Richelieu in September 1943, after refit, with the upper fire control director on fore tower suppressed, and many AA short-range guns added. |
|
| Career (France) | |
|---|---|
| Namesake: | Richelieu |
| Laid down: | 22 October 1935 |
| Launched: | 17 January 1939 |
| Commissioned: | June 1940/October 1943 |
| Decommissioned: | 1967 |
| Struck: | 1968 |
| Fate: | scrapped |
| Class overview | |
| Name: | Richelieu |
| Builders: | Brest Navy Yard |
| Preceded by: | Dunkerque-class |
| Succeeded by: | Alsace-class (planned) |
| Planned: | 4 |
| Completed: | 2 Richelieu Jean Bart |
| Cancelled: | 1 |
| Laid up: | 3 |
| General characteristics | |
| Type: | Battleship |
| Displacement: | 48,950 tonnes |
| Length: | 248 m |
| Beam: | 35 m |
| Draught: | 9.60 m |
| Propulsion: |
six Indret Sural boilers 150,000 hp (112 MW) |
| Speed: | 32 knots (59 km/h) |
| Range: | 7,671 nautical miles (14,207 km) at 20 knots (37 km/h); 3181 nautical miles (5,891 km) at 30 knots (56 km/h) |
| Complement: |
911 men in 1950 (incomplete) |
| Armament: |
8 x 380mm/45 Modèle 1935 guns in quadruple mounts at bow |
| Armour: |
belt: 330 mm |
The Richelieu class battleships were the last and largest battleships of the French Navy, staying in service into the 1960s. They still remain to this day the largest warships ever built by France. Designed in the 1930s to counter of threat of the Italian Vittorio Veneto class battleships, the Richelieu class were essentially scaled-up versions of the preceding Dunkerque class, featuring a main armament of eight 380 mm guns in two quadruple turrets in forward superfiring positions.
Four Richelieu class ships, of three different subclasses, were laid down over the course of three naval construction programs, in 1935, 1936, and 1938. Only the two first units, Richelieu and Jean Bart, were ever completed, and saw service during World War II, first under Vichy control in Dakar (1940) and Casablanca (1942), then under the Allies' control, Richelieu participating in British Home Fleet and Eastern Fleet operations and supporteing the French forces return to Indochina in late 1945. Jean Bart was not completed until the 1950s, and took part in the operations off Port Saïd (Egypt) during the Suez Crisis in 1956. Both were scrapped in the late 1960s.
Contents |
In 1922, the Washington Naval Conference, concluded by the Washington Naval Treaty, decided to stop, for ten years, any new battleship building, as a new naval armaments race was developing, between the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and Japan. The Treaty fixed for battleships to be built, the limits of 35,000 tons for standard displacement, and 406 mm (16-inches) for the main artillery calibre. France and Italy each were also allowed to replace, after 1927, two of their old battleships.[1]
Germany was not subject to the Washington Treaty limitations, but to specific stipulations of the Treaty of Versailles, and was forbidden to build any warship with a displacement greater than 10,000 tons.[2]
But the interest of building battleships seemed very questionable[3] · ,[4] as, during W W I, no decisive victory had resulted from a cataclysmic clash between battleships, as the Japanese victory of Tsushima, more 17 years earlier. However, the war experience had clearly shown the problem of ensuring the safety of maritime commercial roads, for which cruisers appeared better suited than battleships, so by the late 1920s, all the countries which had signed the Washington Treaty undertook the building of new heavy cruiser classes.[5] For France, the priority was the safety of the maritime liaisons between France and her African colonies or protectorates, on the axis Marseilles-Algiers, or Bordeaux-Casablanca-Dakar.
So, in the late 1920s, the most powerful battleships had been designed before the Washington Treaty, and were armed with four double turrets of 15-inches (381 mm)(Queen Elizabeth,[6] and Revenge[7] classes, and HMS Hood,[8] ), or 16-inches caliber (406 mm) (Colorado,[9] and Nagato[10] classes). The Nelson[11] class battleships themselves, built between 1922-1927, with three triple 16-inches turrets forward, were based on 1921 G3[12] battlecruiser concept. The top speed was, for most of them, of 21–24 knots (Revenge, Colorado, Nelson, Queen Elizabeth battleship classes), for a few ones of 27 knots (Nagato class battleships), with the notable exception, in Western waters, of the HMS Hood fast battleship, and the two Renown[13] class battlecruisers, whose speed exceeded 30 knots.
