Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
tm63au

A Possible Alternative History For Two Jutland Greats ?

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,008
[UNHLY]
Members
3,225 posts
25,257 battles

Two great ships both cherished and respected by both sides then and now  have there histories changed 

In 1924 HMS Lion is sold for scrap under The Washington Treaty. What if history is changed and this did not happen.

Three-stacked, dark grey warship at sea

Public outcry for Admiral beatty's Flagship to become a Museum and tourist attraction allows the ship to be put in reserve.

On the 21st June 1919 SMS Derfflinger  is scuttled, raised in 1939 then broken up 1946, again history takes a different path and the ship is boarded and secured before it can be sunk. the ship is left at Scapa flow.  

  A large warship rolls onto its side

In the early 1920's as a act of good will and friendship by Great Britain the ship is returned to Germany.

The Navy has the ship restored for prosperity and placed as a Museum and ceremonial ship.

Fast forward to the late 1920's early 30's both sides start rearming, would and could both sides bring these WWI veterans out for another show down.

Would both Sides do a massive refit and refurbishment to bring them up to front line status and how would look and could they even with a revamp hold there own against there more modern WWII counterparts, what kind morale for both navies be if the sight of the two Jutland warriors were leading the charge into battle once more.

Would it be only worth both nations to do a partial refurbishment on both ships due to age and technology restraints on both ships and have them a second line and or reserve status, reduced to coastal duties or floating AA  duties.

Or perhaps both sides would dare not have them in conflict at all for morale reasons given the devastating effect on either nation if one or both ships were sunk

( refer Hood and Bismarck).

What would be there fate if history was changed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,892
[RLGN]
Members
16,168 posts
28,066 battles

Left alone to rot; if they’d not been kept up beyond caretaker/museum status; and eventually broken up for scrap steel because of national emergency needs.

Most likely left to rot. Yard space and available workers would likely be too limited by the needs of new construction, to allocate such things to break up an old ship.

Lion would finally be scrapped after the war, because politics I don’t care to get into a fight over again.

If the allies hadn’t already bombed it to scrap; Russia takes Derfflinger; screws around with it for five or ten years; then uses it as a target, or scraps it.

Sorry for being Debby Downer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[C_NT]
Members
949 posts
2,438 battles

Agree with the prophet. Outside of being a wreck there just wasn't a path where any of these ships survive to the current day.

It's a disgrace but the UK has unceremoniously scrapped every single historical capital ship since the early ironclad days. Dreadnought, Warspite, Duke of York nothing was safe. It's possible they would have saved Hood given it's status as the largest Royal Navy surface ship of all time and how popular it was(especially if it somehow managed to take out Bismarck) but I wouldn't hold my breath. They scrapped a replica of the Titanic. But to the Lions fate if it somehow survived Washington we need look no further than Tiger, the only 13.5 inch battlecruiser which did survive the treaty. The youtuber Drachinifel was discussing in his video about the Tiger which did survive the Washington Treaty that it just didn't make sense to produce the 13.5 inch shells for one ship when the rest of the battleships/battlecruisers were using 15 inch guns and it fell to the London treaty. And yeah I know the Lion was more historically important than Tiger, same as Iron Duke(which survived as a training ship until 1946) just that the UK at this time clearly didn't care about that sort of thing.

In terms of Derflingger, pretty much the only capital ship to survive Scapa Flow was Baden the most valuable ship of the whole group. They tested it came to the conclusion it was superior to anything in the RN..............and then sunk it in a test. If the most valuable asset in the group didn't sink in the scuttling and was still not kept around, I don't think there'd be hope for the rest of the group either. I don't think the UK would be willing to give the Germans Derflingger as a sign of good will either(they'd just scuttled their fleet) the French and Italians were more likely candidates. Sadly the best case scenario for these ships IMO was for them to sink far out enough where they could not be recovered for scrap living on as wrecks. 

Edited by Aristotle83
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
1,317 posts
41 minutes ago, Aristotle83 said:

just that the UK at this time clearly didn't care about that sort of thing.

