Questions & Answers on Naval History till the Bru Runs Out 4

Apart from a claimed shallow-water capability, the Courageous design offered no meaningful improvement over the Renowns.

Trace the relevant station commanders and use their memoirs alongside official and colonial records, especially for the Indian Ocean station.

It was the easiest and most intuitive to fly during demanding low-level strike missions.

The later Admirals were probably headed toward about 45,000 tons standard and slightly greater speed than Hood.

Yes, and a few cold-weather vessels apparently had comparable facilities, although they were rare; the much larger Typhoon submarines later carried a small sauna.

The choices are the Littorios among capital ships, Midway among carriers, and the British U class among submarines.

Fit exceptionally powerful engines to the Mosquito and explore the resulting speed, even though the airframe might become the limiting factor.

They might have caused greater initial damage, but Britain learned from Alexandria and made later attacks much harder to repeat.

Possibly, but only with significant work to the berth, river depth, moorings, and surrounding bank.

It would likely update secondary and anti-aircraft guns and machinery, with speed a more useful investment than still more armour.

It could have become an F-104 competitor because its mixed rocket-and-jet power was extraordinary for the early 1950s, but its industrial legacy would be less certain.

Remove substantial deck and superstructure weight, then add stabilizing bulges before installing the crane.

The final arrangement is uncertain, but a stepped deck appears more likely than a continuous flush deck.

As one part of an international race involving several European, American, and South American navies, with roots before 1900 rather than only after Dreadnought.

Little would change without fighting, but a clash might spur the Netherlands to complete a battlecruiser by the First World War.

Probably because the Fairey design was judged to have the more robust airframe, although the difference may have been quite small.

They are an obvious practical defense, although modern systems will probably be more elaborate and marketed under a new name.

Probably an improved Nelson-derived class rather than the historical King George V design.

The method was workable with experienced crews, but combat losses and weak retention of institutional knowledge made it increasingly difficult.

Probably; greater financial room could speed rearmament even if the Treasury remained reluctant to expand defense spending dramatically.

One boat inserted early Special Boat Service personnel for demolition work and attacked Italian warships while returning from the mission.

They were adequate and useful in numbers, but an American frigate would not want to fight a ship as powerful as HMS Warrior.

It provides strength, but the fleet should also keep adding third rates whenever possible.

Germany would respond, but Britain would more plausibly choose 9.2-inch guns because 10-inch weapons impose battleship costs without battleship effect.

They would remain LPHs, probably operate Harriers, and could inspire a larger, more amphibious Invincible design.

Choose a broad program with varied modules so you can explore several fields before specializing.

Employment mattered greatly: Falklands and Dogger Bank show their strengths, while Coronel and Jutland demonstrate misuse.

Merlin sounded better, but Double Wasp probably had the better power-to-weight ratio.

A newer carrier could relieve her, but Hermes would probably continue serving in an escort-carrier role.

They may evolve into distributed task groups, with each uncrewed combatant coordinating other systems around it.

The age-of-sail Polish navy, whose promise was repeatedly limited by political fragmentation, port autonomy, and weak funding.

Many older ships would probably be replaced instead of modernized because continuous new construction changes the economic case for major refits.

They rely on close-in weapon systems backed by 30 mm cannon and similar short-range defensive weapons.

No one-to-one match works; Klingon procurement resembles an American pursuit of maximum power, while their combat ethos evokes Japanese patterns mixed with stealth.

It would encourage heavy coastal defenses, closer cooperation with Norway, and earlier development of submarine and offshore-support technologies.

Potentially; lower costs and demonstrated Harrier operations could attract Australia, Canada, and India, probably with national adaptations.

Yes, if it sustained four-ship construction cycles; the resulting 16-inch fleet would also force rival designs upward.

Not a unified standing navy; its members contributed their own ships to occasional joint operations.

Potentially; enough foreign orders could fund a new development path instead of later Harrier variants.

Probably a second Ark Royal-scale carrier, adding another large fleet carrier for the Second World War.

Because the US Navy also expected an early jet replacement and communicated that assumption to Britain.

No; aviation development and experimentation would continue, probably producing even larger carriers by the late 1930s.

Airworthy Swordfish survive in preservation, while some Wessex helicopters were likely among the oldest aircraft still in naval service.

Yes, the long-range ASW role remains necessary, and its eventual replacement will probably be uncrewed.

Yes; Type 26 replaces Type 23's high-end work and Type 31 provides necessary forward-presence capacity.

Probably the Boeing, because a mass-produced airframe provides a much stronger supply and support network.

Several programs were recommended in 2022, with King's the personal favorite, Portsmouth strong for naval history, and course fit more important than one universal ranking.

In the 2022 answer, King's College London led the war-studies options, Birmingham was also recommended, and Portsmouth was highlighted for naval history.

Use a widely operated Boeing or Airbus airframe and build it under license in Britain rather than basing the program on a bespoke British type.

No. Mature students often bring useful focus, and the important choice is a program whose teaching and support fit the student's learning needs.

Super Tomcat offered more capability, but Super Hornet was cheaper to operate and allowed the Navy to sustain larger air groups.

Its carriers cannot operate a conventional AEW aircraft, and helicopters provide sufficient defensive warning for the fleet's needs.

Probably not; basing American aircraft in Australia was more plausible, while purchase talk came mainly from think tanks rather than government policy.

Yes; Britain was already rearming, and an obvious carrier gap would likely win approval for replacement hulls.

No; the Dido-class cruisers were designed around their 5.25-inch gun battery.

It appears to be a smaller evolution of the Queen Elizabeth concept, and building more than one would matter most.

The 2022 answer recommends the University of Texas based on the quality of its naval-history lecturers.

Portsmouth is the first recommendation for maritime history, while Plymouth and King's may fit depending on the project and available supervision.

He would probably dislike Captain Jellico; Dylan Hunt would be an interesting Trafalgar choice because of the battle's high-risk character, though not Nelson's equal.

With air groups, enough to exhaust the modern force's missiles; modern sensors and F-35s otherwise make the old carriers noncompetitive.

It regarded Nimrod as a very good specialist aircraft, though that does not make Orion an inferior fleet solution.

Yes; the common airframe could support an airborne-warning derivative, possibly earlier than otherwise expected.