Video
Problems with Building Bigger Guns - A Short Discussion
BattleshipsDreadnoughtsHMS IncomparableMetallurgyNaval GunneryNaval ProcurementRoyal NavyShip Design
Study Problems with Building Bigger Guns - A Short Discussion, a Dr. Alex Clarke video from 23 Aug 2023, with 13 time notes. Topics include Battleships, Dreadnoughts, HMS Incomparable.
Time notes
- 3:26QuestionCould a 45-calibre 20-inch naval gun have been built in the period under discussion?AnswerQ&A
A proven, useful service weapon remained beyond period capability. Factories could expand their equipment, but barrel metallurgy, droop, turret weight, ammunition handling, and rate of fire made the proposed gun substantially less credible than an 18-inch weapon.
- 3:37Cranes and quenching wells could be expandedNotable Point
Gun works could upgrade lifting gear and enlarge quenching wells, so factory infrastructure was an administrative and logistical problem rather than the decisive obstacle to a larger gun.
- 8:38A small calibre increase drives a much heavier turret systemChapter
Comparing 13.5-inch and 15-inch mountings shows how rapidly turret weight, recoil loads, and balance problems grow as gun calibre increases.
- 11:04Barrel droop makes extreme-calibre guns a metallurgical problemChapter
The core constraint on a very large naval gun is making a long barrel that retains its shape, accuracy, and safety under firing loads.
- 11:44The 15-inch gun applied strategic pressure beyond the shipyardNotable Point
Britain's rapid move to the 15-inch gun served both a qualitative race with other navies and a financial contest intended to intensify Germany's army-versus-navy choices.
- 16:26Heavier shells slow fire control even with radarNotable Point
Very heavy shells and ammunition handling reduce rate of fire, while early radar still required ranging salvos and human information chains.
- 18:28The 10-inch gun illustrates the danger of paper compromisesNotable Point
The apparent middle ground between cruiser and battleship weapons can inherit the disadvantages of both, a warning that also applies to proposed 20-inch guns.
- 20:07British 16.5-inch and 18-inch work was more credible than a 20-inch leapChapter
A plausible British progression through 16.5-inch and 18-inch programmes distinguishes material evidence and informed inference from proof of a ready 20-inch weapon.
- 23:36HMS Dreadnought paired a radical concept with proven technologyNotable Point
Britain could already manufacture a 14-inch weapon, but Dreadnought combined its radical concept with proven components and a conservative armament choice.
- 26:43QuestionHow might the world have changed if Britain had built HMS Dreadnought with 14-inch guns and a 24-knot speed?AnswerQ&A
The exact consequences are unknowable, but Germany's quickly available 11-inch armament would have compared poorly with the new benchmark and a response would have required substantially more weapons development.
- 29:41Royal Navy ships had to make their specified speedNotable Point
A game-imposed half-knot construction penalty prompts a contrast with Royal Navy practice: ships were expected to make their specified speed or return to the yard.
- 31:49The UAD design illustrates armament, armour, and stability trade-offsNotable Point
Building the 15-gun counterfactual inside UAD requires extra belt armour to make the design stable, illustrating system-level compromises while remaining explicitly a game scenario.
- 36:10Gun-building capability narrows sharply above 14 inchesNotable Point
Many powers could develop guns up to about 14 inches, but far fewer built working 18-inch weapons and fewer still deployed them for firing at sea.