repcisg
September 26th, 2003, 03:35 PM
Some time ago I wrote the article below as part of a web site I was planning. Then a couple of weeks back I found a model maker that was producing an accurate version of the Tillman. I bought one just to see what they had done with it. It is an impressive model even at 1/1200 scale.
Things seem a little slow around here right now so I thought I would share this tidbit of history.
The Tillman
Through my many years certain points of history have struck me as not quite right, as explained by various historians,. One such point is the Naval Treaty of 1922, by most accounts a seminal event in the world’s efforts to disarm. According to some a success and others have viewed it as anything but. For me the reasons given for the great and near great naval powers of the time, signing this treaty have never rung completely true. To state that the treaty was based on the need to control the spiraling cost of Battleships completely flies in the face of reason when at least one key player did not have financial problems and was in fact actively seeking to expand their fleet.
For Great Britain whose very survival as a state depends on naval power. To sign way the ability to match or exceed any of its potential adversaries was simply contrary to their own national interest.. And yes, the Great War had left them nearly bankrupt but not destitute. Through the centuries they have always found a way to support the cost of their fleet.
The French were broke; a great part of the war had been fought on French soil, leaving massive scars, mountains of debt and hideous rebuilding costs. All to be born by the French people. For them the Treaty was a Godsend.
But of the Japanese, they had not been engaged in the Great War and their economy was strong and growing. As a growing military power the treaty was just the opposite of what they wanted to do. For them the treaty made no sense at all. In fact within the Japanese government a bitter battle was fought over this issue. In the end, however they caved in, why?
Of all the signatories, the United States was the most in favor of it, even thought coming out of the Great War in a leading position industrially and at sea. Typical of the US, military power was not seen as the best investment rather just the opposite. For them the treaty represented a major savings in cost and resources.
In most histories cost is given for each Naval Power agreeing to the restraints of the Treaty and adhering to it for as long as they did. In others cost and discussions about the ultra-ratio in Battleships are mentioned. This implies a second and perhaps more compelling reason for all parties to sign, but what was this ultra-ratio Battleship?
To find the answer one must dig deep into the murky history of American politics and Battleship design going back some ten years earlier. In 1912 Senator Benjamin Tillman was a member of the Senates over site committee for Naval Construction. At that time they had just approved the design and financing for what would become the Battleships Pennsylvania and Arizona. At the conclusion of these discussions Senator Tillman put a question to the Naval Construction and Repair Bureau asking that they begin a study to determine the ultimate size and strength American Battleships would evolve into if the current trends in armament and growth were to continue. The board tabled the request.
Two years later with World War 1 in full flower, Senator Tillman again placed his question before the committee, only two constraints were listed as required in the study. The ability to pass through the Panama Canal and the ability to use most major US naval ports. This time the committee agreed to submit the question to the Bureau. Four study groups were formed, each tasked to study the problem independently.
In 1917 an initial review of the four studies was carried out, the discussions that followed resulted in the consolidation of the four studies into one using the fourth as the foundation. Out of this process the basic design became know as the Tillman design, reflecting Senator Tillman’s pursuit of the issue.
To those who saw it, the final ship design was, awe inspiring. Even today such a vessel would be a dramatic sight entering a harbor or simply sailing along on the high seas. By 1921 the final design work was done, with funding discussions and projected fleet requirements underway.
Navy projections called for a total buy of 18 ships in three groups of six ships (three for the Atlantic and three for the Pacific). Each group would reflect enhancements over the previous group. Most notably an increase in gun caliber from 18” to 20”s. Basic armor protection would protect the ship from 18” or smaller projectiles, at that time the US was just introducing the 16” gun into its Battleships.
Building costs for these new ships amounted to $50 million each (as compaired to $30 for the Maryland class then entering service) and yet they had more than twice the firepower with greater speed, and range. With armor thick enough to make them untouchable by any other Battleship then afloat or planned. This new design was actually cheaper in overall value than the ships just entering service. And yet at 975 feet and 80,000 tons, only the United States had the facilities to begin construction of an entire fleet of these ships in the near future. The first two units could go into service as early as 1926 or 1927. With at least one per year after that.
To compare, the Maryland Class then just entering US service represented the then state of the art in Battleship design for all the major naval powers.
