Comments by "" (@RedXlV) on "The Drydock - Episode 109" video.

With regard to the use of the term "frigate" in the modern era, there was also that brief period post-WW2 where the US Navy used frigate (with DL or DLG hull numbers) to mean a ship intermediate between a destroyer and a cruiser. Then there was a freak-out in Congress over the Soviets supposedly having more cruisers than the US, so the Navy "solved" that "problem" in 1975 by redesignating most of the frigates as cruisers. At the same time, destroyer escorts became frigates, which brought them in line with how the rest of NATO classified such ships. Incidentally, some of the Soviet "raketny kreyser" (missile cruisers) were actually smaller than American DLGs. It was literally just that they were called cruisers that resulted in the "cruiser gap" nonsense.
40
@TheKingofbrooklin Had the Germans continued building of Salamis for their own use, there were three potential options. Use the 35cm SK L/45 intended for the Mackensen-class battlecruisers. Buy the similar Škoda 35cm K14 guns intended for the Ersatz Monarch-class battleships from their Austro-Hungarian allies. Or much less likely, go against typical German practice and try to create a 28cm or 30.5cm triple turret that would fit into the barbettes intended for American 14"/45s. But in all cases, the work required to adapt a turret would've been more trouble than it was worth, because Salamis simply wouldn't have been that great a battleship. Her armor was quite thin, especially by German standards, but at only 23 knots she wouldn't have anywhere near the speed needed to operate as a battlecruiser. Had the American turrets and guns been delivered before the outbreak of war, no doubt the High Seas Fleet would've made use of her anyway, because a mediocre dreadnought is better than no dreadnought at all. But Germany had much better ships also under construction, like the above-mentioned Mackensen-class battlecruisers (which would've had the same armament as a completed Salamis adapted to German guns, yet would be 5 knots faster and have 50mm thicker belt armor). Had some extra effort been put into naval construction during WW1, they'd have been much better off trying to get SMS Graf Spee (the closest to completion of the Mackensens) into service.
4
The one that annoys me the most with regard to US Navy class names is Colorado-class. Maryland was both laid down and completed a full 2 years ahead of Colorado, and was also launched almost exactly 1 year ahead of Colorado. By every normal standard, they should be the Maryland-class battleships. But Colorado was arbitrarily given a lower hull number (BB-45 rather than BB-46), so it's called the Colorado-class.
2