM). So I would agree with David in saying that the RM's new ships are going to mount at least 15 inch guns. The French aren't really going to be in the picture here at this point. Also considering that they're taking on the British I'd expect at least a partial rebuild for their existing Battleships.

With the French, their alternate build plan is a bit more plausible providing they put even more resources into the army than OTL (though that might be stretching it). With fewer resources the MN decides to work with the ships it already has. Both the Courbet and the Bretagne classes recieve radical rebuilds much like the Italian BB's of OTL did. I'd imagine speed will be the primary goal in these as they'll be concerned with countering the KM's Pocket Battleships. But like I said I'm no expert.

Come WWII, I'd say that Italy is a bit more hesitant to enter the war (or at least the RM is). And that Britain is even more concerned about the French Fleet falling into German hands as it is, at least on paper, more formidable.

On a side note, it would be interesting to give Italy, say an aging aircraft carrier akin to the Bearn. And have the RM forced to depend on said carrier in the aftermath of a Taranto-esque attack enlisting the aid of a Luftwaffe airwing etc. etc. ...
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Hmmmm...I still think they will be looking to counter the French. The RM would certainly consider these 13.4" armed BCs to be great cruiser-killers, wouldn't they?

What other details do you have of this 28/29 battleship design?

EDIT: When I said against the British, I meant in an otherwise-OTL Mediterranean Theater.

Killing cruisers is a lovely plan, unless you KNOW that the enemy will have fast battleships that are more or less proof against your biggest guns. Italy would HAVE to figure, not just the more capable Frnch ships, but also the RN in any decision process. The Med more or less belonged to the RN, insofar as nothing lived there without its permission.
 
Mangled idea of what a reconstructed Bretagne would look like. Notice Dunkerque-like superstructure, removed Q turret, single funnel, and turreted secondaries.

mnf-lorraine-1944-battleship.gif
 
Le Bump!

Assuming minimal butterfly flaps, how does the OTL WW2 at sea differ with modernized Bretagnes and Courbets, but no Dunquerques, and minimally-modified Cavours and Dorias, but two additional Italian battlecruisers, armed with (as Poepoe postulates) x6 - 15" guns?
 
Perhaps the Bretagne class is modified to support a few seaplanes?

If there is a major rebuild, I wouldn't be surprised to see this. But would it be of any significance?

Assuming minimal butterfly flaps, how does the OTL WW2 at sea differ with modernized Bretagnes and Courbets, but no Dunquerques, and minimally-modified Cavours and Dorias, but two additional Italian battlecruisers, armed with (as Poepoe postulates) x6 - 15" guns?

So Vittorio Veneto and her sisters are still built?

Actually, now that I think of it, the french had Richelieu, Jean Bart, and Clemenceau completed or building, so scratch that.

Hmmm. Maybe the swap procedes further. Maybe the French Navy decides to build warships along the general lines of Vittorio Veneto, whereas the Italians adopt the quadruple turrets of Richelieu? How would each design be modified to meet their new navy's requirements?
 
In theory this idea as a whole seems nice, but there were several problems to overcome first.

The main problem in France was the lack of suitable docks capable of holding longer ships than the already constructed Dreadnoughts. Only the St. Nazaire Private Dock was capable of holding anything bigger than the current battleships of the timeframe. (Even the OTL Dunkerque was constructed withouth her bowsection, as the slip on the buildersyard was too short. She eventually moved to the drydoick to have the bow attached to her.)

Furhter more, the hulls of the French Dreadnoughts were of a lesser capacity, than the Italian Dreadnoughts. The bowsection was too short and the guns were placed too far to the ends of the vessels, appart from the wing turrets in the Courbets and the Q mount on Bretagne. Some real redesigning would imply a totally new hull, which was beyond the capacity of the French Shipyards.

Italy on the other hand could do so, but was facing the Treaty of Washington as a limmit, possessing already four Dreadnoughts and was not allowed to built new ones before the second half of the 30's, although it could have added a fifth unit, replacing the scrapped Leonardo da Vinci, as this ship had been lost to an internal explosion in 1917.
 
Rebuilds...

Upgrading the main armament of the older ships was not allowed under the treaty, so France couldn't do it. (The Italian rebuil;ds were an exception, IIRC, but I don't have the treaty in front of me right now.)
 
Top