The Colorado class dreadnought USS Washington under construction. The details of her multi-layer torpedo defense system are easily seen.
The United States enjoyed somewhat of a significant advantage in warship development at this time.
Most major powers (such as Britain and Germany) were locked in the dreadnought race. In an effort to outproduce the competition, the implementation of new features was somewhat hamstrung by the rush to get ships into serve as quickly as possible.
The US Navy on the other hand, could take a more leisurely approach (Not to mention take advantage of data coming from foreign experiences).
Extensive testing of various components was conducted. This was especially true for tank testing of underwater protection schemes.
This led to the development of the highly effective defense systems.
The US was able to determine features such as optimal distance between bulkheads, the best material to fill them (Air vs liquid), the thickness of the bulkhead, organization of said bulkeads, etc.
Further aided by other things (such as the powerplant and tight subdivision), the final Standard Battleships were ahead of the competition as far as underwater protection went.
Even by the Second World War, they remained competitive with the newest designs.
It's not to say the US had superior workmanship. Merely, they had the freedom to design and incorporate new features at a generous pace.
The nature of the Standard Battleships to be incremental improvements over their predecessors was also a likely factor that drove development
Overall, I'm starting to gain an appreciation for the Standards. While not quite gaining the respect of their peers, they were technologically interesting designs that had an impact on US design through the Second World War.
So let's assume that the US Navy did produce it's Lexington class battlecruisers in their original configuration.
How might they have influenced the US Navy during the interwar years and into World War 2?
There likely would have been no Alaska class cruisers for one.
With six large capital ships to patrol the sea lanes, there would be less impetus for the development of the large cruiser proposals in the 1930s.
As a side note, this might have even caused Germany to hesitate on the Deutschland class.
The Renown class/HMS Hood were known to be the major threats to the class due to their speed and power. Having the threat of the Lexington class in the Atlantic would be added to this.
On the post about the Yamato class and torpedoes, someone had pointed out that they always seemed to take on roughly 3,000 tons of flooding after they were initially torpedoed by aircraft or submarines.
Perfect because I wanted to talk about a design flaw in the Yamato design.
Japanese designers went above and beyond in the design of the Yamato class, stretching their capabilities to the limit to produce a very advanced warship.
Notably, the Yamato class used plenty of full scale testing in its design. This was especially true for the armor design.
Gunnery tests against Tosa showed that large calibre shells retained enough momentum to travel for some distance underwater, allowing them to bypass the main armor belt entirely by going under it.
If you think Bismarck supporters are crazy with the "It took an entire British fleet to sink it", Let me introduce you to the Japanese equivalent when discussing the Yamato class.
This picture is tossed around way more than it should, being inaccurate and without proper context
The problem I have with this picture, and the loss of the Yamato class for that matter, is that people don't understand the progression of damage.
They almost seem to assume that the ship's were perfectly fine until that final hit that sent them under.
The fact of the matter is that US Navy aircraft continued hitting the battleships long after they were done and sinking. Some of those bombs and torpedoes were gratuitous at best.
Instead, the proper question is what straw was it that broke the camel's back?
In turns of protection, tumblehome was also effective in countering gunfire at close ranges (approaching horizontally). So much so that the US Navy designed a battleship that returned to a tumblehome hull reminiscent of a civil war ironclad.
However, gunnery ranges ultimately increased so that shells approached at steeper angles. Here, they negated the slope of tumblehome hulls.
This meant that armor that inclined outwards was superior.
The unsung heroes among the United States cruisers during the Second World War were the Brooklyn class light cruisers.
The impact of these cruisers extends far beyond their service. Their very design influenced all future cruisers of the US Navy.
The Brooklyn class cruiser introduced the long flushdeck style hull (increasing structural strength and stiffness) that would be used on future heavy and light cruisers.
The safer location of the stern was chosen to carry aircraft and their equipment (rather than amidships).
Other features were also introduced for cruiser designs. The propulsion system was arranged into the unit system. The final two ships of the class would even introduce the 5"/38 guns in twin mounts.