When Did The Tiger 1 Enter Service

Class of British light cruisers

HMSTiger before conversion
Class overview
Name	Tiger course
Operators	Royal Navy
Preceded past	Minotaur grade
Succeeded past	None
Built	1941–1961
In committee	1959–1979
Completed	3
Retired	three
General characteristics
Grade and blazon	Light cruiser
Displacement	11,700 tons (12,080 tons after conversion of Blake and Tiger)
Length	555.5 ft (169.3 m)
Beam	64 ft (20 m)
Draught	23 ft (seven.0 1000)
Installed ability	80,000 shp (60 MW)
Propulsion	Four Admiralty-blazon iii drum boilers Iv shaft Parsons steam turbines
Speed	31.5 knots (58.3 km/h; 36.2 mph)
Range	viii,000 nmi (fifteen,000 km; 9,200 mi) at 16 knots (xxx km/h; 18 mph)
Complement	716 (Tiger and Blake: 885 post-conversion)
Sensors and processing systems	Tiger and Blake post-conversion: 1 × Type 965 air-surveillance radar with outfit AKE(i) aeriform 1 × Type 992Q target-indication radar 2 × Type 903 gunfire-control radars (MRS 3 arrangement) 2 × Type 904 Seacat burn-control radars (GWS 22 system)
Armament	As built: ii × twin Mk.26 vi-inch gun turrets with QF 6 inch Mark N5 guns and RP15 (hydraulic) or RP53 (electrical) RPC iii × twin Mk.6 3-inch gun turrets with QF Mk.N1 guns Tiger and Blake post-conversion: ane × twin half-dozen-inch Mk. 26 gun turret one × twin 3-inch Mk.vi gun turret 2 × quad Sea True cat missile launchers
Armour	Belt 3.v–3.25 in (89–83 mm) Bulkheads 2–one.5 in (51–38 mm) Turrets 2–ane in (51–25 mm) Crowns of engine room and magazines 2 in (51 mm)
Aircraft carried	Tiger and Blake post-conversion: 4 × Westland Wessex helicopters Later replaced by: 4 × Westland Sea Rex helicopters

The Tiger class were a class of 3 British warships of the 20th century and the last all-gun cruisers of the Royal Navy. Construction as Minotaur-class cruisers began during Earth War Two but due to post-war austerity, the Korean War and Churchill favouring nuclear weapons and aircraft over the surface armada, the hulls remained unfinished. Approval to consummate them to a modified design was given in November 1954 and the three ships – Tiger, Lion and Blake – entered service from March 1959.

In 1964 two of the Tigersouthward were converted into helicopter-carrying cruisers, beginning conveying four Westland Wessex helicopters for amphibious operations then iv Westland Sea Kings for anti-submarine work. The conversion of Blake and Tiger, carried out between 1965 and 1972, was more expensive than expected and so the conversion of Lion was cancelled and she was scrapped in 1975, having been used for spares for her sister ships.

Often described and viewed in the Imperial Navy every bit "hideous and useless hybrids",^[1] and with express manpower, resources, and meliorate ships available, Tiger and Blake were decommissioned in the belatedly 1970s and placed in reserve. Blake was scrapped in 1982 and Tiger in 1986.

Design and commissioning [edit]

HMS Defence, Bellerophon, Blake and Hawke were begun equally Minotaur-course cruisers in 1941-43 ^[a] with three triple 6-inch gun turrets in 1944. Production of the 1942 Design Low-cal Fleet Carriers was given priority^{[ by whom? ]} and of the other ships in the class merely Minotaur, Swiftsure, and Superb were completed by late 1945. Defence, well advanced in structure, was placed in reserve without armament fitted and spent 8 years moored offshore in Gareloch.

Evolution into the Tiger class [edit]

By 1944, the Minotaur form were widely viewed as obsolete.^{[ citation needed ]} The added weight caused by the necessary improver of anti-aircraft guns, radar, electronics and the crew required to operate these, meant that they would exceed structural strength and deep-water stability limits. The design likewise lacked the speed and size of required for service in the Pacific or Chill.^{[ citation needed ]}

As the RN had more ships than it had crew for, and the Canadian fleet lacked larger vessels, HMS Minotaur itself and the Crown Colony-course Republic of uganda ^[b] were gifted to Canada in April 1944. The Majestic Navy's final wartime-built cruiser, Minotaur, was handed over on schedule to the RCN in June 1945. It was the offset British cruiser with both Type 275/274 "lock and follow", air- and surface- fire control and quadruple 40mm Bofors guns.^{[ citation needed ]}

