Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Italian 15" guns had range capability far exceeding any other nations but the price was a barrel life of only around halfBTW the Italian 15in gun was about 30,000kg heavier per barrel so dropping them into the Bayern and Baden turrets was probably a no go.
I find it interesting that only Italy fielded triple 15" guns. Did Britain, seemingly forever leaning on twin 11-15" guns ever consider triple 15" mounts? Of course the French went for quad 15".The Italian 15" guns had range capability far exceeding any other nations but the price was a barrel life of only around half
that of any other nations. Dispersion of shot was also bad.
Sounds like Italian cars.The ammunition was of the Forrest Gump box of chocolates type - you never knew what you were going to get in each batch.
Yes, a number of Washington treaty compliant battlecruiser designs IIRC had triple 15", culminating in F3 design. In the event they decided they rather wanted the equivalent battleship design variant (O3), which became the Nelrods.I find it interesting that only Italy fielded triple 15" guns. Did Britain, seemingly forever leaning on twin 11-15" guns ever consider triple 15" mounts? Of course the French went for quad 15".
I find it interesting that only Italy fielded triple 15" guns. Did Britain, seemingly forever leaning on twin 11-15" guns ever consider triple 15" mounts?
The Lion's had triple 16", not 15". But indeed the war breaking out caused them to be repeatedly postponed and eventually canceled outright.They did, for the Lion-class, which ofc never got built due to war breaking out.
The Lion's had triple 16", not 15". But indeed the war breaking out caused them to be repeatedly postponed and eventually canceled outright.
The 18"/40 Mk.I was designed in 1915 with two single gun turrets intended to be installed in the large light cruiser Furious. In the end she emerged with aviation facilities in place of the forward turret, while the after turret was replaced in Nov 1917 with another aircraft hangar topped by a landing on deck.Lets also remember that the British were fooling around with 18 in guns in 1916-17.
Triple 15in turrets may have been considered a backwards step?
Sackville was built in CanadaAgreed. One day I will get to visit the closest thing to a RN predreadought, the British-built IJNS Mikasa.
IJN Battleship Mikasa: A Photo Guide
Discover IJN Battleship Mikasa, Japan's hero of the Russo-Japanese war. Uncover the ship's history and its huge guns.tokyo-in-pics.com
Mikasa is preserved in concrete. This is an interesting way to avoid corrosion while still supporting the hull.
It would not surprise if there are more British-built warship museums outside of the UK than in their country of origin. For example, the revolutionary turret ship Huascar in Chile would be very nice to visit. Here in Canada I can think of four British-built warship museums (HMCS Haida, Sackville, Ojibwa and Onondaga).
Thanks. I should have known that, having lived in NB for years and visited the ship several times on my trips to NS. It's interesting that we never made any destroyers until the postwar St. Laurent-class. I suppose with so many war surplus ships and a short lived peace dividend there was no need.Sackville was built in Canada
You are forgetting the Canadian Tribals. While the first 4 (Athabaskan, Iroquois, Haida & Huron) were built in Britain by Vickers Armstrong Tyne, the last 4 were built in Canada.at Halifax by Halifax Shipyards.Thanks. I should have known that, having lived in NB for years and visited the ship several times on my trips to NS. It's interesting that we never made any destroyers until the postwar St. Laurent-class. I suppose with so many war surplus ships and a short lived peace dividend there was no need.
In 1990, the St. Lawrence-class ship, HMCS Saguenay visited Toronto on her farewell tour and I recall as a teenager touring the ship. She was only thirty-four years since her 1956 commissioning. HMCS Halifax is now thirty-two years from commissioning and will likely be forty years plus before she's replaced by a River class.
Canada built 4 Tribal class destroyer prior to the St. Laurent class. While they did miss WWII, it wasn't by much: Micmac commissioned in Sept '45Thanks. I should have known that, having lived in NB for years and visited the ship several times on my trips to NS. It's interesting that we never made any destroyers until the postwar St. Laurent-class. I suppose with so many war surplus ships and a short lived peace dividend there was no need.
In 1990, the St. Lawrence-class ship, HMCS Saguenay visited Toronto on her farewell tour and I recall as a teenager touring the ship. She was only thirty-four years since her 1956 commissioning. HMCS Halifax is now thirty-two years from commissioning and will likely be forty years plus before she's replaced by a River class.
Triples were the popular format for 16", with only five dreadnought battleships over two classes (3 x Colorado-class and 2 x Nagato-class) ever fielding twin 16". Only the Brits and USN completed any triple 16" battleships, but in addition to the cancelled Lions, the French Alsace-class (#2 design) and Soviet Sovetsky Soyuz-class were also to be triple 16" armed. Of course the Germans, in their forever quest to have the most inefficient application of displacement over capability planned four twin 16" for their H-class.Oh, thanks for the correction. For some reason whenever Drach mentions the Lions I guess I hear "triple fifteens"? Anyway, good catch.
Triples were the popular format for 16", with only five dreadnought battleships over two classes (3 x Colorado-class and 2 x Nagato-class) ever fielding twin 16". Only the Brits and USN completed any triple 16" battleships, but in addition to the cancelled Lions, the French Alsace-class (#2 design) and Soviet Sovetsky Soyuz-class were also to be triple 16" armed. Of course the Germans, in their forever quest to have the most inefficient application of displacement over capability planned four twin 16" for their H-class.
Indeed. It's a wonder that the British took so long to go with triple mounts given the benefits. The Italians, Russians/Soviets and Austro-Hungarians had triple mounts for all their dreadnoughts. I like the look of the canceled Ersatz Monarch-class with its triple and twin 14", shown below.Not to mention all the 14" Standards with triples USA built. It's a good way to get good numbers of guns aboard without ramping up the size too much.
Indeed. It's a wonder that the British took so long to go with triple mounts given the benefits. The Italians, Russians/Soviets and Austro-Hungarians had triple mounts for all their dreadnoughts. I like the look of the canceled Ersatz Monarch-class with its triple and twin 14", shown below.
View attachment 805284
It's true. When it comes to the first 20 years of the dreadnought era, it's in balanced and beautiful lines where the battlecruiser reigned.I love the clipper-bowed American standards, but otherwise older battleships just look too square and chunky for me: