Alaska remains useful with an early-war anti-aircraft battery

How effective would an Alaska-class large cruiser be if commissioned in 1942 with 1.1-inch and .50-calibre weapons instead of Bofors and Oerlikons?

She would remain a powerful ship because of her numerous 5-inch guns and would become an early priority for replacement of the weaker light anti-aircraft battery.

The early 1.1-inch and .50-calibre fit would be weaker than the later Bofors and Oerlikon battery, but Alaska would still carry many 5-inch guns. The scenario also gives her a large number of 1.1-inch weapons, so the interim light battery still contributes defensive fire. Some 20 mm Oerlikons would probably appear as equipment became available during 1942. Her size and value would make her an early priority for replacement weapons. The temporary close-range weakness reduces air-defence efficiency without erasing the ship's wider combat value.