Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!pacbell.com!pacbell!att!cbnews!military
From: paul@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Paul Bailes)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Battleship Nelson
Message-ID: <1990Aug9.015753.8169@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 9 Aug 90 01:57:53 GMT
References: <1990Jul25.004713.6986@cbnews.att.com> <1990Aug3.031249.20275@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 38
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: paul@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Paul Bailes)

mlfisher@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes:

>What about the KING GEORGE V class, (KGV, PRINCE OF WALES, VANGUARD and DUKE OF
>YORK)? 

Woops!
	KGV class: KGV; PoW; DoY (as you say)
			PLUS
		   Anson; Howe

	Vanguard was a one-off taking advantage of 15" guns and mountings
	salvaged when HMS Glorious and Courageous (WWI light battlecruisers,
	if you can believe such a classification!) were converted to carriers
	during the 20's

[mod.note: Courageous, Glorious, and their sister, Furious (which carried 
18" guns) were officially designated "large light cruisers." - Bill ]

	There was also to have been the LION class after the KGVs (Lion,
	Temeraire, Conqueror, Thunderer): 40,000 tons, 30kts, 9 x 16" guns,
	15" belt, 6" deck over main mags. 1st 2 laid down in 39 I think,
	but cancelled due to need for more escort ship construction.

	I think the Lions to be better value for money than the US Iowas:
	these battlecruisers (only 12" belts!) surely would have been at risk
	at close range - was the USN relying on their speed to keep far away?

>A small point about the RODNEY, she took part in sinking the BISMARCK, (with
>KGV), and was the first (only?) battleship to successfully torpedo another
>battleship.

So I believe too.

Paul Bailes