What Norway could replace its old coastal-defence ships with

If Norway had replaced its Eidsvold- and Tordenskjold-class ships during the 1930s, should it have bought new coastal-defence ships or another type, and how would that affect Narvik?

A modified Sverige-type coastal-defence ship is the expected conventional choice, while fast destroyers or minelayers offer another approach to fjord defence. Better rules of engagement and mutual support would also matter at Narvik.

Finnish coastal-defence ships are rejected because their stability makes them a poor fit for Norway's exposed coast. A modified Swedish Sverige design offers stronger guns and protection, but its cost and dock requirements strain Norwegian resources. The earlier rejection of the surviving British-built monitor illustrates how even a useful ship could demand unaffordable infrastructure work or reliance on foreign yards for refits. A fast large destroyer with dual-purpose guns, extra torpedoes, and mine capacity offers a different way to defend the fjords and redeploy along the coast. Abdiel-type minelayers and refitted Omaha-class cruisers provide further alternatives, although a government replacing coastal-defence ships might simply order more of the same type. At Narvik, restrictive orders left Eidsvold and Norge unable to support each other, so different command arrangements could have improved their chances even with the existing ships.