OK .... here goes an attempt at something .... non Iowa.
It always surprises me how the private yard Vickers managed to come up with what is in my view probably a superior design to the Admiralty Iron Duke class or the USS Texas of the same year (1914) but on some 3,300 tons less displacement Erin (ex Turkish Reshad V sequestered for the RN) comes in at 22,780 tons load but Iron Duke is some 26,100 tons load and Texas was even heavier . Erin has some other practical advantages too in that her secondary battery is better placed and more unlikely to be washed out in a seaway with higher gun elevations . Her center turret main armament is mounted one deck higher with greater command. Her slightly greater beam must have made her steadier too. Protection wise Erin also had a full continuous Torpedo Bulkhead where Iron Duke only had screens protecting the main battery Magazines and Texas had none at all and her citadel length was also shorter. Erin also had the more flared bow that one can see in some later British ships of the period and that must have aided spray suppression in head seas.
In terms of speed armament and protection theres little else to pick between the two designs yet Vickers seem to have done as much as the Admiralty on much lesser displacement and with some notable advantages in Erin.
Clearly there was evidence of Battlecruiser design inefficiency (see Jutland for details) but does this also hint at design inefficiency within the Admiralty at this time viz thier dreadnaughts in that they could have been doing more with less in thier dreadnaught designs as evidenced by the privately designed much lighter Erin ? HMS Marlborough certainly suffered from her lack of a TBD at Jutland after her torpedo hit.
It always surprises me how the private yard Vickers managed to come up with what is in my view probably a superior design to the Admiralty Iron Duke class or the USS Texas of the same year (1914) but on some 3,300 tons less displacement Erin (ex Turkish Reshad V sequestered for the RN) comes in at 22,780 tons load but Iron Duke is some 26,100 tons load and Texas was even heavier . Erin has some other practical advantages too in that her secondary battery is better placed and more unlikely to be washed out in a seaway with higher gun elevations . Her center turret main armament is mounted one deck higher with greater command. Her slightly greater beam must have made her steadier too. Protection wise Erin also had a full continuous Torpedo Bulkhead where Iron Duke only had screens protecting the main battery Magazines and Texas had none at all and her citadel length was also shorter. Erin also had the more flared bow that one can see in some later British ships of the period and that must have aided spray suppression in head seas.
In terms of speed armament and protection theres little else to pick between the two designs yet Vickers seem to have done as much as the Admiralty on much lesser displacement and with some notable advantages in Erin.
Clearly there was evidence of Battlecruiser design inefficiency (see Jutland for details) but does this also hint at design inefficiency within the Admiralty at this time viz thier dreadnaughts in that they could have been doing more with less in thier dreadnaught designs as evidenced by the privately designed much lighter Erin ? HMS Marlborough certainly suffered from her lack of a TBD at Jutland after her torpedo hit.
Comment