It's not truthful or fair to simply say that the UK didn't care. Coming out of the Second World War the economy of the UK was in a right state with over a million homes being damaged or destroyed and enormous debts to be paid to other nations. It was simply not economically viable to preserve large capital ships for the future, spending enormous amounts of money on berthing them, restoring them to a suitable condition and maintaining upkeep going forwards - especially not when there are much more pressing matters to attend to. The sad truth is simply that they were worth more in that moment as scrap than as a potential investment for the future.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
14,008 posts
5,814 battles

It always amazes me how a not uncommon number of Americans consider it a 'disgrace' that the UK didn't spend money preserving their WW2 capital ships, when much of the nation's infrastructure had been damaged or destroyed, and the country was nearly bankrupt. We had no money, and needed what we did have elsewhere on more important things.

The US is fortunate that the Japanese and Germans were never able to seriously attack the US mainland in any prolonged bombing campaign. The US is fortunate that the war didn't take the economy to near the point of bankruptcy. You guys can forget how badly other countries were affected by WW2.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,072
Alpha Tester
6,679 posts
3,338 battles
3 hours ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Left alone to rot; if they’d not been kept up beyond caretaker/museum status; and eventually broken up for scrap steel because of national emergency needs.

Most likely left to rot. Yard space and available workers would likely be too limited by the needs of new construction, to allocate such things to break up an old ship.

Lion would finally be scrapped after the war, because politics I don’t care to get into a fight over again.

If the allies hadn’t already bombed it to scrap; Russia takes Derfflinger; screws around with it for five or ten years; then uses it as a target, or scraps it.

Sorry for being Debby Downer.

This would have to be my guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
604
[KIA-C]
Members
2,347 posts
15,197 battles

I think the only way a Jutland flagship gets preserved is if Jutland is a decisive victory similar to Trafalgar or Tsushima resulting in the destruction and/or surrender of the High Seas Fleet.  So for Lion to be preserved by public outcry would take a fair bit more going on than just what happened historically.  Ironically, you'd probably not have Derfflinger as a result, if the conditions to preserve Lion are met.

Edited by thegamefilmguruman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[C_NT]
Members
949 posts
2,438 battles
15 hours ago, zFireWyvern said:

It's not truthful or fair to simply say that the UK didn't care. Coming out of the Second World War the economy of the UK was in a right state with over a million homes being damaged or destroyed and enormous debts to be paid to other nations. It was simply not economically viable to preserve large capital ships for the future, spending enormous amounts of money on berthing them, restoring them to a suitable condition and maintaining upkeep going forwards - especially not when there are much more pressing matters to attend to. The sad truth is simply that they were worth more in that moment as scrap than as a potential investment for the future.

It is especially since this trend isn't just about the aftermath of WW2. Dreadnought and the WW1 era ships were scrapped in the 1920s. Olympic and the iconic ocean liners were scrapped in the 1930s. What happened after WW2 was the continuation of an existing trend not just a one off situation. 

 

Edited by Aristotle83
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[C_NT]
Members
949 posts
2,438 battles
15 hours ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

It always amazes me how a not uncommon number of Americans consider it a 'disgrace' that the UK didn't spend money preserving their WW2 capital ships, when much of the nation's infrastructure had been damaged or destroyed, and the country was nearly bankrupt. We had no money, and needed what we did have elsewhere on more important things.

The US is fortunate that the Japanese and Germans were never able to seriously attack the US mainland in any prolonged bombing campaign. The US is fortunate that the war didn't take the economy to near the point of bankruptcy. You guys can forget how badly other countries were affected by WW2.

And no one's expecting a country to preserve the whole fleet or even a notable fraction of it but rather a handful of iconic ships. And yes the US only preserved 1 dreadnought era BB beforehand but that era historically didn't matter to the US navy as much as WW2 it should be the other way around! As a result from WW2 we saved nearly every modern BB, a bunch of CV's, some heavy cruisers. We saved Olympia from the war with Spain. The UK couldn't save one major warship beyond a light cruiser from either era. We even had to preserve the Queen Mary, a BRITISH ocean liner. I'm sorry there is no defending the UK's record on this. 

And the UK was closer to the US's situation than they were to the Soviets, French Japanese, Germans and Italians. The UK's run as a great power lasted about another decade after WW2. The funding to save some of these ships was there.  

