WI: Hood sisters built as 8x18 inch naval guns

Now that would make an interesting TL. Something like "A British Washington"?
All Britain was looking for at Washington was a few broad agreements about absolute Gun Calibre and Tonnage.
And the Committee For Imperial Defence recommended a Minimum of 30 Capital Ships for the Royal Navy.
(As the RN already had 45 Dreadnoughts, a not un-achievable figure).
A slow but comprehensive replacement building program is not completely unreasonable, laying down 1 or 2 Battleships a year, over the next 20 years, is not outrageous.
(Although someone is going to say it is, even if we point out that such work is unlikely to be finished before 1940)
 
Now that would make an interesting TL. Something like "A British Washington"?
All Britain was looking for at Washington was a few broad agreements about absolute Gun Calibre and Tonnage.
And the Committee For Imperial Defence recommended a Minimum of 30 Capital Ships for the Royal Navy.
(As the RN already had 45 Dreadnoughts, a not un-achievable figure).
A slow but comprehensive replacement building program is not completely unreasonable, laying down 1 or 2 Battleships a year, over the next 20 years, is not outrageous.
(Although someone is going to say it is, even if we point out that such work is unlikely to be finished before 1940)

That would require a more assertive and aggressive Britain than the one that actually attended the WNC.

But they were in a tough financial spot. The United States of America had them mortgaged eight ways to Sunday.
 
Could work.
So have a total tonnage limit for BBs per country, but no limit to their size...I think there should still be a restriction to gun size though
And preventing a BB holiday is important for Britain, otherwise it's shipyards will have no work and will have a poorly skilled workforce as per OTL
Not while the Americans are reading everyone else's telegrams from home it wouldn't. The Americans want the Royal Navy butchered so they can claim their navy is second to none without having to spend the money to achieve that honestly. The RN stuck with existing and now dated ships suits them fine.
 
Then let it be war:evilsmile:
1.jpg
 
Not while the Americans are reading everyone else's telegrams from home it wouldn't. The Americans want the Royal Navy butchered so they can claim their navy is second to none without having to spend the money to achieve that honestly. The RN stuck with existing and now dated ships suits them fine.
But a more assertive RN won't..
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
I am not sure the others would be scrapped as in this case RN would still have superior guns at least. At least would be far superior to Lex
Which why the existence of these ships would sink the WNT. The entire point was to prevent one country from getting this sort of massive advantage. The difference between an 18" and a 16" gun is remarkable. The AP shell from the 18"/45 Mark II proposed for the later RN heavies weighed 3,300 pounds with a max range of 42,000 yards. The figures for the 16"/45 Mark I (the gun originally meant for the G3 class) fired a 2,048 pound shell to a range of 38K. No way that the U.S. or the Japanese simply allow the RN to have a series of ships that have three miles/5 kilometers greater range, with a vastly more destructive shell, on a hull that would be 10,000 tons heavier than anything else afloat. The RN would certainly love it, but taint gonna happen.
 
Not while the Americans are reading everyone else's telegrams from home it wouldn't. The Americans want the Royal Navy butchered so they can claim their navy is second to none without having to spend the money to achieve that honestly. The RN stuck with existing and now dated ships suits them fine.

I don't believe the Black Chamber (the US's codebreaking outfit) was reading the Brits' mail. They were reading that of the Japanese pretty thoroughly, which included from time time information of their private discussions with the British.

But the British proved amenable enough to US demands that it hardly mattered much, I suppose...
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Which why the existence of these ships would sink the WNT. The entire point was to prevent one country from getting this sort of massive advantage. The difference between an 18" and a 16" gun is remarkable. The AP shell from the 18"/45 Mark II proposed for the later RN heavies weighed 3,300 pounds with a max range of 42,000 yards. The figures for the 16"/45 Mark I (the gun originally meant for the G3 class) fired a 2,048 pound shell to a range of 38K. No way that the U.S. or the Japanese simply allow the RN to have a series of ships that have three miles/5 kilometers greater range, with a vastly more destructive shell, on a hull that would be 10,000 tons heavier than anything else afloat. The RN would certainly love it, but taint gonna happen.
Well, but by the time of WNT, they were already commissioned. An OTL ratio but with bigger absolute tonnage limit (1.5 times of 530k), plus no BB holiday would be fine, and NelRod only built with 8, 9 or 10×15 as a compensation.
 
