What if HMS Resistance was completed as a Renown class battlecruiser

She was originally ordered from HM Dockyard Devonport as a R class battleship before being cancelled. I would assume that the slip planned for her would be used if built as a Battlecruiser.

I can see no major vessels of the Royal Navy laid down in that Dockyard after this. Presumably the dockyard was used for repair and refits and for smaller vessels.

Is the slip at Devonport long enough? A Renown is much longer than a Revenge, Repulse was after all moved from Palmers to John Brown due to the former unable to handle its length.
 
If she was reordered alongside Renown and Repulse the guns and turrets would have still been available
One or two of The Follies would have to be sacrificed, which to paraphrase 1066 And All That, would have been a good thing.

As far as we can tell fifty-six twin 15" Mk I turrets were ordered as follows:​

15in Mk I turrets ordered.png


And fifty-four were built, which ended up being fitted as follows:

15in Mk I turrets fitted.png
 
Last edited:
One or two of The Follies would have to be sacrificed, which to paraphrase 1066 And All That, would have been a good thing.

As far as we can tell fifty-six twin 15" Mk I turrets were ordered as follows:​

View attachment 467760

And fifty-four were build, which ended up being fitted as follows:

View attachment 467763


Extremely useful information, greatly appreciate you sharing.

While the removal of the 15" guns from the monitors could be easily seen for a capital ship, getting them from Fishers pet project is quite a bit more difficult. It doesn't change the fact they got turned into carriers later but I personally find it rather unlikely.
 

MatthewB

Banned
Pull the guns, convert Resistance to a carrier, use those guns for an earlier Vanguard. The RN isn’t short of fast battleships once the KGV class start coming online, but carriers are needed.
 
Extremely useful information, greatly appreciate you sharing.

While the removal of the 15" guns from the monitors could be easily seen for a capital ship, getting them from Fishers pet project is quite a bit more difficult. It doesn't change the fact they got turned into carriers later but I personally find it rather unlikely.
This might be helpful too...

British Capital Ships 1911-12 to War Programmes.png
 
This might be helpful too...


More very helpful stuff, thanks!

I've been racking my brain for a few days now trying to fit another capital ship into the 1915/1916 orders but I don't think it's really possible. Even if the financial aspect is handwaved away, I know there was personnel shortages in yards due to the draft alongside the issues with taking guns, armor, gearing sets, boilers, etc from other ships or ordering even more of them.

Especially seeing how I don't really want a repeat Revenge/QE/Renown, I'd personally like an improved Renown or proto-Hood.
 
While the removal of the 15" guns from the monitors could be easily seen for a capital ship, getting them from Fishers pet project is quite a bit more difficult.
At least 16 turrets would have been required for the 4 battleships in the 1914-15 Navy Estimates and it looks as if 12 were actually built.

Had all 16 been built there would have been enough for four Renowns plus the 4 monitors of OTL.

However, if Fisher stuck his arm in the ship built instead of the cancelled Agincourt would have had three 18" in three single turrets.

According to the Naval Weapons website, three 18" guns were built, but it's not clear that three turrets were built. Interestingly the article in Naval Weapons. "The mountings were essentially 15" (38.1) Mark I turrets adapted to take a single 18" (45.7 cm) rifle but were modified in that they used sighting ports in the glacis plate rather than sighting hoods on the turret roof as in earlier designs." Therefore, it's possible that they were originally the 55th and 56th twin 15" Mk I turrets ordered in the 1914-15 Estimates.
 
Even if the financial aspect is handwaved away, I know there was personnel shortages in yards due to the draft alongside the issues with taking guns, armor, gearing sets, boilers, etc from other ships or ordering even more of them.
IIRC the war the Queen Elisabeth, Revenge and Renown classes cost in the region of £2.5 to £3.0 million each

IIRC the British National Debt was less than £1 billion at the outbreak of the Great War and by the end of the 1918-19 financial year exceeded £8 billion.

Therefore an increase of £2.5 to £3.0 million on the Nation Debt is neither here nor there.
 
IIRC the war the Queen Elisabeth, Revenge and Renown classes cost in the region of £2.5 to £3.0 million each

IIRC the British National Debt was less than £1 billion at the outbreak of the Great War and by the end of the 1918-19 financial year exceeded £8 billion.

Therefore an increase of £2.5 to £3.0 million on the Nation Debt is neither here nor there.

I was personally not worried about cost because in my case, Britain wasn't footing the bill regardless. It's mostly the material and personnel issues.
 
If two additional Renown class had been built in place of the Follies the WNT capital ship force of the Royal Navy might look like.

3 Iron Duke class (with Iron Duke herself converted into a gunnery training ship about 10 years earlier than OTL)
5 Queen Elizabeth class
5 Revenge class
2 Nelson class
4 Renown class
1 Hood class

Total 20 as OTL.

The above would be organised as OTL into four squadrons, i.e. the First, Second and Third Battle Squadrons and the Battle Cruiser Squadron.

It might be a more balanced fleet than OTL because IOTL the ideal strength for the battle and cruiser squadrons seems to be four ships operational with a fifth refitting.
 
If two additional Renown class had been built in place of the Follies the WNT capital ship force of the Royal Navy might look like.

3 Iron Duke class (with Iron Duke herself converted into a gunnery training ship about 10 years earlier than OTL)
5 Queen Elizabeth class
5 Revenge class
2 Nelson class
4 Renown class
1 Hood class

Total 20 as OTL.

The above would be organised as OTL into four squadrons, i.e. the First, Second and Third Battle Squadrons and the Battle Cruiser Squadron.

