Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: What could have been - Australian between wars ship building
Volkodav    2/1/2009 5:25:06 AM
Australia built its own destroyers and cruisers before and during WWI with the light cruiser HMAS Adelaide, commisioned in 1922, being the last Australian built warship to enter service before WWII. Our destroyers were surplus WWI RN ships and our new Heavy Cruisers were ordered from the UK with the only new construction in Australia consiting of a seaplane carrier and a couple of sloops. Three modern light cruisers and several more WWI vintage destroyers were bought during the mid/late 30's to bolster our defences but things could have been very different. During 1923 atoo Island quoted on the construction of a pair of 10,000 ton "treaty cruisers" based on the Effingham hull, its self evolved from the Town Class we had already built, but with three triple 8" turrets inplace of the originals single 7.2" guns. This design was knocked back on cost and the Counties were ordered from the UK instead. I am not suggesting that the atoo Cruiser would be superior to the Counties, infact it would likely have been inferrior but that building these ships in Australia would have better prepared Austrlaias industry for what was needed in the future. Had these ships been built they likely would have taken longer to deliver than the UK built Counties which would have stretched the program enough to make ordering a second batch to begin replacing the early Town's in the early to mid 30's. End result Australia would have entered WWII with an enhanced local production capability that would have allowed us to build the modern warships we needed when we needed them instead of having to rebuild our shipbuilding industry during a global war. We could have gone to war with six heavy cruisers and been able to build upwards of twenty destroyers instead of the three we managed to complete.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3
HERALD1357    And your Danae flight III class    2/14/2009 5:03:04 PM
http://i555.photobucket.com/albums/jj445/battlecrab_2009/DANAECLASSFLIGHTIII.jpg" />
And as promised, the 1935 what might have been,   
 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       2/15/2009 5:31:32 AM
Nice, did you do the elevations?
 
What did you use?
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Virtual shipbuilder.    2/15/2009 9:53:02 AM
The elevations are 9 feet at the breaks. Calculate accordingly.

The Omaha rolls like an drunken Newark barhop going down a flight of stairs: but the Danae has about a 14 second natural roll that makes her an excellent boat to mount flak guns on.
 
Took out the deck armor  and gave her protection over engines and magazines low to offset superstructure. Yopu have splinter protection otherwise and a hypothetical 4.7 DP semi-automatic based on the US pattern 5/38 of semi-auto assisted ram-feed.
 
Australia in effect develops her own destroyer gun from this:
 
 
Oh, I found the Molins gun. That would make a good secondary intermediate DP mount for the pedestal guns when the 4.7s fail in that role.
 
 
I think its too heavy and cumbersome for a tank; if you install it with its feed tray and ram assist. 
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Converted oil tanker   2/16/2009 6:51:02 AM
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Converted oil tanker   2/16/2009 6:52:31 AM
http://i555.photobucket.com/albums/jj445/battlecrab_2009/Convertedoiltankerintocarrier.jpg" width="797" height="500" />
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       2/22/2009 6:09:03 AM
Finally had the chance to dig out some old books on cruisers etc. 
 
Based on the reading the ideal direct follow on from Adelaide would have been the 32kt, 8000Nm @ 12kt range E class light cruiser.  At the end of the day a locally built County would have been the best option.  These ships were good for better than 30kt, had a range of 12000Nm, and their 8"guns had a real world rate of fire of 3 to 4 rpm per barrel.  The Counties were ideal for Australia's needs, we just needed more of them. 
 
Imagine the every action fought by RAN cruisers being fought by Counties instead of Leanders.
 
Into the 30's the 3 to 6 Counties could have been followed by either Southamptons or even better Edinburghs with the E class being converted to fast AA cruisers with twin 4" replacing the 6" battery.
 
The final part of the picture would be a 6x twin 4.5" DP armed CLAA based on the Amphion hull as the Dido was based on the Arethusa, 4x twin 4.5" DL and 4x twin 4" DD.  The full size cruisers would be built until the start of the war and then the CLAA. DL and DD would take over in a war emergency program.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       2/22/2009 6:09:07 AM
Finally had the chance to dig out some old books on cruisers etc. 
 
Based on the reading the ideal direct follow on from Adelaide would have been the 32kt, 8000Nm @ 12kt range E class light cruiser.  At the end of the day a locally built County would have been the best option.  These ships were good for better than 30kt, had a range of 12000Nm, and their 8"guns had a real world rate of fire of 3 to 4 rpm per barrel.  The Counties were ideal for Australia's needs, we just needed more of them. 
 
Imagine the every action fought by RAN cruisers being fought by Counties instead of Leanders.
 
Into the 30's the 3 to 6 Counties could have been followed by either Southamptons or even better Edinburghs with the E class being converted to fast AA cruisers with twin 4" replacing the 6" battery.
 
The final part of the picture would be a 6x twin 4.5" DP armed CLAA based on the Amphion hull as the Dido was based on the Arethusa, 4x twin 4.5" DL and 4x twin 4" DD.  The full size cruisers would be built until the start of the war and then the CLAA. DL and DD would take over in a war emergency program.
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357       2/22/2009 10:49:54 AM

Finally had the chance to dig out some old books on cruisers etc. 

 

Based on the reading the ideal direct follow on from Adelaide would have been the 32kt, 8000Nm @ 12kt range E class light cruiser.  At the end of the day a locally built County would have been the best option.  These ships were good for better than 30kt, had a range of 12000Nm, and their 8"guns had a real world rate of fire of 3 to 4 rpm per barrel.  The Counties were ideal for Australia's needs, we just needed more of them. 