Well, but by the time of WNT, they were already commissioned. An OTL ratio but with bigger absolute tonnage limit (1.5 times of 530k), plus no BB holiday would be fine, and NelRod only built with 8, 9 or 10×15 as a compensation.

If these 18" monster Admirals are already built and the British want to insist on keeping them, it's going to come at a price, isn't it?

As soon as other powers become aware of their armament, the U.S. and Japan are almost certain to redesign the Lexington and Amagi class ships to carry 18" guns, too - and allowing them through to completion in any treaty - well, at least 4 of the 6 planned Lexingtons. Which may actually work to Britain's disadvantage, since the US and Japanese designs will incorporate more lessons from Jutland in their armor protection schemes. They'll be newer ships.

IN any event, even with the greater overall tonnage, there is still the 35,000 ton limit which the parties generally wanted. I guess we assume that the 18" battlecruisers are carved out as exceptions to that limit, with all other capital ships limited to 35K.

The resulting fleets are going to look rather odd: a collection of mostly old, slow 30-35K ton battleships (and a few battlecruisers) armed with 13.5" to 16" guns built around four 18" gunned battlecruisers that would have to be pushing 60,000 tons to marry battlecruiser speed to such huge guns. Of course, the Japanese will be rebuilding all of theirs extensively (assuming the Amagis didn't bankrupt the country). I know you want no battleship holiday, but it is going to be even harder to resist that, now that you've cranked up the limits. Everyone was in budget cutting mode at that point.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Well, but by the time of WNT, they were already commissioned. An OTL ratio but with bigger absolute tonnage limit (1.5 times of 530k), plus no BB holiday would be fine, and NelRod only built with 8, 9 or 10×15 as a compensation.
Guess I described it poorly.

The goal of the WNT was to stop a costly arms race. Central to that was that all the players would have effectively identical ships with near identical capabilities (there were certain differences, the Japanese were more married to speed than the RN, while USN ships were mainly designed so the could maintain cohesion of the battleforce, although this cost the USN formation 2-4 knots). Still, in theory, the three fleets shipping was EQUAL. Having a class of ships that are vastly (and the difference is vast, in a practical sense similar to the difference between the Graf Spee and the Warspite) will upset that balance. There is no way the U.S. or Japanese accept that the RN has a class of warships that can readily destroy any other naval force on Earth. Not going to happen.

The British will be faced with the reality that they are going to have to try to keep up with the United States, which flush with cash, and with a Congress that has no desire to spend a dime, but also has an institutional understanding that the worst money ever spent is for the 2nd best navy and sees the fleet as a way to keep the next European bloodletting on the far side of the ocean and that the Japanese, as a matter of honor are going to match the best either the RN or USN float.

The UK is broke, in debt all the way to the eyebrows, mainly to the United States. The U.S. will, if pressed, simply sink the RN with bundles of $100 bills. Sooner rather than later the Exchequer goes broke (literally, not figuratively, since the ONLY source of credit is, yep, the United States, a country that already hold massive British markers). The U.S. had 12 capital ships under construction at the same time, with a plan to continue to improve and have a "navy second to none". The U.S. Congress was delighted to not have to spend the money thanks to the Treaty, that does not mean it would not have spent the money.

