Military Review

Combat ships. Cruisers. "Yamato", come out ... We will beat!

105
Combat ships. Cruisers. "Yamato", come out ... We will beat!

Today we'll talk about record holders from American shipyards. In fact, it was a feat of labor: to rivet in the literal sense of the word such a crowd of light cruisers that could actually perforate any battleship to death, be it Yamato at least three times.


27 ships built out of 52 planned are powerful. Seven ships were completed as light aircraft carriers.

They were just unique ships. The Clevelands had such a huge number of shortcomings that everyone was sick of them: sailors, officers and even admirals. The cruiser project was created in a hurry, stupidly, without understanding why such a ship is needed at all, but ...

But the Clevelands fought the entire Second World War, but how! Not a single cruiser was lost, and we will talk about the earned "stars" at the end.


And in the beginning, as always, we will have a small historical an excursion in which we ... that's right, let's remember with bad words the Washington Treaty, which quantitatively limited the construction of battleships, aircraft carriers and cruisers.

But not all of them. As you know, cruisers with a displacement of up to 10 tons were not covered by this agreement, which made it very easy for shipbuilders to make a profit. The cruisers were quickly divided into light and heavy, and since the treaty did not apply to light actions, they could be stamped without restrictions at all.

Of course, not every country can do such a thing, but the United States did it. And a new round of the arms race began, called "the construction of contract cruisers."

Truly, man is a strange creature. Agree on restrictions so as not to go down the drain in the arms race, and immediately start building at a triple pace what was not included in the treaties.

In 1938, the United States began work on the compromise cruiser project. The compromise was, of course, between armor and weapons. The Americans wanted something like this: a cruiser with a displacement of 8 tons, armed with 000 or 8 9-mm guns. It was planned to build about twenty such ships.

The appetite came with eating and defeated the project with 10 guns in five twin turrets. A sort of American "Mogami", yes. Anti-aircraft armament was planned from 20 28-mm machine guns. Plus, the cruiser was supposed to have a catapult, one or two aircraft, and at least two three-tube vehicles. And armor.

But the armor didn't fit. Absolutely. And then the war began. As always, unexpected. And the ship's development program was found unsatisfactory. But while the United States was quietly hanging out in neutral status, it was possible to try to change something. Therefore, they did not develop a new ship, but took the Brooklyn-class cruiser project, specifically the Helena cruiser, as a basis.


"Brooklyn" was not without its flaws, but what the American shipbuilders bungled, in general, does not fit well into the head. In 1940, the first two ships were laid down, improvements were made in the course of the play, when the ships were already on the stocks.

The most interesting thing is that no one drove the Americans anywhere. They simply could not foresee Pearl Harbor, but apparently they guessed that Japan could arrange a surprise. Well, there is no more justification for such a race and so many ships.

Which one?

But this: a total of 52 ships were ordered. So even the destroyers were not built up to this point. But a little later, the US Department of Defense slowed down a bit.


A total of 27 Cleveland-class cruisers were built.
Another 9 ships were completed as aircraft carriers of the "Independence" class
The cruiser Galveston was completed after the war and 5 more of the 27 built were converted into missile cruisers.
Two ships were completed as the Fargo class.
And the construction of 14 ships was canceled.

But it's still a record. Nobody has ever built so many. Yes, the thought creeps in about the fact that the quantity compensated for the quality, but with so many cruisers it was possible to do a lot of work. And so, in fact, it happened.

Structurally, for some reason, it was believed that the Clevelands had stability problems. There is no evidence, just a common opinion of some "experts". In fact, when the ammunition and gasoline exploded on the Princeton aircraft carrier (made from a cruiser), the Birmingham, which was trying to extinguish the fire and was standing nearby, was severely damaged, 229 crew members were killed, 400 were injured of various degrees, a shock wave was comparable to the waves from nuclear explosions a little later. But Birmingham did not capsize.


Cruiser Santa Fe during Hurricane Cobra

Unlike the Helena, the Clevelands had a triple bottom instead of a double bottom for mine protection. Added anti-aircraft weapons, without which, as it turned out, you can live, but not for long. The booking and stability were improved, for which the side was obstructed.


In general, as the ships were built, the type design underwent changes, most of which were designed to lower a rather high center of gravity and improve stability. The anti-aircraft armament dropped lower and lower, the rangefinders on the towers were removed, the catapults were removed. Now two towers had one rangefinder on towers # 2 and # 3, which gave the distances for a group of towers on the bow or stern. A controversial maneuver, to be honest.

In the second series of 9 ships, the bulkhead system in the hold was revised, which increased survivability. In addition, various ports and openings in the sides were eliminated. It was necessary to introduce forced ventilation and artificial lighting of living quarters, but this gave additional advantages to survivability.


In general, all this had a positive effect on the ability of the Clevelands to survive in battle. For of the 27 ships not one was lost during the war. Even the Houston, which received two torpedoes and received what is said to be 6 tons of water. It is unlikely that that many, but two torpedoes are serious anyway.

Reservation


The Clevelands' defense was based on an armored belt 127 mm thick and 121 meters long. The belt covered the engine room and the artillery cellar.
The rest of the hull had a modest 38 mm booking.
Armored deck. Thickness 50 mm.
Conning tower. 165 mm at the front, 127 mm at the sides and 76 mm roof.
Towers. Forehead - 165 mm, on the sides and top 76 mm.
The nasal ammunition magazines were additionally covered with 52-mm armor. The aft cellars had additional protection from internal bulkheads with a thickness of 76 to 127 mm.

In general, the Clevelands' reservations resembled the Brooklyn reservation system.


Power plant


Four twin General Electric turbines with a total capacity of 100 HP powered by four Babcock & Wilcox boilers. The maximum speed was 000 knots. At a cruising speed of 32,5 knots, the cruising range was about 15 miles.

The innovation was that the boilers were not located in one or two boiler rooms, but were separated by turbine compartments. This significantly reduced the possibility, in the event of a torpedo or large-caliber projectile hit, to deprive the ship of its course.

In addition, the Clevelands were equipped with 2 x 250 kW diesel generators and two emergency 60 kW independent diesel generators.

weaponry


The main caliber is 12 152 mm guns. They were located in four three-gun towers in pairs, linearly elevated on the bow and stern.


The maximum elevation angle of the guns was 60 degrees. In a three-gun turret, loading was only possible at angles up to 20 degrees. So aiming at high elevation angles significantly reduced the rate of fire of the guns. The fact that the guns were semi-automatic somewhat offset this disadvantage and ensured a rate of fire of 8-10 rounds per minute.

The maximum firing range was 24 km.

The auxiliary caliber consisted of twelve 127 mm universal guns, located in the center of the ship in two-gun turrets. The location of the turrets was very well chosen and the guns could conduct dense anti-aircraft fire in all directions.

Anti-aircraft weapons


Initially, short-range anti-aircraft weapons were supposed to be from Browning's large-caliber 12,7-mm machine guns. But the complete uselessness of such weapons quickly became visible and they began to revise it urgently.

There was an option to install a "Chicago piano", 28-mm four-barreled submachine guns. They could be installed without fear of deteriorating stability, but the reliability and combat qualities of the machines left much to be desired.

Instead of 28-mm assault rifles, it was decided to install quad Bofors with a 40-mm caliber. Alas. The 28-mm unit weighed 6 tons, and the quad Bofors - 11 tons. Nobody wanted to reduce the luxurious battery of 127-mm guns. Therefore, instead of quad 40-mm anti-aircraft guns, they decided to install paired ones.


The cruisers of the first series (except for "Cleveland") had two quadruple and two twin 40s machine guns. The Cleveland had only twin superstructure units. During the modernization of 1942, each cruiser received two more paired assault rifles at the stern, behind the catapult. In May 1944, the cruisers received two more quad mounts and two "twin".

As a result, the final armament of the Clevelands consisted of 4 quad and 6 twin 40-mm installations.

Additionally, the cruisers were armed with 20-mm Oerlikon assault rifles. They were installed wherever possible, and on average the ships carried 30 barrels in single and twin installations. Since these installations were not very effective, they began to be sacrificed when installing 40-mm Bofors.

The ships had Mark 34 fire control systems with Mark 8 radar and Mark 37 with Mark 4 radar. In general, radar equipment on ships was installed completely haphazardly, based on what was available. The following radar modifications could be installed on the Clevelands:

- SK / SK-2 - was able to detect an approaching bomber at an altitude of 3000 m at a distance of 185 km;
- SC-2 and SG - complemented the SK type radar. They also provided detection of ships and ground targets within a radius of 27-40 km;
- SP and SR-3 appeared after the war and were able to detect targets at a distance of up to 180 km.

Radars made anti-aircraft fire possible both at night and beyond the line of sight. Small-caliber battery fire was corrected using a Mark-13 radar and a Mark-34 fire control system.

The 127-mm guns were directed with SK radar and corrected with the Mark-37 system.

Aircraft Armament



In the aft part of the ship there were two catapults, from which it was possible to launch aircraft. There was also a crane for lifting aircraft from the water. The hangar below deck housed 4 to 8 seaplanes, usually the Vaught OS2U Kingfisher. "The plane is about nothing."


After the war, they parted with the planes, on those cruisers that did not go for scrapping, the catapult was removed, and in its place a wooden deck for helicopters was usually installed. During the Korean War, the cruisers participating in it carried a Sikorsky N-5 helicopter on board.


And the aircraft hangar was used to store boats and all kinds of useful junk.

The crew of the Cleveland-class cruiser numbered from 1214 to 1475 people. Habitat conditions were considered to be well below average.

Combat application


Combat use of "Clevelands" - all theaters of military operations of the Second World War. Since there were really a lot of cruisers built, we will restrict ourselves to a brief description of the actions of the ships.


Cleveland... 13 battle stars.

Operation "Torch" as part of the Western Task Force. Then service in the Pacific: campaigns on Guadalcanal, battle at Rennel Island. On March 6, 1943, together with the cruisers Montpellier and Denver, he sank the Japanese destroyers Minegumo and Murasame. Then operations in the Solomon Islands, Maotan Islands, the Philippine Sea. Landing operations in Palawan, Brunei, Minandao, Okinawa.

"Colombia"... 10 battle stars.

The battles at Guadalcanal, Rennel, the landing in New Georgia, Bougainville, together with other cruisers sank the light cruiser Sendai. Solomon Islands, landing at Palau, Philippines. Got hit by a kamikaze, was seriously damaged. After repairs, he took part in the landing at Balikapan and in the battles in Okinawa.


"Montepellier"... 13 battle stars.

Battle of Rennel Island, Solomon Islands, Bismarck Archipelago. The battle in the Gulf of Empress Augusta, then the Maian Islands. Philippine sea. Fights in Saipan, Tinian, Guam. Landings at Mindoro, Lingaen, Palawan, Mindandao, Balikpapan.

Denver... 11 battle stars.

Operation on Colombangra, together with "Cleveland" sank two Japanese destroyers. Landing in New Georgia, shelling of Shortland, battle in Empress Augusta Bay, landing at Bougainville. During the last operation, he received a torpedo and went for repairs. Further operations on Iwo Jima and Palau. Invasion of the Philippines. Participated in the sinking of the destroyer Asagumo. Landings at Mindoro, Lingaen and Palawan. In June 1945, the cruiser took part in operations at Brunei and Balikpapan.

"Santa Fe"... 13 battle stars.