It might be a more balanced fleet than OTL because IOTL the ideal strength for the battle and cruiser squadrons seems to be four ships operational with a fifth refitting.

My main issue with something like that is removing the Follies creates a rather massive butterfly for basically the entire Royal Navy fleet air arm. I wonder if an additional order would be accepted and started by the RN however the completion time for the ship would be rather long and drawn out, likely not being done until the end of the war or post war.
 
My main issue with something like that is removing the Follies creates a rather massive butterfly for basically the entire Royal Navy fleet air arm.
The Royal Navy would not accept the US and Japan being allowed to convert incomplete Battlecruisers into carriers without being allowed to convert or build similar ships themselves as part of the Washington treaty. Without Furious to convert during WWI they may already have built such a ship to combat the Zeppelin threat, or converted an incomplete Resistance.
 
My main issue with something like that is removing the Follies creates a rather massive butterfly for basically the entire Royal Navy fleet air arm. I wonder if an additional order would be accepted and started by the RN however the completion time for the ship would be rather long and drawn out, likely not being done until the end of the war or post war.
Courageous and Glorious weren't converted until the second half of the 1920s. Both were rather long and drawn out and they cost about half as much as a new ship, which because it was a "keel up" design would have made more effective use of the available displacement.

Furious is more of a problem. My guess is that without her, but with the availability in 1917 of four brand new battle cruisers armed with 15" guns, Lion, Princess Royal or Tiger might have had her forward turrets removed and replaced by a flying off deck. Then she would have her rear turrets removed to make way for a landing on deck. This ship wouldn't be converted to a flush deck carrier 1921-25 like Furious was. Instead she would be scrapped on account of being older and having seen more war service. The £2 million spent on the 1921-25 rebuild of Furious would have paid for half a new ship.

Another and more likely alternative is that the construction/conversion of Argus, Eagle, Hermes and Vindictive would have been speeded up.
 
Courageous and Glorious weren't converted until the second half of the 1920s. Both were rather long and drawn out and they cost about half as much as a new ship, which because it was a "keel up" design would have made more effective use of the available displacement.

Furious is more of a problem. My guess is that without her, but with the availability in 1917 of four brand new battle cruisers armed with 15" guns, Lion, Princess Royal or Tiger might have had her forward turrets removed and replaced by a flying off deck. Then she would have her rear turrets removed to make way for a landing on deck. This ship wouldn't be converted to a flush deck carrier 1921-25 like Furious was. Instead she would be scrapped on account of being older and having seen more war service. The £2 million spent on the 1921-25 rebuild of Furious would have paid for half a new ship.

Another and more likely alternative is that the construction/conversion of Argus, Eagle, Hermes and Vindictive would have been speeded up.

I personally can't really see two more Renown's replace the entire Courageous class. Another one off ship is one thing but two more ships is pushing too far. The only reason the Courageous class existed within the 1915 exclusion of new capital ship production was through Fisher and the class being pitched and authorized on the understanding that they were monitors, two full sized battlecruisers don't get that exemption.
 
The Royal Navy would not accept the US and Japan being allowed to convert incomplete Battlecruisers into carriers without being allowed to convert or build similar ships themselves as part of the Washington treaty. Without Furious to convert during WWI they may already have built such a ship to combat the Zeppelin threat, or converted an incomplete Resistance.
A piece of background information.

The 27,000ton limit on individual aircraft carriers in the WNT and the 135,000 ton aircraft carrier tonnage quotas that the British Empire and USA were given were due to what the RN was thinking at the time. That is the RN needed five aircraft carriers and that the optimum displacement was 27,000 tons. 5 x 27,000 tons = 135,000 tons.

By 1924 the plan was to scrap Argus, Eagle, Hermes and Vindictive and build four 16,500 ton carriers (total 66,000 tons) (or was it 17,000 tons = 68,000 tons) which would complete 1928-38. With the 3 converted CBLs that would make 7 aircraft carriers. If there were no Follies to convert it's likely that the plan would be for eight 16,500 ton aircraft carriers.

With no ships to convert it's much more likely that the Treasury and more importantly the Cabinet, Parliament and the voters can be persuaded to pay for new aircraft carriers in the period 1924-34.
 
Last edited:
I personally can't really see two more Renown's replace the entire Courageous class. Another one off ship is one thing but two more ships is pushing too far. The only reason the Courageous class existed within the 1915 exclusion of new capital ship production was through Fisher and the class being pitched and authorized on the understanding that they were monitors, two full sized battlecruisers don't get that exemption.
I don't disagree with that.

Part of the problem is that the length of the war was continually underestimated. If the Admiralty and Cabinet had agreed with Kitchener's assessment that the war would last at least 3 years it would be easier to get more "proper" capital ships approved before the end of 1914 as they would be available before the war ended.

Incidentally underestimating the length of the war retarded the development of flush deck aircraft carriers and became a self-fulfilling prophecy because Argus and Vindictive were completed as the war was ending.
 
More very helpful stuff, thanks!

I've been racking my brain for a few days now trying to fit another capital ship into the 1915/1916 orders but I don't think it's really possible. Even if the financial aspect is handwaved away, I know there was personnel shortages in yards due to the draft alongside the issues with taking guns, armor, gearing sets, boilers, etc from other ships or ordering even more of them.

Especially seeing how I don't really want a repeat Revenge/QE/Renown, I'd personally like an improved Renown or proto-Hood.
So a Revenge class design Y variant?
 
Top