A proposal to sell two updated Tiger-class cruisers to the Regal Australian Navy (RAN) was approved by Winston Churchill in 1944.^[two] On 4 April 1944, Australia's war chiffonier approved structure or acquisition of a cruiser and destroyer, for £half dozen.5 million, to supervene upon HMASSydney and HMASHobart. Despite the opposition of Australian shipbuilders and the Imperial Australian Air Forcefulness, the Australian prime number minister John Curtin agreed (on 18–21 May 1944, while visiting the UK) to the transfer of new RN ships, provided sufficient RAN crews were available to human being them.^[3] Had the ships entered Australian service, they would accept operated as function of British Pacific Fleet carrier groups. The RAN ships would have been re-armed with twin 5.25-inch (133 mm) gun turrets^[4] or triple five.25-inch turrets (a 1942 design pick for RAN cruisers).^{[5] [6] [ page needed ] [7]} While the RAN strongly supported the buy, elements of the Australian authorities perceived^{[ citation needed ]} that they were existence sold ships unwanted by the RN and preferred to support and expand local shipbuilding chapters. In addition, the Centrolineal Supreme Commander, South West Pacific Surface area, US General Douglas MacArthur, recommended that Commonwealth of australia should prioritise air defence of its existing bases and go along to rely on the wartime protection provided by the United states Navy, rather than expanding the RAN fleet. Notwithstanding, in February 1945, the Australian government'due south Defence Committee reaffirmed acceptance of two Tiger-class cruisers.^{[ citation needed ]}

Unlike the Canadian transfer, the Britain Treasury was not going to gift the cruisers to Australia. Past mid-1945, the UK was facing astringent constraints caused past Lend-Charter payments. Among other effects, this led in September 1945 to the cancellation of a batch of 25 US-built Mk 37 Type 275 radar-assisted gunnery systems, and this affected ships including the Tiger form. Nevertheless, the Great britain still wanted payment for the two Tiger vessels, or an equivalent writing-off of repairs on RN ships in Australian dockyards. On eleven April 1945, the UK priced the two ships at £ix one thousand thousand.^[8] In June 1945 the Australian government cancelled the transfer of payments for Defence and Blake, on the grounds that neither send was gear up and that information technology had bereft crews for the cruisers because information technology was as well acquiring British aircraft carriers and destroyers. The RAN was and then offered the temporary transfer of a Boondocks and a Crown Colony-class cruiser, until the Tiger-course were set. This proposal was also rejected on the ground of back-up, every bit the two Canton-class heavy cruisers already in Australian service,^[c] were deemed to have at least five years service life remaining.^{[nine] [ page needed ] [ten]} The Tiger-class was thus never adopted by the RAN.

In 1944–45, the RN had hoped that the new large Battle-class and Daring-class destroyers would be adult every bit substitutes for cruisers in many roles, but the First Bounding main Lord, Andrew Cunningham, realised that the UK upkeep could not back up increasing the destroyer's size from 2,800 to iii,500 tons required for a iii-turret ship with acceptable anti-shipping and anti-surface fire control.^{[ citation needed ]} With the Neptune class scrapped, the suspended ships were the only cruiser hull option and worth considering for rearmament. Past 1946, ix Mk24dc turrets were 75–80% complete with three further turrets partially complete for use with either the Tiger or Neptune-class cruisers. These turrets were a more than advanced version of the wartime Mk 23 triple 6-inch (150 mm). The new Mk 24 half-dozen-inch mounts were interim electric turrets with remote power-control and power-worked breech. The heavier Mk 24 offered a dual purpose gun with 60-caste elevation.^{[d] [ commendation needed ]}

The Tiger design had a broader 64 ft (20 m) beam than Superb on which to adjust the larger turrets. But it was preferred to complete Superb with the older Mk 23 turrets in 1945, a 64 ft axle Swiftsure. The 1942 Tiger pattern was redesigned with better protection and internal division to take advantage of a iii turret design with four twoscore mm "Stabilized tachymetric anti-shipping gun" mounts (STAAG) for close defense force with Blazon 262 radar, Activity Information centre, more pumps and generators.^{[ commendation needed ]}

Past March 1944 Defence and Blake were all but signed off for transfer to the RAN to be completed equally 5.25-inch gun cruisers.^[11] British production of 5.25 turrets was irksome and little work was done on the cruisers other than to launch Defence in September 1944.^{[11] [12] [13] [ page needed ] [14] [ page needed ]} The fact that they were years from commissioning guaranteed that Australia rejected the deal.^{[ commendation needed ]}