Operations in the Aleutian Islands. The shelling of Tarawa and Wake. Landing on the Gilbert Islands. Raid on Kwajallein. Hit Truk. Operations in Saipan, Tinian, Guam and the Pagan Islands. Attacks by Iwo Jima, Yapa and Ulichi. Raids against the Philippines and Formosa. Iwo Jima and Tokyo attacks. Assistance to the damaged aircraft carrier "Franklin" and the evacuation of its crew.

"Birmingham"... 9 battle stars.

Patrolled the Atlantic until the fall of 1943. Participated in the landing in Sicily. Transferred to the Pacific Ocean. Member of the raid against Tarawa. Solomon islands. Landing at Cape Torokina. Raids on the Mariana Islands, Philippines. Okinawa. On October 24, 1944, he received severe damage from the explosion of the aircraft carrier "Princeton" while providing assistance.


The cruiser killed 229 people and injured 420. Repairs continued until January 1945. After that, the cruiser took part in the landing on Iwo Jima. During the battles for Okinawa on May 4, 1945, the cruiser was damaged again, this time by a kamikaze. Repairs were carried out at Pearl Harbor, and the cruiser returned to service in August.

"Mobile"... 11 battle stars.

Raid on Marcus, battles on the Gilbert Islands, raid on tarawa. The Solom Islands. Bougainville. Strikes on Kwajallein, Truk, Saipan, Tiniam, Guam, Visayas raids. In the battle at Cape Engshannyo, he finished off the aircraft carrier Chiyoda and sank the destroyer Hatsuzuki. Battles for Okinawa. Raid on Wake.


Vincennes... 6 battle stars.

Laid down as Flint. But it was renamed in honor of the heavy cruiser that died off the island of Savo. Until 1944, he served in a patrol unit in the Caribbean. Transferred to the Pacific Ocean. Participant of raids on the Mariana Islands, battles in the Philippine Sea, strikes on Bonin Island. Attacks by Minandao, Formosa, Leyte. As part of a group of ships, he sank the destroyer Novaki. Strikes against Indochina and Formosa. Raids on Okinawa.

"Pasadena"... 5 battle stars.

Raids against Formosa and Luzon at the end of 1944. In 1945 he operated in the South China Sea and off the coast of Indochina. Aircraft carrier raid against Tokyo, landing on Okinawa.

"Biloxi"... 9 battle stars.

Landing in the Gilbert Islands, strike on Truk, fighting in the Mariana Islands, landing in New Guinea. Participant in battles in the Philippine Sea, landing on Guam. Acted on the islands of Palau, Bonin, Volcano. Battle of Leyte Gulf. Raids to the Japanese Islands. Landing on Iwo Jima, battles for Okinawa. Raid on Wake Island.

"Houston"... 3 battle stars.


Raids to the Mariana Islands, Bonin, Battle of the Philippine Sea. Fights near Okinawa and Formosa in 1944. In these battles, he was hit by a torpedo, then another. The crew miraculously defended the ship, until the end of the war the cruiser was under repair.

Vicksburg... 2 battle stars.

Until the end of 1944, it was used as a training ship. He participated in the landing on Iwo Jima, struck at Kyushu, and acted against Okinawa. Hit Wake.

"Dutul"... 2 battle stars.

The cruiser carried her main service as part of the Atlantic patrols. He got to the Pacific Ocean only at the beginning of 1945 and managed to take part in the most recent strikes against Japan.

Miami... 6 battle stars.

Patrolled the East Coast and only in April 1944 was sent to the Pacific Ocean. Participated in raids to the Mariana Islands and the Volcano group. Strikes against Saipan, Tinian, Iwo Jima, Chichijima and Pagan. Raids against Palau, Mindanao and Luzon, Formosa, Okinawa and the Philippines. Landing on Leyte. Raids against Hong Kong and Indochina. The raid on Tokyo. The shelling of Ryukyu. Operation against Okinawa.



Astoria... 5 battle stars.

Landing on Luzon, raids against Formosa and China. Tokyo and Iwo Jima attacks. Operations against the Okinawa.

"Amsterdam"... 1 battle star.

Joined in June 1945 and took part in several operations against Japan.

Wilkes-Barr... 4 battle stars.

Operations against the Philippines and Formosa. Landing troops in Lingaen Bay. Attack on Tokyo and operations against Iwo Jima, Chichijima, Hahajima. Rescued the outfit of the aircraft carrier "Bunker Hill", which was damaged by kamikaze. Raids against Japan.

Atlanta... 2 battle stars.

Recent attacks against Okinawa, the Ryukyu Islands and the Japanese metropolis.


As you can see from this list, "Clevelands" (especially the first series) took the most direct part in the war in the Pacific. And they left a noticeable mark in the battles. Yes, the ships were not masterpieces, the project was very controversial, had a huge number of shortcomings, but all of them, separately or together, were not critical.

A large number of cruisers made it possible to carry out many operations in which the Clevelands simply gnawed at the Japanese defenses on the islands with their guns. The two calibers on board, of course, complicated aiming and adjustment, but they made it possible to work very efficiently in fortified areas with both calibers.

The voiced problems in the stability of ships never once caused the death of the Clevelands during the entire war.

It should be noted that the battles around the islands in the Pacific Ocean did not become a test for the Clevelands. Moreover, sturdy, with a lot of barrels, the cruisers were more than useful in these battles. We can say that they "found a place for themselves", grinding the Japanese garrisons on the islands. Yes, maybe the role of floating batteries was not very nice, but very useful.


Not the best survivability, not the best seaworthiness, not the best anti-aircraft artillery. But these were ships that played a significant role in the defeat of Japan.
Author:
105 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Walking
    Walking April 21 2021 04: 30
    +6
    Not one cruiser was killed, and there and then a statement about not very good survivability and examples of the opposite.
    1. Hog
      Hog April 21 2021 14: 55
      0
      Quote: Hiking
      Not one cruiser was killed, and there and then a statement about not very good survivability and examples of the opposite.

      The survivability was low due to the small reservation area (+ the absence of even a minimal PTZ), which is why almost any hit caused significant damage to the ship's hull.
    2. Oden280
      Oden280 April 21 2021 18: 33
      -3
      A sad barge. Everything is average, without a twist.
      1. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe April 22 2021 03: 53
        +1
        A sad barge. Everything is average, without a twist.

        Building one ship like the Cleveland could be a sensation for any fleet in the world (except UK, USA and Japan)
        1. Oden280
          Oden280 April 26 2021 15: 24
          0
          In France, "La Galissonniere" was not nearly worse, with a lower displacement, our 68K, 68bis projects were better, and no one else was building. And the mattresses took everything mediocre, reduced the cost as much as possible and riveted a bunch of them. On the same hull from Brooklyn, they created both light and heavy cruisers with the same sores. Transport workers of the Liberty type, according to the same principles, were built cheaply and cheerfully.
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe April 27 2021 07: 04
            -1
            You so easily throw the words "mediocre", "cheapened", "dull barge", because you do not understand what you are writing about

            Construction of a battleship of 10 thousand tons in / and - An event with a capital letter, for any fleet. Well, maybe except the United States. Most countries did not have such ships at all or built several of them. A cruiser of 10 thousand tons a priori is never "mediocre" and "cheap"

            The fact that 27 of them were built - it was not the "cheapening" that contributed to this, but the wealth of America

            In terms of design, Cleveland had things that no one else had.
            For example, its generators have a total capacity of 3 megawatts - twice that of any cruiser of the same age. Energy consumption is doubled - power machines, weapon drives, etc. Did this somehow affect combat capabilities?

            You can recall its radar equipment, universal caliber, power plant - powerful and reliable - where steam of high parameters (45 atmospheres) was used, but without extreme values ​​(German 70 atm)

            Overall, Cleveland is the most powerful thing most fleets in the world could only dream of.

            "No zest" (c), Yeah)))

            Liberty ships are also not cheap, ordinary steamers of their time, they are cheap to build only according to the concepts of the Yankees, who did not complicate the project, but built ordinary
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 22 2021 12: 34
        +1
        Quote: Oden280
        A sad barge. Everything is average, without a twist.

        With 52 ordered and 27 built sadness and mediocrity no longer matter. smile
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine April 22 2021 21: 33
          +1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          ordered and 27 built sadness and mediocrity no longer matter

          Actually, they do. Considering that the Americans built a second set of KR after the war, but already KRT, and KRL was written off to hell. So the number went a little sideways.
        2. Oden280
          Oden280 April 26 2021 15: 26
          0
          Of course, with such a crowd and gopnik champion stammered.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. mmaxx
    mmaxx April 21 2021 06: 27
    +8
    If we proceed from the correctness of the destination, then the ships are successful and correct. They completed their tasks.
    I think that no country would refuse such "unsuccessful" cruisers in a war.
  4. Aleksandr97
    Aleksandr97 April 21 2021 09: 17
    +7
    The cruisers had one specific drawback that other fleets left in the armored era: they were armed with two medium-caliber guns of close calibers, which made it difficult to zero in at medium and long distances at one target. Friedman wrote on this matter that many experts consider the presence of two close calibers to be a disadvantage, but firstly, the mass of shells differed twice, and secondly, the United States did not have another large caliber of anti-aircraft artillery.
    Light anti-aircraft weapons were inadequate: half the size of the Baltimors, which were the largest by only 2000 tons, and six barrels less than half the size of the Atlant. They also showed themselves poorly as an air defense cruiser, it was the Cleveland-class cruiser that could not save the Princeton. from one single Japanese aircraft. Having lost the power of the Brooklyn, they did not become an anti-aircraft shield for aircraft carriers. The Clevelands had a very heavy construction overload. The upgraded potential of the Clevelands turned out to be small, and therefore they were scrapped before their "older brothers". As a result, the command of the American fleet valued the Clevelands extremely low. In 1947, these new cruisers (some were not even two years old) were put into reserve, and in 1959-60 they were scrapped.
    1. Potter
      Potter April 21 2021 10: 31
      +1
      Thank you, Alexander. The article, as always, was written by Roman as a bestseller and reads fascinatingly. But you can read about the mentioned shortcomings in your comment. I want to add that the limitation of the standard displacement of 10000 tons just led to the lack of modernization potential. And as a consequence, the inevitable increase in the MLA trunks became the reason for both overload and deterioration of stability, an increase in the number of the crew with a deterioration in habitability. I remembered that the USSR, although it did not sign the agreement, tried to adhere to the limit of 68 tons when designing the cruisers of pr.10000. As a result, during the development of Project 68K, both aircraft armament and torpedo tubes were removed, but it was not possible to achieve the requirements of the assignment for the number of MZA assault rifles, despite the overload. And ships free from restrictions, etc. 68-bis grew up to 13200 tons of standard and 16300 tons of full displacement. At a different technical level of design solutions - a welded hull and armor included in the work of the hull.
      1. Macsen_wledig
        Macsen_wledig April 21 2021 12: 57
        +3
        Quote: Potter
        I remembered that the USSR, although it did not sign the agreement, tried to adhere to the limit of 68 tons when designing the cruisers of pr.10000.

        Actually, I signed it.
        And he even began to design Project 68 with a displacement of 8000 tons, but in view of the change in the foreign policy situation, the displacement was increased to 10000 tons, while adding the 4th main turret.
      2. Normal ok
        Normal ok April 21 2021 19: 31
        -1
        Quote: Potter
        The article, as always, was written by Roman as a bestseller and reads fascinatingly.

