Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "1047 Battlecruisers - Guide 185 (NB)" video.
-
3
-
Yes, BK and Gues, they were intended as cruiser killers, just like the WWI Brit battle cruisers. They are bigger and more expensive than a CA, but, at some point, they are probably going to find themselves in a situation where they are up against real battleships, running is not an option, and they are going to get pounded, just like a CA, in spite of their extra cost to build and run. Scharnhorst did OK, until it ran into the Duke of York. Imagine what would have happened to the Lexingtons if they had been built as Battle Cruisers, and got stuck into the Solomons campaign.
2
-
1
-
@johnshepherd8687 Yes, the USN had plenty of BBs by the time the Alaskas entered service. In fact, if the IJN had sent out a cruiser swarm, like the Alaskas were supposed to intercept, the cruiser swarm would probably run into BBs instead. I think the Brits, USN and Italians were 100% correct in building nothing but treatymax BBs in the 30s. I suspect it was only a small group in the USN that saw the shiny things the French, Germans and Dutch had/planned, and decided that the USN "had to have it too", and, when the war engulfed every part of the world except the Americas, they were able to get funding for their pet project. Sanity was restored with the end of the war, and the Alaskas were shoved straight into mothballs, and stayed there until they went to the breakers, while the Iowas were reactivated for Korea, and stayed in service well into the 50s, then mothballed again, and reactivated again in the 80s.
1