#2Historians Live: With @Drachinifel comes to chat & build UAD Dreadnoughts that Almost were P3

A simulated British response to Japan's Number 13 design tests whether twelve 18-inch guns, 33 knots, and heavy protection can fit within 58,000 tons.

Extensive reconstruction could make it possible, but gun blast, power demand, internal obstructions, and shipyard requirements make the practical case doubtful.

A generator on deck avoids difficult access below, but noise, blast, and heat complicate that apparently simple refit option.

Turret removal creates space for missiles, but internal layout and the difference between empty launchers and a complete installation still matter.

Ten twin 4-inch mounts and simulated pom-poms give the British design a heavy antiaircraft fit while armor weight favors the main armament over the conning tower.

A simulated Italian answer to Nelson combines 381 mm guns and 30 knots within 35,000 tons, then exposes compromises in secondary mounting and fire control.

Their shock tolerance is not quantified. The proposed response is to fire the exposed torpedoes early, before repeated main-gun fire over the launchers.

The Italian design's heavy battery depends on one vulnerable fire-control center, while its bridge also has an obstructed view.

Two 1940 game designs use an 80,000-ton allowance for either twenty 16-inch guns or twelve 18-inch guns, with Pacific range and enlarged canal locks shaping the hull.

No; the exercise assumes the intended expanded locks associated with Montana planning, allowing a beam wider than Iowa's.

Two additional ammunition hoists are recalled as passing through the lower 12-inch mount to supply the upper 8-inch turret.

A hypothetical British competitor for Japan's Kongo contract compares a ten-gun battlecruiser with a twelve-gun alternative carrying very light secondaries.

South Dakota's electrical distribution deserves examination against contemporary engineering practice and the control systems available in the 1940s.

The cause is unresolved. Suggested explanations involve transformer or alternator taps, a winding error, or a deliberate requirement for a higher-voltage circuit.

A recalled machinery photograph places a clutch aboard a geared-turbine warship and records its operating-speed restriction.

Two hypothetical 90,000-ton battleships converge on sixteen 16.5-inch guns but favor different protection schemes and engagement ranges.

The tentatively recalled purpose was to use launch ramps, reach maintenance buildings, and move between waterways over land.

The rocket-assisted Tallboy proposal adds eight RP-3 rockets to a heavy bomb to increase impact speed and penetration.

The T12 Cloudmaker and a two-Grand-Slam B-29 configuration illustrate the modifications associated with exceptionally large bunker-busting bombs.

Perhaps three for a B-52 and one or two for a B-2, as a rough estimate based mainly on physical space.

A recalled proposal would replace a 747's passenger accommodation with four twelve-shot rotary cruise-missile launchers.

A disputed Vulcan B3 performance claim leads into a counterfactual Concorde bomber with rotating missile bays and a fast approach-and-withdrawal concept.

The caliber is linked to remembered H-class studies, while the game model's oversized twin 18-inch and 20-inch mounts drive the quadruple 16.5-inch layout.

A 1920s design challenge forces same-caliber wing and centerline turrets into an Austro-Hungarian capital ship.

Drachinifel chooses the New Mexico class; Dr. Clarke chooses the as-built South Dakota class, while also appreciating the 1920s design.

As a smaller mobilization Vanguard retaining the 15-inch battery, with ten twin 4.5-inch mounts and roughly 28 knots instead of the full ship's higher speed and complexity.

Competing Agincourt alternatives explore triple 15-inch guns and twin 18-inch guns under counterfactual British technology assumptions.

Duke of Edinburgh class, with Princess Royal among the possible ship names.

Yes, but no Swedish class is identified and the later claim that Hoche could defeat Sweden's leading ships remains disputed.

Yes, as a battlecarrier: it combines carrier aviation with capital-ship gun power rather than serving as a single-purpose flight-deck ship.

Opinions differ: one view accepts the battlecarrier label, while the stricter view calls Galactica a heavily armed carrier because she lacks a distinct main gun battery.

About 16 inches, comparable to the maximum thickness used for turret armor.

A proposed connection between British 18-inch gun development and Agincourt's cancellation supports one interpretation of her intended armament.

Nelson's many proposed refits tested affordability and supported arguments against proposals as well as preparing ships for construction.

Earlier central-battery and barbette ironclads are credible opponents; early Whitehead torpedoes create only a remote chance against much larger ships.

A 1940 Japanese yard must build a prestigious-looking battleship for a Chinese client state without creating a threat to Japan.

Yes, and coal is recommended because Manchuria has substantial local deposits.

A deliberately unreliable game design combines an intimidating battery with machinery, protection, and supply demands intended to overwhelm its recipient.

A modest coal-fired design could look inferior to Japan while offering Manchukuo usable firepower and easier port access.

A 24-knot game design trades international competitiveness for firepower, port access, and machinery suited to its intended regional opponent.

The judges disagree over whether port access or deliberate unreliability should decide the client-state challenge.

A 1932 game-design brief combines the Constitution name with a 30,000-33,000-ton limit and a fast capital-ship role.

A good first effort despite important flaws, especially when measured against the US Navy's rapid transition from monitors rather than mature foreign designs.

Not fundamentally; straight decks operated jets successfully, while angled decks solved landing-speed, safety, and sortie-rate problems.

It was highly contingent; different wars, treaty timing, capital-ship programs, and carrier development could have produced very different fleets and doctrine.

Historical explanation requires attention to unrealized options and contemporary constraints, as well as the path events ultimately took.

A game design combines Tennessee-type main guns and 33 knots, then sacrifices some secondary armament for flagship accommodation.

Two similar game battlecruisers differ in protection and antiaircraft fit, with period suitability raised during their comparison.

A third entrant trades twelve-gun firepower for an eight-gun battery and existing single 5-inch/38 mounts that could reach service with less development risk.

Similar twelve-gun battlecruisers offer a choice between extra armor and growth margin or roomier flagship accommodation.