Another two Tiger-course cruisers were cancelled. Hawke was laid down in July 1943, and Bellerophon possibly had a keel laid downwardly. Piece of work on all the cruisers other than Superb stopped after mid-1944. Information technology appears that the 1942 program Hawke and Bellerophon were destroyed in 1944 and reordered as improved Boondocks-class calorie-free cruiser and Neptune-grade cruisers in Feb 1944 and February 1945. ^[east] The naval authorities of the fourth dimension and through the Cold State of war hold that the Neptune class were under construction, the main and secondary twin 4.5-inch (110 mm) turrets, boilers and mechanism for the beginning three ships ordered and existence built in accelerate of the hull construction, as information technology was planned to get the first two Lion-class battleships underway.^[16] At the end of the war it was idea Bellphoron 'due south hull was already under construction at Newcastle, simply Hawke, an Improved Belfast with a 76 m (249 ft) beam or the beginning Neptune was almost fix to launch in Portsmouth dockyard^[17] The more advanced of the two ships, Hawke, was cleaved upwardly in 1947, a controversial decision as although she was still on the slip in the Portsmouth dockyard her boilers and mechanism were complete and her new 6-inch guns close to completion.^[18]

The whole class, which was constructed with a tight, cramped, and about impossible to modernise citadel, was nearly superseded past the completely redesigned N2 8500-ton 1944 cruiser, within the aforementioned 555 ft × 64 ft (169 m × 20 k) box of the Colony/Minotaur blueprint, which was approved by the Admiralty Board on xvi July 1943.^{[19] [20]} The blueprint had 4 twin automatic 5.25-inch guns, better range, internal space, subdivision and economical 48,000 hp (36,000 kW) machinery for 28 knots (52 km/h; 32 mph). Twenty 4 of twenty-5 leading RN admirals and the Sea Lords favoured the N2 and preferred the lighter dual purpose v.25 turrets; the incoming new First Body of water Lord Cunningham disagreed believing 6-inch guns were essential.^{[ citation needed ]} By 1944 the 5.25 RP10 was an improved gun and mount, compared with the 1942 version ^[f] and development of two epitome automatic 5.25-inch twin turrets continued at Vickers until 1948.^[24]

In 1948 the Royal Navy had proposed in "Ships of The Future Navy" to replace 23 cruisers and 58 fleet destroyers with 50 light cruisers with Cruiser/Destroyers - four 5-inch guns, torpedoes, anti-submarine mortar and "skillful radar" on 4–five,000 tons displacement congenital to destroyer standards.^{[25] [26]} The Admiralty offered the authorities two such proposals in 1951: a new broad axle Bellona course with four twin Mk vi 4.five-inch guns and an enlarged version of The states Mitscher and Forrest Sherman-course destroyers with British machinery and sensors with 3 single U.s. 5-inch/54 and 2 twin U.s. 3-inch/50-quotient guns.^{[ commendation needed ]}

The 2nd Churchill regime, elected in 1951, favoured the RAF and reduced the naval upkeep. With the RN priority existence anti-submarine frigates, the restart of work on the Tiger cruisers was delayed past three years (as was any further cruiser reconstructions) to 1954. The original decision to delay the Tigers in the late 1940s was to reassess cruiser design and the provision of constructive anti-aircraft (AA) fire-control to appoint jet aircraft which was beyond UK industrial capability at the fourth dimension.^[27] Consequently, higher priority was given to the battleship HMSVanguard, the Battle-class destroyers and the two new Audacious-class aircraft carriers (Eagle and Ark Imperial) for allocation of the 26 Usa-supplied medium-range anti-shipping gun directors (delivered through Lend-Lease in 1944/5)^[28] The US supplied version of Blazon 275 Loftier Altitude/Low Altitude DCT were stabilised and tracked multiple air targets of Mach 1.5+, the US directors were superior to the fragile Great britain version of Blazon 275, the only medium-range AA burn down control until 1955, which could barely distinguish transonic targets at Mach 0.8.^[29] The 1947–49 menstruum saw a peace dividend, and frigate construction became the priority in the Korean War.^{[30] [ folio needed ]}