And I'd get this to an extent if WW1 didn't yield almost the exact same result. We preserved more ships from that era and it was a less important war in American history with almost none of the BB's seeing any action. 

And I started out like many maritime history people with ocean liners and the way the Olympic was scrapped when it was clearly viable as an attraction spoke to the way the UK treated their 20th century history. It is a disgrace at best an actual crime at worst. Growing a fondness for warships has only reinforced that. This viewpoint should not amaze you, it amazes me more there's people in the UK whose first instinct is to defend this when if anything they should be more upset than Americans. 

Is asking for say the preservation of Warspite, Duke of York maybe a County class heavy cruiser or is that too much? The Country class even shares the same built in regional pride thing which was instrumental to saving US BB's named after particular states especially Texas.

Edited by Aristotle83
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
1,317 posts
7 hours ago, Aristotle83 said:

It is especially since this trend isn't just about the aftermath of WW2. Dreadnought and the WW1 era ships were scrapped in the 1920s. Olympic and the iconic ocean liners were scrapped in the 1930s. What happened after WW2 was the continuation of an existing trend not just a one off situation

And you think that the economy of the UK didn't suffer enormously after WWI? Keep in mind that it took until 2015 for the UK to finally finish paying off its war loan that was taken out in 1917. The national debt of the country increased from £650 million in 1914 to £7 billion in 1918. It's also worth pointing out that the rate of technology development during the First World War, especially in terms of naval architecture meant that ships such as Dreadnought were superseded incredibly quickly and many didn't get the chance to build up a 'legendary' name for themselves in terms of combat achievements, many people then simply didn't look at them the same way we do today.

You're right in one sense though, WWII was a continuation of an existing trend, a trend of the nation being economically hammered by the cost of a World War.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
14,008 posts
5,814 battles
14 hours ago, Aristotle83 said:

And no one's expecting a country to preserve the whole fleet or even a notable fraction of it but rather a handful of iconic ships. And yes the US only preserved 1 dreadnought era BB beforehand but that era historically didn't matter to the US navy as much as WW2 it should be the other way around! As a result from WW2 we saved nearly every modern BB, a bunch of CV's, some heavy cruisers. We saved Olympia from the war with Spain. The UK couldn't save one major warship beyond a light cruiser from either era. We even had to preserve the Queen Mary, a BRITISH ocean liner. I'm sorry there is no defending the UK's record on this. 

And the UK was closer to the US's situation than they were to the Soviets, French Japanese, Germans and Italians. The UK's run as a great power lasted about another decade after WW2. The funding to save some of these ships was there.  

And I'd get this to an extent if WW1 didn't yield almost the exact same result. We preserved more ships from that era and it was a less important war in American history with almost none of the BB's seeing any action. 

And I started out like many maritime history people with ocean liners and the way the Olympic was scrapped when it was clearly viable as an attraction spoke to the way the UK treated their 20th century history. It is a disgrace at best an actual crime at worst. Growing a fondness for warships has only reinforced that. This viewpoint should not amaze you, it amazes me more there's people in the UK whose first instinct is to defend this when if anything they should be more upset than Americans. 

Is asking for say the preservation of Warspite, Duke of York maybe a County class heavy cruiser or is that too much? The Country class even shares the same built in regional pride thing which was instrumental to saving US BB's named after particular states especially Texas.

Murica saved this!

Murica saved that!

Honestly I think you're just reinforcing my criticism. You're superimposing your own country's history on top of others, and believing that because the US saved this and that, everyone should have been able to do it as well. 

You have failed to understand just how in debt the UK was. Retaining great power status for a while longer does not equal awash with cash. We already owed the US money from WW1 before WW2 even started, which put us into more debt. Those war debts weren't fully paid off until the 21st century. You have also failed to understand the politics of the post war period. Because when a country's economy is in tatters, the government have no money, rationing is still in effect for a few more years, towns have been bombed out and in need of repair, etc... Most citizens probably will not look too kindly on politicians saying "we will spend money on preserving these now obsolete battleships, instead of building new homes!"