        Doubts are vaguely plagued: is this not the reincarnation of Pikul?))
    2. Pushkowed
      Pushkowed April 21 2021 11: 11
      +3
      two medium-caliber guns of close calibers
      "Two-headed caliber".
    3. mmaxx
      mmaxx April 21 2021 14: 22
      0
      With different guidance and radar systems, I don’t believe that it was difficult to control the fire. For 5-inches, the projectile is 2 times lighter.
      And they were taken to the reserve, first of all, because they were unnecessary. The United States already had a gigantic fleet.
      If you look closely, most of the amirikos' ships were unsuccessful. But this did not affect their effectiveness in any way.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 22 2021 21: 35
        +3
        Quote: mmaxx
        If you look closely, most of the amirikos' ships were unsuccessful. But this did not affect their effectiveness in any way.

        Yes. More precisely, the system they created compensated for the shortcomings of individual units.
    4. Baron pardus
      Baron pardus April 22 2021 17: 25
      +5
      Well, there weren't TWO main calibers in the American fleet then on cruisers, or even battleships, DON'T LO. 127mm is NOT a main gun, it is a universal weapon, moreover, it is mainly used as a long-range anti-aircraft gun. When disassembling with enemy cruisers, they did not particularly hope for this caliber. In theory, thanks to radars, American cruisers entered into artillery contact with the enemy at a long distance, and against LARGE surface ships 127mm caliber was not often used on cruisers, these guns are NOT there FOR THIS. By the way, if you condemn American ships for "two different main battalions", then you can just as well condemn the Japanese (the same 127mm universal artillery caliber), and the British (102mm station wagons), and indeed everyone. The additional caliber (88-133mm) is not a main battery, but a universal weapon capable of shooting at planes (it is easier to shove a radar fuse into a 127mm projectile than into a 40mm projectile), and, if you need to upset a ship that has entered the range of the gun. To give up the "medium caliber" on cruisers means to deprive yourself of long-range anti-aircraft artillery. By the way, 127mm anti-aircraft guns are the most effective anti-aircraft guns of the American fleet. I agree that the Germans chose not the best option, installing 150mm guns on their Deutschlands in addition to 280mm, but these 150mm are not all-rounds at all. Do not confuse an additional main battery, which is not capable of conducting anti-aircraft fire, with a universal weapon that can shoot at planes (very effectively), and a ship that comes closer to upset with a 127mm BB or a mine, and work along the coast. Well, the choice of a universal caliber is a compromise between the weight of the installation, rate of fire and firepower. The 105mm German mount, or the British 102mm will be lighter than the American 127mm, but the power of the projectiles is also different.
    5. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 22 2021 19: 49
      +4
      Quote: Aleksandr97
      They also showed themselves poorly as air defense cruisers, it was the Cleveland-class cruiser that could not save the Prínston from a single Japanese aircraft.

      There it was not about the cruiser's air defense. The aircraft that attacked the Princeton yawned at the group's air defense, without giving it a preliminary target designation and finding it only upon launching the attack. Not even Worcester could have done it in those seconds.
    6. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko April 23 2021 14: 25
      +3
      Quote: Aleksandr97
      As a result, the command of the American fleet valued the Clevelands extremely low.

      And you did not think that it was precisely those ships that were considered "expendable" in the admiralty of the countries, and in fact brought the most benefit in that war? In fact, the main sea heroes of WWII are precisely destroyers and light cruisers, and not even aircraft carriers at all (well, there is no question of battleships). Who were not sorry, and that is why they did the lion's share of all the work.
  5. Pushkowed
    Pushkowed April 21 2021 11: 26
    +6
    In their articles "Marine stories. Torpedo nightmare September 15, 1942"And"Marine stories. Friday the 13th or "scuffle" at Guadalcanal"dear Roman has already inserted a photo heavy cruiser "Helena" (CA-75, type "Baltimore", 1945), passing it off as light cruiser "Helena" (CL-50, type "Brooklyn", 1938), as noted in the comments.

    And here again ...

    This is heavy "Helena":


    And this is easy:


    Even the numbers on board are visible.
    Not to mention that the light one has 3 "pyramid" towers in the nose.
  6. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 21 2021 11: 58
    +3
    In 1938, the United States began work on the compromise cruiser project. The compromise was, of course, between armor and weapons. The Americans wanted something like this: a cruiser with a displacement of 8 tons, armed with 000 or 8 9-mm guns.

    Americans in 1938 wanted strange: KRL in 8 kt with universal 6 ". A kind of mini-" Worcester ".
    PMSM, if the Yankees received the universal 6 "in time, then 10-11 kilotons might have climbed.
    But the development of these guns was delayed by the industry until the end of the war. Therefore, the project of a small KRL with a universal 6 "caliber split into two: a small KRL with a universal caliber reduced to 5" (Atlanta-type scouts), and a traditional KRL with a non-universal, but 6 "caliber.
    1. bk0010
      bk0010 April 22 2021 00: 05
      +2
      Quote: Alexey RA
      PMSM, if the Yankees received the universal 6 "in time, then 10-11 kilotons might have climbed.
      No: the universal 6 "on" the heaviest light cruisers of 18000 tons "turned out to be not only expensive, but also so heavy that a tower with a non-universal 6" together with a tower with a universal 5 "came out easier than one tower with a universal 6".
      Tell me, who do you think can play the role of the optimal light cruiser WWII? For heavy cruisers, this is a desmoin (yes, it was built after the war, but it could have been created before it, if they figured out what to do to prepare for WWII), but is there one among the lungs?
      1. Engineer
        Engineer April 22 2021 11: 13
        +3
        The optimal strands of WWII are Yapi. Pretty obvious and I think most will agree with this.
        There are simply no optimal WWII light cruisers.
        The British built liners, then they considered that 5 liners are 4 counties in price and decided to further reduce the VI. The result is even more controversial.
        Captains Romani and Yahagi are interesting, but they just couldn't find a job.
        Brooklyn, Cleveland, town are strong, but in VI they are equal to a heavy cruiser, which, other things being equal, is even stronger.
        The colonies look like clippings of town and are therefore hardly optimal.

        Large light cruisers were built mainly due to the exhaustion of the contractual limit for heavy ones and specifically in response to the appearance of the Mogami.
        Small light cruisers never found their niche.
        Medium - linders and colonies were substitutes for large ones, marked "for the poor" and corresponding restrictions.

        In my opinion, there was simply no niche in terms of cost-effectiveness between large destroyers of 3-4 thousand tons and cruisers of 10-12 thousand tons.
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig April 22 2021 11: 35
          +1
          Quote: Engineer
          The optimal strands of WWII are Yapi. Pretty obvious and I think most will agree with this.

          I would clarify: the last strands. Types "Tone" and "Ibuki".
          Earlier types required too much tweaks / rework to be trendy, so to speak ...
          1. Engineer
            Engineer April 22 2021 11: 47
            +1
            My opinion is starting with Takao.
            Ibuki, for obvious reasons, cannot be considered either optimal or even just good.
            Excellent ships from the early 30s.
            Earlier types required too much work / rework

            The shortcomings were corrected for a long time, but instead they received ships that entered service long before the war, went through a full cycle of combat training and managed to become floated formations.
          2. unknown
            unknown April 24 2021 05: 44
            0
            Deutschlands.
            1. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig April 24 2021 10: 40
              0
              Quote: ignoto
              Deutschlands.

              At the time of the design of the "battleships", Weimar Germany signed the Washington Treaty? :)
              1. unknown
                unknown April 25 2021 05: 46
                0
                Of course not.
                But, in terms of displacement, "battleships" fit perfectly into the class of "heavy cruisers".
                1. Macsen_wledig
                  Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 11: 57
                  0
                  Quote: ignoto
                  Of course not.
                  But, in terms of displacement, "battleships" fit perfectly into the class of "heavy cruisers".

                  Fit in who argues.
                  Only the rest of the countries that built the KRT did not sign an agreement with the "Versailles" conditions.
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine April 25 2021 12: 49
                    0
                    Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                    Only the rest of the countries that built the KRT did not sign an agreement with the "Versailles" conditions.

                    )))
                    You can add another 5 thousand tons of priblud from Hipper to Spee and you get the minimum LC of the contract for 36 years. That would be an MCT worthy of Mordor)))
        2. bk0010
          bk0010 April 22 2021 21: 07
          0
          Quote: Engineer
          There are simply no optimal WWII light cruisers.
          So it seemed to me too
          1. Kuroneko
            Kuroneko April 23 2021 14: 32
            +1
            Quote: bk0010
            So it seemed to me too

            The Italians, but they had pasta instead of the crew (the British themselves, respectfully and sarcastically, even said that the Italians knew how to build good ships, but did not know how to fight on them at all). Plus, the Italians had huge problems with the quality of shells and guns.
            1. unknown
              unknown April 24 2021 05: 46
              0
              The Italians at least fought at sea. And in WWI, and in the second. Unlike the French.
              For the Italians, starting with the C series, light cruisers turned out to be close to the optimal type.
            2. Santa Fe
              Santa Fe April 27 2021 07: 23
              0
              the British themselves, respectfully sarcastically, even said that the Italians know how to build good ships, but they absolutely do not know how to fight on them

              Only the British could say that.
              The rest have no right to say so, if they met with the British, any fleet, except for the Japanese, would have done it to the fullest.

              In fact - the Italian fleet ensured uninterrupted supply of troops in the North. Africa. And he caused a lot of problems to the enemy.

              Regia Marina has organized the delivery of 1,1 million troops and more than 4 million tons of various cargoes to North Africa, the Balkans and islands in the Mediterranean. The return route was carrying precious oil. Frequently, cargo and personnel were placed directly on the decks of warships.

              According to statistics, transport vessels under the cover of Regia Marina delivered 28 Italian and 266 German trucks and tanks to the African continent.

              Aces of submarine warfare Gianfranco Gazzana Prioroja (sank 11 transports with a total of 90 tons) or Carlo Fezia di Cossato (000 trophies). In total, a galaxy of ten best Italian submariners sank over a hundred ships and vessels of the Allies with a total displacement of 16 tons!

              Or the only case in history - the boat "Toricelli" sank a destroyer in a surface art battle.

              A separate page - underwater sabotage of the Black Prince Borghese
        3. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine April 22 2021 21: 47
          0
          Quote: Engineer
          Pretty obvious and I think most will agree with this.

          It’s strange. This is the first time I see such an opinion. Tone was the best cruiser at the beginning of the war, but at the end she was still a Balt, taking into account all the circumstances.
          Quote: Engineer
          The colonies look like clippings of town and are therefore hardly optimal.

          Swiftshur?
          In general, there is an opinion that the Fletcher type EM became the best CD. Better, of course, Gearing, but alas, as usual with the Yankees.
          Quote: Engineer
          Large light cruisers were built mainly due to the exhaustion of the contractual limit for heavy ones and specifically in response to the appearance of the Mogami.

          Yes, they came up with bullshit.
          Quote: Engineer
          Between large destroyers of 3-4 thousand tons and cruisers of 10-12 thousand tons, there was simply no niche in terms of cost-effectiveness.

          It is hard to say. There were niche options.

          You are right, replacing KRL with KRT, cleats with balts, would be a good solution. But in reality, even the Americans did not do this, for a number of reasons.
          1. Engineer
            Engineer April 23 2021 11: 07
            +2
            It’s strange. This is the first time I see such an opinion. Tone was the best cruiser at the beginning of the war, but at the end she was still a Balt, taking into account all the circumstances.