The lunacy of an arms race becomes its own justification. What you wind up with is a huge number of ungodly expensive ships, with 18", followed shortly by 20" and then, as soon as engine designers can get the SHP, 22" gun balanced designs. Somewhere around the second or third 18" gun ship the Japanese economy collapses, seeing this the Japanese decide to expand while they can and start the war in China five or six years earlier. By the time the G3 is being replaced by the H3 and N3 by the O3, the British economy crashes to a degree that makes the Depression look like a minor cash flow problem. The U.S. winds up with a pile of white elephants that are obsolete by 1940-41. Everyone loses, as is generally the case in arms races, but the U.S.economy is, by far the most able to handle the costs.
 
The lunacy of an arms race becomes its own justification. What you wind up with is a huge number of ungodly expensive ships, with 18", followed shortly by 20" and then, as soon as engine designers can get the SHP, 22" gun balanced designs. Somewhere around the second or third 18" gun ship the Japanese economy collapses, seeing this the Japanese decide to expand while they can and start the war in China five or six years earlier. By the time the G3 is being replaced by the H3 and N3 by the O3, the British economy crashes to a degree that makes the Depression look like a minor cash flow problem. The U.S. winds up with a pile of white elephants that are obsolete by 1940-41. Everyone loses, as is generally the case in arms races, but the U.S.economy is, by far the most able to handle the costs.

After I finished my own post, I reflected for a moment on what the advent of this 18" capital ship would mean once building began anew. 18" would be the new standard now for any big gun ship (might as well say fast battleship at this point, battlecruiser becoming a pretty moot category by now) - I mean, assuming there *is* a battleship holiday. Which, as you rightly note, there should be, if the British have any sense. They can't match the U.S. in a naval arms race, and even a scaled down continuation of replacement construction under a juiced up WNT will be expensive - the NelRods cost £7million each, almost three times what a QE had cost just a decade before. It's nice to keep the yards and expertise up to date, but it will come at a steep price. And all that for weapon systems of increasingly dubious value for the money spent.

So the King George Vs, North Carolinas, South Dakotas, Richelieus and Bismarcks (or whatever classes emerge at that time) will have to be 18", or something of similar striking power (hard to see the Germans settling for less than 420mm, which is basically their H41 class in all its 69,000 ton glory). Meanwhile, Japan will feel compelled to build to 20" for the Yamatos - on its strategy, it has no choice. I can hear the Japanese economy wheezing to death now, I think. Britain might well be able to afford all this, but the problem is that it would have to come at the expense of something else, and in this case, I fear that will be (for starters) carriers and cruisers, and maybe even aircraft development. Which isn't going to be a helpful tradeoff come World War II.

No, if Britain is going to try any tweaking of the WNT, I think they'd be better off upping the tonnage allowance for aircraft carriers. But few were thinking along those lines back then.

The U.S. winds up with a pile of white elephants that are obsolete by 1940-41.

As is, they already 15 of those when war broke out in 1939. :) Though I'm sure there are a few very old Marines who might beg to differ...
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Guess I described it poorly.

The goal of the WNT was to stop a costly arms race. Central to that was that all the players would have effectively identical ships with near identical capabilities (there were certain differences, the Japanese were more married to speed than the RN, while USN ships were mainly designed so the could maintain cohesion of the battleforce, although this cost the USN formation 2-4 knots). Still, in theory, the three fleets shipping was EQUAL. Having a class of ships that are vastly (and the difference is vast, in a practical sense similar to the difference between the Graf Spee and the Warspite) will upset that balance. There is no way the U.S. or Japanese accept that the RN has a class of warships that can readily destroy any other naval force on Earth. Not going to happen.

The British will be faced with the reality that they are going to have to try to keep up with the United States, which flush with cash, and with a Congress that has no desire to spend a dime, but also has an institutional understanding that the worst money ever spent is for the 2nd best navy and sees the fleet as a way to keep the next European bloodletting on the far side of the ocean and that the Japanese, as a matter of honor are going to match the best either the RN or USN float.

The UK is broke, in debt all the way to the eyebrows, mainly to the United States. The U.S. will, if pressed, simply sink the RN with bundles of $100 bills. Sooner rather than later the Exchequer goes broke (literally, not figuratively, since the ONLY source of credit is, yep, the United States, a country that already hold massive British markers). The U.S. had 12 capital ships under construction at the same time, with a plan to continue to improve and have a "navy second to none". The U.S. Congress was delighted to not have to spend the money thanks to the Treaty, that does not mean it would not have spent the money.

The lunacy of an arms race becomes its own justification. What you wind up with is a huge number of ungodly expensive ships, with 18", followed shortly by 20" and then, as soon as engine designers can get the SHP, 22" gun balanced designs. Somewhere around the second or third 18" gun ship the Japanese economy collapses, seeing this the Japanese decide to expand while they can and start the war in China five or six years earlier. By the time the G3 is being replaced by the H3 and N3 by the O3, the British economy crashes to a degree that makes the Depression look like a minor cash flow problem. The U.S. winds up with a pile of white elephants that are obsolete by 1940-41. Everyone loses, as is generally the case in arms races, but the U.S.economy is, by far the most able to handle the costs.

Maybe not completely no BB holiday but maybe you can be allowed to replace 2 old BBs after say, 7 years. You still have tonnage limit and gun limit. Building NelRod with 15 inch gun would allow the Brits to raise its speed close to things like Littorio (but would not equal with 1920s tech). After all, Britain can argue that Hood and Co was designed during wartime for that war, not just d***waving.

Next, having a 18 inch Hood could butterfly away the transfer of Hood design to the USN, instead, they might have to keep it, as well as various post Jutland info secret like the way the Japanese kept Yamato hidden, instead of making it travelling around the world for d***waving purpose like OTL.

But I would prefer completing 2 and converting 2 others into CVs.

And a stronger RN and a stronger shipbuilding and marine engineering industries would make Britain more confident to actually enforce tighter naval restrictions on Germany.
 
The Air Ministry would have a fit at the thought of providing aircraft for a carrier of that size. Who knows maybe it will prompt them to give back the Royal Naval Air Service the next time the RN tries to get it back?
 
And a stronger RN and a stronger shipbuilding and marine engineering industries would make Britain more confident to actually enforce tighter naval restrictions on Germany.

It could have the opposite effect - placing so much self-assurance in its monster Admirals that MacDonald's and Baldwin's governments take an even more blasé attitude toward German rearmament.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
It could have the opposite effect - placing so much self-assurance in its monster Admirals that MacDonald's and Baldwin's governments take an even more blasé attitude toward German rearmament.
Because Britain would not want Germany to build the same type of monster. They would have to make sure that Germany would not build anything exceeding 15 inch or even 13 inch

Besides, in this case, there would be a very good reason for Britain to hide the Admiral design.
 
Maybe not completely no BB holiday but maybe you can be allowed to replace 2 old BBs after say, 7 years. You still have tonnage limit and gun limit. Building NelRod with 15 inch gun would allow the Brits to raise its speed close to things like Littorio (but would not equal with 1920s tech). After all, Britain can argue that Hood and Co was designed during wartime for that war, not just d***waving.

Next, having a 18 inch Hood could butterfly away the transfer of Hood design to the USN, instead, they might have to keep it, as well as various post Jutland info secret like the way the Japanese kept Yamato hidden, instead of making it travelling around the world for d***waving purpose like OTL.

But I would prefer completing 2 and converting 2 others into CVs.

And a stronger RN and a stronger shipbuilding and marine engineering industries would make Britain more confident to actually enforce tighter naval restrictions on Germany.

It doesn't matter why the ships were designed as far as the US was concerned , if GB is building ships with 18" guns the US will do so as well. It isn't going to let itself get outgunned and the US has much more money. Despite Japanese complaining it limited the US more than anyone else. The Japanese were building ships at almost top speed even within those limits the US was not. It had more money than anyone. Having the same limits for the USN and the RN hurt the USN more than the RN. The US could simply outspend the UK + Japan with ease.
 
Top