U.S. Battleships: An Illustrated Design History

Rating:
Summary: A very fine addition to your library
Review: I both scratch build models and study US Naval history. This book gives excellent reasons why the US rebuilt its seapower after the 20 suspension of Naval building following the American Civil War.

One of the best parts of this book is Dr. Friedman includes are the "post civil war" monitors in the design history. Monitors are not battleships in a proper sense. However, Dr. Friedman's giving them a seperate chapter does show that he concluded, correctly, that the Monitors were considered capital ships up until the time of the Spanish-American war.

Furthermore, Dr. Friedman pulls no punches regarding the short comings of American ships. In words, American ships are slow and were often 2rd class in design. But, he defends the reasons why the US Navy kept the old triple expansion steam engine rather than going over to the HMS Dreadnought type steam turbines. American ships had severe design limitations imposed by the US Congress and the operational requirements of having to steam far distances to the Southern Pacific area. So, American ships were designed for long distances and economy, not speed. No other navy in the world had such different design requirements forced upon them. The fact of the matter is a small battleship, such as the c. 1910 era USS Michigan, had a greater range than most Royal Navy ships of the same era on much less tonnage. But, the cost of this is the USS Michigan could only steam at 18 knots rather than the 22 knots the typical post Dreadnought Class British Battleship.

Dr. Friedman goes into detail about the problems of the last ten America battleships. The North Carolina class had a bad vibration problem. On paper they looked better than the British KGV class. However, the NC class had vibration problems and powder handling would have been deemed unacceptable by the Royal Navy. Indeed, the powder problems come to haunt America in 1989. The Alabama class was excessively crampted by any standard and that class was seen merely as a war expedient. The Iowa nearly failed as a design because the turret design was not reconciled with the hull design. Bluntly, the turret almost didn't fit on the Iowa and this nearly led to the failure of the class. Also, a torpedo hit on the North Carolina led the US Navy to nearly "blister" the Iowa class. However, the fast battleship's speed would have fallen to 30 knots: the US navy was unwilling to give up the speed for protection.

From a ship scratch building point-of-view, there are few other better publicans than this one. Presently, this writer is working on the USS Kearsarge, launched c. 1900 and modeling fit will be from 1912. Dr. Friedman give reasons for the Kearsarge's ununusual design (and why no other nation followed it) and then why the ship was rebuilt in the 1912 era.

This reviewer didn't mind the lact of follow-up to the end-of-the-battleships. The battleships in 1980 were seen as an inexpensive way to bring back massive firepower into the US Navy. However, the 1989 explosion in the US Iowa was caused by poor powder handling techniques. Also, American logistics could not afford the maintenance costs of the battleships. In addition, technology had passed the guns of the battleships. Modular type warships using evolved US Army MRLS rocket systems may be the future of ship-to-shore attack (litorial conflict). The US Naval Institute publication, "Proceedings" had an extensive article on the demise of return of the Battleship in 2000. Dr. Friedman could only follow up the rebuilding battleships in the 1980s era with the nearly as quick exit of the battleship in the post Gulf War era.

This reviewer is not a US Navy Veteran. However, I have done a fair amount of study of American sea power. Dr. Friedman sets the standard for writing on American Naval Ship design. This review owns four of Dr. Friedmans "Illustrated" series and has read every one of them.

No reader of Dr. Friedman will come away disappointed. Dr. Friedman is an excellent writer.

My only wish to to meet the man in real life. It would be a great honor.

Rating:
Summary: A very fine addition to your library
Review: I both scratch build models and study US Naval history. This book gives excellent reasons why the US rebuilt its seapower after the 20 suspension of Naval building following the American Civil War.

One of the best parts of this book is Dr. Friedman includes are the "post civil war" monitors in the design history. Monitors are not battleships in a proper sense. However, Dr. Friedman's giving them a seperate chapter does show that he concluded, correctly, that the Monitors were considered capital ships up until the time of the Spanish-American war.