By 1949 two culling fits for the Tigersouth had been drawn upwards, one as anti-aircraft cruisers with six twin three-inch seventy calibre and 1 with two twin QF 6-inch Marker N5 guns (Mark 26 automatic mountings) and iii twin iii-inch/70s. Both were designed primarily for high-level anti-aircraft defence and largely intended as a replacement for the v.25-inch and four.v-inch turrets on battleships and one-time armada carriers. The rapid-burn car twin 3-inch and half dozen-inch were designed on a post-war philosophy that the kickoff twenty seconds of anti-jet aircraft and anti-missile engagement were disquisitional and that the twin 3-inch firing at 240 rounds per minute would successfully engage six air targets in twenty-second bursts. Sustained burn down for naval gunfire back up (NGS) was non a pattern requirement. The automated twin half dozen-inch guns for the secondary role of defence and attack on trade too provided some very high level (upwards to 8-mile altitude) anti-shipping capability. In historical terms, information technology represented a light armament and similar US weapons introduced on USSWorcester had experienced considerable problems with jamming and had performed beneath expectation.^[31] A third lower-cost option of fitting two Mk 24 turrets in 'A' and 'B' positions and ii to four semi-automated Mk 6 twin 4.5-inch^[g] '10' and 'Y' turrets and on the flanks was considered during the Korean War ^[32] as an immediate surface fighting response to Sverdlov. However the 1945 Neptune-class Mk 24 half-dozen-inch turrets and Mk vi iv.5-inch mounts required a crew of 900+^[33] Just similar the Colony-course in the 1950s, just one 6-inch turret would take been manned. However, equally with the proposed 1951 Bellona Mk 2, the RN 4.5-inch DP was non a good postwar AA weapon.^[33] The six Mk 24 DC turrets were unfinished and circuitous, with two pairs of Type 274 and Type 275 directors. The outset United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland-sourced reliable 275M directors were fitted in 1956, in Royalist and in Blazon 12 frigates, fourteen years later the introduction of the United states of america Mk 37 DCT.^[34] This confirms^{[ commendation needed ]} in late 1951 UK industry could still not build precision bearings or work to the fine tolerances needed for authentic naval AA burn down and burn down-control box components had to be ordered from the Us. By 1953, United states of america Mk 63 directors in the MRS 8 directors for close-in defence had been fitted at US expense in most major RN units and cruisers. Newfoundland was reconstructed to a pattern very similar to that planned for HMS Hawke and the Tigers with ii/274 surface DCTs with the unreliable, UK glasshouse 275 first. On practise AA firing Royalist easily outshot Newcastle.^[35] DC wiring had been removed from the Tiger class in 1948 and the dated Mk 24 was non suitable for fast completion of the form ^[36] There was a stiff desire that the new cruisers should have AC power, not DC or dual.^[37]

At that place was swell doubt of the claim of completing the Tigers, given that Soviet Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear" turboprop and Tupolev Tu-16 "Badger" jet bombers flew faster and higher than anticipated which added to the argument for missile equipped-ships for anti-aircraft defence force. The Sverdlov grade 6.9-inch armour and speed and range as well outclassed the ii turret Tigersouth. Fifty-fifty 6-inch bombardment was increasingly unacceptable to the Majestic Navy later Korea and was allowed only on the first twenty-four hours of Operation Musketeer later stiff political opposition. The RN staff were completely divided over the development of new AA guns larger than 4-inch mail war including Charles Lillicrap, the Director of Naval Construction in 1946 who saw the new 3-inch/70 as eliminating the need for the new Mk 26 directors and advocating suspending cruiser blueprint as much as lack of finance. ^[38] That and the fact the new twin 3-inch/70 and twin Mk 26 half-dozen-inch were half-dozen years from being tested led to both Tigersouth and Minotaursouthward existence suspended in 1947, and slowed work on the new half dozen-inch and proposed new 5-inch guns. The proven Mk 23 seemed more than acceptable and its efficiency was improved in the 1950s.^[h]

Revised design [edit]

In 1954 construction of the three ships was approved to the 1948 design mounting new automated half dozen-inch and three-inch guns. This was a controversial conclusion, made to avoid ordering larger cruisers or new shipping carriers of questionable utility at immense cost and the credible Soviet Sverdlov threat. The Tigers lacked the deep water speed^{[ description needed ]} and armament to claiming the Russian ships, on newspaper, while other RN officers idea a couple of Darings or Blazon 41 frigate anti-shipping frigates were all that was needed to challenge the inexperienced Russian crews.^{[39] [ page needed ]} Cruisers were better deterred and sunk by aircraft carriers operating Bell-ringer Ocean Hawk and de Havilland Sea Venom strike shipping.^{[40] [i]}

The Nov 1954 cabinet meeting deciding the fate of the Royal Navy took 6 hours. Churchill was determined to limit the defence force upkeep with a view to developing nuclear weapons and less vulnerable RAF shipping.^[42] The cheaper Tigers were approved in 1954, the Purple Navy estimating completion in iii years for £6 meg compared with v years and £12m for a new cruiser design.^[43] The new automatic twin 6-inch and twin iii-inch dual-purpose guns designed for larger cruisers like the Minotaur were canonical for production. The modernised Tigers were an acting mensurate with the expectation that guided missile equipped ships were "at to the lowest degree ten years away". The 1957 Defence force White Newspaper nether Duncan Sandys proposed to reduce the agile cruiser fleet^[44] the Tigersouthward, Swiftsure and Superb ^[j] would enter service as acting anti-aircraft ships, until the Canton-course destroyers were commissioned and the two 2d World War cruisers, HMSBelfast and HMSBermuda were mothballed.

