Best rebuilt battleship?

From the Washington Naval Treaty to the end of the Second World War.
User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Best rebuilt battleship?

Postby Gary » Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:37 am

Hi all. :cool:

Which do you rate as the best re-built Battleship?

QE?
Warspite?
Valiant?
Tennessee?
California?
WeeVee?
CONTE DI CAVOUR ?
GIULIO CESARE ?
CAIO DUILIO ?
ANDREA DORIA ?


My own thoughts are WeeVee due in large part to her main battery and the vaunted USN 5"/38 secondary battery for AA use.

Any input would be apprieciated.

thanks
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

Tiornu
Supporter
Posts: 1222
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:13 am
Location: Ex Utero

Re: Best rebuilt battleship?

Postby Tiornu » Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:11 am

For a ship of the line, the WeeVee and Tennessees were the best. Their advanced FC outfit gave them an unsurpassed ability to hit, and they were powerfully armed.
For a more mobile design, Renown or a Kongo would be good choices. The Italian ships represent a remarkable achievement, but I really distrust their armor--not that the others were all that great.

User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Postby Gary » Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:15 pm

What was the range of the Tennessee's/WeeVee's guns?

30,000 yards?
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Postby Gary » Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:52 pm

34,000 yards according to

http://www.voodoo.cz/battleships/
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

User avatar
marcelo_malara
Senior Member
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
Location: buenos aires

Postby marcelo_malara » Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:33 pm

Hi Gary:

From a pure technical point of view, the most demanding job was made on the Italian´s. Their lenght was increased, the machinery power output tripled and the gun´s caliber increased too.
The Kongos were lenghtened too and the machinery power doubled.
WV just received bulges and new secondary artillery, like Warspite.
Again, I am not judging the efectiveness of the upgrade, just the work done.

User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Postby Gary » Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:20 pm

Thanks Tiornu and Marcelo
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

User avatar
_Derfflinger_
Supporter
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 5:01 pm
Location: Missouri, USA

Postby _Derfflinger_ » Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:53 am

How good would Gneisenau with the six 15" boomers have been?

Derf

User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Postby Gary » Sun Jul 23, 2006 12:04 pm

She'd still have the Boiler hump.

Besides, I'd rather have Tennessee's 12 X 14 inch guns than 6 X 15 inch
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 2906
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Postby Dave Saxton » Sun Jul 23, 2006 11:49 pm

What about the speed?

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Rebuilt battleships

Postby Antonio Bonomi » Mon Jul 24, 2006 7:02 am

Ciao all,

YES, probably the Italians were the ones to renew the most of the ships,.. un until the point that it was better to make it brand new, .. 3 more Littorio Class battleships were better than 4 old Cavour class.

They ( Cesare and Cavour ) were used only at Punta Stilo, .. facing Warspite and QE's ( other renewed one's but stronger ) with no fear, .. but unsuccesfully.

After it was clear that Littorio's were much better and faster, .... but with no air coverage,..unsuccesfull as well but at least equal or better than the British ones as ships.

Ciao Antonio :D

Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Postby Bgile » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:57 pm

marcelo_malara wrote:Hi Gary:

From a pure technical point of view, the most demanding job was made on the Italian´s. Their lenght was increased, the machinery power output tripled and the gun´s caliber increased too.
The Kongos were lenghtened too and the machinery power doubled.
WV just received bulges and new secondary artillery, like Warspite.
Again, I am not judging the efectiveness of the upgrade, just the work done.


I believe the US Battleships received completely upgraded FC systems, bringing them up to the Iowa Class standard, as well as the latest air and sirface search radars.

User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Postby Gary » Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:22 pm

Apart from lack of speed the Tennessee's and WeeVee were probably nearly as good as a modern Battleship.
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

User avatar
RNfanDan
Supporter
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:06 pm
Location: USA

Re: Best rebuilt battleship?

Postby RNfanDan » Wed Aug 02, 2006 6:33 pm

Gary wrote:Hi all. :cool:

Which do you rate as the best re-built Battleship?

QE?
Warspite?
Valiant?
Tennessee?
California?
WeeVee?
CONTE DI CAVOUR ?
GIULIO CESARE ?
CAIO DUILIO ?
ANDREA DORIA ?



The "technical" part of me favors Tennessee and California.

My better judgment however, stands firmly with Warspite and Queen Elizabeth. Whatever these legendary British battleships lacked in "paper" comparisons with the Tennessees is, in my opinion, more than compensated by their outstanding return on investment. The British battleships also did not simply spend their service careers, steaming about as second-string backups!
Image

User avatar
Chel Sea
Supporter
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:35 pm
Location: Central London

Re: Best rebuilt battleship?

Postby Chel Sea » Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:37 pm

RNfanDan wrote:
Gary wrote:Hi all. :cool:

Which do you rate as the best re-built Battleship?

QE?
Warspite?
Valiant?
Tennessee?
California?
WeeVee?
CONTE DI CAVOUR ?
GIULIO CESARE ?
CAIO DUILIO ?
ANDREA DORIA ?



The "technical" part of me favors Tennessee and California.

My better judgment however, stands firmly with Warspite and Queen Elizabeth. Whatever these legendary British battleships lacked in "paper" comparisons with the Tennessees is, in my opinion, more than compensated by their outstanding return on investment. The British battleships also did not simply spend their service careers, steaming about as second-string backups!


That's almost exactly what I was thinking, particularly the QE.

Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: Best rebuilt battleship?

Postby Bgile » Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:46 pm

RNfanDan wrote:
The "technical" part of me favors Tennessee and California.

My better judgment however, stands firmly with Warspite and Queen Elizabeth. Whatever these legendary British battleships lacked in "paper" comparisons with the Tennessees is, in my opinion, more than compensated by their outstanding return on investment. The British battleships also did not simply spend their service careers, steaming about as second-string backups!


OK, so because Tennessee didn't have the same combat career as QE, that makes QE a better ship?

USS North Carolina was the first modern US battleship to join the pacific fleet, and the ONLY battleship in that fleet at the time she joined it. She spent the whole war defending carriers and bombarding shore targets, so I guess that makes QE a better ship?

I suppose you could say that all British ships were a better return on investment, because there were fewer of them so each was called upon to do more.

Finally, why could QE not be described as a second string backup? It seems obvious to me that she was, but maybe I'm missing something here.


Return to “Naval History (1922-1945)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests