Nelson-class battleships

File: HMS Nelson.jpg (1MB, 3399x1961px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3399x1961px

>>30766996
Building one armoured box to house all the guns and ammunition is far more efficient in terms of weight than building two armoured boxes fore and aft.

Initially, they also had an amusing problem with breaking the huge reinforced windows when firing a broadside.

They were arguably the 2nd best treaty battleships after KGV.

Nelson would be pleased with the 'straight at em' design.

>>30766996
It looks cool but Iowa class best class. Yuropoor battleships are just inferior.

I like them. A Nelson class intimidated both Scharnhorst and Gneisenau when they went to attack a convoy being escorted by one (can't remember if it was Nelson or Rodney). When they saw that brutal bastard with nine 16 inch guns pointing at them they turned around and went home.

Rodney made Swiss cheese out of Bismarck. One of her shells hit the front of one of Bismarck's forward turrets, blew out the back of it like a giant shotgun blast which destroyed her bridge and nearly everyone on it. Metal.

What slavshit looks like done by Brits.

>>30767349

The UK had battleships in construction (Lion-class) and planned (N3, K2, K3, J3, I3, H3C) that were superior to Iowa and Yamato. However, there was literally no need to prioritize them because of the RN having complete dominance of the Atlantic, north sea and Mediterranean.

The Pacific was a minor conflict in comparison to the war in europe, even for the US who prioritised it there was a 9:1 ratio of supply in favor to Europe.

There was really nothing special about US warship design compared to British and in some regards German, Italian and French. The fact is that the US had the time and resources to build these ships whereas the European nations could not justify the cost.

Many of the traits that made Iowa superior to Yamato were actually technological imports from the UK. Notably proximity fuses and radars powered by cavity magnetrons.

But you know the rules; USA won the war on its own.

Not pretty, not fast, but a tough, ugly bruiser designed to give and take a hammering. Like a BB turned up to 11.

16 inch guns were very impressive for the 1920s when they were built.

>>30766996
slow and derpy

File: Rodney Salvo.jpg (181KB, 884x520px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 884x520px

Nelson class a best

File: Rodney_firing_on_Bismarck.png (2MB, 1346x548px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1346x548px

>>30768916

File: Nelson 1942.jpg (208KB, 1204x767px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1204x767px

>>30768932

File: Nelson Panama.jpg (87KB, 744x528px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 744x528px

>>30768940

File: inside turret A (2).jpg (64KB, 800x613px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 800x613px

>>30768949

File: Rodney hard to port-The other way.jpg (71KB, 640x429px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 640x429px

>>30768957

File: Rodney Firing.jpg (35KB, 743x463px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 743x463px

>>30768965

>>30767349
I mean Iowa was made 20 years after Nelson, so nice b8 m9

A realistic comparison is Nelson and Colorado, and in that case Nelson wins hands down

>>30768993
Nelson broke itself down whenever it fired its guns and had difficulties with turning. So no, I don't think Nelson wins this one.

>>30769021
Is that what happened when Rodney fired upon Bismarck? Or when Nelson took part in D-Day? Oh no, it didn't. Early difficulties with a new design of ship doesn't mean it was crap throughout its career, see KGV arguably the best British BB its birth was riddled with gun issues, turned out a good ship in the end

>>30767767
but p0werful for its time.

it was a treaty battleship which meant it was limited to a certain tonnage speed was sacrificed in favour of armor and firepower although the speed was respectable for the time of launching.

>>30769021
while its true that nelson took more damage from firing its own guns than from bismarcks guns during the action, that isnt to say it took significant damage from firing its own guns, none of the damage it incurred impaired its combat capability. As for turning it had a tighter turning circle than most destroyers under most circumstances its turning difficulties were limited to high winds due to the superstructure acting as a sail and only presented a issue in crowded harbours, never proving to be a problem in service