Naval Historywith Dr. Alex

Q&A · 50:37-53:23

Should Britain have chosen F3 instead of Nelson and Rodney?

The F3 alternative offered a fast, well-protected ship and a possible route to improving the guns of older British capital ships without increasing their calibre.

15-inch GunsBattlecruisersF3 BattlecruiserNelson Class BattleshipsRoyal NavyWashington Naval Treaty
Watch at this timeFull video guide
Question

Should the Royal Navy have built F3 rather than Nelson and Rodney?

Short answer

Both historians favour F3 for its combination of speed, protection and improved 15-inch guns, while questioning how much the Nelsons owed to the wish to match foreign 16-inch ships.

Notes

Nelson and Rodney are admired for their service, but their 16-inch armament is questioned as a prestige response to the Nagato and Colorado classes. F3 would have provided a fully armoured battlecruiser with a new 15-inch gun. That weapon also offered a possible improvement for older British ships already armed with guns of the same calibre. The treaty argument distinguishes increasing calibre from installing an improved gun of the existing calibre. American improvements to the 14-inch guns of the standard battleships supply the comparison, while a British 15-inch/45 or possible 15-inch/50 remains a proposed development rather than an upgrade that actually occurred.