            Balt goes through the forest. 42 years old did not have time for meat grinders, which means it is not needed. Even a granny (Pensacola) can shoot along the shore.
            Plus another episode with "the longest ship on earth" ...
            Portland is many times more efficient. Generally handsome. They beat him not even with feet, but with crowbars, and he showed himself from the best side. Spoon road for dinner.

            In fact, the most honored cruisers of the allies are Portland, San Francisco and Norfolk. Never top-end in terms of characteristics.

            The optimal heavy cruiser is the one that was built in the 30s, before the war, so as not to interfere with mobilization projects in wartime - submarines, aircraft carriers, escort ships, etc.
            The Japs are excellent with this. True, they completely failed the wartime program, but that's another story.

            Swiftshur?

            Mid 44? I scold Baltimore for 43, but here is such crap
            Moreover, in terms of strength, it is approximately equal to York, which was founded as early as 27. I won’t even be surprised if York pushes him

            It is hard to say. There were niche options.

            I believe that there was no

            You are right, replacing KRL with KRT, cleats with balts, would be a good solution.

            Not this way. The Clevelands even managed to naval battles in the first half of the 1rd.
            Brooklyn is better than both, and Mogami is even better for stronger and ready earlier. Once again, we come to the conclusion that the optimal cruiser of the WWII is a heavy, built in the 30s in a nominal limit of 10 thousand tons. in fact 11 thousand tons of standard + 1000 tons for modernization. Anything that is much larger is oversized, expensive, belated crap, everything that is less is also crap.
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine April 23 2021 21: 50
              0
              Quote: Engineer
              Balt goes through the forest. 42 years old did not have time for meat grinders

              No, if you think so, then the candidates are understandable. You need pre-war ships. I would then single out rather Deutschdand, after him, yes, the Japanese and Hipper.
              Quote: Engineer
              The Japs are great with this

              I just wanted to be happy for the Japs, how lucky they were, and you immediately broke off (((
              Quote: Engineer
              Moreover, in terms of strength, it is approximately equal to York, which was founded already in 27

              Are you considering them in a duel version, are you? Then yes, almost any light is inferior to any heavy, even such a disabled person as York-Exeter. But the logic is simple, 1 Balt tower weighs as much as two Cleve towers.
              Quote: Engineer
              I believe that there was no

              Well, you have expanded the destroyers and 4K, so not only Tashkent got in, but also British mine loaders, for example.
              Quote: Engineer
              The Clevelands even managed to naval battles in the first half of the 1rd.

              When I spoke about the alternative replacement of cleaves with balts, I had in mind the rejection of cleaves and the laying of balts instead of them on the same dates.
              1. Engineer
                Engineer April 23 2021 22: 50
                0
                No, if you think so, then the candidates are understandable. You need pre-war ships. I would then single out rather Deutschdand, after him, yes, the Japanese and Hipper.

                The Germans have already been discussed
                I singled out Deutschland long ago. Turbine German would be an almost ideal ship, but an alternative.
                Hipper is a polbismarck-nafig, Deutschland is also a polbismarck, but there it is at least clear what we pay for.
                Are you considering them in a duel version, are you?

                And in dueling, of course, too. Should I appreciate the beauty of forms? Do not like York put Aoba and company.
                Well, you have expanded the destroyers and 4K, so not only Tashkent got in, but also British mine loaders, for example.

                Akizuki. The rest is from the evil one. Although Tashkent is quite normal.
                For light cruisers, the only niche is a small torpedo cruiser for the Japanese in 42-43. Everything.
                When I talked about the alternative replacement of cleaves with balts, I meant the rejection of cleaves and the laying of balts instead of them on the same dates

                It turns out equally bad. The head cleave came into operation in the summer of 42. The Balt will take even longer to build. Acceptance, finishing touches, combat training, flight to Australia, replenishment of supplies. She won't make it to Guadalcanal in any way.
                Brooklyn norms. Humble yourself.
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine April 24 2021 00: 21
                  -1
                  Quote: Engineer
                  Hipper - polbismarck - nafig

                  It is better not to lean on pricing issues. In the Reich, in Japan, in the States, everything is quite complicated.
                  Quote: Engineer
                  Don't like York

                  The British didn't really like York, I think. I think I have marked the course. With the same weight of the main ship, 8 "barrels will come out about half as much. If the enemy is an MCT or serious cruisers, that's okay, but if you expect to fight with auxiliary cruisers, then it's not a fact, not a fact that you need to overkill. A ship is a ship for confronting merchants, auxiliary cruisers, EVs and counter-destroyers, and only in extreme and undesirable cases - their own kind, in no case an MRT or LK.
                  Quote: Engineer
                  Brooklyn norms. Humble yourself.

                  Brooklyn is a freak. It was just the big light cruisers that were idiocy. The task of light cruisers is to build 2-3 units instead of 1 CMT.
                  Quote: Engineer
                  It turns out equally bad. The head cleave came into operation in the summer of 42.

                  So no non-contractual KR will have time for you. Is that just to cancel all Brooklyn, so that in 39 the Americans rushed to build the Balts in an emergency without feeling their feet. The head one was under construction for exactly two years, just in time to receive combat readiness by the fall of the 42nd.

                  Although Guadalcanal is a strange criterion, of course. The Americans would find out somewhere about sea mines and torpedo boats - they would not need any cruisers at all. And if you really want to shoot, there are old battleships, both American and British, practically useless.
                  1. Engineer
                    Engineer April 24 2021 10: 17
                    0
                    It is better not to lean on pricing issues. In the Reich, in Japan, in the States, everything is quite complicated.

                    It is necessary to fit. The British will confirm. So far I have been comparing prices within the same country. So the rules.
                    With the same weight of the GK 8 "trunks will come out about half the size

                    Of course not. Checked navweaps. 3x155 Mogami installation - 180 t. 2x203 Mogami 166-175 t. Metric.
                    KRL is a ship for confronting merchants, auxiliary cruisers, EMs and counter-destroyers, and only in extreme and undesirable cases - to their own kind. Not an MCT or a LC under any circumstances.

                    Bullshit Bob Barnett and Filka Wayne will undoubtedly find your position very important.
                    This is the same nonsense as "tanks do not fight with tanks." War puts everything in its place. The aforementioned Tashkent paid for itself 10 times as a transport, although in principle it was not intended for this. And I shouldn't have done that.
                    Brooklyn is a freak

                    You are just bombarded by the fact that the Americans have made a sane ship. laughing
                    Although not optimal
                    The task of light cruisers is to build 2-3 units instead of 1 CMT.

                    British town - 2.1 million pounds. County 1.8 Million I look forward to examples of at least adequate cruisers for 1 million pounds. I'm not talking about optimal ones at all
                    So you will not have time for any non-contractual KR

                    Do not need. Contractual consulted And the amers and the Japanese. Such is the paradox. The Japanese in the 42nd proved to be excellent, and the American inferior to them rested and dragged, albeit in bloody snot. The Yapas did not play for a raise and left, but this was not the fault of their cruisers. All good fellows, no alternative Balts instead of Brooklyns are simply needed. Balts are not needed at all.
                    Although Guadalcanal is a strange criterion, of course

                    Normal criterion.
                    The time of the cruisers ended with the battle at the North Cape at the end of 43. Then only shooting along the shore or an epic mess like a battle near Samar Island. Not in time for the battles - not needed.
                    1. Cherry Nine
                      Cherry Nine April 24 2021 12: 19
                      -1
                      Quote: Engineer
                      Checked navweaps. 3x155 Mogami installation - 180 t. 2x203 Mogami 166-175 t. Metric.

                      It has its own atmosphere. 6 "is very heavy compared to the rest, and 8" is very light. In any case, we come to at least 4 towers for the switch in the MCT. If there are 3 towers, you get York.
                      Quote: Engineer
                      War puts everything in its place

                      Yes. British RCLs secured the continental blockade.
                      Quote: Engineer
                      the Americans made a sane ship.

                      You are confused about your own position. It would be sane if 4 towers were changed to 2x8 ", and the fifth was thrown overboard in order to shove something more useful. Let me remind you that all Brooklyn entered service after the parliamentary decision to replace the Mogami towers in March 37th.
                      Quote: Engineer
                      I look forward to seeing examples of at least adequate £ 1m cruisers.

                      This is a strange question, considering that the British were asking and answering exactly this question. Aretheusa, $ 1.2 million
                      Quote: Engineer
                      Do not need. Contractual coped

                      Sorry, but you came close to the inquisitorial thesis "History has no subjunctive mood."
                      Quote: Engineer
                      Balts are not needed at all.

                      Do not need anything.
                      Quote: Engineer
                      Normal criterion.

                      Afterglow.
                      1. Engineer
                        Engineer April 24 2021 12: 58
                        +1
                        ... In any case, we come to at least 4 towers for the switch in the MCT. If there are 3 towers, you get York.

                        Exactly. Therefore, the six-inch will no longer be two, but one and a half with a comparable weight. The basic rule of thumb is 2 eight-inches in a turret roughly equal to 3 six-inches in a turret in terms of mass with significant power superiority.
                        Yes. British RCLs secured the continental blockade.

                        Old songs. For those who cannot analyze. The continental blockade was provided with all the power of Britain. From the Enigma codebreakers and the Coastal Command to the Bomber Command, which forced the Germans to withdraw from Brest. Not your malacholny KRL.
                        You are trying in your own position. He would be sane if 4 towers were changed to 2x8 ", and the fifth was thrown overboard in order to shove something more useful.

                        Then he would become optimal. And so sane
                        Let me remind you that all Brooklyn went into operation after the parliamentary decision to replace the Mogami towers in March 37th.

                        Meanwhile, the enlightened British are trying to shove the colonies into 8-8.5 thousand tons of displacement. Presumably, in the hope that the Japanese will come to their senses and sign a second London. Against this background, even Brooklyn is a model of clairvoyance.

                        This is a strange question, considering that the British were asking and answering exactly this question. Aretheusa, $ 1.2 million

                        Exactly. That is, not 2-3 pieces instead of the county, but only one and a half. Apart from the fact that Aretyusa was a shameful remnant in terms of characteristics (it is better not to even meet with Italian cruise lines), and her basic functions laid down in design - squadron reconnaissance, leading destroyers and fighting enemy EMs were practically not in demand in the war. You will undoubtedly argue to the point of opting out, but I think even you will not defend the optimality of the aretuse.
                        Sorry, but you came close to the inquisitorial thesis "History has no subjunctive mood."

                        It's just that what you suggest is even worse, and attempts to optimize give even less realistic and more expensive options.
                        And in general, you keep the bar consistently. The optimal light cruiser of WWII is the one who did not have time for it. laughing Just like with the best battleship of WWII.
                        Do not need anything.

                        Essexes and destroyers and submarines are needed. As in reality. Yapam need dragons and akizuk. Brittam colossuses and destroyers and sloops. The rest of the Amers, Britons and Japs already had before the war. War is the time of mobilization projects. To put it very simply
                        Teardrop
                        .
                        Retrospective analysis. The real usefulness of any ship is judged only by its lasting knowledge.
                      2. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine April 24 2021 13: 46
                        0
                        Quote: Engineer
                        The basic rule is 2 eight inches in a tower are approximately equal to 3 six inches

                        You have chosen the most profitable option for you. For the same French, the Sufren towers weighed 180 tons, for Algeria they were already 40 tons more.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        For those who cannot analyze

                        Hmm, and it was not you who complained to me about ambition and aplomb?
                        Quote: Engineer
                        And so sane

                        Heavy cruiser with light turrets? And you are not so hard to please. First, you must not be an Englishman ...
                        Quote: Engineer
                        the Japanese will come to their senses and sign the second London

                        The Japanese are not the only and not the main potential enemy. And what about the enemy? Leipzig? Z-destroyers?
                        Quote: Engineer
                        not 2-3 pieces instead of the county, but only one and a half

                        There is no need to cheat. A mid-20s cruiser would have cost differently in the mid-30s. I think you know that around the 30th year, the problem of two million cruisers was very serious, so that the cruiser of the 35th year would have cost no less than Norfolk. Just under 2,5 M.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        even with Italian KRLs it is better not to meet

                        Naturally, it is better not to meet with the Italian KRL in 9 thousand tons. It is better to meet with him, the same Pensacola, and clarify your point of view on the correlation of forces between KRT and KRL.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        even you will not defend the optimality of the aretuse.

