Q&A · 2:25:41-2:26:51

Why the Alaska class was not a capital ship

Alaska's absolute size resembled an early dreadnought, but relative to contemporary Iowas and Montanas it remained a cruiser-scale design.

Question

Was the Alaska class a capital ship, and what change might have made it one?

Short answer

No. A substantially heavier main battery, preferably six 16-inch guns, would be needed to move it toward contemporary capital-ship status.

Notes

Alaska does not qualify as a capital ship when compared with other ships being built in the same period. Six 14-inch guns might push a redesigned ship toward the boundary, though six 16-inch weapons would better match contemporary capital-ship expectations. The actual Alaska displaced only about half as much as the nearest American battleships and carried 12-inch guns. Resemblance to HMS Dreadnought in absolute tonnage is misleading because warship size had risen greatly over the intervening decades. Classification therefore depends on a ship's place within its own generation as well as its raw dimensions.