Re: Royal Navy Super Battleships and Battlecruisers
Posted: Thu May 19, 2016 6:47 pm
To understand logic behind those designs, You have to come back to the end of Great War.
In 1919 started committee to investigate if battleship, as a kind of ship, is something that Royal Navy needed.
There were some sounds, that battleship is dead. Future weapons will be light forces, submarines, planes and so one.
Committee investigated many proposals – including some strange ideas as “explosive remote controlled motorboat”, “remote controlled airplane full of explosives” and so one.
Committee ended in March 1920.
Conclusion was, that battleship, as a strongest ship of the fleet is still needed.
Of course she will not act alone. It will be part of the larger force, and battleship – or better to say – battleships will be strongest part of that force. Against enemy with such a force anything else could not guarantee success.
Battlecruisers were considered as needed only optionally. If enemy will have battlecruisers, British will need own. If enemy will not have battlecruisers, that class of the ships could be omitted.
It was stated, that thanks to its great size, and cost, battlecruiser is a “capital ship”. Yes “capital ship” term was used before WNT. So such a costly ship had to have battleship level of protection, and battleship armament. Higher speed was to be attained by greater size. In other words battlecruiser was to be simply fast battleship.
In this therm – WWII era American South Dakota class was a battleship, and Iowa was battlecruiser version of South Dakota.
Committee ended even with recommendation, how new battleship should look like.
I never seen any drawings, but description is quite precise. It is quite easy to imagine her. It was just Bismarck. Yes – in 1919 British ideal battleship was a bit smaller Bismarck. I don’t know if Germans had access to that committee conclusions, but Bismarck seems to be point to point realization of that battleship conception, only with 25 knots and smaller size.
Every other difference due to different navy and local habit. Even three shaft machinery was recommended.
Main armament – 8x15” C50 gun. New model with high muzzle velocity, expected to have nearly identical penetrating power as US 16” Mk I guns ( if fired the same quality shells ).
No AA artillery was specified, and soon new committee about such a guns were started.
The only important conclusion of that committee was that battleships were needed in the fleet.
In 1919/1920 building new battleships become more and more urgent.
British had strongest battleship force in the world, but most of them were quite old. 12” were obsolescent, and 13.5” nearly so. In case of new ships, Hood was just completed, and her sisters suspended on very early stage of construction, soon canceled.
There were no new orders, and Japan and USA started new construction program.
In USA – Colorados, South Dakotas and Lexingtons were started, or were to be started soon.
In Japan new ships were started.
British knew virtually everything about US ships, but had little knowledge about Japan construction, but expected that Japan will start some kind of upgraded Queen Elizabeth and/or Hood, not virtually not armoured, very fast battlecruisers and slow battleships.
After finishing those ships, it was expected that Royal Navy become second or possible even third world power ( in battleships at last ), and it was unacceptable.
At first it was conception of starting 3 battleships and 1 battlecruiser in 1920/21 year budget, and 3 battlecrusiers and 1 battleship year later. Soon it was changed to 4 battlecruisers first, and 4 battleships next year.
It was start point of real development of new ships, ended with G3/N3 designs.
So new committee started to decide how new battleship and battlecruiser should look like.
Even before committee started in May 1920 two battleship designs were prepared. Both with 18” guns, and armour enough against such a shells. They were named LII and LIII. LII with twin turrets, and LIII with triple.
Speed were more or less the same as in “battleship 1919” - 25 to 26 knots.
Armour was on different principle. Conception of multilayer protection was abandoned. New shells become so strong, that allowing them to reach hull, and explode inside, was considered not good idea ( as we remember in “Bismarck scheme”, some AP shells were expected to penetrate external belt/deck and detonate inside over main armour deck. Exact the same principle was in armour conception of battleship 1919, and all previous British battleships since Majestic ).
But in XIX century expected enemy had 12” guns, in WWI era max 14”. 1920 expected enemy will have 16” guns for sure, and quite probably 19” or larger guns soon ( British thought that Japan will soon have such a guns )
Any detonation of such a shell inside hull will make considerable damage, even if contained above armour deck. It simply could not be ignored, so it was decided to keep shells out of the hull.
To keep out such a shells, armour had to be very thick, and that alone was not enough. It was real need to slope it to add resistance, as new AP shells become better and better.
Those first two designs were some sort of initiative outside any committee, but was basic for further development, so are interesting.
First thing – abandoned armour coning tower! Yes those ships were designed with no armour in that area.
Another interesting thing – all turrets on the same level – as in some Russian designs. Forward arcs were blocked with small elevation ( less than 12 degree ), but in longer ranges not.
Possibly that was try to keep center of gravity down with such a heavy guns/armour and very high free board.
Armour is interesting, specially very strong deck armour. Belt was internal, with bulges. I don’t know reason of such strange “cut” in the belt similar to American’s WWII South Dakota.
Try to force flash from torpedo explosion in that place? Oil intakes?
Twin turrets were considered better from any practical point of view, I think it is no need to explain why, but generated larger ship. Nearly 1000 tons larger, with 1 knot less speed, with the same armour. So triple turrets makes considerable weight economy.