Length 624 ft
Width 97 ft 4”
Depth 30 ft
Weight 32,600 tons.
Armament 8 - 16"/45 caliber guns in four twin turrets.
Twelve 5"/51 guns in single casemate mountings
Top Speed 21 knots.
Engines : 28,900 hp
Rang at 18 knots economy speed 10,000 miles
Armor designed to stop 14 inch shells
The new Ultra-ratio design (Tillman)
Length 980 ft
Weight 80,900 tons
Width 108 ft
Depth 40 ft
Top speed 28 knots +
Engines : 180,000 hp
Range at 21 knots economy speed 18,000 miles.
Armament :
…………..15 – 18”/47 guns in five triple turrets. (first 6 ships)
…………..15 – 20”/47 guns in five triple turrets. (second group of 6 ships)
…………..15 – 20”/47 guns in five triple turrets. (third group of 6 ships)
…………..Twelve 5"/51 guns in single casemate mountings.
Armor designed to stop 18 inch shells
When one compares these numbers, it becomes clear, the moment the first “Tillman” entered service all existing Battleships would become obsolete. Japan and Great Britain might have tried to build monsters such as these. But neither nation had shipyards large enough, new yards were needed, delaying by several years the introduction of this class of battleship into their Navies. The US on the other hand had two shipyards large enough with slipways of sufficient length to begin immediate construction.
While all sides agreed to the terms of the treaty, only Japan saw the treaty as a means of gaining a time advantage. During the period the treaty was in effect they built two shipyards with slipways capable of supporting ships of that size. Once the treaty lapsed they immediately began construction of the 60,000-ton Yamato class Battleships.
In summery it wasn’t just the cost of the continuation of the arms race that drove countries like Japan and Great Britain to sign the treaty, it was the threat of the US gaining absolute mastery of the worlds oceans if they did not.
A side Note:
Not only did the “Tillman” represent the ultimate in Battleship design but the basic hull allowed for future growth. Marine engine technology was advancing rapidly, the power to weight ratio of turbine engines was improving almost yearly. It has been projected that at some point later versions with more advanced engines could have reached speeds of 35 knots. This would make them some of the fastest warships in the world. Even today a modern supper Carrier can achieve only 32 knots.
Things seem a little slow around here right now so I thought I would share this tidbit of history.
The Tillman
Through my many years certain points of history have struck me as not quite right, as explained by various historians,. One such point is the Naval Treaty of 1922, by most accounts a seminal event in the world’s efforts to disarm. According to some a success and others have viewed it as anything but. For me the reasons given for the great and near great naval powers of the time, signing this treaty have never rung completely true. To state that the treaty was based on the need to control the spiraling cost of Battleships completely flies in the face of reason when at least one key player did not have financial problems and was in fact actively seeking to expand their fleet.
For Great Britain whose very survival as a state depends on naval power. To sign way the ability to match or exceed any of its potential adversaries was simply contrary to their own national interest.. And yes, the Great War had left them nearly bankrupt but not destitute. Through the centuries they have always found a way to support the cost of their fleet.
The French were broke; a great part of the war had been fought on French soil, leaving massive scars, mountains of debt and hideous rebuilding costs. All to be born by the French people. For them the Treaty was a Godsend.
But of the Japanese, they had not been engaged in the Great War and their economy was strong and growing. As a growing military power the treaty was just the opposite of what they wanted to do. For them the treaty made no sense at all. In fact within the Japanese government a bitter battle was fought over this issue. In the end, however they caved in, why?
Of all the signatories, the United States was the most in favor of it, even thought coming out of the Great War in a leading position industrially and at sea. Typical of the US, military power was not seen as the best investment rather just the opposite. For them the treaty represented a major savings in cost and resources.
In most histories cost is given for each Naval Power agreeing to the restraints of the Treaty and adhering to it for as long as they did. In others cost and discussions about the ultra-ratio in Battleships are mentioned. This implies a second and perhaps more compelling reason for all parties to sign, but what was this ultra-ratio Battleship?
