The Future Building Committee probably doesn't get off the ground in APOD as the RN doesn't come under enough pressure to take their eye of the ball in the first place, so don't need a special committee to catch up. That's actually a bit of a driver for some of our ship options to date.

The case for US 8" guns would ultimately come down to Treasury asking if this was really the best use of scarce dollar reserves or LL credits and IMHO sh1t canning the idea on those grounds. Quite simply better a British solution for better or worse in military terms helps pay the piper for the industrial investment to build them and a host of other things. The difference between the USN 8" and redesigned 9.2" is more than 2:3 in burster weight for HE and GREAT deal more in retained velocity, go out to 15-20k yrds and the 9.2" has lost a couple of hundred feet per second off its muzzle velocity, where the USN 8" that started with about the same MV of something like 2,700fps is down to about 1,200 or so. That plus the extra 50-60lb of shell weight adds up to a lot more thump down range and a flatter trajectory to boot. I've not go range tables for either, but the 9.2" needed about 5 degrees less elevation to 30,000 yards which means a greater danger space. I'm no expert on exterior ballistics, but 200mm seems to be a dividing line between the big boys and the toys, the price is of course you pay the big boys rate for ships too

You make a good point about basing rights, there's no doubt the US would like/ask for basing rights in UK territory, but I suspect the most obvious course (if the OTL DD deal is excluded) is the most likely, that is the the US 'Rent' gets credited to the general UK account against Cash & Carry or LL as negotiated. London would probably want to chalk it up against C&C, where Washington might prefer LL and the result would be some compromise.

Well there is enough work for COW and Vickers that's for sure, but whoever gets the production orders, I suspect Vickers Woolwich will do the turret, simply on the basis of design depth. As far as I am aware H&W had little interest in heavy ordnance until the late 30's, so I doubt they'd have kept a functioning design staff.

shane

Rule .303
Shoot straight, you bastards.

<a href="http://www.dotstospots.com.au/affiliate/41/"></a>