Reply to thread

Message

Pretty sure the 12” was the opposite of a serious project. The 9.2 more serious but evaporated against reality of doing it and Staff unanimously in favour of Vanguards (Brown’s Nelson to Vanguard). Brown talks about various 9.2/8” heavy cruisers but makes no mention of a 12” at all so the idea there was some push to send that kind of firepower to the Far East is without evidence. As above makes far more sense as a quick study just to flesh out what the Japanese might do - I’ve been part of that for developing outline aircraft concepts that draw from intelligence and feed back to aid analysis of int.

Again from Brown - more Vanguards were proposed, to use turrets from R class boats but there was no effort to spare.

I suspect building ships reliant on turrets that might not be available (in battle/sunk!) was also a consideration given only 4 were spare immediately for Vanguard. The Rs being expected to be useful as pre-Dreads had been in WWI.

<blockquote data-quote="Purpletrouble" data-source="post: 393861" data-attributes="member: 15600">Pretty sure the 12” was the opposite of a serious project. The 9.2 more serious but evaporated against reality of doing it and Staff unanimously in favour of Vanguards (Brown’s Nelson to Vanguard). Brown talks about various 9.2/8” heavy cruisers but makes no mention of a 12” at all so the idea there was some push to send that kind of firepower to the Far East is without evidence. As above makes far more sense as a quick study just to flesh out what the Japanese might do - I’ve been part of that for developing outline aircraft concepts that draw from intelligence and feed back to aid analysis of int.Again from Brown - more Vanguards were proposed, to use turrets from R class boats but there was no effort to spare.I suspect building ships reliant on turrets that might not be available (in battle/sunk!) was also a consideration given only 4 were spare immediately for Vanguard. The Rs being expected to be useful as pre-Dreads had been in WWI.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Purpletrouble, post: 393861, member: 15600"] Pretty sure the 12” was the opposite of a serious project. The 9.2 more serious but evaporated against reality of doing it and Staff unanimously in favour of Vanguards (Brown’s Nelson to Vanguard). Brown talks about various 9.2/8” heavy cruisers but makes no mention of a 12” at all so the idea there was some push to send that kind of firepower to the Far East is without evidence. As above makes far more sense as a quick study just to flesh out what the Japanese might do - I’ve been part of that for developing outline aircraft concepts that draw from intelligence and feed back to aid analysis of int. Again from Brown - more Vanguards were proposed, to use turrets from R class boats but there was no effort to spare. I suspect building ships reliant on turrets that might not be available (in battle/sunk!) was also a consideration given only 4 were spare immediately for Vanguard. The Rs being expected to be useful as pre-Dreads had been in WWI. [/QUOTE]

Verification