                        I have to disappoint you, I will break the next bottom. I will defend 18 Arethews or 27 Tromps against 9 Brooklyns without a single doubt.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        And in general, you consistently hold the bar

                        A sign of skill.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        The optimal light cruiser WWII is the one who did not have time for it.

                        Naturally. Optimal warships are built after the war. If the four-tower Brooklyn with enhanced air defense were all sent at once for cutting, then Brooklyn was definitely not optimal. As a result, you correctly identified a little earlier, there remained the large heavy cruiser Baltimore as an adult cruiser and the small cruiser Giring under the guise of a destroyer. These ships, with a sufficient number of SRT, shared the functions of the KRL.
                        But if KRT is not enough and you need to score something with the KRL limit, then Brooklyn is, politely speaking, a dubious choice.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Essexes and destroyers and submarines are needed. As in reality. Yapam need dragons and akizuk. Brittam colossuses and destroyers and sloops. The rest of the Amers, Britons and Japs already had before the war

                        And I also considered my roll in AI as a quirk.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        The real usefulness of any ship is judged only by its lasting knowledge.

                        This is a pointless approach. You will thus cancel, for example, the entire French fleet, and the German surface fleet in general too.
                      3. Engineer
                        Engineer April 24 2021 14: 36
                        0
                        You have chosen the most profitable option for you. For the same French, the Sufren towers weighed 180 tons, for Algeria they were already 40 tons more.

                        Algeria 220 long, Galissonnier 169 long with slightly better bookings (sort of like) from Algeria 30% heavier. For 4 plants the difference is 200 tons. For 10000 thousand tons, this is a 2% percent difference. Is it worth arguing further or shall we accept 2x8 ~ 3x6 for Washingtonians?
                        Hmm, and it was not you who complained to me about ambition and aplomb?

                        I, of course, have complaints. And more about the delicate and vulnerable mental organization of the claim)
                        Heavy cruiser with light turrets? And you are not so hard to please. First, you must not be an Englishman ...

                        But in essence, Brooklyn is quite businesslike and fighting and is stronger than a town and a heap):
                        The Japanese are not the only and not the main potential enemy. And what about the enemy? Leipzig? Z-destroyers?

                        The uncles from the Admiralty were doing a good job. They appointed the enemy by a strong-willed decision. And what happened in real life, well, it's happening. Nobody is perfect .
                        To the pile, fatty Zara was spotted without an underwear back in 36. They estimated 1-2 thousand tons of excess. Reactions in shipbuilding are zero. And so it will do.
                        There is no need to cheat.

                        So don't cheat. Britain has 26 to 33 years inclusive deflation... It happens)
                        Naturally, it is better not to meet with the Italian KRL in 9 thousand tons. ...

                        With 7,5 thousand montecuccoli too. And with the condottierry too
                        It is better to meet with him, the same Pensacola, and clarify your point of view on the correlation of forces between KRT and KRL

                        Granny is a favorite, although the Italian dude is not without chances.
                        But if KRT is not enough and you need to score something with the KRL limit, then Brooklyn is, politely speaking, a dubious choice.

                        Brooklyn is the normal choice of the healthy and wealthy for hammering the negotiated limits.
                        I have to disappoint you, I will break the next bottom. I will defend 18 Arethews or 27 Tromps against 9 Brooklyns without a single doubt.

                        Not surprised, limeiphils are capable of anything.
                        Aretyuz amers do not need at all. 20 Arethews instead of 10 towns for Britons? Are you definitely for the Englishman.?
                        And I also considered my roll in AI as a quirk.

                        You have quirks, I have a sane assessment)
                        This is a pointless approach. You will thus cancel, for example, the entire French fleet, and the German surface fleet in general too.

                        There is only one point in the study of history - the interest of the student
                        Clea - creative lady
                        And any art in itself is a completely useless thing (c)
                      4. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine April 24 2021 16: 19
                        -1
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Is it worth arguing further or shall we accept 2x8 ~ 3x6 for Washingtonians?

                        880 ~ 507 No, I won't accept that. I have already said that KRT starts with at least 8 guns. 6 guns can be considered taking into account the LMS of the end of the war, but not the 30s.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        stronger than town and heaps):

                        Here you need to look more closely, somewhere it has arrived, somewhere has disappeared. Helena is perhaps stronger, but Brooklyn himself ...
                        Quote: Engineer
                        And what happened in real life, well, it's happening. Nobody is perfect .

                        That's right, I myself like to screw in just this phrase.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Estimated 1-2 thousand tons of excess. Reactions in shipbuilding are zero. And so it will do

                        There is no need to demand adequacy from diplomats, they live on their planet. In my specific opinion, no matter how hard the British tried, they did not surpass Secretary of State Hughes.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Britain 26 to 33 inclusive deflation

                        Deflation is deflation, and ships are only getting more expensive.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        And with the condottierry too

                        It is generally better not to meet with 6 "cruisers. In your strange world, cruisers hunt each other in battle royale. I have Omaha and 4 Bensons, or even Atlanta and 4 Fletchers without radars against Arethewza and 4 Tables. hunt, maybe caught.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Brooklyn is a perfectly normal choice for the healthy and wealthy.

                        You forgot the cumulative VI limit.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Amers are not needed at all

                        Amers do not need anything, you can chill. We have already discussed this with you.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        20 Arethews instead of 10 towns for Britons?

                        Quite. Towns are a mistake, like all ailments. There is no need to do KRL, meaning the fight with the MCT. 20 is perhaps superfluous, it can be less, and resources should be spent on something more reasonable.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        I have a sane assessment

                        Well, if you have - then yes, of course.
                      5. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 24 2021 17: 24
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        6 guns can be considered taking into account the LMS of the end of the war, but not the 30s.

                        Rimsky-Korsakov wrote back in the 25th year that three guns are enough for zeroing ...

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        and spend resources on something more reasonable.

                        For example?
                      6. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine April 24 2021 17: 31
                        -1
                        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                        Rimsky-Korsakov wrote back in the 25th year that three guns are enough for zeroing ...

                        It was an alternative opinion to the mainstream, I think. There will be artillery radars - another story.
                        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                        For example?

                        Pfft ... This is a whole altistory to write.
                      7. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 24 2021 18: 10
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        It was an alternative opinion to the mainstream, I think.

                        Well, that is, the Krasvoenmores learned from an alternative opinion? Well, OK...

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Pfft ... This is a whole altistory to write.

                        Then how can you know that the funds will go to something reasonable? :)
                      8. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine April 24 2021 18: 49
                        -1
                        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                        Did the Krasvoenmores learn from an alternative opinion?

                        Appeals to the authority of the Krasvoenmores in naval affairs are so-so trump cards.
                        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                        Then how can you know that the funds will go to something reasonable?

                        No way. But for me, the construction of MCTs, converted into KRL, is well below the middle of the list of reasonable things.
                      9. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 24 2021 20: 10
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Appeals to the authority of the Krasvoenmores in naval affairs are so-so trump cards.

                        As you wish...

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        You do not.

                        Then why all these fabrications of yours?
                      10. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine April 24 2021 22: 07
                        0
                        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                        Then why all these fabrications of yours?

                        Consider this a bad mental habit. I tend to place historical facts on a correct / incorrect scale, which is heresy from an academic point of view. Actually, our dispute with our colleague Engineer is partly theological in nature. I am outraged by the very existence of the Brooklyns and Clevelands (among many other things), and he has no less a list of complaints about limes.

                        Returning to reality, the appearance of Mogami sowed in the minds of the admirals of the other two large fleets a frankly bad idea that it is possible and necessary to do six-inch underKRT at the expense of the KRL limit. This idea seems to me to be extremely unfortunate (for everyone except the Japanese). Moreover, for the Americans, it is even more unfortunate than for the British - the Yankees had the opportunity to build any ships for 3 years. And "any" non-contractual cruiser of size 10K + would be, firstly, heavy or super heavy, and secondly, it looks much more like Baltimore than Brooklyn 2x5x8 ".
                        As for the KRL limit, my colleague is right, the most reasonable thing for the Americans would be to design something of the Giring-Akizuki-Mogador-Tashkent format for a large series. With the understanding that this is a super destroyer, not an undercruiser.

                        But with the British, the situation is somewhat different. They knocked out a maximum cruising limit for themselves with specific goals. The town was a departure from these goals. Let me remind you, for example, that two Linders and an undersized KRT fought with the same Spee, so I cannot say that without the Towns the British would be afraid to get in somewhere.
                      11. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 12: 04
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        And "any" non-contractual cruiser of size 10K + would be, firstly, heavy or super-heavy, and secondly, it looks much more like Baltimore than Brooklyn 2x5x8 ".

                        Maybe the Americans remembered about the Japanese destroyers?

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        With the understanding that this is a super destroyer, not an undercruiser.

                        What is his tactical purpose?
                      12. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine April 25 2021 12: 43
                        0
                        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                        What is his tactical purpose?

                        Conventional oceanic EM of the Gearing type without efforts to reduce VI.
                        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                        Maybe the Americans remembered about the Japanese destroyers?

                        In the sense of shooting back? These are the same Americans who built Atlanteans for this very purpose. There are 6 towers 5/38 on Cleves and Balts, like the second and third Atlant groups.

                        And the Fletchers, by the way, were built quite a lot.
                      13. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 13: 44
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        In the sense of shooting back?

                        Exactly...

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        These are the same Americans who built Atlanteans for this very purpose. There are 6 towers 5/38 on Cleves and Balts, like the second and third Atlant groups.

                        Actually, the 5 "/ 54 Mark 16 in the Mark 41 turret was put into the Atlant project.
                        But she didn’t ...
      2. Engineer
        Engineer April 24 2021 17: 25
        +1
        880 ~ 507 No i won't take it

        http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNFR_6-55_m1930.php
        La Galissonnière: 169 tons (172 mt)

        169 * 4 = 676 Of course you won't.
        4 towers 2x8 = 4 towers 3x6 + 200 tons.
        200 tons cannot be directly converted into a 5-tower just like that, because there are still feeding devices, a barbet and you need to add 15 meters of the hull length to a 5 tower and then additionally strengthen and lengthen the nose to compensate for the additional mass.
        These tons can be converted into turret armor enhancement. But initially, as far as can be judged, the towers of Algeria are somewhat better armored than 70-100 against 50-100 (the most cursory search shows)
        Argue further? Or is it a tower on a tower?
        Here you need to look more closely, somewhere it has arrived, somewhere has disappeared. Helena is perhaps stronger, but Brooklyn himself ...

