Bruships 70: Travelling along...

Yes, although the issue was buoyancy and seakeeping rather than structural weakness; the design prioritized a long, high-speed hull form.

The accompanying description identifies it as the escort carrier USS Croatan and also lists several destroyers in the scene.

No. The concept and six-inch autoloaders had promise, but the class was too small and its systems were not made to work reliably enough.

Both were effective for their intended roles, but Iowa was bounded by the Panama Canal while Alaska was bounded by the heavy-cruiser concept.

They were useful against merchant ships and could also hurt many lightly armoured protected cruisers of the period.

A redesigned layout could have exchanged selected turrets for Sea Dart and Sea Cat while retaining guns and adding lighter weapons.

Admiral James O. Richardson, who protested the basing policy and wanted the fleet returned to the West Coast.

A large amount, together with the space demanded by Iowa's heavier armour.

It was a real problem, but many ships normally sailed and used their engines only when needed, limiting continuous soot exposure.

No. Hood retained battlecruiser arrangements, while a true fast battleship also combines speed with battleship-level protection and subdivision.

Both arrangements were explored at different points; he recalls water-filled tubes in at least one configuration but treats the exact sequence cautiously.

They used some camouflage, but it was limited so that landing and operating markings remained visible.

US and UK collections are improving, but reciprocal arrangements with researchers near local archives remain useful for material that is not online.

Alaska would hold a decisive advantage and would probably sink the Deutschland-class ship very quickly.

As a worthy opponent: Alaska could have heavier armour, but the British battlecruisers generally carried larger guns.

Possibly in some respects, but other design requirements and infrastructure limits would still have kept the ships distinct.

Yes, if small-tube boilers had enabled about 28 knots while preserving the class's battleship characteristics.

HMS Renown, because she would fill the absence of a surviving British capital ship while remaining more manageable than some alternatives.

Yes, a 1944-era Arctic camouflage pattern used on destroyers.

It increased anti-aircraft coverage, allowing at least several mounts to engage from most approach angles.

The powers would probably build whole classes of larger capital ships, prompting an international cycle of enlarged designs rather than a single exceptional vessel.

No. The maximum thickness could be similar, but it did not cover the same share of the hull.

Probably not, because late-war radar and other upgrades were important parts of the ships' combat value.

Their survivability relied heavily on manoeuvre, and Mediterranean waters offered less room to exploit that advantage.

Warship categories changed while designs grew, so a tonnage treated as heavy-cruiser scale in one era could describe a light cruiser in another.

Yes. The heavier-gunned Tiger could fight a Kongo-class ship without undue difficulty.

Potentially, but an effective ram required the whole hull to be shaped and strengthened for the collision.

They could make the Grand Fleet markedly faster, restoring Dreadnought's usefulness and giving British battlecruisers and destroyers still greater mobility.

Not reliably. Shock and vibration could disable the occupants, and nearby follow-up hits could cause catastrophic damage.

Concern would centre on the resulting two-ocean threat, pushing the United States toward either accommodation or major rearmament.

Probably much like HMS Tiger with fifteen-inch guns, although the after-turret layout would depend on related design developments.

Not necessarily, but it would have to use the Danish exits or Germany would need to widen the Kiel Canal.

Usually by a mixture of builder staff, naval assessors, and some personnel who will form the ship's first crew.

They might reach about 19 or 20 knots, but hull form and the rest of the machinery would prevent a much larger gain.

Not as a separate modern treatment, but a 1957 class history offers approximately one chapter per destroyer.

Examples include 13.5-inch dreadnoughts, Renown, Crown Colony and Arethusa cruisers, Hunt destroyers, U-class submarines, and escort carriers.

Expect a North Sea clash and French efforts to hunt down Deutschland-class commerce raiders around the world.

Some precautions existed, while wood and caulking offered natural insulation; possible lightning losses are known, though no example is identified here.

Ships would be designed to use both Suez and Panama, allowing two-way imperial movement while giving Britain leverage over a vital US route.

A highly capable Chinese woman pirate leader, although the exact name is uncertain in this exchange.

The United States nearly chose the pom-pom, while Britain nearly chose the 40 mm Bofors.

They were often used in battle-line conditions that constrained their designed advantage of high-speed manoeuvre.

The balance between volume of fire and longer-range accuracy would shift, affecting individual actions more than overall campaign results.

Yes, improved Sea Vixen derivatives were studied, but the Phantom was judged the more cost-effective choice.

Very likely, as a radar-centred air-defence cruiser probably closer to an enlarged Bristol concept than a direct copy.

Royal Navy ships could manoeuvre toward the observed fall of an enemy salvo, changing course before the opponent's correction arrived.

Destroyers would suffer a severe weight penalty, while the mandate would probably accelerate development of a triple six-inch autoloader for larger ships.

Most policy might remain similar, but carrier spending could shift toward large new ships instead of extensive reconstruction of wartime hulls.

Revision is useful when new evidence warrants it; the problem is judging past actors solely by present-day standards.

They could share docks; the key difference was that naval yards served emergency fleet needs while civilian yards had to sustain commercial workloads.

In the late 1940s; earlier successes occurred, but dependable use required homing technology and less reliance on luck.

She was the first to cross the threshold and instantly became the standard against which every battleship was compared.

It would detonate beneath the keel and try to break the ship's back, though keel damage is not invariably an immediate sinking.

One would do serious damage, two might sink her, and three would make the loss much more certain, depending on hit location and damage control.

Some armoured cruisers were already close to the concept; the Duke of Edinburgh class is his example of the transition.