To find the answer one must dig deep into the murky history of American politics and Battleship design going back some ten years earlier. In 1912 Senator Benjamin Tillman was a member of the Senates over site committee for Naval Construction. At that time they had just approved the design and financing for what would become the Battleships Pennsylvania and Arizona. At the conclusion of these discussions Senator Tillman put a question to the Naval Construction and Repair Bureau asking that they begin a study to determine the ultimate size and strength American Battleships would evolve into if the current trends in armament and growth were to continue. The board tabled the request.
Two years later with World War 1 in full flower, Senator Tillman again placed his question before the committee, only two constraints were listed as required in the study. The ability to pass through the Panama Canal and the ability to use most major US naval ports. This time the committee agreed to submit the question to the Bureau. Four study groups were formed, each tasked to study the problem independently.
In 1917 an initial review of the four studies was carried out, the discussions that followed resulted in the consolidation of the four studies into one using the fourth as the foundation. Out of this process the basic design became know as the Tillman design, reflecting Senator Tillman’s pursuit of the issue.
To those who saw it, the final ship design was, awe inspiring. Even today such a vessel would be a dramatic sight entering a harbor or simply sailing along on the high seas. By 1921 the final design work was done, with funding discussions and projected fleet requirements underway.
Navy projections called for a total buy of 18 ships in three groups of six ships (three for the Atlantic and three for the Pacific). Each group would reflect enhancements over the previous group. Most notably an increase in gun caliber from 18” to 20”s. Basic armor protection would protect the ship from 18” or smaller projectiles, at that time the US was just introducing the 16” gun into its Battleships.
Building costs for these new ships amounted to $50 million each (as compaired to $30 for the Maryland class then entering service) and yet they had more than twice the firepower with greater speed, and range. With armor thick enough to make them untouchable by any other Battleship then afloat or planned. This new design was actually cheaper in overall value than the ships just entering service. And yet at 975 feet and 80,000 tons, only the United States had the facilities to begin construction of an entire fleet of these ships in the near future. The first two units could go into service as early as 1926 or 1927. With at least one per year after that.
To compare, the Maryland Class then just entering US service represented the then state of the art in Battleship design for all the major naval powers.
Length 624 ft
Width 97 ft 4”
Depth 30 ft
Weight 32,600 tons.
Armament 8 - 16"/45 caliber guns in four twin turrets.
Twelve 5"/51 guns in single casemate mountings
Top Speed 21 knots.
Engines : 28,900 hp
Rang at 18 knots economy speed 10,000 miles
Armor designed to stop 14 inch shells
The new Ultra-ratio design (Tillman)
Length 980 ft
Weight 80,900 tons
Width 108 ft
Depth 40 ft
Top speed 28 knots +
Engines : 180,000 hp
Range at 21 knots economy speed 18,000 miles.
Armament :
…………..15 – 18”/47 guns in five triple turrets. (first 6 ships)
…………..15 – 20”/47 guns in five triple turrets. (second group of 6 ships)
…………..15 – 20”/47 guns in five triple turrets. (third group of 6 ships)
…………..Twelve 5"/51 guns in single casemate mountings.
Armor designed to stop 18 inch shells
When one compares these numbers, it becomes clear, the moment the first “Tillman” entered service all existing Battleships would become obsolete. Japan and Great Britain might have tried to build monsters such as these. But neither nation had shipyards large enough, new yards were needed, delaying by several years the introduction of this class of battleship into their Navies. The US on the other hand had two shipyards large enough with slipways of sufficient length to begin immediate construction.
While all sides agreed to the terms of the treaty, only Japan saw the treaty as a means of gaining a time advantage. During the period the treaty was in effect they built two shipyards with slipways capable of supporting ships of that size. Once the treaty lapsed they immediately began construction of the 60,000-ton Yamato class Battleships.
In summery it wasn’t just the cost of the continuation of the arms race that drove countries like Japan and Great Britain to sign the treaty, it was the threat of the US gaining absolute mastery of the worlds oceans if they did not.
A side Note:
Not only did the “Tillman” represent the ultimate in Battleship design but the basic hull allowed for future growth. Marine engine technology was advancing rapidly, the power to weight ratio of turbine engines was improving almost yearly. It has been projected that at some point later versions with more advanced engines could have reached speeds of 35 knots. This would make them some of the fastest warships in the world. Even today a modern supper Carrier can achieve only 32 knots.