        And Brooklyn itself.
        There is no need to demand adequacy from diplomats,

        Do you seriously think that the Lords of the Admiralty asked politicians "who is our enemy there?" Maybe you still read Brown? Or just remember Henderson, who outplayed everything in the aircraft carrier concept because he thought so himself, but not because the ministers whispered to him.
        Deflation is deflation, and ships are only getting more expensive.

        And also the spread of welding. There is undoubtedly a trend for an increase in prices, but it directly correlates with a trend for an increase in displacement. And we are not going to increase it. A sharp turnaround only in the early 40s, when the increase in the price of radars and automation exceeded the increase in VI.
        She'd better not face 6 "cruisers at all. In your strange world, cruisers hunt each other in battle royale.

        In my world, there was a battle at La Plata, Berwick versus Hipper, New Year's battle, Battle of the Danish Strait, destruction of Bismarck, sinking of Scharnhorst, Spartivento, battle in the Bay of Biscay, battle at Cape Spada. Trinidad and Edinburgh against the Germans.
        Cruisers participated everywhere and everywhere there was a demand for the big and the strong. Your undersized Aretuza is simply out of competition.
        I have Omaha and 4 Bensons, or even Atlanta and 4 Fletchers without radars against Arethyuz and 4 Tables. And let the condottieri hunt Worspeight, maybe they will catch him. All over the face.

        Ah, right, welcome to a strange world laughing More hell and fumes.
        You forgot the cumulative VI limit.

        Exactly. In a limited limit, the value of each unit must be increased.
        Amers do not need anything, you can chill. We have already discussed this with you.

        His Majesty Essex. Needed. You have not learned again.

        You continue to drown for Balt, although to give it real value you had to go all out and alternatively replace Brooklyn with it. This in itself is heresy. But even so, questions remain. The "balanced" Balt held the hit of the air torpedo no better than the "overloaded" cleave. Loss of a nose is generally beyond the bounds of decency. And artillery fire Balt is not tested.
        With Aretyuza, it’s even awkward for you. Already this remnant is really difficult to come up with a task wherever he screwed up. The Britons themselves understood this, having built only 4 pieces. What are 20.

        Returning to the origins
        Japanese strands + Akizuki optimum or very close.
      3. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 24 2021 18: 05
        -1
        Quote: Engineer
        169 * 4 = 676 Of course you won't.
        2x8 towers = 4 3x6 towers + 200 tons

        )))
        You continue artillery preparation along the first line of trenches, when I have already retreated to the second.
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        In any case, we come to at least 4 towers for the switch in the MCT. If 3 towers turn out to be York

        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Towns are a mistake, like all ailments. There is no need to do KRL, meaning the fight with the MCT.

        I will say again, I consider all ten-thousanders, KRL with 6 "towers, a mistake. Except, of course, Mogami. Border cases - Fiji and the last Condottieri.
        Quote: Engineer
        And Brooklyn itself

        Not a fact anymore. By the way, there are 8 years between Norfolk and Brooklyn.
        Quote: Engineer
        Do you seriously think the Lords of the Admiralty asked politicians

        This is your English admirals 20-ies for some reason want to fight the Japanese 40-ies. Popadants.
        Quote: Engineer
        And we are not going to increase it.

        York / Colony?
        Quote: Engineer
        Cruisers participated everywhere and everywhere there was a demand for the big and the strong.

        Apparently, it seemed to you that I canceled 19 English MCTs? No, I haven't. From KRT, I would only cancel New Orleans with Wichita, and that the Americans were angrier and put 20 Balts at once in the 39th.
        Quote: Engineer
        In a limited limit, the value of each unit must be increased.

        What for? One unit will never be in two places at once.
        Quote: Engineer
        His Majesty Essex. Needed

        What an alternative you are.
        Quote: Engineer
        Essexes and destroyers and submarines are needed. As in reality. Yapam need dragons and akizuk. Brittam colossuses and destroyers and sloops

        I seem to have already blamed you for your propensity to progress. Essexes are not the reality of the 30s.
        Quote: Engineer
        You continue to drown for Balt, although to give it real value you had to go all out

        I continue to drown for Balt, because a normal 40s KRT looked like Balt, and not like Mogami, God forbid. Your desire to prove that the Americans were wrong by exchanging cleaves for balts looks strange. In addition, you are constantly shifting to the second line of trenches "military-built ships are not needed", although why not build, since there are opportunities, it is not clear.
        As I have already emphasized many times, I argue from the point of view of the rational use of resources. Cleveland was not a model of intelligence in any context, much less Brooklyn. Especially Brooklyn, here you can just point a finger at a healthy person at Brooklyn. I'm talking about Mogami, if anything, not about Aretyuzu. By the way, about Cleveland a healthy person. Swiftsur was founded in September 41, a little over a year after the first Cleveland, somewhere in the area of ​​the American's 10th corps (excluding AB).
        Quote: Engineer
        Japanese strands + Akizuki optimum or very close.

        Oddly enough, I agree.
      4. Engineer
        Engineer April 24 2021 18: 48
        0
        I will say again, I consider all ten-thousanders, KRL with 6 "towers, a mistake. Except, of course, Mogami. Border cases - Fiji and the last Condottieri.

        The mistake is what can be better? undoubtedly
        Fiji is almost TKR, the question arises, are we saving on buttons?
        In Fiji, I have no information on the price. It would be clearer what we were fighting for

        By the way, about Cleveland a healthy person. Swiftsur was founded in September 41, a little over a year after the first Cleveland, somewhere in the area of ​​the American's 10th corps (excluding AB).

        Remove one tower from the cleave, eliminate the overload, and get almost a complete analogue. If the Americans fought in the North Atlantic and covered the convoys, they might have done so.
        And so the Cleveland is better armed and armored.
        What for? One unit will never be in two places at once.

        But in reality, the Angles came to the "light-heavy" colonies, and not the post-aretus.
        I seem to have already blamed you for your propensity to progress. Essexes are not the reality of the 30s.

        You did not understand
        Here it is
        Essexes and destroyers and submarines are needed. As in reality. Yapam need dragons and akizuk. Brittam colossuses and destroyers and sloops

        Refers exclusively to wartime. And not to attempts to change the pre-war construction.
        Apparently, it seemed to you that I canceled 19 English MCTs?

        Didn't seem to. But the niche for Arethews did not appear that way. And in general, for small KRLs in the realities of war.
        In addition, you are constantly shifting to the second line of trenches "military-built ships are not needed", although why not build, since there are opportunities, it is not clear.

        Who has? from the amers? Undoubtedly at the Yaps? basically no. The Britons? Complicated.
        In 42 years, not a single normal aircraft carrier for direct cover of northern convoys, you cannot look at wartime destroyers without tears, and in general there is not much.

        Oddly enough, I agree.

        So after all, there are no light cruisers in this concept.

        Summary
        discas about the CFL niche revolves around Fiji again. The country that is building Brooklyn and will build Baltimore does not need Fiji. A country that has Mogami and Tekai doesn't need Fiji. Does a country that has Fiji need Fiji, provided that there is no Mogami, but there is only a Norfolk, and there will be no Balts in principle? Maybe from the age of 37, realizing that the Yapas and Itals will not go to the second London, and assessing their achievements, not to build a second series of towns and Fiji, but to build a 4x2x8 "TKR" according to the formula, declare 10 - build 11 - modernize 12 thousand tons?
        We again squeezed KRL into a niche and TCR characteristics
        This is your English admirals 20-ies for some reason want to fight the Japanese 40-ies. Popadants.

        Speech specifically about the 37th year. The Britons stubbornly ignore the two elephants.
      5. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 24 2021 19: 33
        -1
        Quote: Engineer
        Fiji is almost TKR, the question arises, are we saving on buttons?

        MCTs are banned. And if we remove the fourth tower from 8 "Fiji, we will return to the York problem.
        Once again, if you want to put 8-9 barrels of 8 ", fire control system and air defense adequate for the 40s, and even sensible armor - fly out in 15K in no time.
        Quote: Engineer
        In Fiji, I have no information on the price. It would be clearer what we were fighting for

        The first thing that came across. Jamaica 1940, again 2M, again they, relatives. True, there is already everything complicated with the pound exchange rate.
        Quote: Engineer
        Remove one tower from the cleave, eliminate the overload, and get almost a complete analogue.

        So the British have already removed))) Uganda summer 39th. But Americans are the smartest, as usual.
        Quote: Engineer
        the reality of the Angles came to the "light-heavy" colonies, not post-aretus

        They solved the problem "how to cram Town into 8K" and crammed it. It's a shame if in vain.
        Are you now drowning for Colony? I cannot keep track of the change in your position.
        Quote: Engineer
        But the niche for Arethews did not appear that way. And in general, for small KRLs in the realities of war.

        In the realities of war, the niche is about the same as that of Fiji with cleats. Not a war with Japanese MCTs never. Another thing is that during the war the aforementioned ships turned into a combined KRL - an air defense cruiser, and there is not much room for such a feint on Aretyuz.
        Quote: Engineer
        Who has? from the amers? Undoubtedly

        I actually talked about the Balts at the beginning.
        Quote: Engineer
        realizing that the Yapas and Itals will not go to the second London,
        Cancel a second London? It's like giving a shit.
        Your position - the correct decision is a large MCT and a small KRL (Akizuki will not fit into the pre-war EVs). This is the case for post-war Americans. If the number of MCTs is limited, then you can build almost MCT on 10K-6 ", or you can try to build something reasonable just like a CRT. Even the Yankees are not enough for all the holes of the MCT, and the work of 10 Ohms and 9 Atlant must also be done by someone Small 3K QRLs, in turn, have limited seaworthiness for the ocean, so it is very worthwhile to think about something in the size of 5-6K.
      6. Engineer
        Engineer April 24 2021 20: 15
        0
        Once again, if you want to put 8-9 barrels of 8 ", fire control system and air defense adequate for the 40s, and even sensible armor - fly out in 15K in no time.

        And I once again write that this is all from the evil one and MCT in the technologies of the 30s are quite adequate in the 40s.
        Norfolk and Portland and Yapas. Everything is good.
        I again remind you about half the price of Bismarck - Hipster. More than half the price of Washington Baltimore.
        And when the British designed their TKR in the early 40s, they immediately got 5 million. More than half of the king.
        No need to move 15 thousand. There is no need to improve and optimize cruisers. Golden Formula 10-11-12

        The first thing that came across. Jamaica 1940, again 2M, again they, relatives. True, there is already everything complicated with the pound exchange rate.

        Inflation in Britain
        1940 16.8%
        1939 2.8%
        1938 1.6%
        1937 3.4%
        1936 0.7%
        1935 0.7%
        1934 0.0%
        Thus, nothing significant until just 40 years old. But KF worked under fixed contracts, which I have written about many times. The money was most likely allocated even earlier. Remembering the towns with 2.14 million. Still saving on buttons?
        as the British have already removed))) Uganda summer of the 39th. But Americans are the smartest, as usual.

        Stop. Friedman writes that the colonies suffered precisely from what the Clevelands are charged with - overload, stability problems, cramped conditions, and lack of displacement reserves.
        The British take down the tower, but still get the 9000 standard and this (Swiftsur) is served as a standard. In fact, if the Americans had acted in more turbulent latitudes, they would also quite possibly have done so and would have received their equivalent. Expensive, but more powerful. Parity.
        Default Fiji doesn't look better than Cleave. Parity again
        Are you now drowning for Colony? I cannot keep track of the change in your position.

        I Finish Aretuza
        I actually talked about the Balts at the beginning.

        And at the very beginning I said it is not necessary)

        Cancel a second London? It's like giving a shit.