It's not that the UK is a 'disgrace'. It's because the US is just the exception, having a unique set of financial, political, and cultural circumstances which made it possible to preserve much more from WW2. Look around at the other main combatants from WW2 and how many WW2 era ships they have saved between them. Honestly if you actually did some research on what historical ships we have preserved, you will find that the UK is far from being a disgrace among its peers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[C_NT]
Members
949 posts
2,438 battles
13 hours ago, zFireWyvern said:

And you think that the economy of the UK didn't suffer enormously after WWI? Keep in mind that it took until 2015 for the UK to finally finish paying off its war loan that was taken out in 1917. The national debt of the country increased from £650 million in 1914 to £7 billion in 1918. It's also worth pointing out that the rate of technology development during the First World War, especially in terms of naval architecture meant that ships such as Dreadnought were superseded incredibly quickly and many didn't get the chance to build up a 'legendary' name for themselves in terms of combat achievements, many people then simply didn't look at them the same way we do today.

You're right in one sense though, WWII was a continuation of an existing trend, a trend of the nation being economically hammered by the cost of a World War.

I'm a MMT believer, the debt is not the economy and I've never seen the national debt used in a context without justifying some sort of cut there's otherwise no justification for. While I get that wasn't really known back then, that sort of argument isn't going to get any sympathy from a MMT believer. 

The point with Dreadnought is it was already legendary without doing anything. Also I believe it was the only BB to sink a U-Boat. Another thing the Olympic did that merited preservation!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[C_NT]
Members
949 posts
2,438 battles
11 hours ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

Murica saved this!

Murica saved that!

Honestly I think you're just reinforcing my criticism. You're superimposing your own country's history on top of others, and believing that because the US saved this and that, everyone should have been able to do it as well. 

You have failed to understand just how in debt the UK was. Retaining great power status for a while longer does not equal awash with cash. We already owed the US money from WW1 before WW2 even started, which put us into more debt. Those war debts weren't fully paid off until the 21st century. You have also failed to understand the politics of the post war period. Because when a country's economy is in tatters, the government have no money, rationing is still in effect for a few more years, towns have been bombed out and in need of repair, etc... Most citizens probably will not look too kindly on politicians saying "we will spend money on preserving these now obsolete battleships, instead of building new homes!"

It's not that the UK is a 'disgrace'. It's because the US is just the exception, having a unique set of financial, political, and cultural circumstances which made it possible to preserve much more from WW2. Look around at the other main combatants from WW2 and how many WW2 era ships they have saved between them. Honestly if you actually did some research on what historical ships we have preserved, you will find that the UK is far from being a disgrace among its peers.

The US is far from perfect and I feel you're unfairly portraying my arguments with your experiences with others. Even within the lens of historical preservation the US has particularly struggled with ship upkeep getting ships into dry berths(Texas, United States, America etc) but that's a problem we have as a result of keeping the ships around to try. 

I don't care about national debts for reasons I discussed in post above, it's an imaginary issue for powerful developed nations with valuable currency's. Even today the Pound does very well. I do not find it compelling at all, just as I don't find my country's national debt a compelling reason to do horrible things(I admit the US's horrible things done in the name of austerity are far worse and they do not even merit comparison but we are talking about boats here). Your country being in debt does not mean your economy is in tatters that is just nonsense.

And when you speak to doing better than your peers most of your peers capital ships were sunk and/or captured. They mostly never got to the preservation phase except Turkey/Germany with the Goeben. Though yes the UK's record beats the French and Germans. Russians and Japanese it's debatable especially seeing as they had much less to work with in terms of circumstances and ships itself.

 

Edited by Aristotle83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,918
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,450 posts
1,963 battles
On 6/22/2020 at 4:03 AM, Aristotle83 said:

The UK's run as a great power lasted about another decade after WW2.

So did rationing. Indeed, at some points post war even bread was rationed, whilst it hadn't been in the war.   

 

And whilst the UK was in debt, its economy was also rather worse off. And what there was, often went to things that were more important than preserving a warship or two. Like rebuilding the bomb shattered country, the backlog of infrastructure maintenance, or building a land fit for heroes as the Government sought to (according the slogans, at least). That isn't cheap, and as nice as it would be to have those ships, the social programmes were worth more. 

Still, it is not a cloud without a silver lining. People were upset to see the naval history going to the breakers, and that spurred the saving of many other things. The last World War One light cruiser, for instance. The last LST Mk III. Sailing frigates, Belfast, WarriorM33, the Royal Navy's very first submarine, along with at least two X-craft (or an X and an XE, I forget which) and the rebuild A class Alliance. Its not as large or flashy as the American collection, but it was never going to be. But that doesn't make it worth any less.   