But neither France nor Italy were intending to build battleships with similar characteristics as these of the most recent American, British, or Japanese mastodontes, very heavily armed and armored. They were only decided to modernize their ageing battleships, refurbishing the propulsion machinery, and upgrading the main artillery, as the Treaty of Washington has authorized them to undertake much more radical modernizations than the other treaty powers. In the same way, both powers reserved the right to employ their capital ship tonnage allocation (70,000 tons) as they saw fit, subject to Treaty limits, not only two battleships of 35,000 tons, but also three 23,000 tons or four 17,500 tons.[14]
The Treaty of Washington, by greeting France the same global battleship tonnage of 175,000 tons as Italy, in a proportion of 1 to 3 to the United States and the United Kingdom, and 1 to 1.8 to Japan, was resented as humiliating. But the battleships were not the core of the French warship building programm, which was adopted by the French Parliament in 1924, under the name of «Statut Naval». Its aim was that the French Navy was able to counter the both navies of Italy and Germany.[15] But from 1924 to 1932, the annual «Tranche Navale» (litterally slice of the so-called «Statut Naval») will have included only cruisers, destroyers, torpedo-boats, and submarines.[16]
The French Admiralty, under Vice Admiral Salaün, discussed, in 1926-1927, of ships designed as «cruiser killers», able to outgun and outrun the Italian heavy cruisers, which were considered as the main threat against the maritime liaisons between France and North Africa,[17] as the first unit built, Trento, had been laid down in 1925, and launched in 1926. The French designers considered a displacement of 17,500 tons which would have allowed to build four units, respecting the maximum limit of 70,000 tons, which the Treaty of Washington had fixed for the replacements authorized for France. An artillery arrangement of two 305 mm (12-inches) quadruple turrets forward was examined, combining the choice of quadruple turrets made by the French designers of the prewar Normandie[18] and the «all forward» arrangement of the Nelson battleship class. The speed would have been of 34-35 knots, the armor able to resist to 203 mm shells. But, finally, such warships would not have been able to fight in the battle line against the old Italian battleships[19] · .[20]
In 1927, studies were undertaken of ships designed as battlecruisers of 37,000 tons. A «trial» displacement of 37,000 tons would have been the equivalent of a «standard» Washington displacement of 32-33,000 tons, near the maximum limit for battleship displacement fixed by the Treaty of Washington. But it clearly appeared than the building of 35,000 tons battleships was outpassing the technical and financial capacities of the French Navy, as the building costs of the linked infrastructures (new building forms and graving docks) for hulls of about 230-250 m length allowing to reach a speed of 27-30 knots, would have been equivalent of those of two more battleships, and would have jeopardized the building programme of the other categorizes of warships, cruisers, destroyers, and submarines.[21]
Moreover, in the same time, discussions at the Disarmament Subcommittee of the League of Nations had begun in Geneva, about the pursuit of naval armaments limitation policy. The United Kingdom was trying to obtain more drastic limitations than those of the Washington Treaty, as 25,000 tons for battleship maximum displacement, and 305 mm for battleship maximum caliber, and the French Government did not wanted to jeopardize these negotiations.
Everything changed when, in February 1929, the German Reichsmarine laid down the keel of Deutschland, an «armoured ship» (in German Panzerschiffe), of 10,000 tons displacement, respecting formally the limitations of the Treaty of Versailles, actually at least 25 % heavier but this was not known at this moment. With two 280 mm (11-inches) caliber triple turrets, and a speed of 26 knots, this ship outgunned every so-called heavy cruiser with their 203 mm (8 inches) guns intended to respect the Washington Treaty limitations concerning the caliber of cruiser main artillery, and outran every battleship, except the three fastest British units, HMS Hood, HMS Renown and HMS Repulse.[22] The type of Deutschland was commonly designated as a «pocket battleship», being actually as her German denomination indicated well, an «armoured cruiser».[23]
The reaction of the French Admiralty was to prepare draft drawings for a ship which would outclass the German "pocket battleship", in armament, armor and speed. It appeared that the armament of the French previous projects might be retained, that the speed might be of 30 knots, and not necessarily superior, but the most important feature was that the armor had to be thicker to resist to 280 mm shells. These considerations were leading to a displacement of about 23,000 to 25,000 tons, which fits the maximum displacement that the United Kingdom found suitable in the naval armament limitations negotiations.
