Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "The Drydock - Episode 215 (Part 1)" video.
-
@cycloneranger7927 that question was being asked when 16" guns were selected for the Colorados in 1916. iirc, the official answer from the USN was that the New Mexicos would not have been cost efficient to try to convert during construction. Tennessee and California were not laid down until after the decision on the Colorados had been made, in the summer of 16. From what I can find, the barbettes of the Tennessee's are the same diameter as those on the Colorados: 32 feet. The part of the twin 16" turret that extends down into the barbette on the Colorados is actually about 6" smaller in diameter than the triple 14". I'm going by memory here, but sticks in my mind that the turrets for the Tennessees had not been built yet, when the decision was made to go to 16" for the Colorados, they were still in design. So, yes, by everything I see, it would have been feasible to build Tennessee and California with 16" guns. Now, we get to the complications. BuOrd had ordered 14"/50 guns for the New Mexicos, Tennessees, and the battlecruisers, in one lot. The Navy had those 14" guns coming out it's ears. Shifting the Tennessees to 16", with so much money already sunk into building the 14"/50s would have had Congress in an uproar about the waste. Then we get to the Washington Naval Treaty. In a feat of diplomatic art, Hood was deemed "post-Jutland" even though it was designed before the battle. Tennessee and California, both laid down after Hood, and with a more advanced armor and torpedo protection system, were deemed "pre-Jutland", while the Colorados, a near-repeat of the Tennessees, but with 16" guns, were deemed "post-Jutland". I lay the difference between the "pre" and "post" ships to the Tennessees having 14" guns. If the Tennessees were built with 16", it would have been nearly impossible to insist they were "pre" ships. With Tennessee and California 16" armed and deemed "post-Jutland", the US would not have been allowed to complete Colorado or West Virginia. After the treaty went into effect, upgunning the ships was prohibited. As for getting more speed out of the standards, you are dealing with multiple problems with the turbo-electric ships, because, even having more steam, you would need to install uprated turbines, uprated generators, and uprated final drive motors. The interior arrangement of the ships was specialized for TE drive, making it impossible to shift to modern geared turbines, for anything resembling a reasonable cost. And the ships were still short and fat. Lengthening them to improve speed would add even more cost, and, as they were already over 30,000 tons, there may not have been enough room left before hitting the 35,000 ton treaty limit, to lengthen them enough to significantly improve speed. The Italian Andrea Doria class gained about 4,000 tons in their rebuild, but they started far below the 35,000 ton limit.
2
-
2
-
@davidharner5865 The Tennessees and Colorados were significantly different than the New Mexicos inside, due to the turbo-electric drive. The New Mexicos had the boiler rooms amidships, and the engine rooms all in line with the shafts. The TE powered ships had the boiler rooms along the perimeter of the hull, to also act as a secondary torpedo barrier, while the tubro-generator sets were along the centerline, inboard of the boiler rooms. Only the electric motors were in line with the shafts. Admiral Strauss at BuOrd made an interesting comment about the increased elevation of the Tennesse's guns. He had maintained, for some time, that all combat would be fought within 12,000 yards, so he said the Tennessees would never need the rage they could reach with 30 degree elevation, but, as it did not cost more to build the mounts with the greater elevation, he did not oppose it.
1
-
@davidharner5865 Strauss was head of BuOrd. During a previous stint at BuOrd, as a young officer, he invented the concept of the superimposed turrets, as used on the Kearsarge and Virginia classes. His devotion to the "more smaller guns means more hits" school became obsessive. In newspaper articles speculating on whether the Tennessees would have 14" or 16", there was FUD inserted in the article, but no source named, that the then new British 15"/42 suffered extremely high barrel wear, while the 14" showed excellent durability, with that point expanded to claim all guns larger than 14" would probably suffer excessive wear. After Jutland, Daniels and the General Board decided on 16", for it's ability to penetrate at longer ranges. In his annual report in late 1916, Daniels said the decision was made "over the objections of some officers". Strauss requested sea duty, about a year before his stint at BuOrd would have been expected to end. There was no movement on his request for a couple months. In a public Congressional hearing, Strauss, again, trotted out his 14" talking points, pushing back on the decision his superiors had made months before. President Wilson nominated Ralph Earle, then head of the Indian Head proving range, as head of BuOrd the next day, and Strauss got his sea duty, command of Nevada. This entire row over gun size was very public and widely reported in the newspapers at the time. Daniels wasn't all bad. He had no Navy experience, but he had the General Board to advise him, and he was capable of listening, sometimes. Strauss wasn't all bad either. After the gun size row, he was still widely respected, and was appointed to a seat on the General Board some years later.
1
-
1