Hopefully Bristol will be saved, being one of the last Falklands veterans, and if the stars align, maybe Zenith and Whimbrel might be saved too. We watch and wait to see. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[C_NT]
Members
949 posts
2,438 battles
18 hours ago, mr3awsome said:

So did rationing. Indeed, at some points post war even bread was rationed, whilst it hadn't been in the war.   

 

And whilst the UK was in debt, its economy was also rather worse off. And what there was, often went to things that were more important than preserving a warship or two. Like rebuilding the bomb shattered country, the backlog of infrastructure maintenance, or building a land fit for heroes as the Government sought to (according the slogans, at least). That isn't cheap, and as nice as it would be to have those ships, the social programmes were worth more. 

Still, it is not a cloud without a silver lining. People were upset to see the naval history going to the breakers, and that spurred the saving of many other things. The last World War One light cruiser, for instance. The last LST Mk III. Sailing frigates, Belfast, WarriorM33, the Royal Navy's very first submarine, along with at least two X-craft (or an X and an XE, I forget which) and the rebuild A class Alliance. Its not as large or flashy as the American collection, but it was never going to be. But that doesn't make it worth any less.   

Hopefully Bristol will be saved, being one of the last Falklands veterans, and if the stars align, maybe Zenith and Whimbrel might be saved too. We watch and wait to see. 

 

 

I want to make clear I value the preservation of human lives over the preservation of ships. Given that my country lacks many of the human rights the UK(for now) has, the importance of providing a decent life for your citizens does not escape me and is something I and many if not most Americans envy. However again I reject the idea that's an either or choice or that the most historically relevant ships destruction was somehow necessary or justified(MMT). Greece the poster child of debt has preserved a heavy cruiser. The UK was maintaining 90-100 capital ships during WW1, not to mention armored cruisers which were at least as large. It was within their power to save a handful. Dreadnought, Warspite and the ocean liner Olympic would have been economically viable as tourist attractions at the times each were scrapped which is why I bring them up first. People knew the Dreadnoughts historical importance when it was scrapped it wasn't something that became apparent just after the fact etc. 

I'm of course thankful that some ships were saved. Again I get it not being a fair expectation to save as much as the US. The collection is better than nothing but it's still sad and is overall not a positive outcome given what you could have saved. I also know this is not just a USA v UK topic and that there are plenty of UK people who share these sentiments. They apparently aren't present giving reactions but they exist.

And yes I share your hope for the ships from the Falkland era. We shall see.

Of the naval ships you're citing Belfast is really the only one that was moved to be saved from the scrapyards by the public. Caroline and Warrior were just lucky enough to remain in service for about a century.  

This started out responding to OP that there was nothing the Lion could have done to be saved by the public given that the UK didn't spare barely anything made of iron from the scrappers. And that's the truth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,001
[REVY]
Members
2,811 posts
15,013 battles
On 6/21/2020 at 2:32 AM, tm63au said:

Two great ships both cherished and respected by both sides then and now  have there histories changed 

In 1924 HMS Lion is sold for scrap under The Washington Treaty. What if history is changed and this did not happen.

Three-stacked, dark grey warship at sea

Public outcry for Admiral beatty's Flagship to become a Museum and tourist attraction allows the ship to be put in reserve.

On the 21st June 1919 SMS Derfflinger  is scuttled, raised in 1939 then broken up 1946, again history takes a different path and the ship is boarded and secured before it can be sunk. the ship is left at Scapa flow.  

  A large warship rolls onto its side

In the early 1920's as a act of good will and friendship by Great Britain the ship is returned to Germany.

The Navy has the ship restored for prosperity and placed as a Museum and ceremonial ship.

Fast forward to the late 1920's early 30's both sides start rearming, would and could both sides bring these WWI veterans out for another show down.

Would both Sides do a massive refit and refurbishment to bring them up to front line status and how would look and could they even with a revamp hold there own against there more modern WWII counterparts, what kind morale for both navies be if the sight of the two Jutland warriors were leading the charge into battle once more.