The 1930 London Naval Treaty decided that the ten-years «battleship holiday» agreed at Wahington would be extended for further five years, until 1936, December 31. France and Italy were authorized, however, to build the remplacement tonnage which they were entitled to lay down in 1927 and 1929 in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty of Washington. Nevertheless, France and Italy refused to adhere to every other qualitative limitations, which were mainly concerning cruisers. France argued that ship construction had just started in Germany of the armour-clad Deutschland, and following the rejection of the agreement by France, Italy was no longer prepared to accept new restrictions[24] · .[25]
In order to establish an agreed ceiling to new naval construction, bilateral talks took place between France and Italy, with the great encouragement of the United Kingdom, at the very beginning of 1931, and a «basis of agreement» was concluded on March 1. Up to 1936, both countries would have been allowed to build only two battleships each of 23,333 tons. But it was not possible to go further, as the Regia Marina was not satisfied of the 23,333 tons battleship Italian project,[26] with three twin 381 mm turrets, and a profile reminiscent of the heavy cruiser Pola, then in construction[27]: a very complete refit of the artillery and power plant of the Conte di Cavour battleships class[28] will begin in 1933, and the studies on the 35,000 tons will be going on.
However, in 1931, the French Admiralty explicitely confirm the choice of the battleship of 23,333 tons, as the battleship of 17,500 tons would have been too lightly armored, and the battleship of 35,000 tons would have required technical and financial capacities that outranged the possibilities of France. This battleship of 23,333 tons would have had a 213 m length, with a 27.5 m beam, two quad 305 mm/55 cal turrets forward, three quad 130 mm turrets Dual Purpose aft, a speed of 30 knots, an armored belt of 230 mm, and an horizontal protection of 150 mm. But when this proposal was submitted to the Parliament, in 1931 May, the discussion lasted two months, with much criticism, as it was difficult to understand why it was necessary to have a displacement double of the warship which was to be countered, and why it was not preferable to build a 35,000 tons battleship. So, in the 1931 Estimates, in July, funds were allocated only for further studies, with the proviso that the final characteristics should be subject to a thorough revision, the results of which would have to be submitted to the Parliament, before passing any building orders. Then, Vice Admiral Durand-Viel, the new Chief of Staff of the French Navy from 1931 January, requested further studies for upgrading the main artillery caliber, from 305 mm to 330 mm, to outgun the Italian battleships.
This resulted to an increase in displacement to 26,500 tons, a 2-meter increase in length, a 2.5-meter increase in beam, a slight reduction in maximum speed to 29.5 knots, the substitution of 330 mm/52 guns to 305 mm/55 ones, two more double 130 mm DP turrets, and a slight increase of the thicknes of the armored belt, as on the armored decks[29] · .[30] In early 1932, the project was approved by the Parliament committees, and the Minister of Defence, François Pietri, succeeded to include it in the 1932 Estimates. So emerged the Dunkerque,[31] which was ordered on 1932, October 26, and laid down on 1932, December 24.
After Deutschland, Admiral Scheer, on June 1931, and Admiral Graf Spee, on October 1932, had been laid down.[32] So the French Navy asked to have quickly a second ship with the same characteristics as Dunkerque: she was included in the 1934 Estimates.[33]
Originally, the Deutschland class was intended to count six units. On February 14, 1934, two more German battleships were ordered, officially, the fourth and fifth units of the Deutschland class, as the Third Reich has not yet denounced the Treaty of Versailles. But, during more than one year, there were discussions about their definitive characteristics, as the laying down of Dunkerque was leading to an upgraded version of the «pocket battleship». Finally, they emerged as the only other class of «little battleships»,[34] with the Dunkerque class, to be faster than the 1920s battleships, with a displacement substantially under the limits of the Treaty of Washington. Heavier than the Dunkerque class battleships (31,800 tons), with the hull dimensions of the Ersatz Yorck battlecruiser class, projected in 1915, they were strongly armored with a 350 mm belt, and bearing an horizontal armor equivalent to the later King George V, or Bismarck battleship classes. However they were only armed with nine 280 mm guns, the same calibre as the Deutschland class. A heavier caliber had been considered for the main artillery, and was preferred by Adolf Hitler, as the Dunkerque class battleships were armed with 330 mm guns. But when the final design of these ships was about to be settled, Germany was negotiating the 1935 Anglo-German Naval Agreement, and the British Government was pressing very strongly for a limitation on the battleship main artillery calibre. So reluctantly, an improved gun, with longer barrel, higher muzzle velocity, but the same 280 mm calibre was chosen.[34] Gneisenau was laid down on May 6, 1935, and Scharnhorst, on June 15, 1935.
