Naval Historywith Dr. Alex

Q&A · 2:16:42-2:21:05

Why smaller battleship shells do not deliver cruiser-like fire rates

The six-inch versus eight-inch rate-of-fire logic breaks down at battleship scale, while extreme 20-inch weapons would sacrifice too much loading efficiency.

14-inch Guns15-inch Guns16-inch Guns18-inch Guns20-inch GunsBattleshipsCruisersKing George V Class Battleships (1939)Naval Guns
Watch at this timeFull video guide
Question

What rate-of-fire advantage comes from choosing fourteen-inch instead of fifteen- or sixteen-inch battleship guns?

Short answer

Very little in real battle; the meaningful six-inch versus eight-inch cruiser comparison does not scale to extremely heavy battleship ammunition.

Notes

Triple six-inch cruisers can gain a real volume-of-fire advantage over eight-inch ships because the ammunition remains comparatively manageable. Fourteen- and sixteen-inch shells are both so heavy that machinery, safety, and loading cycles dominate their handling. The theoretical extra round therefore does not translate cleanly into battle performance. At the opposite extreme, Britain and the United States might have had the industry to build a few ships with 20-inch guns, but very slow loading would make them inefficient. Designers would then have a strong reason to return to more workable triple 18-inch turrets. Calibre alone does not determine useful volume of fire.