        Lymephilam? Count me in

        So it is very worthwhile to think about something in the amount of 5-6K

        In the war, they did not come up with it. After too.
      7. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 24 2021 22: 48
        0
        Quote: Engineer
        Norfolk and Portland and Yapas. Everything is good.

        Why Portland? Wichita.
        Quote: Engineer
        More than half the price of Washington Baltimore.

        What does Washington have to do with it? A quarter of Iowa, less than half of Alaska. As for the Germans, the later the bookmark is, the crazier the prices.
        Quote: Engineer
        Golden Formula 10-11-12

        I don't like the "just fine" approach for ships at Cleveland's price. For any ships.
        Quote: Engineer
        Remembering the towns with 2.14 million

        What for? Jamaica is an 8K town, it shouldn't be cheaper. If you want to push through the thesis that the Town at the County price is a bad buy, then that's another conversation.
        Quote: Engineer
        the Clevelands are charged with overload, stability problems, cramped conditions, lack of displacement reserve.

        Exactly. The Americans did the same shit, but almost one and a half times more. At the same time, at the time of laying the cleave, it was known about the problems of Fiji. How could you be so pathetic - the devil only knows.
        Quote: Engineer
        In fact, if the Americans had acted in more turbulent latitudes, they would also quite possibly have done so and would have received their equivalent. Expensive, but more powerful. Parity.

        What the hell? Why remake Cleve if there is a Balt for practically the same money? Or do you respect any KRT, except for Balt?
        Quote: Engineer
        Default Fiji doesn't look better than Cleave

        And you take a closer look. May 5, 1940 taken over by the Fiji Navy, Cleveland laid down on July 1, 1940. The British have already managed to realize, repent and lay down all 3 Ugandans, and the Americans have not even begun their long way through the rake. Although it seemed that they cut the corner and made just Uganda upsize from Brooklyn.
        Quote: Engineer
        I Finish Aretuza

        Do not finish off, the British finished off not Fiji, but Dido. By the way, a bad ship.
        Quote: Engineer
        Lymephilam? Count me in

        I had no doubt that you have something to lay out. But canceling London in '37 is a completely different alternative. Everything changes there.
        Quote: Engineer
        In the war, they did not come up with

        Come on. And before, and during, and after the war, ships 4-6K in bulk. Over time, they only ceased to be called cruisers.
      8. Engineer
        Engineer April 24 2021 23: 44
        0
        Why Portland? Wichita.

        Portland just lit up like a god. Tore up the dance floor with a template to boot. So he cited it as an example that the KRT from the 30s is very nothing.
        What does Washington have to do with it? A quarter of Iowa, less than half of Alaska. As for the Germans, the later the bookmark is, the crazier the prices.

        What does Iowa and even more useless Alaska have to do with it?
        Washington is actually the most useful American battleship. I compare it with him.

        What for? Jamaica is an 8K town, it shouldn't be cheaper.

        Why shouldn't you? We save a thousand tons of metal structures and a couple of hundred tons of armored steel, less powerful machines. Some kind of alternative arithmetic for lemon.
        Exactly. The Americans did the same shit, but almost one and a half times more. At the same time, at the time of laying the cleave, it was known about the problems of Fiji. How could you be so pathetic - the devil only knows.

        So Fiji is shit after all? Amazing nearby.
        Why is Swiftshur the best? Shit cut and served again ceases to be so?
        Pathetic Cleve is definitely stronger than Fiji.
        By the way, an interesting pattern:
        Yorktyune-Illastries, Atlanta-Dido, town-Brooklyn, Fiji-Cleve, King Washington. Americans are always stronger, although not optimal and overpriced except for York

        What the hell? Why remake Cleve if there is a Balt for practically the same money?

        Balt is not until 43 years old in real life. Of the two alternatives, Cleve's rework is much smaller compared to the Balt instead of Brooklyn.
        By the way 2, the first Brooklyn 18.5 million, the last 25 million Clevelands 31-42 million Baltimore 40+
        Brooklyn is the cheapest and earliest. TA-dah
        Brooklyn is just like Xiaomi for amers. Top for your money. Humble yourself.

        Do not finish off, the British finished off not Fiji, but Dido. By the way, a bad ship.

        Again, a successful ship of 5-8 thousand tons does not come out. Amazing

        But canceling London in '37 is a completely different alternative.

        I was not going to alternative, just captain. The British set the limit, the Americans agree. Italians do not invite Littorio from them, the Japanese send everyone Yamato from them. The French agree. Germany agrees, but builds Bismarck, the USSR agrees, but builds the Soviet Union. Some kind of crap for all the "good and progressive", for the "enlightened" especially
        By the way 3. As I understand it, 2nd London did not limit the size of destroyers. They fall into category b Light Surface vessels with a limit of 8000 tons and 155 mm cannon. Akizuki is legal for all fleets.
      9. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 25 2021 00: 26
        -1
        Quote: Engineer
        Portland just lit up like a god

        Once a year, the stick shoots.
        Quote: Engineer
        Washington is actually the most useful American battleship.

        In the middle of 41, Carolina is not on the menu. And what is - I have named. It seems that the economic linkors in the realities of the 40s have already been hacked to death.
        Quote: Engineer
        Why shouldn’t it?

        Because by making the ship 20% smaller with all other possibilities being equal, you will most likely make it more expensive. Would the English have done the conditional Garibaldi - your arithmetic would have worked.
        Quote: Engineer
        So Fiji is shit after all? Amazing nearby

        Not like Cleveland)))
        Quote: Engineer
        Why is Swiftshur the best?

        Because they stopped fap on GC and found an acceptable balance.
        Quote: Engineer
        Pathetic Cleve is definitely stronger than Fiji.

        Again you are drawn to compare a non-contractual ship with a contractual one.
        Quote: Engineer
        King Washington. Americans are always stronger, although not optimal

        2 Washington -5 Kings, Americans are slowing down, Vanguard-Alaska, Americans are crazy, what a shame.
        Quote: Engineer
        Balt is not until 43 years old in real life

        Well, Cleve is not there until autumn 42, and you still have to redo the project.
        Quote: Engineer
        Brooklyn cheapest and earliest

        Naturally, pre-war ships are cheaper. What's the news?
        Quote: Engineer
        Brooklyn is just like Xiaomi for amers. Top for your money.

        For amers, perhaps. Brooklyn 15 New Orleans 14, Wichita 19 Hornet 22, Cleveland 31, have I suggested starting the shootings?
        Quote: Engineer
        Again, a successful ship of 5-8 thousand tons does not come out

        Why would a ship with such artillery be successful?
        Quote: Engineer
        As I understand it, 2nd London did not limit the size of destroyers. They fall into category b Light Surface vessels there limit 8000 tons and 155 mm

        Not. You missed the speed limit and torpedo limits. EM 1500-1850, and then a cruiser.
        Quote: Engineer
        Some kind of crap for all the "good and progressive", for the "enlightened" especially

        What's the difference. The main thing is to tell journalists about the struggle for peace. Everything is not easy there, just from the strange Labourist MacDonald they switched to the strange conservative Baldwin. Sending everyone to such and such a mother is not the right kind of people.
      10. Engineer
        Engineer April 25 2021 10: 10
        0
        Once a year, the stick shoots.

        San Francisco and Norfolk again
        Not. You missed the speed limit and torpedo limits. EM 1500-1850, and then a cruiser.

        Where is it all?
        Isn't this the second London?
        https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000003-0257.pdf
        In the definitions, this is not only Light Surface vessels, Capital Ships, Aircraft-Carriers, Submarines etc

        And where is the tonnage limit?
      11. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 25 2021 11: 30
        0
        Quote: Engineer
        Where is it all?

        You are right, was careless. EO restrictions in the first London, in the second only light / minor demarcation. I have always taken the 1850 limit for 1939 for granted, this issue needs to be clarified.
      12. Engineer
        Engineer April 25 2021 11: 46
        0
        The total tonnage limit has also been removed. And for all types. So?
        Walk a flaw?
        Akizuki to every home
      13. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 25 2021 12: 45
        -1
        Quote: Engineer
        Walk a flaw?

        Not so easy. Vinson's Act 38 refers to all three treaties. And I don't see any akizuka on either side of the Atlantic.

        By the way, a technical question. Is it just my bell at the top of the website that has stopped tinkling?
      14. Engineer
        Engineer April 25 2021 13: 30
        0
        I don't seem to have a call either.

        Akizuk is not, and the British will not have them at all. After the tribles and jervis they seemed to get scared "oh guys, we make quite good destroyers, what's the matter with us, are we sick?" And they took up the old.
        Andryukha about battles "they had all types of weapons and equipment except, in fact, guns"

        And there really is no limit on the total tonnage.
      15. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 25 2021 19: 59
        -1
        Quote: Engineer
        Andryukha about battles "they had all types of weapons and equipment except, in fact, guns"

        You seem to have seen enough English sayings to understand that for the sake of a catchphrase, these people did not spare their father. Battle is more armed than Fletcher. On the Australian in general, there are 3 double staags, 6 single bofors and 2 main battery towers, this is most likely stronger than Geering (2x3x5 / 38, 2x4 + 2x2 40mm), given the effectiveness of stags.
      16. Engineer
        Engineer April 25 2021 21: 03
        0
        You seem to have seen enough English sayings to understand that for the sake of a catchphrase, these people did not spare their father.

        Amazing mental similarity with one of the commentators on VO winked
        Battle is armed stronger than Fletcher

        Usually you like to remind the bookmark date, but this is clearly not the case. "This is different"
        Battle "ultimate" in technology. But he was not late enough for the DB. Some even showed the flag of surrendered Japan. They would have been late for six months to be "the best destroyers of WWII" according to the established canon.
      17. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 25 2021 22: 11
        -1
        Quote: Engineer
        Amazing mental similarity with one of the commentators on VO

        I will definitely not regret the father of my own FDR.
        Quote: Engineer
        Usually you like to remind the bookmark date, but this is clearly not the case.

        Strange claim. You yourself brought the battle into the thread. With whom can I compare it, if not with the Americans of the same year of the bookmark? Another conversation is that the British at that moment already massively cosplayed Sevastopoli in terms of the construction time.
        Quote: Engineer
        They would have been late for six months to be "the best destroyers of WWII" according to the established canon.

        The canonical best destroyer is just Giering, adopted by the fleet in May 45th.
  7. unknown
    unknown April 25 2021 06: 23
    +1
    So, the fourth tower was already removed from the "colonies". And the displacement still grew from series to series. It turned out the same "La Galissoniere", only in a larger displacement.
  8. Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine April 25 2021 07: 01
    -1
    Quote: ignoto
    So, the fourth tower was already removed from the "colonies"

    Yes. But with 3 turrets, they have 9 guns, not 4, for example. About this and the conversation, that if you can allocate only ~ 500 tons or less on the main complex, then 8 "will not fit. Three York towers weigh 726 metric tons, three Balta 900+ towers, 4 two-gun Pensacola towers, very light, weigh 760 tons.
    Quote: ignoto
    Or maybe just keep building Brooklyn.

    Can not. The Americans removed one tower and added air defense, that is, they did exactly the same as the British from Fiji, but in a third larger size and with exactly the same problems, for some reason.
    Quote: ignoto
    that in the history of WWII there are no cases when a heavy cruiser won a duel with a light cruiser of the last generation.