As the French Navy ship designers thought that Dunkerque class battleships' armor was able to resist to 280 mm calibre shells, there would not have been any necessity to conceive an heavier battleship class. But, in Italy, the new French battleships were considered as breaking the balance between the French and Italian battleship fleets in the Mediterranean waters. The new Italian battleships were intended by the Regia Marina to counter the Dunkerque class battleships, but also the more heavily armed battleships of the British Mediterranean Fleet.[35] Duce Benito Mussolini announced, on May 26, 1934, the decision of Italy to fully use the right of building battleships as they were resulting of the naval limitations treaties. Some days later, the Stefani news agency announced the laying down of two 35,000 tons battleships,[29] armed with nine 381 mm guns,[36] which received in October 1935 the names of Littorio and Vittorio Veneto.[35]
The time had occurred to build the first French 35,000 tons battleship. But time was missing to achieve a design for a new heavier battleships class. The French Navy Board, (Conseil Supérieur de la Marine, French equivalent to the British Board of Admiralty) recommended, unanimously, on June 25, 1934, to not modify the 1934 Naval Program, and to order the building of a new Dunkerque class battleship, improving the vertical armored protection: Strasbourg laying down was ordered on July 16, 1934.[37]
Eight days later, on July 24, 1934, the French Navy Board defined the characteristics of the new French battleships as follows :
Thirteen months later, the Service Technique des Constructions navales, (S.T.C.N.), French equivalent of the Department of the Director of Naval Construction, in the Royal Navy, established a definitive project which was submitted to the Minister, on August 14, 1935, adopted on August 31, and Richelieu was laid down, on October 22, 1935. So acting, France was not respecting the Washington Treaty and the 1930 Treaty of London, as more of 88,000 tons of new battleships, instead of 70,000 tons, have been ordered, before December 31, 1936. But, on June 18, 1935, the Anglo-German Naval Agreement had been signed, between the United Kingdom, without consulting France, and the Third Reich, cancelling de facto the limitations of the Treaty of Versailles concerning the limitations of displacement of the various types of warships, and gretting Germany the right of building a war navy within the limit of 35% of the total tonnage of the Royal Navy. Having lost the hope of being able to counter both German and Italian Navies, as the Versailles and Washington Treaties allowed it, France considered that the Dunkerque class battleships were the answer to the Scharnhorst class and the Richelieu class battleships the answer to the Littorio class.
Germany went a step further, laying down two new battleships, Bismarck in November 1935, and Tirpitz in June 1936. These ships, strongly armoured as their protection absorbed more than 40% of their standard displacement, with a very large beam of 36 m, got a very classic design, eight 380 mm calibre guns in double turrets, two forward and two aft, the secondary anti-ship artillery in six double 150 mm turrets on sides. A powerful anti-aircraft artillery in sixteen 105 mm guns in eight double turrets, and numerous 37 mm and 20 mm mountings, controlled by six high-angle directors was unmatched anywhere[38] : officially declared as 35,000 tons, their tonnage was more than 42,000 tons standard and even nearing 50,000 tons full load.[39][40]
The French answer was the laying down of the second Richelieu class battleship, Jean Bart, in December 1936.
The Richelieu class had a planned standard displacement of 35,000 tons, equal to the limit fixed by the Washington Treaty, with a main armament of eight 380 mm guns in two quadruple turrets. Three ships in two subclasses were laid down: all had the main turrets in forward superfiring positions, while the fourth unit was planned with one turret forward and the other aft. There were also differences among subclasses in the secondary artillery and the aircraft installations planned to be fitted, as well as minor differences between Richelieu and Jean Bart resulting from the completion of the latter unit ten years after the former one.
Vice admiral Durand-Viel, Chief of Navy General Staff, was very concerned about the continuity between the Richelieu battleship class and the preceding Dunkerque battleship class, whose leadship had been ordered only two years before.
The French Navy Board had indicated, in July 1934, a minimum calibre, 380 mm, which was dictated by the choice of the Regia Marina, and a maximum, 406 mm, which was still the limit fixed by the Washington Treaty. For the number of guns, eight was the minimum determined by the practice for spotting efficient salvos, and it was one of the reasons for which the Regia Marina had not been satisfied by the 23,300 tons battleship project of 1931, with six 381 mm guns only. The maximum of nine guns corresponded to a battery of three triple turrets, as on the new Italian battleships.
