Naval Historywith Dr. Alex

Q&A · 4:01:09-4:04:02

Trading Courageous and Glorious for a third Renown

A third Renown-class battlecruiser would preserve a useful fast capital ship while pushing later carrier conversion toward large Admiral-class hulls.

Admiral Class BattlecruisersAircraft CarriersCounterfactual HistoryCourageous Class Warship LineageRenown Class BattlecruisersWashington Naval Treaty
Watch at this timeFull video guide
Question

How could Britain be persuaded to build a third Renown instead of Courageous and Glorious?

Short answer

Emphasize Renown's lasting capital-ship value and redirect Admiral-class hulls into large carriers, producing a much stronger fast fleet before the treaty era.

Notes

The counterfactual replaces Courageous and Glorious with a third Renown-class battlecruiser in the 1915 program. That ship is more likely to remain valuable enough for reconstruction, changing which capital ships Britain retains during treaty negotiations. Without the large light cruisers available for conversion, the panel would preserve several Admiral-class hulls and complete four as armored-deck carriers with deck-edge lifts. Entering the Washington system with four roughly 45,000-ton carriers and five fast 15-inch battlecruisers would profoundly reshape both British force structure and the treaty baseline.