BEST WARSHIP OF THE WORLD

 

because there was no war when carriers were built en masse. but they made battleships obsolete in '41 at latest and no battleships were built after 43 up to this day except for the Iowa Class, Alaska Class and HMS Vanguard. after all, all those AA cruisers and modern AEGIS cruisers are a waste to you?

 

Submarines? again the latest are magnificent but the first submarines in service did not alter Naval History.

 

ok, so 12 million tonnage of Entente ships sunk in ww1 and 14 million Allied tonnage in ww2 sunk by German U-boats alone and all those hundreds of escort carriers and escort destroyers were just German propaganda i suppose?

 

 

The day HMS Dreadnaught entered service she changed Naval History, changed Naval thinking and concepts, and made every capital ship on the planet obselete.  One hell of a claim to fame and unmatched anywhere in the world I think.

 

it was a new ship design which served as model for all following ships, true, but basically it was just a hyprid between a monitor and an armoured cruiser, so it was not that fundamentally new compared to subs or carriers...

 

You fail to understand my point!!.  The thread as I understand it is about a single warship from any period of time  that deserves to be called the best in the world!!!. obviously the very latest ships are generally much better than their predessesors, but I repeat NO INDIVIDUAL  SHIP HAS EVER CHANGED NAVAL DOCTRINE, THINKING, TACTICS, OR MADE EVERY OTHER  CAPITAL SHIP OBSELETE IN A SINGLE DAY EXCEPT HMS DREADNAUGHT!!!!.

 

Dreadnaught also caused serious headaches for the Royal Navy, because all it's capital ships were made obselete as well and it's huge advantage in numbers vanished when the rest of the world built dreadnaughts.

 

 I never said it was unsinkable but the  sheer fact that earlier class battleships were subsequently  classed as "pre dreadnaught" does not seem to bring the point home to you.

 

Doctrine & tactics changed because suddenly a fleet of superfast, super armed  & super armoured battleships made every other navy without them vunerable and outmoded.  If you cant match them in numbers and design then you have to change your tactics and doctrine to meet the new threat as best as you can.

 

Also Dreadnaught was not a "hybrid"  it is acknowledged in every book and detailed history of naval history as a completely new and revoluntionary design which was copied by every major navy on the planet. NO SINGLE WARSHIP IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD HAS EVER HAD THE IMPACT THAT HMS  DREADNAUGHT HAD ON HER LAUNCH.  

 

just accept it  Temujin, i'm right and your wrong!! 

 

 

 

HMS Dreadnought (Battleship, 1906-1922)

HMS Dreadnought, an 18,110-ton battleship built at Portsmouth Dockyard, England, represented one of the most notable design transformations of the armored warship era. Her "all-big-gun" main battery of ten twelve-inch guns, steam turbine powerplant and 21-knot maximum speed so thoroughly eclipsed earlier types that subsequent battleships were commonly known as "dreadnoughts", and the previous ones disparaged as "pre-dreadnoughts". The swiftness of her construction was equally remarkable. Laid down in October 1905, she was launched in February 1906, after only four months on the ways. Dreadnought was commissioned for trials a year after her keel was laid and was completed in December 1906. Her building, trials and early service were closely watched by the World's naval authorities, including the U.S. Navy's Office of Naval Intelligence, the source of all of our photographs of Dreadnought.

Also........

 

 

The Radetzky class were pre dreadnaughts in style but were in fact commissioned after HMS Dreadnaught, also you have taken the speed quote out of context as it was the combination of guns, armour, steam turbine engines and speed that made  Dreadnaught the leap forward that she was. 

 

you still failed to elaborate on the change in tactics, tell me what fundamental tactic change the Dreadnought brought about based ona n actual example (battle)? also, the dreadnaught didn't changed the name of battleships, at least outside Britain...and there was another new class of ships that gave name to a new class of battleships, the USS Monitor and its design was in fact revolutionary because it was the first Iron-clad ship and it had a turret as main armament...the Dreadnaught is also iron-clad and has turrets...there was also the battle of Yalu river, Japanese vs Chinese, the Chinese had 2 battleships who were reputedlycalled the best ships in the pacific and all the Japanese ahd were armoured crusiers and torpedo-boats, yet the japanese won although being seriously outgunnend by the Chinese due to superior tactic.

 

Confused..is that aimed at me? If it then of course superior battleships mean something but generally as you pointed out superior tactics are the better commodity.

 

DukeC, for the next gen of aircraft carriers;

 

Yeah, I have my doubts too, in particular could you fire torpedos or missiles out without breaking the subcavatonic air bubble, if not then enemies with tracking equipment and air to sea missiles would slaughter you. Finally you'd have to be very careful about depth and ejection would again break the subcavatonic bubble (as would a good hit) meaning no escape. Still its an intersting site.