The quadruple turret arrangement was saving more than 25% weight on turret armoring, compared to four double turrets, while retaining the same firepower, but it appeared quickly that the 380 mm caliber was the largest feasible for a quadruple turret. With a 32 m beam, and 406 mm (16-inch) caliber guns, the Nelson class battleships had accommodated only triple turrets. But on the Dunkerque, with 31 m beam and 330 mm (13-inch) guns, the four barrels of each turret were not yet mounted independently in individual mounts because this would have meant an unduly large barbette diameter. For that reason the right and left hand pair of barrels where placed in a common mount each.[31] It will not have been the case on the fore and aft 14-inches quadruple turrets of the British King George V class battleships, which had 34 m beam and 356 mm caliber, 3-meter more beam and only 1-inch more calibre than on Dunkerque.
The drawback of the quadruple turret was the risk of receiving a single unlucky shot which would destroy one turret, and would cripple one half of the main battery: the quadruple turrets of Dunkerque class battleships had been divided internally, with a 25 to 40 mm bulkhead to localise damage.[41] This device will be noted as effective at Mers-el-Kebir, when the first British 381 mm shell, striking Dunkerque, rebounced on the 330 mm turret II, killing all servants in the right half turret, as the left one remained operational.[42]
But the «all forward» arrangement of two quadruple turrets, and more broadly the proximity between the magazines of the main artillery turrets, induces the greatest risk, crippling the totality of the main battery, or even provoking the loss of the ship. On Dunkerque, to avoid this risk, the forward turrets had been positioned 27 m apart from one another,[31] more than on the Nelson class battleships.[43] Nevertheless, the French Navy studied various other solutions, with three turrets (one quadruple and two double, two triple and one double, or three triple). In every case, with three turrets, there would has been an excess of weight, in comparison with two quadruple turrets, and, in counterpart, a propulsion plant power reduced to 100,000 hsp, and a speed loss of 2.5 knots, for a little benefit of distributing the main armament on a greater length.[44] So following the proposal of the head of STCN, the Chief of Navy General Staff choose as early as November 1934 the «all forward» arrangement with two quadruple turrets.[45]
The solutions used on Dunkerque class battleships were retained on Richelieu, in a scaled up version: «all forward» disposition, in two 2476 tons quadruple turrets Model 1936, built by Saint-Chamond, weighing 3,096 tons with the weight of the barbette. It was nearly 1,000 tons more than the about 1,500 tons quadruple turrets of Dunkerque[46] or triple turrets of Littorio.[47] The world heaviest turrets will have been the three-460 mm gun turrets on Yamato with 2,774 tons,[48] the U.S. Navy heaviest built turrets, the 1704 tons turrets of Iowa class battleships,[49] the heaviest Royal Navy turrets ever built, the three-406 mm gun turrets of Nelson class battleships weighing 1568 tons, and the four-356 mm gun turrets of King George V, weighing 1550 tons.[50]
Each Richelieu turret was divided in two half turrets, by a 25 to 45 mm bulkead. The guns, in the half turrets, were in pairs, and although each gun was in a separate cradle, the relative movement of the guns of each pair was limited. The guns were so close (1.95 m, only 0.30 m more than on Dunkerque) that a wake effect between shells fired simultaneously by a half turret lead to an excessive dispersal, which has not been corrected before 1948 on Richelieu.[51] The turrets were positionned 33 m apart from one another, 6 meters more than on Dunkerque.
The weight of one barrel was 110 tons,[46] less than the 181 tons barrel onYamato,[48] or the 130 tons barrel on Nelson,[50] nearly the same weight as the 112 tons barrel on Nagato,[48] the 109 tons barrel on Bismarck,[52] the 107 tons barrel on Iowa,[49] the 102 tons barrel on Littorio,[47] or the 97 tons Queen Elizabeth barrel, and more than the 80 tons King George V barrel.[50]
The maximum angle of elevation of guns on the Model 1936 turret was 35°.With a 830 m/s muzzle velocity, the maximum range was theoretically 41,500 m, practically 37,800 m. The rate of fire was from 1.3 rounds per minute to 2 rpm. The maximum training speed was 5°/s, and the maximum elevating speed 5.5°/s. The 380 mm shell was an Armor Piercing Capped (APC) shell, registered in the French Navy as Obus de Perforation (OPf). The OPf Model 1935 was an extrapolation of the 330 mm OPf Model 1935, in use on the Dunkerque. The 380 mm shell was 1,905 m long and weighed 884 kg, less than the 406 mm Massachussets shell (1224 kg),[49] which hardly stroke Jean Bart, at the battle of Casablanca (1942), and some kilos more than the weight of the 381 mm shells of HMS Barham or HMS Resolution (875 kg),[50] which near missed Richelieu at the battle of Dakar (1940).
