Although not strictly relevant to this thread, I have come across the original drawings in the ADM file so am posting here for posterity as the originals are rarely seen compared to the redraws from Layman & McLaughlin.The two images Tzoli posted above are from The Hybrid Warship by R. D. Layman & Stephen McLaughlin, Conway Press, 1991.
The first is a double reconstruction, a sketch based on a sketch in Antony Preston's Battleships 1856-1977 which was illustrating a hybrid Lion the DNC had drawn up in March 1941. This original sketch is lost. All we know is that all the main turrets were retained and the flight deck was too short. It had been the Controller, Rear Admiral Bruce Fraser who had asked the DNC, Goodall to base the hybrid design on Lion - Fraser pointedly rejected a hybrid based on Vanguard, presumably because she was more urgently wanted than the Lions.
Apparently the meeting hated the design. They proposed a Nelson-style arrangement of all turrets forward but they feared this would make the ship 50-55,000 tons. So it seems that the official design would have been a three-turret ship (A, B, Y layout). Preston's sketch was an illustration (I have never seen the 1977 original), we don't know what secondaries or dedicated carrier features were planned.
It was at this 12th March 1941 meeting that the Director of Plans proposed two quadruple turrets rather than the Nelson layout and sketched a doodle, which has ever since been interpreted - wrongly - as being based on Richelieu (which I have debunked elsewhere).
In any case by that September the official hybrid ship was dead.
The second drawing is based on a sketch by Rear Admiral Denis W Boyd, Flag Officer Mediterranean Aircraft Carriers. He submitted a report on 'Capital Ship Design' to Admiral Cunningham (C-in-C Med) in early 1942, no doubt heavily influenced by the destruction of Z Force a few weeks earlier. His proposal included a sketch of a hybrid battleship; 45,000 tons, 800 x 100 ft, 9x 15in or 16in guns, 16x 5.25in guns or smaller, an 80ft wide flight deck (wider if beam was increased to 110ft). It was simply a sketch and not with necessarily with Lion in mind at all. Cunningham sent the report to the Admiralty.
Goodall looked at it but as his own designs had been rejected as deeply flawed, this unsolicited design was of no interest.
Which ADM file are those from?Although not strictly relevant to this thread, I have come across the original drawings in the ADM file so am posting here for posterity as the originals are rarely seen compared to the redraws from Layman & McLaughlin.The two images Tzoli posted above are from The Hybrid Warship by R. D. Layman & Stephen McLaughlin, Conway Press, 1991.
The first is a double reconstruction, a sketch based on a sketch in Antony Preston's Battleships 1856-1977 which was illustrating a hybrid Lion the DNC had drawn up in March 1941. This original sketch is lost. All we know is that all the main turrets were retained and the flight deck was too short. It had been the Controller, Rear Admiral Bruce Fraser who had asked the DNC, Goodall to base the hybrid design on Lion - Fraser pointedly rejected a hybrid based on Vanguard, presumably because she was more urgently wanted than the Lions.
Apparently the meeting hated the design. They proposed a Nelson-style arrangement of all turrets forward but they feared this would make the ship 50-55,000 tons. So it seems that the official design would have been a three-turret ship (A, B, Y layout). Preston's sketch was an illustration (I have never seen the 1977 original), we don't know what secondaries or dedicated carrier features were planned.
It was at this 12th March 1941 meeting that the Director of Plans proposed two quadruple turrets rather than the Nelson layout and sketched a doodle, which has ever since been interpreted - wrongly - as being based on Richelieu (which I have debunked elsewhere).
In any case by that September the official hybrid ship was dead.
The second drawing is based on a sketch by Rear Admiral Denis W Boyd, Flag Officer Mediterranean Aircraft Carriers. He submitted a report on 'Capital Ship Design' to Admiral Cunningham (C-in-C Med) in early 1942, no doubt heavily influenced by the destruction of Z Force a few weeks earlier. His proposal included a sketch of a hybrid battleship; 45,000 tons, 800 x 100 ft, 9x 15in or 16in guns, 16x 5.25in guns or smaller, an 80ft wide flight deck (wider if beam was increased to 110ft). It was simply a sketch and not with necessarily with Lion in mind at all. Cunningham sent the report to the Admiralty.
