When talking about battleships, it's often necessary to somehow name turrets. In the pre-dreadnought days it usually wasn't too hard, as there were only two main turrets, and you could call them "fore" and "aft". But dreadnoughts generally had between three and seven turrets, and different nations used different techniques to designate them.

USS Wyoming, showing turrets 1-6

The USN's system was the easiest to understand. The turrets were simply numbered fore to aft. While this system is simple and effective, it had one major drawback. It didn't deal with wing turrets well. This wasn't a problem for the USN, which never used wing turrets, but most dreadnought-owning navies did, and needed a different system. Read more...

In 1898, tensions between the US and Spain over the remains of Spain's Caribbean empire boiled over after the battleship Maine blew up in Havana Harbor. The US declared war and blockaded Cuba, while the Asiatic Fleet under George Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet in the Philippines at Manila Bay. The Spanish dispatched a fleet to break the blockade, but it ended up trapped in Santiago on Cuba's south coast in late May, while the Americans began making plans to land an army and take the city.

Troops landing at Daiquiri

The Fifth Army Corps had been assembled at Tampa for the invasion of Cuba, and the initial plan had been for it to sail on June 9th. In the days before its departure, several ships on patrol in the waters around Florida spotted what they believed to be heavy Spanish ships. Upon further investigation, these universally turned out to be either American or neutral vessels, but the net result was to delay the sailing of the transports until June 14th. The six-day voyage to Santiago was uneventful, and on June 22nd, the troops began to go ashore at Daiquirí, 12 miles east of Santiago. Fortunately, it was unopposed, or things might have devolved into chaos and failure, as is so common in amphibious operations. Admiral Sampson, commander of the American fleet, didn't have command over the troopships, and many of their captains refused to come close inshore. Worse, they had been loaded haphazardly, and nobody was quite sure where important supplies were. While the boats tasked with bringing troops ashore had a total capacity of 1,800 men, only 6,000 troops were landed between 10 am and 6 pm on the first day. Read more...

Gentlemen,

We are at a crucial juncture. Not in the war against Austria, which continues to go well with their recent defeats at Sirte and at the Second Battle of Sibenik. But in ship design. We have recently developed the technology to mount three turrets on the centerline of a ship, opening the way for us to reduce in importance the secondary batteries of our ships. Exactly what form these ships will take is still an open question, however.

An Editorial from Le Figaro:

Why do the Austrians continue their hopeless struggle? Repeatedly, we have smashed their fleet. At Second Sirte alone, we sank 10 ships. And yet, they have only offered peace deals that leave them in control of Norway. They cannot continue this forever. Our blockade will strangle them sooner, rather than later, and France will never be short of sailors to man our ships and send their fleet to the bottom. Soon, our current ships will be joined by new vessels that will be the envy of the world. Then Austria will have no choice but to capitulate, and we can face the real threat, that of Germany. Read more...

Now that I've finished with my tale of the development of the British and American battleships as actually built, I can turn my attention to some of the cul-de-sacs along the way, design concepts that were considered and then bypassed for one reason or another. Probably the most interesting and certainly the most famous of these is the Maximum Battleship.

Benjamin Tillman

The maximum battleship was the brainchild of Senator Benjamin Tillman, a powerful member of the Senate Committee on Naval Affairs.¹ In 1912, Tillman, exasperated with the continual growth of the ships the Navy was requesting, asked them to study the biggest battleship they could actually make use of, given the limitations of the existing docking facilities, most notably the Panama Canal, which was under construction and would open in two years. The first result was an enlarged version of Nevada: 38,000 tons, 12 14" guns, a 17" belt and 23 kts. The Bureau of Construction & Repair was horrified at the size of the resulting ship, which could only fit into two drydocks in the country, both on the West Coast. To bring size down, they cut speed to 20 kts, which saved 3,000 tons and enough length to fit the ship into drydocks on the East Coast. Read more...

Life Magazine, the famous news weekly that published from 1936 to 1972, is online. Google books has the entire archive, free of charge. I, of course, went looking for battleship-related content, and came across a real gem. In April 1942, Life published How to Build a Battleship, a look at the construction of the new battleships at Philadelphia Navy Yard.

Washington ready for launch at Philadelphia

I thought I would add commentary, things that Life either didn't know or couldn't say for security reasons.² Philadelphia built three battleships in this era, Washington, New Jersey and Wisconsin. Washington was in service when the article was written, while the other two were still on the ways. Read more...

Even after a battleship had been designed, built, launched and fitted out, it still wasn't quite ready to go into service. Anything as large and complex as a warship needs to be thoroughly wrung out before it can be considered ready to go to war.³

Iowa is inclined during her shakedown period

This was the job of sea trials, a joint effort between the builder and the navy to make sure that everything was actually working. These began with machinery trials, first simply running up the engines dockside to make sure they actually worked, and then taking the ship to sea under her own power the first time. After everyone was satisfied that the engines were working, and any deficiencies were corrected, performance trials would begin. There was always some doubt about how a new ship would perform, particularly if it was the first of the class. Several different trials would be run, most notably the 1-hour full-power trial, where the ship would run a measured mile, probably going faster than she ever would again.⁴ Another important trial was the 8-hour power trial, which was intended to prove that the engines could stand the strain of prolonged use at high power, if not quite so high as the 1-hour trial. Then there were economy trials, intended to give figures on fuel consumption and feedwater usage.⁵ Read more...

It's time for our regular open thread. Talk about whatever you want, as usual.

Something I recently found is the RTW2 wiki. This isn't well-indexed by Google, and it has a lot of good information, particularly for those participating in the RTW2 game who don't own a copy.

Overhauled posts since last time include Yalu River, DismalPseudoscience's review of Mikasa, German Battleships in WWII, The 15" Battleships, Museum Ships - United States, and my pictures from LA Fleet Week 2016.

While everyone has heard of Bismarck and Yamato, almost no one has heard of the battleships of Italy's navy, the Regia Marina. What makes this odd is that the Italian battlefleet might well have had a greater impact on the course of the war than the battleships of the other two Axis powers.

Conte di Cavour

Italy began the war with a mere six battleships, four of them leftovers from WWI. These ships, split between the Conte di Cavour and Andrea Doria classes, had been the beneficiaries of the most extensive reconstruction received by any battleship in the interwar era. Their speed had risen from 21 to 26 kts at the sacrifice of the triple turret previously carried amidships, while the remaining 10 guns were bored out from 12" to 12.6". The deck armor was increased and a Puligese torpedo defense system was installed. All told, only about 40% of the original structure remained unaltered after the reconstruction. Read more...

In 1941, the USN's aviation community was faced with a conundrum. Thousands of new pilots would need to learn the art of taking off from and landing on aircraft carriers, but the previous solution of using an operational carrier would remove a desperately-needed ship from frontline service. Even the new escort carriers, less-capable merchant conversions scheduled to begin entering service in 1942, would be in great demand to fight the Battle of the Atlantic. One enterprising officer came up with a plan to solve this, taking ships and shipbuilding resources otherwise largely useless to the war effort, and turning them into the first decks that thousands of naval aviators would fly from, including future President George H. W. Bush.

Sable

The plan was simple. Instead of training aviators on the ocean, they would be trained on the Great Lakes. These lakes had long supported a flourishing maritime industry, and while canals did connect them to the ocean, many ships had been built that were too big for the locks.⁶ A pair of these, the excursion steamers Seeandbee and Greater Buffalo, were to be purchased and quickly fitted with flight decks. The ships that emerged, Wolverine and Sable, were the world's only fresh-water paddle-wheel coal-burning aircraft carriers. Not the only ships with this combination of characteristics, but the only carriers to have any of those traits.⁷ Read more...

The Japanese decision not to sign the 1936 London Naval Treaty placed the British in a bind. The treaty had been the latest step in a 15-year effort to hold down the size and cost of battleships, which had been working reasonably well. The British had considered the 35,000 ton, 14" gun treaty battleship limits too loose, and now Japanese intransigence would force another step up in gun caliber and tonnage relative to the ships of the King George V class, which were about to be laid down.

Vanguard on trials⁸

As usual, design studies had begun even before the first escalator clause, raising the treaty cap from 14" to 16", was invoked when Japan failed to sign. In some ways, the British were well-positioned for the change, as the King George V had, rather unusually, been designed for protection against 16" gunfire while carrying 14" guns. However, the greater weight of 15" or 16" guns would have meant unacceptable cuts in speed, so it was fortunate that negotiations quickly began for invoking the second escalator clause, which would allow increases in the tonnage limit over the 35,000 tons allowed by the treaty. Read more...