Tillman monsters.

Buba

A total creep
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Reaction score
1,549
Let us do a search for all those "no WNT, what happens?" threads :)
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Reaction score
22,487
I'd guess a G3 and whatever gets built instead of a KGV. Improved Lion class maybe? There was a version planned with 12x16 inch guns like the Montana. Maybe one of those paper ships from world of warships :p

Interesting to speculate what the 1930s would bring in the wake of an arms escalation. I'd guess 18 inch guns become standard as the big navies all had prototypes, and its a fair point carriers may develop less if more money goes into guns.
Cruisers would be interesting too, Japan and the US had some powerful ships planned but I think only a handful of Alaskas were used
It's a shame we didn't keep the Alaska's operational along side the Iowa's.

They would have made great cruise missile and AA missile platforms, similar to the Cleveland's that were converted to the Albany class guided missile cruisers.
 

bintananth

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2021
Reaction score
2,031
It's a shame we didn't keep the Alaska's operational along side the Iowa's.

They would have made great cruise missile and AA missile platforms, similar to the Cleveland's that were converted to the Albany class guided missile cruisers.
The Alaskas were the last battlecruisers - even though they were never classified as battlecruisers - and too expensive to keep.

All the expense and crew of a battleship without the ability to fight one on even terms. I could see the US keeping some of the older fast battleships instead.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Reaction score
2,971
I'd guess a G3 and whatever gets built instead of a KGV. Improved Lion class maybe? There was a version planned with 12x16 inch guns like the Montana. Maybe one of those paper ships from world of warships :p

Interesting to speculate what the 1930s would bring in the wake of an arms escalation. I'd guess 18 inch guns become standard as the big navies all had prototypes, and its a fair point carriers may develop less if more money goes into guns.
Cruisers would be interesting too, Japan and the US had some powerful ships planned but I think only a handful of Alaskas were used
Speaking of cruisers - if we have battleships with 18-20 inch guns,then heavy cruisers could have 10-11 inch guns.Something like german pocket battleships for all navies.
 

Atarlost

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2020
Reaction score
286
The Alaskas were the last battlecruisers - even though they were never classified as battlecruisers - and too expensive to keep.

All the expense and crew of a battleship without the ability to fight one on even terms. I could see the US keeping some of the older fast battleships instead.
Battlecruisers are defined by battleship peer armament. 12" guns were no longer modern battleship armament when the Alaskas were designed. The Alaskas are where armored cruiser trends were going before the battlecruiser cut off that line of development. So, if we're being honest with ourselves, are the Deutschlands and Scharnhorsts. Even the Germans hadn't considered 11" guns an acceptable battleship armament since the Helgolands. I mean, they were being honest with the Deutschlands, it was British propaganda that upsold them because treaty heavy cruisers weren't fit for purpose. The Scharnhorsts were just delusional.

The Iowas are the battlecruisers. Their relationship to the Montanas was much closer to the relationship between contemporaneous battlecruiser and battleship classes within the same navy than between successive battleship classes.
 

Harlock

I should have expected that really
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
5,874
Speaking of cruisers - if we have battleships with 18-20 inch guns,then heavy cruisers could have 10-11 inch guns.Something like german pocket battleships for all navies.
could be, if I recall Britain was looking at 9.2 inch guns on projected cruisers, Germany had 11inch guns on their cruiser killers (like the planned P-class) Japan had a 12 inch design, yeah, I guess battlecruisers were about to make a return :p
 

Vargas Fan

Depressed and Heartbroken
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Reaction score
685
Location
Troon, Scotland
Yeah that's the one I think, must have been quite a clenching moment launching something from there :p

I'd have liked to see this one built, one of the original designs for Yamato




would have used diesel engines too hence no big funnel. Very interesting take
That is John Browns shipyard which built such vessels as the original Cunard liners Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary, the QE2, HMS Vanguard among others.

And there is the tributary river.

 

ATP

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Reaction score
2,971
With bigger battleships and cruisers - it would be probable more big destroyers,too.Like french with 138mm and german with 150mm guns.
 

Harlock

I should have expected that really
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
5,874
With bigger battleships and cruisers - it would be probable more big destroyers,too.Like french with 138mm and german with 150mm guns.
possible but perhaps not useful, at that point something like an Atlanta or Dido light cruiser would be a better investment. Big problem with destroyers is they are pretty unstable gun platforms and too small to mount good gun directors (or radar later)
This makes it difficult for destroyers to hit things unless at close range, and if up close better to have lots of smaller faster loading guns
 

Buba

A total creep
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Reaction score
1,549
Battlecruisers are defined by battleship peer armament.
Can be debated until the cows come home.
:)
This makes it difficult for destroyers to hit things unless at close range, and if up close better to have lots of smaller faster loading guns
What he said.
The Narvik class looks good on paper, but the Elbing class was many times more usefull.
 