Goodall looked at it but as his own designs had been rejected as deeply flawed, this unsolicited design was of no interest.
Which ADM file are those from?
Thanks.Which ADM file are those from?
The file is ADM 1/11950
Description:
This file was originally catalogued under more than one subject code. These subject codes and details of this file are as follows:
AVIATION (90): Proposal by Rear Admiral Mediterranean Aircraft Carriers for aircraft-carrying capital ships.
SHIP AND VESSELS (91): Proposals by Rear Admiral Mediterranean Aircraft Carriers for aircraft carrying capital ships.
Thanks for both original drawings! Did you perhaps also photograph the file?Although not strictly relevant to this thread, I have come across the original drawings in the ADM file so am posting here for posterity as the originals are rarely seen compared to the redraws from Layman & McLaughlin.The two images Tzoli posted above are from The Hybrid Warship by R. D. Layman & Stephen McLaughlin, Conway Press, 1991.
The first is a double reconstruction, a sketch based on a sketch in Antony Preston's Battleships 1856-1977 which was illustrating a hybrid Lion the DNC had drawn up in March 1941. This original sketch is lost. All we know is that all the main turrets were retained and the flight deck was too short. It had been the Controller, Rear Admiral Bruce Fraser who had asked the DNC, Goodall to base the hybrid design on Lion - Fraser pointedly rejected a hybrid based on Vanguard, presumably because she was more urgently wanted than the Lions.
Apparently the meeting hated the design. They proposed a Nelson-style arrangement of all turrets forward but they feared this would make the ship 50-55,000 tons. So it seems that the official design would have been a three-turret ship (A, B, Y layout). Preston's sketch was an illustration (I have never seen the 1977 original), we don't know what secondaries or dedicated carrier features were planned.
It was at this 12th March 1941 meeting that the Director of Plans proposed two quadruple turrets rather than the Nelson layout and sketched a doodle, which has ever since been interpreted - wrongly - as being based on Richelieu (which I have debunked elsewhere).
In any case by that September the official hybrid ship was dead.
The second drawing is based on a sketch by Rear Admiral Denis W Boyd, Flag Officer Mediterranean Aircraft Carriers. He submitted a report on 'Capital Ship Design' to Admiral Cunningham (C-in-C Med) in early 1942, no doubt heavily influenced by the destruction of Z Force a few weeks earlier. His proposal included a sketch of a hybrid battleship; 45,000 tons, 800 x 100 ft, 9x 15in or 16in guns, 16x 5.25in guns or smaller, an 80ft wide flight deck (wider if beam was increased to 110ft). It was simply a sketch and not with necessarily with Lion in mind at all. Cunningham sent the report to the Admiralty.
Goodall looked at it but as his own designs had been rejected as deeply flawed, this unsolicited design was of no interest.
No, I came across the images somewhere else, but next time I get to Kew I might pull this file to have a look see.Thanks for both original drawings! Did you perhaps also photograph the file?
greetings
The letters that go with these drawings have been published inThanks for both original drawings! Did you perhaps also photograph the file?Although not strictly relevant to this thread, I have come across the original drawings in the ADM file so am posting here for posterity as the originals are rarely seen compared to the redraws from Layman & McLaughlin.The two images Tzoli posted above are from The Hybrid Warship by R. D. Layman & Stephen McLaughlin, Conway Press, 1991.
The first is a double reconstruction, a sketch based on a sketch in Antony Preston's Battleships 1856-1977 which was illustrating a hybrid Lion the DNC had drawn up in March 1941. This original sketch is lost. All we know is that all the main turrets were retained and the flight deck was too short. It had been the Controller, Rear Admiral Bruce Fraser who had asked the DNC, Goodall to base the hybrid design on Lion - Fraser pointedly rejected a hybrid based on Vanguard, presumably because she was more urgently wanted than the Lions.
