feasibility of keeping WW I battleships around for WW II.

[EwenS]

Except Chile didn't declare war on anyone in Jan 1943. Having been neutral to that point, it broke off diplomatic relations with all 3 major Axis powers having broken up various spy rings in 1942, and forcing the survivors to flee to Argentina.

Breaking diplomatic relations with another country is a long way short of declaring war.

Substantial numbers of both German & Italian citizens continued to live peacefully in Chile.

Chile breaks neutrality to preserve democracy

Chile’s president, Juan Antonio Rios, announced today that the country had suspended relations with Germany, Italy and Japan. In a radio broadcast to the Chilean people, Rios explained his plans to…

blogs.shu.edu

On 18 May 1943 it also broke diplomatic relations with Hungary. Romania,Bulgaria & Vichy France.

Chile did declare war on Japan in April 1945.

Timeline for it all here.

The World at War - Diplomatic Timeline 1939-1945

worldatwar.net

I would expect that the Chileans would never get to PH in your scenario. You just need to look at Adm King's attitudein 1943/44 to the prospect of a BPF arriving. He only accepted it when ordered by his political masters, then insisted it should be self supporting. He stopped a French TG based around Richelieu and the ships modernised in the US.

So how is the Chilean Navy going to support it's PH TG.

Edit. The RNethN, after the withdrawal from the DEI in early 1942, operated as part of US Seventh Fleet in SWPA under MacArthur.

 

[Shortround6]

You are trying to stick old, obsolete hulls and guns into a modern war. The benefits are small and the problems are large.

The Dreadnought era has two main periods. 1906-1922 (16 years) and 1923-1945 (22 years), Note that 1923 to 1939 is 16 years.
Anybody think that 1918 airplanes had any business trying to fight in WW II?
Anybody think that 1918 tanks had any business trying to fight in WW II?
Would anybody even use a 1914 staff car or truck in a WW II Army?

At least none of the Chilean group is coal-fired.

and once you have said that you have pretty much exhausted the good points. It is all down hill from there.
Non-standard ammo. Non standard parts. AA armament not even up to 1939 standards unless extensive refit.

 

[z42]

You are trying to stick old, obsolete hulls and guns into a modern war. The benefits are small and the problems are large.

You use them like the WWI era battleships were used historically, as convoy escorts and for shore bombardment? For such tasks extensive refits are maybe not worth it?

For an actual fleet action, you bring your modern capital ships.

The Dreadnought era has two main periods. 1906-1922 (16 years) and 1923-1945 (22 years), Note that 1923 to 1939 is 16 years.
Anybody think that 1918 airplanes had any business trying to fight in WW II?
Anybody think that 1918 tanks had any business trying to fight in WW II?
Would anybody even use a 1914 staff car or truck in a WW II Army?

I don't think that's an entirely fair comparison. Tanks and airplanes were more or less brand spanking new inventions at the time, and were thus developing quickly. By comparison, steam powered gunships were much more mature, even though they developed rapidly

 

[Shortround6]

You use them like the WWI era battleships were used historically, as convoy escorts and for shore bombardment? For such tasks extensive refits are maybe not worth it?

For an actual fleet action, you bring your modern capital ships.

I don't think that's an entirely fair comparison. Tanks and airplanes were more or less brand spanking new inventions at the time, and were thus developing quickly. By comparison, steam powered gunships were much more mature, even though they developed rapidly

It took 4-5 years for steam turbines to totally eclipse reciprocating engines. In fact the USS New York, Texas and Oklahoma all used VTE engines. Mostly because early direct drive turbines had much less cruising range than VTE expansion engines. There were also major changes in boiler construction in the first 10-12 years of the dreadnought era, not counting oil fuel.
Steam propulsion machinery changed with 1930s ships getting twice the power per ton as mid/late WW I powerplants. Let alone earlier powerplants. British were late to adopt small tube boilers even for coal fired boilers.
There was a lot going on under the decks, which allowed for more power from smaller machinery spaces which allowed for more armament and/or more protection on the same size ship. When used on a somewhat larger ship the increase in the ship's fighting power was huge.