While outwardly identical, the iii Tigers where each very different in their electrics. Blake was essentially an experimental cruiser with all-electric turrets able to engage Mach 2.v air targets but was put in reserve in 1963 for lack of technical staff.^{[45] [46]} Lion had deteriorated after eight years in Gareloch before reconstruction as a Tiger and had to exist withdrawn from operations "Eastward of Suez" in 1963 due to boiler, mechanical and armament problems.^[47] HMNZS Royalist, with some Majestic Navy coiffure, was reactivated as a surface escort for carrier groups in Southeast Asia in 1964 to deter the threat of the Indonesian Sverdlov and in 1965 to back up the amphibious carriers with air defence and full general fleet support. By 1966 Royalist, like Blake and Panthera leo, was unsustainable in the year of the confrontation with Indonesia. The large Daringsouth were refitted (from 1961) with MRS3 fire-control to provide a substitute for the Tigers; their 3 turrets giving them an advantage over the Tiger.

Conversions [edit]

Past 1964 the Conservative Government and half the naval staff saw the Tigers as no longer affordable or credible in the surface gainsay or fleet air defence office and would have preferred to decommission them but given they were technically only three years old and congenital at immense expense, scrapping them was politically difficult. They canonical conversion into helicopter carriers; carrying Westland Wessex helicopters for Royal Marine Commando operations. A large hangar replaced the 'Y' turret, the forrad turrets were retained for gunfire support and anti-surface work. Intended to provide extra powerful vessels to support and conduct amphibious operations east of Suez where it was difficult logistically for the Royal Navy to sustain even i operational carrier and one commando carrier in 1963–64. The original plan retained the three twin 3-inch mounts with an updated sonar and radar including Type 965 and replacing the Type 992 target indicator radar with the Type 993. British Army preference in 1964 with the Indonesian confrontation edifice was to retain the Tigerdue south with their 6-inch guns for shore battery.^{[48] [49] [fifty]}

3 configurations (scheme'due south X, Y, and Z) were considered in 1965 for the conversion to helicopter carriers. X had deck infinite for 1 helicopter and a hangar for three at the cost of the rear half-dozen-inch turret, Y gave deck space for two Wessex helicopters and hangar for four once the 6-inch and 3-inch armament were removed, Z was same deck space and hangar capacity as Y but ii helicopters could take off (or country) at once. Z was chosen every bit the all-time option even for a projected six-twelvemonth lifespan and expected to accept 15 months and cost £2 one thousand thousand per send. ^{[51] [ page needed ]} The final cost was £12 million for all 3 and £x.5 million for the helicopters. It was recognised that 75 pilots would also exist needed at a time when the FAA was already 37 pilots short.^{[51] [ folio needed ]}

To avoid the political problem of scrapping new cruisers equally well as the shipping carriers, the Labour Government elected in Oct 1964 decided to retain large ships for command and flagship roles and accustomed the RN and Mod statement that iii Tiger cruisers would supersede the anti-submarine warfare role previously provided by aircraft carriers. At the time the Royal Navy was by and large concentrated on eastward of Suez operations and the anti-submarine deterrent office was to counter slow Indonesian and Chinese diesel-powered submarines. In theory, even i Tiger could threaten the utilise of nuclear depth charges and costless upwardly space on aircraft carriers for strike and air combat aircraft.^{[ citation needed ]}

The government connected the conversion of Tiger and Blake after deciding on farther ship cuts and a faster phase-out of carriers in 1968. During the conversion of Blake, the programme was changed to permit the cruisers to operate four more capable Westland Sea King helicopters, although simply three Sea Kings could actually ever be accommodated and serviced in the new longer hangar, which forced the replacement of the side 3-inch gun mounts with less effective Seacat guided weapon organization.^{[52] [53]} The low priority given to deterrence of Soviet submarines in the Northern Atlantic by the MoD is reflected in the decision to convert a suitable anti-submarine helicopter platform, the carrier Hermes into an amphibious carrier. The afterwards advent of the Invincible-class aircraft carriers would seem to add weight to this proposal.^{[ citation needed ]} Hermes and Barrier were larger, and offered more hangar capacity. The regime'due south priority was to arm aircraft in West Deutschland with tactical and thermonuclear weapons. Provision of nuclear depth charges for anti-submarine, aircraft carriers, destroyers and frigates was limited, although approval for Leander, Rothesay and Canton form ships for triggering Nuclear depth bombs was given in 1969 and these ships offered quieter listening platforms than the Tigersouth.^{[ commendation needed ]}