Furthermore, Dr. Friedman pulls no punches regarding the short comings of American ships. In words, American ships are slow and were often 2rd class in design. But, he defends the reasons why the US Navy kept the old triple expansion steam engine rather than going over to the HMS Dreadnought type steam turbines. American ships had severe design limitations imposed by the US Congress and the operational requirements of having to steam far distances to the Southern Pacific area. So, American ships were designed for long distances and economy, not speed. No other navy in the world had such different design requirements forced upon them. The fact of the matter is a small battleship, such as the c. 1910 era USS Michigan, had a greater range than most Royal Navy ships of the same era on much less tonnage. But, the cost of this is the USS Michigan could only steam at 18 knots rather than the 22 knots the typical post Dreadnought Class British Battleship.

Dr. Friedman goes into detail about the problems of the last ten America battleships. The North Carolina class had a bad vibration problem. On paper they looked better than the British KGV class. However, the NC class had vibration problems and powder handling would have been deemed unacceptable by the Royal Navy. Indeed, the powder problems come to haunt America in 1989. The Alabama class was excessively crampted by any standard and that class was seen merely as a war expedient. The Iowa nearly failed as a design because the turret design was not reconciled with the hull design. Bluntly, the turret almost didn't fit on the Iowa and this nearly led to the failure of the class. Also, a torpedo hit on the North Carolina led the US Navy to nearly "blister" the Iowa class. However, the fast battleship's speed would have fallen to 30 knots: the US navy was unwilling to give up the speed for protection.

From a ship scratch building point-of-view, there are few other better publicans than this one. Presently, this writer is working on the USS Kearsarge, launched c. 1900 and modeling fit will be from 1912. Dr. Friedman give reasons for the Kearsarge's ununusual design (and why no other nation followed it) and then why the ship was rebuilt in the 1912 era.

This reviewer didn't mind the lact of follow-up to the end-of-the-battleships. The battleships in 1980 were seen as an inexpensive way to bring back massive firepower into the US Navy. However, the 1989 explosion in the US Iowa was caused by poor powder handling techniques. Also, American logistics could not afford the maintenance costs of the battleships. In addition, technology had passed the guns of the battleships. Modular type warships using evolved US Army MRLS rocket systems may be the future of ship-to-shore attack (litorial conflict). The US Naval Institute publication, "Proceedings" had an extensive article on the demise of return of the Battleship in 2000. Dr. Friedman could only follow up the rebuilding battleships in the 1980s era with the nearly as quick exit of the battleship in the post Gulf War era.

This reviewer is not a US Navy Veteran. However, I have done a fair amount of study of American sea power. Dr. Friedman sets the standard for writing on American Naval Ship design. This review owns four of Dr. Friedmans "Illustrated" series and has read every one of them.

No reader of Dr. Friedman will come away disappointed. Dr. Friedman is an excellent writer.

My only wish to to meet the man in real life. It would be a great honor.

Rating:
Summary: Another Volume in an Excellent Series
Review: I will disagree with others that say this is not for the novice. I will agree that it is not for the casual reader but an interested novice would do well to start with this book. Although very detailed it is very well written and the illustrations are superb. While not cheap this book is an excellent value. This is not an Operational History and does not cover the employment of these ships in naval operations. It does cover the design evolution and the modernizations and changes that were performed to them as well as some that were just considered. The coverage of alternative designs and the tradeoffs that went into each iteration of the American Battleship is superb.

Rating:
Summary: Full of detail and unexpected nuggets
Review: This is a comprehensive, large volume, with extensive text, line drawings (by Alan Raven) and photos. The prospective purchaser should be aware that a generous portion of the book is given to detailing large numbers of alternative designs - if you are interested only in ships actually built then you might skip over these sections.

Friedman is a fine author, deeply studied in naval affairs and an entertaining read.

Rating:
Summary: American Battleships
Review: This is a great book for those who are interested in the technical information about the US Navy battleships. In great detail the book covers the evolution of the battleships from the early monitors of the post Civil War period to the cancelled Montana Class during WWII. Although a bit outdated since it was printed during the period when the Iowa Class was being reactivated, the seventeen chapters greatly explain each class of battleships as well as differences among the sister ships. Technical information regarding design, design proposals, dimensions, types of guns/calibers, machinery, armor, internal hull arraignment, etc. are included. This book is not for the novice, but for those naval historian/architectures or those who simply enjoy reading/studying the technical aspects of the book is a must have.