This would have been an evolution of the Danae. I'm not crazy about the Emerald Class internals, the Danaes are much easier to convert to barbette and hoist layout because of their machinery arrangements. Its also a question of economics. Countioes were expensive in manning and sustainment costs. Sometimes simple and small is good enough.  

Imagine the every action fought by RAN cruisers being fought by Counties instead of Leanders.

The Battle of the Plate would have been different. Got to remember that British cruiser limitations under treaty applied to Australia as long as Britain supplies the cruisers. I noted earlier that AFAIK the 6/45 was the design limit available to the RAN at the time.

Into the 30's the 3 to 6 Counties could have been followed by either Southamptons or even better Edinburghs with the E class being converted to fast AA cruisers with twin 4" replacing the 6" battery.
 
The amidships single mount 6'/45 positions were too cramped to take a twin 4' replacement. The centerline 6'/45 which is ahead of the seaplane catapult is useless so would be a wasted suppression and replacement.
 
 
The final part of the picture would be a 6x twin 4.5" DP armed CLAA based on the Amphion hull as the Dido was based on the Arethusa, 4x twin 4.5" DL and 4x twin 4" DD.  The full size cruisers would be built until the start of the war and then the CLAA. DL and DD would take over in a war emergency program.
 
The costs for that program are immense. The US only built TEN 8'/45 gun cruisers.  we only built twenty cruisers total between 1929-1939.  I would argue that the US would have been smarter to build more Atlanta's and fewer Pensacolas and used the saved money for operations and technology (torpedo) improvements.
 
Manning ships, even for a large nation is a significant economic impact in peacetime.

Herald
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       2/23/2009 5:10:17 AM
The thing is Australia did buy 2 County CA's, 2 Oberon SS's, 3 Modified Leander CL's, as well as building a seaplane carrier and 4 Grimsby Class Sloops between the wars.  Prior to WWI the RAN consisted of a Battlecruiser, a couple of cruisers and several destroyers.  Immediately following WWI the RAN consisted of 1 Indefatigable class Battlecruiser, 3 Town class CL, 1 Scott class DL, 4 S&T class DD and 6 J class SS.  Money was there to be spent but was it spent wisely?
 
Building the Counties in Australia was apparently considered but decided against because the extra cost of doing so would have precluded the construction of the seaplane carrier HMAS Albatross.  Considering the limited use the RAN got out of Albatross the money would have been better spent on local construction of the Counties and developing or naval construction industry.  Further money could have been saved though not buying submarines, they were expensive and difficult to maintain being returned to the UK in 1931 after only 4 years service, mostly in reserve.
 
By concentrating on locally built Counties, skipping the ultimately useless submarines and seaplane carrier as well as the 3 Amphions, Australia should have been easily able to afford to build and crew 4 or more Counties during the 30's. 
 
While 4 heavy cruisers would have been more useful than the force we did have in 39 the biggest benefit is the infrastructure we would have built up over two decades of naval construction.  It would not only have increased our ability to defend our selves in WWII but would have set us up for the post war period.
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357       2/23/2009 8:54:17 AM

The thing is Australia did buy 2 County CA's, 2 Oberon SS's, 3 Modified Leander CL's, as well as building a seaplane carrier and 4 Grimsby Class Sloops between the wars.  Prior to WWI the RAN consisted of a Battlecruiser, a couple of cruisers and several destroyers.  Immediately following WWI the RAN consisted of 1 Indefatigable class Battlecruiser, 3 Town class CL, 1 Scott class DL, 4 S&T class DD and 6 J class SS.  Money was there to be spent but was it spent wisely?

Manning for the Counties=     1550 or thereabouts.
Manning for the Leanders=     2070 or thereabouts.
Manning for the Oberons=        110 or thereabouts.
Manning for the Albatross        450 or thereabouts
Manning for the sloops              550 or thereabouts.
                                                       4730 or thereabouts.
as per the 1930 program.
 
Manning for the Indefatigable=    850 or thereabouts.
Manning for the Chathams=        1350 or thereabouts.
Manning for the DL=                      170 or thereabouts  
Manning for the destroyers=        400 or so. 
manning for the submarines=       300  or so.
                                                          3070 total 
 
Now I look at that manning and then I look at the shore establishment needed to sustain and I come up with about 7500 men RAN for that time period.  I think we can comfortably set the upper manning limit as 10,000 men altogether for the RAN.
 
For the 7500 man limit, the logic of four large cruisers as a squadron becomes quite compelling as a unit within the Royal Navy; but that leaves you with the problem of what happens oif the RN isn't there to protect your regional interests? .Which brings us back to what should Australia build based on her budgets/  
 
Building the Counties in Australia was apparently considered but decided against because the extra cost of doing so would have precluded the construction of the seaplane carrier HMAS Albatross.  Considering the limited use the RAN got out of Albatross the money would have been better spent on local construction of the Counties and developing or naval construction industry.  Further money could have been saved though not buying submarines, they were expensive and difficult to maintain being returned to the UK in 1931 after only 4 years service, mostly in reserve.
 
The Weird Sisters now look to be out of the picture.  Building four Counties would just about use up all the historically budgeted resources that the RAN had.

By concentrating on locally built Counties, skipping the ultimately useless submarines and seaplane carrier as well as the 3 Amphions, Australia should have been easily able to afford to build and crew 4 or more Counties during the 30's. 

 The question is what do you use for escort and patrol at that point? You need something a bit more than four ships to cover the minimum RAN period  mission-or do you hope the RN fills the void?..

While 4 heavy cruisers would have been more useful than the force we did have in 39 the biggest benefit is the infrastructure we would have built up over two decades of naval construction.  It would not only have increased our ability to defend our selves in WWII but would have set us up for the post war period.
 
Stick with the original British proposal of a composite Far East squadron.   Use the three converted Fisher F
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics