HMAS Australia

[DOCUP]

lets say. Australia wanted to keep the HMAS Australia, instead of losing her to the Washington Naval treaty. What would her refit have looked like?

[John 3rd]

I KNOW I have seen that art somewhere! Might it have been for War Plan Orange? Don't remember...

[spence]

IIRC HMAS Australia was an early build battlecruiser that was pretty much obsolete by the end of WW1. Really wonder whether any nation would think seriously about saving it because of the cost of rebuilding her to 1920s standards (or beyond). WW1 sparked some substantial innovations in power plants (boilers and turbines).

Not just a question of tonnage.

[Alikchi2]

About halfway down this page, Canis has some drawings of possible refits.

http://wolfsshipyard.com/Misc/NeverWeres/royal.htm

They could be decent cruiser killers or counters to something like Graf Spee.

[DOCUP]

Thanks Alikchi.

I found this while looking around. Interesting article.

http://www.navyhistory.org.au/a-battles ... s-1937-49/

Spence: I agree with you. HMAS Australia would of been a pain to modernize in the 30s. Probably not worth it.

[spence]

While modernization of the power plant might have been feasible it appears that the British had determined to get rid of the 12" gun entirely following WW1. Thus a major consideration for the Australian government would have been the replacement of the ship's main armament since the available stock would expire and there was no place in Australia capable of producing ammunition for the main armament. Would a redesign of an Indefatigable class BC to carry 15" guns (the caliber decided on by the RN) even have been possible? To say nothing of adding additional armor, that's a lot of topside weight to put on a hull that size.

[Skyros]

Possibly if a heavy unit was considered for the RAN Britain would have built another Admiral Class Battle Cruiser and given it to Australia? Thus you could have a Hood in the pacific.