The proposed course of four large Type 82 destroyers (planned to back-trail the CVA-01 aircraft carriers) fitted with nuclear Ikara anti-submarine missiles could have been a more reliable nuclear deterrent,^{[ citation needed ]} but the Ikara was ultimately fitted only to carry conventional Marker 46 torpedoes and due to the 1966 Defense White Paper only ane Blazon 82 air defense force destroyer, HMSBristol, was built every bit a testbed for the weapon technologies. Bristol lacked a helicopter hangar, and was plagued past problems common with dated and complex steam propulsion.^{[ commendation needed ]}

With no other options, work began to convert Blake to a helicopter cruiser in 1965 and Tiger in 1968. The structural modernisation piece of work on the hulls was difficult and expensive. However, the ships successfully served as helicopter command cruisers and provided an statement to justify the structure of their replacement, the Invincible-class "through deck cruisers". Lion 'south conversion was cancelled due to rising costs and by 1969, information technology was obvious that Blake 's conversion was unsatisfactory. Lion remained operational until belatedly 1965, when she was placed in reserve and used as a parts source for the conversion of Tiger and she was sold for breaking upwardly in 1975. The conversions left Tiger and Blake some 380 tons heavier with a full displacement of 12,080 tons and their coiffure complements increased past 169 to 885. Originally. Blake 's conversion had been more expensive than envisaged (£5.5 million) and Tiger 's £13.25 one thousand thousand, due to the level of inflation at the time.^{[ commendation needed ]}

Obsolescence and decommissioning [edit]

The decommissioned HMS Tiger at Portsmouth Navy Days in 1980, showing the helicopter deck and hangar

HMS Tiger on the same day, showing the forward half-dozen-inch guns which were retained in the conversion.

Blake returned to service in 1969 and Tiger in 1972, using Panthera leo for spares before she was scrapped in 1975. Cutbacks in Royal Navy funding and manpower, under the new Bourgeois regime and the belief in the Hawker Siddeley Nimrod maritime patrol shipping and submarines for anti-submarine operations, reduced the need for the grade.^{[ citation needed ]} The recommissioning of the carrier Bulwark and conversion of Hermes into a helicopter carrier, then anti-submarine carrier meant that they could deport twice equally many Sea Kings equally the Tigers farther decreased their importance. In April 1978, Tiger was withdrawn from service, followed by Blake in 1979; both ships were laid up in reserve at Chatham Dockyard. When Blake was decommissioned in 1979, she was the final cruiser to serve in the Royal Navy and her passing was marked on 6 December 1979 when she fired her principal guns for the concluding time in the English Channel.^{[ citation needed ]}

During the Falklands War, Blake and Tiger were surveyed to decide their condition for reactivation. The survey determined both ships to exist in practiced condition and they were put into dry-dock, Blake at Chatham, Tiger at Portsmouth. By mid-May, information technology was determined that the ships would not be completed in time to take function in the war and work ceased.^{[ citation needed ]}

Chile showed interest in acquiring both ships, the sale did not go on and the ships sabbatum at anchor. Blake was sold for breaking up in tardily 1982 and Tiger in 1986.^{[ citation needed ]}

Ships of the class [edit]

Pennant	Proper noun	(a) Hull architect (b) Principal machinery manufacturers	Laid down	Launched	Accepted into service	Deputed	Decommissioned	Estimated building price[54]
C20	Tiger (ex-Bellerophon) [55]	(a) & (b) John Brown and Co Ltd, Clydebank.[56]	ane October 1941 [55]	25 October 1945 [55]	March 1959 [56]	18 March 1959 [55]	xx April 1978 [55]	£12,820,000 [56]
C34	Panthera leo (ex-Defence) [55]	(a) Scotts Shipbuilding & Engineering Co Ltd, Greenock (to launching phase) (a) Swan Hunter & Wigham Richardson Wallsend-on-Tyne (for completion).[57]	24 June 1942 [55]	2 September 1944 [55]	July 1960 [57]	twenty July 1960 [55]	Dec 1972 [55]	£14,375,000 [57]
C99	Blake (ex-Tiger, ex-Blake) [55]	(a) & (b) Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company Govan, Glasgow.[57]	17 August 1942 [55]	twenty December 1945 [55]	March 1961 [57]	8 March 1961 [55]	December 1979 [55]	£14,940,000 [57]

Notes [edit]

