Yuku free message boards

Dave Bender wrote:

---

Not if Britain begins a naval building race. The U.S. will take it as a challenge and out build the RN. Just like they threatened to do during WWI when Britain was stubborn concerning some minor diplomatic issue.

Depending on an internationally orientated US Government, I would agree. However the policy of the USA in the twenties was more domestically orientated and formulated as Isolationalistic, meaning it did not care what was going around outside US borders for most of the time. (Something like: "if you leave me alone, I will leave you alone".) The USA was not fully convinced it needed a deepwater navy equal to the Royal Navy, or even a navy at all to combat at distant waters. The USN basically stuck to what is already had and did not develop new types of warships, appart from the three Aircraft Carriers. Even the projected battleships were old style warships, simmilar to the existing battlefleet, only a bit larger. The Battlecruisers were even worse and at best just as Fisher originally had in mind for a battlecruiser. Simmilarly the USN did not develop the cruiserconcept, as other powers did and only designed a few scoutcruisers of the Omaha class in this period, while the Washington Cruisers of Salt Lake City class were projected later on as a resuilt of Japanese building.
So USN most likely will get between 25 and 30 battleships/battlecruisers in 1930. (12 newly build ones + 1 add. Colorado Class + 12 post Nevada class vessels. Older pre Nevada's most likely decommisioned, but perhaps in mothballs.)

The Royal Navy was the biggest navy after the Great War ended, although equipped with many older and worn out vessels. The bulk of the Grand Fleet was obsolete and all 12 inch and some 13.5 inch gunned ships were overclassed by the latest USN and IJN designs. Only the Iron Duke Class and HMS Tiger still retained some fighting value, as did the 15 inch gunned ships. The Fisher "Large Light Cruisers" were of no use and were supposed to get reconstructed as aircraft carriers. The Royal Navy badly needed the newly designed and warexperience thought through G-3 and simmilar vessels, even if the Hood Class was to be sacreficed for this. (appart from the lead vessel, naturally) Even if only four were constructed, the total ballance of power would shift again to the UK, as these ships had no contemporaries of equal capabilities. Perhaps even the two Nelsons could be build as well, to reenforce the slow battlefleet. Even with limmited economical resources, it was still affordable for the UK, still the worlds second largest economy in the Interbellum.
So the Royal Navy in 1930 could posses between 22 and 26 ships in the battlefleet, 16 to 20 of them old and six, or more, new additions.)

Japan is something else, as it had nine Dreadnought type vessels. (one accidently destroyed in the war.) and was building the two Nagato's and projected six more fast BB's and eight Battlecruisers. Of the later ones, one was destroyed in the Tokyo Earthquake, still leaving potentially 15 new ships plus two plus nine. With a grand total of at least 25 battleships, it would be equal in total to both USN and Royal Navy, with an advanced possition, since it did not need to devide its battlefleet on two oceans, like the other superpowers. Even if Settsu was decommisioned, it did not do anything on this strength ballance, since Settsu already was out of date. Even the possible deactivation of the Kongo's was not a serious loss, as the much more powerfull Amagi Class vessels could replace them, as did the even more powerfull Nr-13 class.
Connsequence of this was a possible economic drop, if the IJN did put this much energy in its Naval Arms race.