Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "" video.

  1. wrt the question about upgunning USN Standards, SecNav Daniels and the General Board agreed to go to 16" on the Colorados, in the summer of 1916, overruling the head of BuOrd, Strauss, who favored the 14". There was a flurry of chatter in newspapers, at that time, about upgunning the New Mexicos and Tennessees. A naval office weighed in on the feasibility of upgunning the New Mexicos, and he said the cost would be exorbitant. At that time, the Tennessees had not yet been laid down. The 1917 SecNav annual report states that the contracts for the turret equipment for the Tennessees and Colorados had been let that year, and the turrets for all of those ships were still in design, a year after the decision to go to 16" had been made. Seems that is should have been feasible to upgun the Tennessees, by making the decision in the summer of 16, before the first rivet had been driven, and before work had started on the physical turret equipment for those ships.
    1
  2. What could not have been foreseen, in 1916, was the Washington Treaty. The Treaty divided battleships into "pre-Jutland" and "post-Jutland" classes. Hood was deemed "post-Jutland", but Tennessee and California were deemed "pre-Jutland", even though they were laid down after Hood. The Colorados were deemed "post-Jutland". If the Tennessees had 16", instead of 14" guns, arguing they were "pre-Jutland" would be a big ask. More likely, 16" armed Tennessees would be deemed "post-Jutland", meaning there would be no argument for completing Colorado or West Virginia, unless the UK wanted to build four Nelsons, and the Japanese were allowed to complete Tosa.
    1