1. ^ later known as Swiftsure class subsequently Minotaur was transferred to the Royal Canadian Navy and renamed Ontario
2. ^ At the time of the agreement in 1943 Uganda was undergoing repair and refit in the USA
3. ^ Australia was scrapped in 1955 and Shropshire (which had been gifted by UK to replace the sunk Canberra in 1942) in 1954.
4. ^ A full electric powered turret had been fitted in Diadem in 1944 and, with ability ramming, the shells fired at consistent intervals and it had sufficient training and summit speed to have some dual purpose capability against jet aircraft and early guided missiles.
5. ^ Janes Fighting Ships 1944–45, states that Hawke was laid downwardly in August 1944^[15] as a Tiger
6. ^ Spartan fired 900 rounds in support of the preliminaries to the Anzio landings.^[21] Covering the Normandy landings, Diadem and Blackness Prince played an important General Fleet Support (GFS) and command part.^{[22] [ page needed ]} Black Prince fired one,300 rounds in the flow 6–fifteen June 1944.^[23]
7. ^ as used on Daring-class
8. ^ In the Naval Boxing of Guadalcanal action against Japanese cruisers suggested that manually operated six-inch triples at low summit could sustain high rates of burn down of viii–10 rounds per minute (rpm) in the estrus of the battle in activeness, and HMS Bermuda in 1960 accomplished 12rpm, at low meridian at shut range and higher barrel-wear. The USN maintained the similar Cleveland grade triple vi-inch turret on its mail service-war missile conversions, including USSGalveston, which maintained one-half its original half-dozen- and 5-inch ammunition with twin RIM-viii Talos surface-to-air missile launchers and was more than capable than HMS Tiger.
9. ^ Australia had HMASMelbourne with Sea Venom,^[41] Canada HMCSBonaventure with McDonnell F2H Banshee fighters and India had INSVikrant (formerly Hercules) with Sea Hawks and French Bréguet 1050 Alizé - all 3 were wartime 1942 Design Calorie-free Fleet Carriers built for mod jet aircraft
10. ^ modernisation of Superb was cancelled that year and information technology was decommissioned in November 1957. Superb has received a refit from January 1955 to April 1956 to be available for the Suez functioning. The reconstruction of Swiftsure as a fourth Tiger was structurally consummate by June 1959 just its new armament had been sold to the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) and Chile, and it was not worth fitting recycled 4-inch and 40 mm armament. Swiftsure was scrapped in 1962 later numerous RN proposals to catechumen it to a missile cruiser or helicopter carrier. Converting into a small flat-deck shipping carrier was considered.

Citations [edit]