    And how many such duels were there? And so that straight duels, and not three on one?
  9. bk0010
    bk0010 April 24 2021 19: 04
    0
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    This is your English admirals 20-ies for some reason want to fight the Japanese 40-ies. Popadants.
    Which ships would you send them documentation for if you played on their side?
    And why are you pushing Baltimore, and not Des Moines with post-war air defense and rapid-fire 8 "? 20 De Moines could not have been built in 39?
  10. Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine April 24 2021 22: 18
    0
    Quote: bk0010
    Which ships would you send them documentation for if you played on their side?

    Swiftshur.
    Quote: bk0010
    not Des Moines with post-war air defense and rapid-fire 8 "?

    Because Des Moines is a childhood dream come true, like driving a Lamborghini Diablo or blowing Pamela Anderson. Now 2021, Mrs. Anderson soon 54, Diablo is mostly rusty junk, and only sick will be proud of such achievements. How to be proud of Des Moines in the 50s.
    With one clarification. American admirals were fulfilling their dreams of the 30s not with their own money, but for the state ones.
    Quote: bk0010
    It was impossible to build 20 de moines in 39?

    Not. It would be possible - at the same shipyards and for the same money in the 39th they would build 20 battleships, albeit not the best ones.
  11. Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 24 2021 20: 15
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    Fight in the Danish Strait

    KRT participated there only as observers.

    Quote: Engineer
    Your undersized Aretuza is simply out of competition.

    In fact, when the British lost the Bismarck, Tovey sent the Aretuza to the Danish Strait, although a couple of towns were free ...
  12. Engineer
    Engineer April 24 2021 20: 19
    0
    KRT participated there only as observers.

    Eugen?
    In fact, when the British lost the Bismarck, Tovey sent the Aretuza to the Danish Strait, although a couple of towns were free ...

    I am trying to assess the real contribution. Not just participation.
  13. Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 12: 10
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    Eugen?

    Yes ... I didn't notice the elephant.
    Focused on the British.

    Quote: Engineer
    I am trying to assess the real contribution. Not just participation.

    Isn't plugging a potential hole an investment?
  14. Engineer
    Engineer April 25 2021 12: 18
    0
    From the outside it seems that Tovey just disposed of the least valuable asset - they will sink well, to hell with her.
    If there was a tangible contribution, then yes. I re-established contact there, brought in some big guys.
    Comrade Aretteyuza, during your absence they did not need your presence.
  15. Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 13: 46
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    Comrade Aretteyuza, during your absence they did not need your presence.

    As you wish... :)
  16. Engineer
    Engineer April 25 2021 15: 46
    0
    Don't take it personally, please
  17. Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 16: 09
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    Don't take it personally, please

    Yes, that's not the point at all ... :)
    I mean, you can argue endlessly and everyone will still remain with their own.
    In general, don't bother. ...
  18. Engineer
    Engineer April 25 2021 16: 24
    0
    My goal is to broaden the horizons of knowledge and a more comprehensive understanding whenever possible.

    Revisions are not uncommon. There was a time and I was sure that Implacable was absolutely the best, and the Italian fleet had failed all the tasks assigned to it.

    Aretyusa's combat value dropped sharply due to economy. There would be some episode to look at her from a different angle.
  19. Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 16: 53
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    Aretyusa's combat value dropped sharply due to economy. There would be some episode to look at her from a different angle.

    Connection actions Won't you suit you?
  20. Engineer
    Engineer April 25 2021 16: 57
    0
    Not. There is a beating of a child in a greenhouse. Baseball bat. The guardianship is purely symbolic.
  21. Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 17: 07
    +1
    Quote: Engineer
    The preservation is purely symbolic.

    Who is to blame that the Trento couple decided to withdraw themselves ... :)
  22. Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine April 25 2021 20: 04
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    There would be some episode to look at her from a different angle.

    Take a look at the Linders, there is a difference of 2 barrels of 6 ". The second pair of Arethews had 4 double 4" anti-aircraft guns, defeating 4 single ones on Linder, so it would not be worse than him in artillery.
  23. unknown
    unknown April 25 2021 06: 14
    +1
    For Argentina, the British built the cruiser Argentina on the basis of Aretyuza.
    The standard displacement is 6500 tons. Armament is 9 * 152mm. It may be close to the optimal light cruiser in terms of cost.
  • unknown
    unknown April 25 2021 06: 08
    0
    Or maybe just keep building Brooklyn. Instead of Clevelands.
  • unknown
    unknown April 25 2021 06: 05
    0
    Patyanin in his monograph on British cruisers wrote that in the history of WWII there are no cases when a heavy cruiser won a duel with a light cruiser of the last generation.
    At long distances, the heavy cruiser has an advantage, but at medium ranges, due to the rate of fire, the light cruiser of the latest generation wins. Especially when you consider that most heavy cruisers are inferior to light cruisers of the latest generation in terms of armor.
    1. Macsen_wledig
      Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 12: 12
      0
      Quote: ignoto
      Patyanin in his monograph on British cruisers wrote that in the history of WWII there are no cases when a heavy cruiser won a duel with a light cruiser of the last generation.

      Well ... This.
      If you dig into the details of the battles, then some secondary factors will surely come up.
  • unknown
    unknown April 24 2021 05: 49
    0
    The best light cruiser of the WWII is the Italian type E. Armor 2131 tons, and on the Baltimore - 1790 tons.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine April 24 2021 12: 25
      0
      Quote: ignoto
      Italian type E

      Nice car, but big. Again the question "why not 8", Northampton is the same size, Algeria is slightly larger. Garibaldi is good against the background of the KRL, which are one and a half times smaller, but against the background of the named KRT, and even 6 "machine guns of the Anglo-Saxons, and even the Colony, is no longer a fact.
      1. unknown
        unknown April 25 2021 06: 28
        0
        10 * 152mm with a firing range of 26 km. Some of the heavy ones had a firing range of 28 km.
        And, for some reason, we forget the cruiser type 68. The firing range is 32,5 km. Like the best heavy ones.
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig April 25 2021 12: 13
          0
          Quote: ignoto
          10 * 152mm with a firing range of 26 km. Some of the heavy ones had a firing range of 28 km.
          And, for some reason, we forget the cruiser type 68. The firing range is 32,5 km. Like the best heavy ones.

          The firing range is a thing in itself ...
          In reality, they preferred to shoot at a range of full visibility of the target with the KDP.
  • unknown
    unknown April 24 2021 05: 40
    0
    The optimal heavy cruisers are German "battleships" of the "Deutschland" type.
    Close to optimal are New Orleans-class cruisers.
    From the lungs - "La Galissoniere" and Italian "condottieri" types D and C.
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 22 2021 12: 29
    +1
    Quote: bk0010
    No: the universal 6 "on" the heaviest light cruisers of 18000 tons "turned out to be not only expensive, but also so heavy that a tower with a non-universal 6" together with a tower with a universal 5 "came out easier than one tower with a universal 6".

    Well, yes, 208 tons for a two-gun turret with a universal 6 "/ 47 versus 155-175 tons for a three-gun turret with a non-universal 6" / 47.

    In principle, for four towers it is possible to fit into 11 kt of standard displacement: the shortened Brooklyn, in which 5x3-152 / 47 and the entire ZKDB are replaced by 4x2-152 / 47 DP.
    Quote: bk0010
    Tell me, who do you think can play the role of the optimal light cruiser WWII?

    But they are not. The combatants are suboptimal, and the non-combatants do not know their real characteristics.
    1. bk0010
      bk0010 April 22 2021 21: 14
      0
      Quote: Alexey RA
      But they are not. The combatants are suboptimal, and the non-combatants do not know their real characteristics.
      Thank you
      Quote: Alexey RA
      shortened "Brooklyn", in which 5x3-152 / 47 and the entire ZKDB were replaced by 4x2-152 / 47 DP.
      What for? 127 mm reached everyone both in height and in range, and 12 6 "is an argument better than 8 6".
      Quote: Alexey RA
      can fit into 11 kt standard displacement
      All the evil in this phrase: well, in the times of treaties, all right, but during the war, why "write"? It would be necessary to proceed from the tasks, to calculate the needs and already from them to calculate the displacement. After all, this is not a battleship, which may not fit into the channel, but the reduction in displacement also costs money and, perhaps, not very different from the money for increasing VI.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine April 22 2021 22: 08
        +2
        Quote: bk0010
        is there one among the lungs?

        Two, Tre Krunur (founded in 43, designed even earlier, but it took a long time to complete) and Jacob van Heemskerk. La Galissonniere is usually praised, but in the 40s it was already outdated.
        1. bk0010
          bk0010 April 23 2021 20: 27
          0
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Two, Tre Krunur (founded in 43, designed even earlier, but it took a long time to complete) and Jacob van Heemskerk.
          I didn't know about them before, thanks. But something they did not impress at all in comparison with the subj, and that was declared in the article as an unsuccessful cruiser.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine April 24 2021 02: 07
            +1
            Quote: bk0010
            that one was declared in the article an unsuccessful cruiser.

            He was unsuccessful.
            Although I protect the KRL from the Engineer's attacks, in the case of large KRLs he is right - Cleve most likely won from replacing the 3-gun turrets with 2-gun 8 "towers from Pensacola. Plus it's just a badly made ship, this happens quite often.

            Successful CRLs, on the one hand, should not raise the question "why not just put 8 inches" - they should be significantly smaller and cheaper, and on the other hand, they should qualitatively surpass EVs, even the strongest, so that again there is no question "why for this money did not build 2-3 destroyers. " In such cases, we knock out all KRL for 10 + K tons and are looking for something acceptable in 5-8 thousand tons of VI. There were quite a few of them in the thirties. But in the 40s, the size and price of ships, including the CD, took off with a rocket, so saving a couple of hundred tons on the main battery was already sheer triviality. Some new perspective on the issue was required. So if we are talking about interesting ships of the war period, the choice is not so great.
        2. unknown
          unknown April 24 2021 05: 41
          0
          The Swedish cruiser had Italian roots.
  • Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 21 2021 12: 53
    +6
    But not all of them. As you know, cruisers with a displacement of up to 10 tons were not covered by this agreement, which made it very easy for shipbuilders to make a profit. The cruisers were quickly divided into light and heavy, and since the treaty did not apply to light actions, they could be stamped without restrictions at all.

    The author never bothered to read the contracts of the 20s and 30s ...

    Structurally, for some reason, it was believed that the Clevelands had stability problems.

    Taking into account what the author sets out below, he also needs to read Evers' "Military Shipbuilding" ...

    Unlike the Helena, the Clevelands had a triple bottom instead of a double bottom for mine protection.

    If the author had looked at the drawings of the "Brooklyn", he would have seen that there was a triple bottom on the "Brooklyn" as well.

    Even the Houston, which received two torpedoes and received what is said to be 6 tons of water. It is unlikely that that many, but two torpedoes are serious anyway.

    Page 10 War damage report No.53 answers your question ... :)

    The innovation was that the boilers were not located in one or two boiler rooms, but were separated by turbine compartments.

    On the 2nd series of "Brooklyn" GEM was echeloned ...

    And further on the little things ...
  • CTABEP
    CTABEP April 21 2021 17: 46
    0
    God is on the side of large battalions.
  • alsoclean
    alsoclean April 21 2021 21: 10
    +1
    "Dutul"... 2 battle stars.

    The cruiser carried her main service as part of the Atlantic patrols. He got to the Pacific Ocean only at the beginning of 1945 and managed to take part in the most recent strikes against Japan.

    It wasn't actually called that ...
    And it was called CL-87 Duluth Well, if in Russian - DOULUT !!