Would it be only worth both nations to do a partial refurbishment on both ships due to age and technology restraints on both ships and have them a second line and or reserve status, reduced to coastal duties or floating AA  duties.

Or perhaps both sides would dare not have them in conflict at all for morale reasons given the devastating effect on either nation if one or both ships were sunk

( refer Hood and Bismarck).

What would be there fate if history was changed. 

 

On 6/21/2020 at 4:04 AM, Estimated_Prophet said:

Left alone to rot; if they’d not been kept up beyond caretaker/museum status; and eventually broken up for scrap steel because of national emergency needs.

Most likely left to rot. Yard space and available workers would likely be too limited by the needs of new construction, to allocate such things to break up an old ship.

Lion would finally be scrapped after the war, because politics I don’t care to get into a fight over again.

If the allies hadn’t already bombed it to scrap; Russia takes Derfflinger; screws around with it for five or ten years; then uses it as a target, or scraps it.

Sorry for being Debby Downer.

 

On 6/21/2020 at 6:21 AM, Aristotle83 said:

Agree with the prophet. Outside of being a wreck there just wasn't a path where any of these ships survive to the current day.

It's a disgrace but the UK has unceremoniously scrapped every single historical capital ship since the early ironclad days. Dreadnought, Warspite, Duke of York nothing was safe. It's possible they would have saved Hood given it's status as the largest Royal Navy surface ship of all time and how popular it was(especially if it somehow managed to take out Bismarck) but I wouldn't hold my breath. They scrapped a replica of the Titanic. But to the Lions fate if it somehow survived Washington we need look no further than Tiger, the only 13.5 inch battlecruiser which did survive the treaty. The youtuber Drachinifel was discussing in his video about the Tiger which did survive the Washington Treaty that it just didn't make sense to produce the 13.5 inch shells for one ship when the rest of the battleships/battlecruisers were using 15 inch guns and it fell to the London treaty. And yeah I know the Lion was more historically important than Tiger, same as Iron Duke(which survived as a training ship until 1946) just that the UK at this time clearly didn't care about that sort of thing.

In terms of Derflingger, pretty much the only capital ship to survive Scapa Flow was Baden the most valuable ship of the whole group. They tested it came to the conclusion it was superior to anything in the RN..............and then sunk it in a test. If the most valuable asset in the group didn't sink in the scuttling and was still not kept around, I don't think there'd be hope for the rest of the group either. I don't think the UK would be willing to give the Germans Derflingger as a sign of good will either(they'd just scuttled their fleet) the French and Italians were more likely candidates. Sadly the best case scenario for these ships IMO was for them to sink far out enough where they could not be recovered for scrap living on as wrecks. 

Both ships were essentially designed and built Pre-WW1.
Both saw hard service during WW1 and would have needed major refits and/or rebuilds to continue to be viable.

Now you suggest they become museum ships. Not a completely unheard of thing. The US had USS Olympia and USS Oregon. Both survivors of the Spanish American War, both became classified as 'relics' in the US Navy. Olympia on the east coast, Oregon on the west.

So where is Oregon today? The US entered WW2 and the Navy reclaimed her for scrapping. Her superstructure was removed and most of her internals before the Navy halted scrapping and used her as a hulk to retake Guam.

Anyway, back to the Lion and Derfflinger. First off, as she was 'surrendered' to the British along with most of the German High Seas fleet, she will never 'go home'. The Ships in Scapa Flow that were either saved from sinking, or recovered, even those that never even made the journey, were divided up among the Allies. The British tested Beyern to eventual destruction, the US bombed the Ostfriesland (General Billy Mitchell) and eventually sank her. Derfflinger would likely meet the same fate either by Russia, France, Britain, Japan, or the US. This is not to mention the fact that the Treaty of Versailles would prevent the Germans from even having her.

Back to Lion.