Apparently the meeting hated the design. They proposed a Nelson-style arrangement of all turrets forward but they feared this would make the ship 50-55,000 tons. So it seems that the official design would have been a three-turret ship (A, B, Y layout). Preston's sketch was an illustration (I have never seen the 1977 original), we don't know what secondaries or dedicated carrier features were planned.
It was at this 12th March 1941 meeting that the Director of Plans proposed two quadruple turrets rather than the Nelson layout and sketched a doodle, which has ever since been interpreted - wrongly - as being based on Richelieu (which I have debunked elsewhere).
In any case by that September the official hybrid ship was dead.
The second drawing is based on a sketch by Rear Admiral Denis W Boyd, Flag Officer Mediterranean Aircraft Carriers. He submitted a report on 'Capital Ship Design' to Admiral Cunningham (C-in-C Med) in early 1942, no doubt heavily influenced by the destruction of Z Force a few weeks earlier. His proposal included a sketch of a hybrid battleship; 45,000 tons, 800 x 100 ft, 9x 15in or 16in guns, 16x 5.25in guns or smaller, an 80ft wide flight deck (wider if beam was increased to 110ft). It was simply a sketch and not with necessarily with Lion in mind at all. Cunningham sent the report to the Admiralty.
Goodall looked at it but as his own designs had been rejected as deeply flawed, this unsolicited design was of no interest.
greetings
Ron
Jones, B (ed), 2018, The Fleet Air Arm in the Second World War Volume II, 1942-1943, Publications of the Navy Records Society No. 165, Routledge, London & New York |
Dear @Tzoli,Ships covers from the Brass Foundry archives. My freind went there and photographed the relevant covers as well as 2 of the Vanguard covers, both showing the as designed (aka KGV/Lion Proto Vanguard style superstructure, secondaries, catapult and pom-poms) and as finished drawings
As far as I know I passed everything that I photographed on to you. That would be three ships covers for the 1938 Lion, one ships cover for the 1944-45 Lion and the "as designed" and "as completed" plans for Vanguard and the "as designed" plans for 1938 Lion. There is an armour plan for Lion (attached below) but none for Vanguard and I can't recall if there was one or not. I can have a look next time I visit the Brass Foundry; although I am not sure when that will be. However, the Vanguard plans do show the armour arrangement very well (attached below) even though they don't state the various thicknesses. The Vanguard ships cover would provide those figures but I don't have that yet.
Only two Vanguard covers were scanned, as laid down and as finished. Quoting my friend:
As far as I know I passed everything that I photographed on to you. That would be three ships covers for the 1938 Lion, one ships cover for the 1944-45 Lion and the "as designed" and "as completed" plans for Vanguard and the "as designed" plans for 1938 Lion. There is an armour plan for Lion (attached below) but none for Vanguard and I can't recall if there was one or not. I can have a look next time I visit the Brass Foundry; although I am not sure when that will be. However, the Vanguard plans do show the armour arrangement very well (attached below) even though they don't state the various thicknesses. The Vanguard ships cover would provide those figures but I don't have that yet.
I want to build a replica of the lion class in this picture but in full hull.Can you give me the plan(s) or the reference (imperial war museum,national maritime museum or british archives...) for ordering them? Sincerely yours.My RN battleship
View attachment 627519
...which, given the ongoing development of automatic guns, FCS, and, potentially, guided shells(AA/AS) - was the absolutely right path to go. Fire control was going through a revolution, why keep the old (FC/probability) based gun numbers?I'm surprised by the continuous degradation of the design as cost realizations came into play. If the thought exercises continued at that rate, they eventually might have been down to two twins up front and forgone armor altogether except for the magazines.
I know the name Vanguard was proposed for Lion no.5 not sure if a name was proposed for the last one though- Unnamed and Unnamed (never ordered - anyone know if they were allocated names??)