Long range fire was also changing almost by the year in the first decade or so. The HMS Dreadnought had completed with a 9ft rangefinder.
The British conducted trials with a gun director in 1912 with the Orion and Thunderer. Very successful although somewhat primitive. By Aug 1914 8 Ships had been fitted but by Jutland on 2 British Dreadnoughts had not been fitted. These were main armament only. It took several more years for director control to extend down to secondary batteries and searchlights.
And this was 1st and perhaps 2nd generation equipment.
In the Nevada class the central fire control station was placed below the main armored deck. Actually the main armored deck was placed over the top of the central fire control station by raising the the main armor deck up one deck. These ships were laid down in 1912 and completed in 1916. The preceding New York and Texas were completed with the central fire control station above the armored deck as this was fitted during construction. The directors in tops or on the conning tower were the eyes and fed information to the central firing control station.
As expected fighting ranges increased, often faster than the ships could be constructed, and bigger guns were mounted and thicker armor was used some ships actually were obsolete when completed in some of the smaller navies due to building time.
Some nations dreadnoughts were limited due to construction/doctrine. The French Bretagne class was completes with 12 degree elevation and a max range of 14,500 meters.
although the Lorraine's rear turret was changed to 18 degrees in 1917 but the other turrets and her sisters were not changed until after 1918 due to other work in the dockyards. Between the wars the elevation was finally changed to 23 degrees and max range of 23,700meters which compares badly with the French 8in cruisers (28,000 meters?)
Many navies went a little overboard with long range gunnery during the 1920s and early 30s. The ability to actually see an enemy ship at over 30,000 meters due to weather was exceedingly rare. Seeing does not mean hitting. Time of flight of the shells at long range could exceed 60 seconds and accurate ranging and course setting was essential to order to predict future enemy position. Very good fire control equipment was needed.
Ships, as the Germans found out, had a central nervous system (fire control) that could be damaged/ knocked out rendering the ship mission killed even if the guns still would fire, the engines would still drive the ship at speed and the hull would still keep the ship afloat. But the ship could no longer effectively defend her self.

We have not even looked at what a 3rd rate AA suite was like on some of these ships in some of the these old ships. Eight heavy AA guns in some of the British and American ships were bad enough, trying to use an old ship with only four heavy AA guns and a scattering of light AA is asking for trouble in any but the most heavily occupied airspace. That or you need to station special AA ships near the antique to guard her which really makes her a poor bargain.
Or you give her a quicky refit at the expense of one or two other ships not getting refits with better AA.
The US spent a crap load of money on some of the old Pearl Harbor ships.
USS Tennessee

Yes, better AA than an KGV, but that was 1944, not 1939-41.

 

[SaparotRob]

I believe a lot of the stuff raised/repaired/recommissioned at PH was due to the "powers that be" being really ticked off.
"Oh yeah? We'll decide when we get rid of these ships!"
I have my usual documentation.

 

[Glider]

You use them like the WWI era battleships were used historically, as convoy escorts and for shore bombardment? For such tasks extensive refits are maybe not worth it?

For an actual fleet action, you bring your modern capital ships.



I don't think that's an entirely fair comparison. Tanks and airplanes were more or less brand spanking new inventions at the time, and were thus developing quickly. By comparison, steam powered gunships were much more mature, even though they developed rapidly

I know that this is a broad brush statement but for the first half of the war, fleet actions were normally fought using early battleships as the 'Modern Battleships' were not normally ready for action, until the second half of the war. The German Navy being the biggest exception to the rule probably because they didn't have any old WW1 capital ships, therefore almost be definition, anything they had was almost certainly going to be new.

 

[EwenS]

I believe a lot of the stuff raised/repaired/recommissioned at PH was due to the "powers that be" being really ticked off.
"Oh yeah? We'll decide when we get rid of these ships!"
I have my usual documentation.

As for the old Pacific Fleet ships on 7 Dec 1941 not all were that heavily damaged with half back in service by the end of Feb 1942.

Colorado - missed PH altogether due to being in West Coast refit
Pennsylvania - repaired and back at sea by end of Feb 1942
Maryland - salvaged & repaired / modernised by end of Feb 1942
Tennessee - repaired & back at sea by end of Feb 1942. Full modernisation undertaken Oct 1942-May 1943
Nevada - salvaged before end of April 1942 and back in service by end of the year.
California - salvage and repairs / modernisation took until Jan 1944
West Virginia - salvage & repairs / modernisation took until July 1944
Oklahoma - total loss
Arizona - total loss

It was mostly those battleships that were single moored or had been moored outboard on Battleship Row at PH that came off worst.

The 3 New Mexicos were transferred from the Atlantic to the Pacific in Jan 1942 to bolster the Pacific Fleet's 4 available old battleships from Feb 1942.

You don't hear much about the old BB in 1942 because they spent much of their time patrolling off the West Coast as a backstop against a Japanese attack getting past the carriers. The other issue was that there were not enough replenishment oilers to keep them with the fleet in the South Pacific. That left only the oldest 3, Arkansas, New York & Texas, in the Atlantic plus new ships working up.

This is the predicted completion dates for the new battleships as at 1 Dec 1941 and 1 May 1942 as passed to FDR:-

North Carolina - working up but with vibration problems
Washington - working up but with vibration problems
South Dakota - June 1942 / commissioned March 1942
Indiana - Oct 1942 / commissioned April 1942
Massachusetts - Oct 1942 / May 1942
Alabama - Oct 1943 / Dec 1942
Iowa - Nov 1943 / April 1943
New Jersey - May 1944 / July 1943
Missouri - Nov 1944 / Nov 1944
Wisconsin - June 1945 / Sept 1944
Illinois - May 1946 / Oct 1945
Kentucky - May 1945 / Dec 1944
Montana - Nov 1946 / May 1946
Ohio - May 1947 / Dec 1946
Maine - Feb 1946 / Feb 1946
New Hampshire - Oct 1946 / Oct 1946
Louisiana - May 1946 / Dec 1945