If the ship had become a Museum, it would have been pretty much tied to a dock for say a minimum 10 years. 10 years of inactivity and no maintenance besides say cleaning of the 'public' spaces and maybe re-painting to a point. Bringing it back into service isn't as simple as changing the oil, fueling it up, and firing it up. Its going to need to be drydocked and every system on board is going to have to be gone through. Some parts might have to be replaced. If you are modernizing it, you have to take the time to decide what is being replaced and how. There is also the issue that the armor design is pre-Jutland, not to mention early Battlecruiser design. Alot of things changed between Lion and Hood (well....other then the tendency to explode). The amount of time and money spent you might have been better off building a new ship with modern armor set-up.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[C_NT]
Members
949 posts
2,438 battles
19 hours ago, Lord_Slayer said:

 

 

Both ships were essentially designed and built Pre-WW1.
Both saw hard service during WW1 and would have needed major refits and/or rebuilds to continue to be viable.

Now you suggest they become museum ships. Not a completely unheard of thing. The US had USS Olympia and USS Oregon. Both survivors of the Spanish American War, both became classified as 'relics' in the US Navy. Olympia on the east coast, Oregon on the west.

So where is Oregon today? The US entered WW2 and the Navy reclaimed her for scrapping. Her superstructure was removed and most of her internals before the Navy halted scrapping and used her as a hulk to retake Guam.

Anyway, back to the Lion and Derfflinger. First off, as she was 'surrendered' to the British along with most of the German High Seas fleet, she will never 'go home'. The Ships in Scapa Flow that were either saved from sinking, or recovered, even those that never even made the journey, were divided up among the Allies. The British tested Beyern to eventual destruction, the US bombed the Ostfriesland (General Billy Mitchell) and eventually sank her. Derfflinger would likely meet the same fate either by Russia, France, Britain, Japan, or the US. This is not to mention the fact that the Treaty of Versailles would prevent the Germans from even having her.

Back to Lion.

If the ship had become a Museum, it would have been pretty much tied to a dock for say a minimum 10 years. 10 years of inactivity and no maintenance besides say cleaning of the 'public' spaces and maybe re-painting to a point. Bringing it back into service isn't as simple as changing the oil, fueling it up, and firing it up. Its going to need to be drydocked and every system on board is going to have to be gone through. Some parts might have to be replaced. If you are modernizing it, you have to take the time to decide what is being replaced and how. There is also the issue that the armor design is pre-Jutland, not to mention early Battlecruiser design. Alot of things changed between Lion and Hood (well....other then the tendency to explode). The amount of time and money spent you might have been better off building a new ship with modern armor set-up.

Yeah I agree with everything your saying about Lion and Derflingger. My point when calling the UK's track record preserving ships a "disgrace" is that there was no pathway for the Lion to be preserved given they destroyed virtually all their capital ships including ones whose cases for preservation were more obvious at the time. Brought up Tiger and Iron Duke as reflections of what Lions fate would have likely become if she'd survive Washington. With Derflingger I brought up Baden too to suggest if the most valued German ship(whom the RN considered superior to any of their own BB's) wasn't worth keeping around longer, Derflinnger had no chance.

I am aware of the difficult path ships in that era would require to survive to the current day. Being kept around for decades is what gives them the opportunity to be saved even if being kept around means being abandoned and left to rot. It still leaves the door open for the vessels to be saved at a later date.  

The US's record on ship preservation is the best. It is obviously flawed. I am far from a blind Merica defender. I find the Oregon story really sad because her value as a historical vessel clearly outweighed the value of what she was used for. Pre WW2 US's preservation record was far from perfect. Olympias preservation is an outlier similar to the Victory in the UK. Part of why the US's ocean liner record isn't as abhorrent as the UK is because the US didn't have major ocean liners before America and United States(the latter could hopefully can be saved). We then nuked a ton of naval history from several nations(heres a terrifying image btw that we kept hushhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Crossroads#/media/File:Crossroads_Baker_Scrubdown.jpg). While we saved a lot of carriers we didn't save the most decorated US warship of all time in the Enterprise.  Also the US using states as their naming convention probably is why Texas and the WW2 BB's are around they otherwise might not be, especially Texas. This created pride in particular regions of the country who didn't want to see a ship named after their state scrapped. UK BB's weren't going to have this support and I admit that's a built in advantage that gave some of these US BB's a fighting chance. But the UK's surviving County class of Heavy Cruisers were all scrapped. 