Rest of armament as in committee, less AA guns. AA committee were just started, to it was not decided which, and how many AA guns had to be mounted.
Next designs later.
In 1919 started committee to investigate if battleship, as a kind of ship, is something that Royal Navy needed.
There were some sounds, that battleship is dead. Future weapons will be light forces, submarines, planes and so one.
Committee investigated many proposals – including some strange ideas as “explosive remote controlled motorboat”, “remote controlled airplane full of explosives” and so one.
Committee ended in March 1920.
Conclusion was, that battleship, as a strongest ship of the fleet is still needed.
Of course she will not act alone. It will be part of the larger force, and battleship – or better to say – battleships will be strongest part of that force. Against enemy with such a force anything else could not guarantee success.
Battlecruisers were considered as needed only optionally. If enemy will have battlecruisers, British will need own. If enemy will not have battlecruisers, that class of the ships could be omitted.
It was stated, that thanks to its great size, and cost, battlecruiser is a “capital ship”. Yes “capital ship” term was used before WNT. So such a costly ship had to have battleship level of protection, and battleship armament. Higher speed was to be attained by greater size. In other words battlecruiser was to be simply fast battleship.
In this therm – WWII era American South Dakota class was a battleship, and Iowa was battlecruiser version of South Dakota.
Committee ended even with recommendation, how new battleship should look like.
I never seen any drawings, but description is quite precise. It is quite easy to imagine her. It was just Bismarck. Yes – in 1919 British ideal battleship was a bit smaller Bismarck. I don’t know if Germans had access to that committee conclusions, but Bismarck seems to be point to point realization of that battleship conception, only with 25 knots and smaller size.
Every other difference due to different navy and local habit. Even three shaft machinery was recommended.
Main armament – 8x15” C50 gun. New model with high muzzle velocity, expected to have nearly identical penetrating power as US 16” Mk I guns ( if fired the same quality shells ).
No AA artillery was specified, and soon new committee about such a guns were started.
The only important conclusion of that committee was that battleships were needed in the fleet.
In 1919/1920 building new battleships become more and more urgent.
British had strongest battleship force in the world, but most of them were quite old. 12” were obsolescent, and 13.5” nearly so. In case of new ships, Hood was just completed, and her sisters suspended on very early stage of construction, soon canceled.
There were no new orders, and Japan and USA started new construction program.
In USA – Colorados, South Dakotas and Lexingtons were started, or were to be started soon.
In Japan new ships were started.
British knew virtually everything about US ships, but had little knowledge about Japan construction, but expected that Japan will start some kind of upgraded Queen Elizabeth and/or Hood, not virtually not armoured, very fast battlecruisers and slow battleships.
After finishing those ships, it was expected that Royal Navy become second or possible even third world power ( in battleships at last ), and it was unacceptable.
At first it was conception of starting 3 battleships and 1 battlecruiser in 1920/21 year budget, and 3 battlecrusiers and 1 battleship year later. Soon it was changed to 4 battlecruisers first, and 4 battleships next year.
It was start point of real development of new ships, ended with G3/N3 designs.
So new committee started to decide how new battleship and battlecruiser should look like.
Even before committee started in May 1920 two battleship designs were prepared. Both with 18” guns, and armour enough against such a shells. They were named LII and LIII. LII with twin turrets, and LIII with triple.
Speed were more or less the same as in “battleship 1919” - 25 to 26 knots.
Armour was on different principle. Conception of multilayer protection was abandoned. New shells become so strong, that allowing them to reach hull, and explode inside, was considered not good idea ( as we remember in “Bismarck scheme”, some AP shells were expected to penetrate external belt/deck and detonate inside over main armour deck. Exact the same principle was in armour conception of battleship 1919, and all previous British battleships since Majestic ).
But in XIX century expected enemy had 12” guns, in WWI era max 14”. 1920 expected enemy will have 16” guns for sure, and quite probably 19” or larger guns soon ( British thought that Japan will soon have such a guns )
Any detonation of such a shell inside hull will make considerable damage, even if contained above armour deck. It simply could not be ignored, so it was decided to keep shells out of the hull.
To keep out such a shells, armour had to be very thick, and that alone was not enough. It was real need to slope it to add resistance, as new AP shells become better and better.
Those first two designs were some sort of initiative outside any committee, but was basic for further development, so are interesting.
First thing – abandoned armour coning tower! Yes those ships were designed with no armour in that area.
Another interesting thing – all turrets on the same level – as in some Russian designs. Forward arcs were blocked with small elevation ( less than 12 degree ), but in longer ranges not.
Possibly that was try to keep center of gravity down with such a heavy guns/armour and very high free board.
Armour is interesting, specially very strong deck armour. Belt was internal, with bulges. I don’t know reason of such strange “cut” in the belt similar to American’s WWII South Dakota.
Try to force flash from torpedo explosion in that place? Oil intakes?
Twin turrets were considered better from any practical point of view, I think it is no need to explain why, but generated larger ship. Nearly 1000 tons larger, with 1 knot less speed, with the same armour. So triple turrets makes considerable weight economy.
Rest of armament as in committee, less AA guns. AA committee were just started, to it was not decided which, and how many AA guns had to be mounted.
Next designs later.