1. ^ P Smith & J Dominy. Cruisers in Activeness 1939–1945. William Kimber. 1981. London, p. 240 ISBN 978-0718302184
2. ^ D. 24-hour interval. The Politics of War. Australia at War 1939–45. From Churchill to MacArthur, Sydney: Harper Collins, 2002, pp. 589–591
3. ^ Gill 1968, pp. 470–72.
4. ^ Gill 1968, p. 470–2.
5. ^ Freidman (2002) pp (notes)371–375
6. ^ Frame, T; Goldrick, J; Jones, P (1991), "Reflections on the RN", Papers of 1989 ADF Conference on RAN History, Kenthurst, NSW: Kangaroo
7. ^ Murfin 2010, p. 58–9.
8. ^ Stevens, D. (1996), The RAN in WW2, Sydney: Allen & Unwin, pp. 14–16
9. ^ T. Frame & J Goldrick /[Ed] (1991), "Reflections on the RAN", Papers from Seminar Australian Navy History at ADF University Canberra., Kangaroo Press {{citation}}: CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
10. ^ Gill 1968, pp. 469–472.
11. ^ ^{a b} Gill 1968, p. 470-two.
12. ^ Murfin 2010, p. footnote 14, p. 59.
13. ^ Stevens. The RAN 1942–45
14. ^ Freidman. British Cruisers Two World Wars and Afterward
15. ^ Janes Fighting Ships 1944–45. First published 1944/46. Reprinted, Low and Sampson (1978), p. 39
16. ^ C. Bong. Churchill & Ocean Power. OUP (2019) London, pp. 308–320
17. ^ A J Watts. Allied Cruisers. Janes Publishing. London (1979); H. Lenton. British Cruisers. MacDonald. London (1973) pp. 142–3 & RN Major Warships in New Statesman Yearbook 1952
18. ^ Moore
19. ^ Freidman (2012) p. 261
20. ^ Moore. Warships 1996, re N2
21. ^ Raven & Roberts, p. 335
22. ^ Raven & Roberts
23. ^ Lt Cdr Gerry Wright Black Prince. Printshop (2007). Granada. Wellington, p15
24. ^ Moore 2006, p. 51.
25. ^ Brownish & Moore 2012, p. 29.
26. ^ Admiral Philip Edwards. Ships of the Future RN (1949) TNA Admiralty 1161-5362-(1948–52)
27. ^ C.Barnett. The Verdict of Peace: Britain betwixt her Yesterday and the Future . MacMillan. London (2001) pp 122, 347
28. ^ P. Marland. "Post State of war Fire Control in the RN" in Warship 2014. Conway. London (2014) p149
29. ^ P. Hodge & N. Freidman. Destroyer Weapons of WW2. Conway Maritime. (1979) London, pp. 101–03
30. ^ Friedman, N. (2010). British Cruisers Ii World Wars and After. UK: Seaforth.
31. ^ N. Freidman. US Cruisers. An Illustrated design history. Arms & Armour. London (1985), p357 & Freidman. United states Naval Weapons. Gun, Missile, Mine & Torpedo from 1883 to present.(1983) pp. 70–1
32. ^ Brown & Moore 2012, p. 47.
33. ^ ^{a b} Friedman 2010, p. 371–seven.
34. ^ Barnett, Correlli (2001). The Verdict of Peace: United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland between her Yesterday and the Future. London: MacMillan. pp. 47, 321.
35. ^ Pugsley, Christopher (2003). From Emergency to Confrontation: The New Zealand Armed Forces in Malaya and Borneo 1949–1966. NZ/Au: Oxford University Press. ISBN0195584538.
36. ^ C. Walters. Tiger form in Ships Monthly
37. ^ Murfin 2010, p. 57.
38. ^ Moore 2006, p. 41, 42 – line 2.
39. ^ A. Clarke. Sverdlov Cruisers and the RN Response, British Naval History
40. ^ Moore 2006, pp. 43–44.
41. ^ Friedman 2016, p. 174.
42. ^ P. Zeigler. Mountbatten: the Official biography London (2001)^{[ page needed ]} & van der Vat, Dan (2001), Standard of Ability, Hutchinson, ISBN0091801214 The Royal Navy in the Twentieth Century, London: Pilmco, 2001, ISBN9781842122969 ^{[ page needed ]}
43. ^ Brown & Moore 2012, pp. 23–29.
44. ^ "Statement on Defence force 1957. Outline of Future Policy". White Newspaper. HMSO. 15 March 1957, pp. seven–8, s15.
45. ^ Civil Sea Lord Lord Ewing (18 March 1963), "Vote 1. Pay, etc., of the Royal Navy and Imperial Marines", HC Debates, vol. 674, 145
46. ^ D. Healey. Time of my Life. Norton,(1980) NY, p. 275
47. ^ Brown & Moore 2012, p. 48.
48. ^ P. Darby. British Defence policy East of Suez 1947–1968. OUP & R.I.I.A. Oxford (1993) p. 268
49. ^ Dark-brown & Moore 2012, p. 50.
50. ^ DEFC 10/457 xvi February 1964 and Board of Admiralty ten/63 ADM 167/162 and 1/64 ADM 167/163
51. ^ ^{a b} Brown & Moore 2012.
52. ^ Freidman 2012, p. 321.
53. ^ D.Wettern. "Tiger Form" in Janes Defense force Annual. Janes.(1973) London
54. ^ "Unit cost, i.e. excluding cost of certain items (e.grand. aircraft, First Outfits)."
    Text from Defences Estimates
55. ^ ^{a b c d e f one thousand h i j grand l k n o} Gardiner, Robert Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1947–1995, pub Conway Maritime Press, 1995, ISBN 0-85177-605-1 page 504.
56. ^ ^{a b c} Navy Estimates, 1959–60, pages 230–1, List and particulars of new ships which have been accustomed or are expected to exist accepted into HM service during the Financial Twelvemonth ended 31st March 1959
57. ^ ^{a b c d east f} Navy Estimates, 1961–62, pages 220–1, Listing and particulars of new ships which have been accepted or are expected to be accepted into HM service during the Financial Yr ended 31st March 1961

References [edit]

• Chocolate-brown, D.K; Moore, G. (2012). Rebuilding the Royal Navy. Warship Design since 1945. UK: Seaforth.
• Freidman, North. (2012), British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After, Barnsley: Seaforth, ISBN9781848320789
• Friedman, N. (2016), Fighters over the Armada. Naval Air Defence from the Biplane to Cold War, Barnsley: Seaforth
• Gill, One thousand. H. (1968), The Majestic Australian Navy, 1942-1945, Australia in the War of 1939–1945, Series 2 (Navy), vol. Ii, Canberra: Australian State of war Memorial
• Moore, G. (2006), "Postwar cruiser design for the Purple Navy 1946–56", Warship
• Murfin, D. (2010). "AA to AA. The Fiji'south Turn Full Circle". Warship. London: Conway.
• Stephen, G.M. (2003), British warship design since 1905, London: Ian Allen

External links [edit]

• Colledge, J. J.; Warlow, Ben (2006) [1969]. Ships of the Royal Navy: The Complete Record of all Fighting Ships of the Majestic Navy (Rev. ed.). London: Chatham Publishing. ISBN978-1-86176-281-8.
• Tiger-class cruisers
• Tiger class at Uboat.net

When Did The Tiger 1 Enter Service,

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger-class_cruiser

Posted by: sieverswoudde89.blogspot.com

Share this post