Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "The Drydock - Episode 174" video.

  1. wrt the question of US built battleships for the Ottoman Empire, Argentina was trying to sell the Rivadavias. If the Ottomans opted to buy the Rivadavias, instead of, or together with, the "Gin Palace", they still would have would up empty handed. By the time the Rivadavias were sorted out and ready for delivery, it was spring of 1915, and, as Drac said, they would be unable to get into the Med. The US government may have blocked delivery to the Ottomans in early 15 anyway. Bethlehem Steel won a contract from the Admiralty to build subs. When the Wilson administration got wind of the deal, the subs were impounded until the US joined the war on the UK's side. The alternative would be for the USN to sell a "mistake". The USN knew the Mississippis were a mistake, so sold them to Greece. The South Carolinas were also a mistake as their inadequate speed left them steaming with the pre-dreadnoughts, rather than the other dreadnoughts. The US might have been willing to part with them in the summer of 14, if the Ottomans waived enough money around, and had not already purchased the Rio.
    1
  2.  @voqiir3802  I assume you are referring to the Ottoman buying the Rivadavias. The Ottoman Empire joined the war October of 1914. Rivadavia was not complete until December, 1914, and Moreno was not complete until February of 15. Yes, the legality of Churchill seizing both of the Ottoman ships when they were on the brink of the Ottoman crews taking possession, was questionable. Buying the Rivadavias would have a couple issues. First, Armstrong would need to decline to guarantee the French loan, and Bethlehem Steel would need to be willing to guarantee a larger loan. Second, the US government would need to have a more casual attitude about the sale of military technology. Argentina had been exploring selling the ships before they were complete, and, with rising tensions in Europe, there were several interested parties. The US government put significant pressure on Argentina to not sell the ships. The other scenario, the Ottoman buying the South Carolinas from the USN, in response to Greece buying the Mississippis solves the delivery time frame issue as the Mississippis were sold in the summer of 14. That would require Armstrong declining to guarantee the French loan, to keep the Ottoman shopping. But who would guarantee the loan to pay for the US ships? The deal that comes to mind might be where the USN uses the proceeds from the sale of the two South Carolinas to pay for a forth New Mexico, with the new ship built by Bethlehem Steel, provided Bethlehem guarantees the loan for the sale of the old ships. The treaty after the war required Turkey to make the French loan good, but the President of Bethlehem Steel would have had some very nervous shareholders until then.
    1
  3.  @voqiir3802  OK, so the question is what could the Ottoman have bought in the US at that time? According to Wiki, the order for Resad V was placed June 8, 1911, at an estimated cost of 2.5M GBP, which was financed internally, built to a modified KGV design, which held cost down. It is still looking like the most likely purchase in the US would be a sister of the Rivadavias. Most US battleships were designed by the Navy, and the US government may not want to share it's latest designs. The Rivadavias were designed by Bethlehem Steel, during a competition for the Wyoming class, but rejected by the Navy in favor of it's own design. As it's own design, Bethlehem could have had more freedom who they sold ships to. The Rivadavias were priced at $10.7M USD each, while the price of Resad V, converted to USD at the time would be $12.15M, so the Ottoman are saving a bit of money. Bethlehem's Fore River yard launched Rivadavia August 26th, 1911, so the slipway was clear less than three months after receiving the order. My bet is Bethlehem Steel would lay the keel for the Ottoman ship at Fore River sometime in the fall of 1911. Resad V was laid down at Vickers December 6th, 1911. So far, the schedule is the same, and the US ship costs less. But the Brits were very good at building battleships. Vickers had Resad V built and ready for handover in 2 years, 8 months. It took Fore River 4 years, 7 months, to complete Rivadavia. With the keel laid in fall 1911, the Ottoman ship would not be completed until spring 1916, and would promptly be impounded by the US government. The only way the Ottoman would have a chance of taking delivery of the ship is if the William Cramp yard built it. Cramp got Wyoming from keel laying to commissioning in 2 years 8 months so would just make it under the wire before the Ottoman Empire entered the war. Cramp had launched Wyoming May 25, 1911, so the slipway was clear when the Ottoman ordered their ship. It would just be a matter of waiting for the material to be delivered from the steel mills. Bethlehem would probably want the ship built in it's own yard however. It would be an interesting test of wills, the Ottoman wanting an earlier delivery, and Bethlehem wanting to maximize profit by building the ship in it's own yard.
    1
  4.  @voqiir3802  first, a correction to my above comments, Bethlehem Steel did not buy the Fore River yard until 1913, so any prospective transaction in 1911 would have been between the Ottoman and the Fore River yard, which created the design for the Rivadavia class. What you suggest is possible. Did the UK immediately offer compensation for the ships it seized? The way the Germans "sold" Goeben and Breslau to the Ottoman two weeks after the seizures in the UK would probably make the Brits think Germany and the Ottoman were already defacto allies. Another thought comes to mind: it would have been as unknowable in 1911 as the four-plus year build time, but the Curtis turbines that powered the Rivadavias were not very good. Delivery of both ships to Argentina was delayed due to the turbines being defective. Just before the Rivadavias were built, USS North Dakota was built for the USN, also with Curtis turbines. The Curtis turbines in North Dakota proved so troublesome that they were replaced in 1917, at a cost of some $700,000, the equivalent of $19.5M today. If the Ottoman tried for a new built ship with 14" guns, instead of 12", they would make another discovery: the early US 14" guns tended to droop, as the British discovered with the ones they bought. I'm thinking the best the Ottoman could have done in the US was to buy the two South Carolinas from the USN, with their more reliable triple-expansion engines and well tested 12"/45 guns.
    1