Feel the people who I upset by calling the UK's record a "disgrace" agreed with my conclusion the ships were doomed but are upset I don't think the destruction was in any way justified. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,001
[REVY]
Members
2,811 posts
15,013 battles

the UK does still have a few ships left from the sailing days

Besides Victory, I believe they have a frigate as a museum ship, as well as a second frigate in a condition that is even more rare: it is still 'in-ordinary'. Literally that ship was never finished, had a roof built over the main deck, and was preserved for future use that never came. It is still there and still carries the original roof from what I understand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,918
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,450 posts
1,963 battles
On 6/25/2020 at 4:41 PM, Lord_Slayer said:

the UK does still have a few ships left from the sailing days

Besides Victory, I believe they have a frigate as a museum ship, as well as a second frigate in a condition that is even more rare: it is still 'in-ordinary'. Literally that ship was never finished, had a roof built over the main deck, and was preserved for future use that never came. It is still there and still carries the original roof from what I understand

Yep, and they are sister ships too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
784 posts
62 battles
On 6/21/2020 at 8:32 AM, tm63au said:

Two great ships both cherished and respected by both sides then and now  have there histories changed 

In 1924 HMS Lion is sold for scrap under The Washington Treaty. What if history is changed and this did not happen.

Three-stacked, dark grey warship at sea

Public outcry for Admiral beatty's Flagship to become a Museum and tourist attraction allows the ship to be put in reserve.

On the 21st June 1919 SMS Derfflinger  is scuttled, raised in 1939 then broken up 1946, again history takes a different path and the ship is boarded and secured before it can be sunk. the ship is left at Scapa flow.  

  A large warship rolls onto its side

In the early 1920's as a act of good will and friendship by Great Britain the ship is returned to Germany.

The Navy has the ship restored for prosperity and placed as a Museum and ceremonial ship.

Fast forward to the late 1920's early 30's both sides start rearming, would and could both sides bring these WWI veterans out for another show down.

Would both Sides do a massive refit and refurbishment to bring them up to front line status and how would look and could they even with a revamp hold there own against there more modern WWII counterparts, what kind morale for both navies be if the sight of the two Jutland warriors were leading the charge into battle once more.

Would it be only worth both nations to do a partial refurbishment on both ships due to age and technology restraints on both ships and have them a second line and or reserve status, reduced to coastal duties or floating AA  duties.

Or perhaps both sides would dare not have them in conflict at all for morale reasons given the devastating effect on either nation if one or both ships were sunk

( refer Hood and Bismarck).

What would be there fate if history was changed. 

That is a very interesting question. The clear answer is: it depends. Depends on (better?) alternatives and what the other side does.

In short Derfflinger could have been a good raider if that would have been the operational requirement. Her horizontal protection was poor by the standard of WW2 so probably a Refit would have changed that. To do that you need to remove the deck so you can fit Diesels on t he two Center shafts - range was her second shortcoming. The 30.5cm L/50 was one of the finest navel rifles of al time - no need to change them. The Germans even developed a new shell for WW2 - just for coastal batteries! In such form the ship would have been a more capable unit than the Scharnhorts of the actual timeline. 

 

On the Lions - the only redeeming strength of these units was speed. However - if a potential enemy has capable raiders - such as the refitted Iron Dog as described above the Royal Navy would all of a sudden have a large demand for escorts. For that purpose the Lions would in fact be an option. Their horizontal protection could maybe be slightly improved, the Q-turret would probably be removed and the machinery optimized with new boilers. You gain space for a large sea plane handling facility to detect raiders - remember that radar wasn’t super reliable in the 1930s and Scout planes were absolutely en vogue! Now you could on top replace the old - rather mediocre 34.3cm guns with modern KGV 35.6cm guns. This would essentially make them equal to Renown and Repulse and she could be used as convoys and even Carrier escort. Quite useful should such a thread exist 

 

This of course with a lot of “what-ifs” but it would be a possible outcome.

 

Btw. These nice pictures I found on the internet and on the EU WOWS forum:

 

9FE9431D-83E8-4D44-BF22-7570ED0AD9F6.thumb.jpeg.e3baaaccec1e8ab77fd5e31c8a8f39cf.jpeg

 

C4CF452E-B0F0-4F88-8DAF-5EAE9B7F8642.thumb.png.b117e7fd8db841a3018afaacb9ad98ae.png

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×