Re: Big guns on small ships

At 1:59 AM +0000 12/17/97, Rob Paul wrote:
>"Light battlecruisers" is a perfectly reasonable description of these
>vessels, but "large light cruisers" is how the RN designated them-
their
>armour was apallingly thin and scanty, even compared with early
>battlecruisers.  C and G saw action in WW1 as supports for cruiser
forces
>(and were sunk as CVs early in WW2).  The Baltic raid/invasion idea
>persisted into WW2, interesingly enough (Operation Catherine (or
>Caroline, I
>forget) using lightened R-class BBs amongst others.

In volume one of his history (Gathering Storm), Churchill reprints the
Admiralty memo on Operation Catherine. Given the Luftwaffe's spotty
record in anti-shipping operations, the Baltic operation would have
been a reasonable risk. The R-class battleships weren't just going to
be 'lightened' for the operation, the conversion plan was more
ambitious. The ships were to be stripped to two main turrets, and the
extra mass used for deck armor to ward off aerial bombs. Anti-torpedo
bulges were also to be added, which would have substantially increased
the ships bouyancy and reduced their draft to a reasonable depth for
Baltic operations. The lack of yard space for the conversion was
largely responsible for preventing the conversion.

Michael Carter Llaneza	  http://www.hypnotic.com/
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1991-1950
Devolution is very real to me.

Whenever I hear the "Odd Couple" theme, I get this image of Dennis
Rodman borrowing Marge Schott's toothbrush.