Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "The Drydock - Episode 143" video.

Russian treatment of loaned ships brings to mind the old phrase "beat it like a rented mule".
39
@ivanmonahhov2314 from the activity information I have read on Royal Sovereign, it went into the Philadelphia Navy Yard for refit in late 42. It was there through most of 43. The 15" ammo hoists were worn out, but the USN wouldn't touch them. So it went back to the UK without the hoists repaired. The RN looked at it as a candidate to provide fire support for the Normandy landing, but rejected her, because the ammo hoists were worn out. So they fobbed her off on the Russians. Seems that, by the end of 43 the only R-class that was still serviceable was Ramillies. Malaya was worn out too, and also retired at the end of 43.
4
@toddwebb7521 or even replace a twin turret with a triple. Sure, it's possible. It's not as easy as simply lying about the displacement. The ship would probably be in the yard for months to make all the mods, so it wouldn't surprise anyone.
3
@gregorywright4918 I agree that Repulse got the nod because it could keep up with PoW. Sending two QEs, not PoW or Repulse, solves the speed differential issue. Some accounts say that it was considered to add Hermes to the force as Hermes was in South Africa at the same time that PoW rounded the cape, so she could have joined the force, but Hermes could not keep up. Hermes could keep up with QEs though. The issue hangs on Churchill's insistence, apparently over pushback from the Admiralty, that a new battleship be sent. The RN didn't seem to be put off by the QE's speed, or lack thereof, as they had all of them in the Med, facing off against the 27kt Italian rebuilds and the 30kt Littorios. Some material I have seen says that, once in Singapore and looking over the situation, Phillips requested the Rs be sent to Singapore. But, by the time Resolution and Ramillies had made it to Ceylon, it was March, Force z had been sunk and Singapore had fallen to the Japanese.
3
AA armament and Force Z. I have read that Churchill wanted to send a new battleship to Singapore to impress the natives, hence Prince of Wales. Repulse was already in the Indian Ocean, which apparently nominated her as consort, but Repulse's AA armament seems woefully inadequate: apparently 3 Vickers and half a dozen QF 4". Did that concern Admiral Phillips? QE and Valiant had much more potent defensive armament and would seem to be a better choice. Their positions in Alexandria could be filled by using Operation Chieftain to facilitate transfer of Malaya to Alexandria and Revenge could be ordered to Alexandria after it delivered a convoy to Aden on the 20th, while Malaya's position with Force H could be filled by Prince of Wales, which passed near Gibraltar on October 29th. on it's way to the Cape.
1
Regarding the question on shell caliber, was there consideration of main armament throw weight at the Washington Conference? If main armament was limited to 8-16" or 9-15" or 12-14" the total weight of shells fired by the 16", 15" and 14" batteries would be quite close, while giving designers choices whether to plan for the greatest penetration, or sending a greater number of shells downrange, thus increasing the probability of a hit. Verification would also be simpler. It's easier to count the number of guns, and measure the bore, than to estimate displacement. If the treaty set limits for the US and UK for 15 battleships, and limiting the main armament as described, there would not be any incentive to build wildly huge ships, because tonnage beyond that really needed to support the treaty limited battery would be a waste of material and money. If a spendthrift country decided to build 42,000 ton ships, they would not have more firepower than a 32,000 ton ship.
1
@toddwebb7521 sure. Or build with 12-14" guns, but have the turrets designed so the 14" can be changed out for 16". iirc, Drac did a piece about the Japanese cruisers that were designed to be upgunned from 6" to 8", and the Scharnhorsts were designed to be upgunned from 11" to 15". It's still easier to simply lie about the displacement.
1
@gregorywright4918 yes, there is a decided risk to trying to do a hardware cheat, instead of simply lying. Drac's piece on the County class cruisers pretty much implies the ships were planned from the start to be up armored, probably beyond the treaty's 10,000 tons, as soon as the treaty fell apart, or they figured no-one was looking. Ever notice how the belt armor is installed on a KGV? Looks like a slab simply bolted on the side of the hull. Would have been exceptionally dangerous for the Admiralty to design the KGVs at 35,000 tons, without that belt armor, planning to up armor it the same way the Counties were up armored when no-one was looking, or didn't care anymore. A too sudden start of the war would have had the KGVs making the Renowns look robust and survivable. Of course, as things worked out, with the US and UK agreeing on a displacement increase in June of 38, the belt armor could be installed while the ships were still building, and no-one would care if they ended up being 38,000 or 40,000 tons, but the risk that things would not work out that way, when the KGVs were being designed, was astronomical. That's why I like my armament limitation scheme better than a displacement limitation scheme. It's harder/riskier to cheat.
1