Harlock

I should have expected that really
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
5,874
I'd say the Alaska was more of a Battlecruiser than actual battlecruisers :p
Originally the concept was for the ships to be evolved armoured cruisers with 9.2 inch guns which would have been perfectly good. They outgunned the best of the armoured cruisers and would have enjoyed superior speed too. But Jackie 'speed' Fisher had them upgunned to 12 inch guns mostly because he really wanted a to hammer home his own theories.

Initially there was a lot of opposition to this with Jellicoe in particular vehemently hating the idea. Bigger guns meant a bigger ship, which meant a more expensive ship, which meant fewer ships. Jellicoe wanted more smaller ships which could do their primary job as cruiser hunters and heavy scouts but wouldn't have the power to tempt commanders to duel battleships. Oops.

Even after battlecruisers became a thing Jellicoe kept pushing for this new ship design above a heavy cruiser but less than a battlecruiser but it never went anywhere. It does however show a niche which you could argue the Alaska fits into, or an Azuma, maybe a Scheer which would n truth be the originally battlecruiser idea before Fisher got his mitts on it :p
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Reaction score
22,487
I'd say the Alaska was more of a Battlecruiser than actual battlecruisers :p
Originally the concept was for the ships to be evolved armoured cruisers with 9.2 inch guns which would have been perfectly good. They outgunned the best of the armoured cruisers and would have enjoyed superior speed too. But Jackie 'speed' Fisher had them upgunned to 12 inch guns mostly because he really wanted a to hammer home his own theories.

Initially there was a lot of opposition to this with Jellicoe in particular vehemently hating the idea. Bigger guns meant a bigger ship, which meant a more expensive ship, which meant fewer ships. Jellicoe wanted more smaller ships which could do their primary job as cruiser hunters and heavy scouts but wouldn't have the power to tempt commanders to duel battleships. Oops.

Even after battlecruisers became a thing Jellicoe kept pushing for this new ship design above a heavy cruiser but less than a battlecruiser but it never went anywhere. It does however show a niche which you could argue the Alaska fits into, or an Azuma, maybe a Scheer which would n truth be the originally battlecruiser idea before Fisher got his mitts on it :p
How would you rate the Hipper's?

They had pretty good guns and speed, but are just seen as heavy cruisers most of the time.
 

Buba

A total creep
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Reaction score
1,549
How would you rate the Hipper's?
Now,, where is that emoticon ...
(n)
Below average, breakdown prone heavy cruisers?
On that tonnage other navies better and/or more reliable ships.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Reaction score
22,487
Now,, where is that emoticon ...
(n)
Below average, breakdown prone heavy cruisers?
On that tonnage other navies better and/or more reliable ships.
I'm just thinking, could the Hipper's qualify as battlecruisers, or are they just old style heavy cruisers with a bit more armor and speed?
 

Harlock

I should have expected that really
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
5,874
How would you rate the Hipper's?

They had pretty good guns and speed, but are just seen as heavy cruisers most of the time.
I'd agree with Buba and say they were at the upper end of a heavy cruiser. They compare quite well with the American Baltimore and are a little below the Des Moines which I'd say were the best of the best :)

I'd guess Scharnhorst might be the closest thing to a German Battlecruiser, it is almost exactly the same philosophy as the WWI German BCs though I think there were hopes to upgrade them into small battleships.
 

Buba

A total creep
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Reaction score
1,549
Repairs to the Gneisenau were to be combined with rearming to 3x2x38cm. There were some problems with this.
But not exactly small - S&G were slightly bigger than e.g. the QE class or the Standards - which shows that speed costs ...
 
Last edited:

ATP

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Reaction score
2,971
Repairs to the Gneisenau were to be combined with rearming to 3x2x38cm. There were some problems with this.
But not exactly small - S&G were slightly bigger than e.g. the QE class or the Standards - which shows that speed costs ...
I read,that initially they would get 3-2-35cm,but Hitler vetoed it becouse he do not wonted provoke England.
 

Buba

A total creep
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Reaction score
1,549
I read,that initially they would get 3-2-35cm,but Hitler vetoed it becouse he do not wonted provoke England.
This, as well as the 3x28cm jobbies were more or less off the shelf, whereas 2x35 or 2x38 would have to be designed first. Which takes years ...
 

ATP

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Reaction score
2,971
So,we would end with USA,Japan and England navies made of Tillmans,recon carriers,big heavy cruisers,when Italy and France try compensate by making battleships with 380 instesd of 320/340mm guns,and bigger carriers.
Germans would build bigger Bismarcks from the start,and more pocket battleships.

How it would change war? In Europe Bismarck would sunk in first battle to G3 battlecruisers,and Pearl Harbour without Kaga and Akagi is impossible.
So,attacking only Malaya,and Dutch india instead.USA send fleet,but war is unpopular,and eventually USA agree to peace with Japan,letting them keep Java.
Europe - more american troops send there,so Allies take more land.Hungary ,Yugoslavia,maybe Bulgary still free.
Poland and Romania under soviet yoke.

After WW2,Japan still is superpower.
 
Top Bottom