The OPfK Model 1935 incorporated a dye bag and fuze (dispositif K) to colour ( yellow for Richelieu and orange for Jean Bart) not only splashes but hits, thereby facilitating spotting for ships operating in formation while in combat. No Highly Explosive (HE) variant of the 380 mm shell was originally provided. A total of 832 APC shells are intended to be provided, slightly fewer than in the Dunkerque class battleships (896 rounds).
Remote Power Control (RPC) was to be fitted for both training and elevation; however the failure of the Sautter-Harlé-Blondel system fitted on the Dunkerque class battleships resulted in a loss of confidence in the application of this technology to heavy armored turrets, and it was never fitted.[53]
The French Navy had been precursor in fitting dual-purpose battery on battleships,[54] in the early 1930s, and seven years later, with the shortcomings of the 130 mm and 152 mm DP turrets and of the 37 mm twin automatic AA mountings, the solution of having a low-angle secondary battery and a high-angle tertiary battery was a feature of the new battleships in construction, as in the German and Italian navies.
For the secondary artillery, all early projects were keeping the 130mm caliber Dual-Purpose, in five quadruple turrets, at the same position as on the Dunkerque class battleships, but with quadruple turrets amidships, instead of double turrets. A tertiary anti-aircraft «75mm zénithaux» battery was considered, to complement the 130 mm DP battery of the early design sketch.
As, in that time, the torpedo surface attacks were considered more dreadful than aircraft bombing, an heavier calibre was required for the anti-ship battery. Since the Nelson class battleships, the Royal Navy has adopted a six 152 mm double turrets battery as secondary artillery on battleships. The Kriegsmarine had chosen 150 mm guns on Scharnhorst, and the Regia Marina was fitting the 35,000 tons battleships with 152 mm calibre guns. It was decided to adopt triple 152 mm turrets, as fitted on the most recent light cruisers, Émile Bertin and La Galissonnière class cruisers which were then being built. The S.T.C.N. proposed two solutions, five 152 mm turrets, and six 75 mm single mountings, or four 152 mm turrets, without the fifth turret (central axial), or with two center line aft turrets in superfiring position, and eight 75 mm single mountings, but it was difficult to install this AA battery, keeping it out of the blast effects of the main and secondary batteries.
The French Navy Board, in April 1935, resolved to fit Richelieu with five 152 mm turrets in the same disposition as the 130 mm battery on Dunkerque. It was decided that these 152 mm turrets had to be dual-purpose, and that the tertiary 75 mm AA battery had to be abandoned, as the sustitution of 152 mm DP turrets, weighing 306 tons[46] to the 130 mm turrets, weighing 200 tons, was inducing an excess of weight of about 500 tons. It was also decided to install a new weight-saving propulsion plant, developing the same power, 150,000 hsp, but using Sural (suralimenté) boilers, instead of the more conventionnal boilers fitted on Dunkerque. It was thence possible to reduce the number of boilers rooms from three to two, which allowed to reduce the length of the «citadel» on nearly five meters, and consequently the weight of the armored belt. As other weight-reduction measures, the thickness of the armored belt was reduced, from 360 mm previewed, to 330 mm, and its inclination increased from 11°30' to 15°24' to compensate the thickness reduction. The thickness of the longitudinal bulkheads, of the conning tower, and of the turrets and barbettes of the 152 mm guns were reduced too.
The triple 152 mm Model 1936 Dual Purpose turret, was an extrapolation of the 152 mm Model 1931 Low-Angle turret. The guns, mounted on separate cradles, were 1,85 m apart. The training speed was 12°/second, and the elevation speed 8°/s. The gun maximum elevation was 90°, with theoretically loading at every elevation. The muzzle velocity was 870 m/s. The shells used, against sea targets, were Semi Armored Piercing (SAP) shells, registered in the French Navy as OPfK Model 1931, with dye bag, weighing 56 kg, or 57,1 kg (OPfK Model 1937). Against aircraft, the 152 mm/55 Model 1930 guns were firing High Explosive (HE) shells, registered OEA (Obus Explosif en Acier) Model 1936, weighing 54,7 kg, or 49,3 kg (OEA Model 1937). Starshells, registered as OEcl (Obus Eclairant) Model 1936, weighing 47 kg, were to be provided for the amidships turrets. The rate of fire was 6.5 rounds per minute, against sea targets, and 5 rpm against aircraft. The maximum range against sea targets, with a 45° elevation, was 24,500 m. Full RPC was fitted. On Richelieu, the planned ammunition outfit was two thousands SAP shells, nearly one thousand HE shells and 650 illuminating shells, for three triple turrets fitted.[55]
The 152 mm Model 1931 Low-Angle turret proved to be highly satisfactory, at least comparable to the German single or twin 150 mm guns turrets, or the Italian triple 152 mm turrets Model 1934 or 1936. But for anti-aircraft purpose, the 152 mm Model 1936 turret was considered as complex and fragile, with a too slow rate of fire against rapid-moving aerial targets, with a deficient RPC, and prone to jamming in loading at angles superior to 45°. The reason of this failure had to be looked for in the too great weight, 227 tons without the barbette, of the 152 mm DP Model 1936 turret, nearly 55 tons heavier than the 172 tons for the 152 mm Model 1931. It must be noted that there will not have been other examples of 152 mm guns used as anti-aircraft battery, but, post war, two U.S. Navy cruisers of the Roanoke class and three Royal Navy cruisers of Tiger class, with much more performing RPC and control fire direction devices than the French ones used just before WWII.
As, at the very beginning of the war, on November 1939, it became evident that the projected 37 mm ACAD Model 1935, automatic anti aircraft twin mountings, would not be provided in time for the completion of Richelieu, a drastic revision of the AA battery was needed. The amidships 152 mm turrets had to be landed, and twelve 100 mm/45 Model 1930 guns in six twin 100 mm mountings, CAD Model 1931, were intended to be fitted, as they had been on the last 10,000 tons Treaty cruiser Algérie, and were intended on the planned De Grasse class cruisers. To respect the priority of completing Richelieu first, four mountings had to be removed from the reconstructed battleship Lorraine,[56] and two from a battery near Marseilles.[57] The 152 mm amidships turrets were not even mounted on Jean Bart, neither barbettes installed. The 100 mm mountings were fitted on Richelieu, in Avril-May 1940.
The 100 mm CAD Model 1930 turrets were dual-purpose. SAP shells (100 mm OPf Model 1928) weighing 15 kg, were fired on sea targets, with a muzzle velocity of 765 m/s and a 15,800 m maximum range, but it seems that 10 rounds per gun only were embarked, as it was considered that the anti-ship fire would be mainly insured by the stronger 152 mm guns. HE shells (100 mm OEA Model 1928) weighing 13,5 kg, were fired on aerial targets, with a muzzle velocity of 780 m/s and a 10,000 m ceiling (at 80° maximum elevation). The rate of fire was 10rpm. Illuminating shells (100 mm OEcl Model 1928) were provided, in replacement of the 152 mm OEcl Model 1936, which seemed, if they had been provided, to have been landed with the 152 mm amidships turrets, as they were not mentionned in the war time ammunition inventories.[55]
The 100 mm guns proved to be the most reliable arms of Richelieu in her early war carrier, till 1942.
For the short range anti-aircraft defence, the French Navy had planned to develop, for the Dunkerque class battleships, an automatic version (37 mm ACAD Model 1935) of the 37 mm semi-automatic anti-aircraft twin mountings (CAD Model 1933), which had a 30 to 40 rpm rate ot fire theoretically. Hand loaded, using six-round box magazine, the rate of fire was practically 15 to 20 rpm, as in the same time, the British Pom Pom gun, or the Swedish designed Bofors 40 mm/L60 gun had a 120 to 200 rpm rate of fire. Thence the 37 mm ACAD Model 1935 was expected to have such a rapid rate of fire. But in 1940, only a a prototype ACAD mounting designated Model 1936 was trialled aboard the old patrol sloop Amiens and apparently successfully used during the Dunkirk evacuation.[58]
Six 37 mm ACAD Model 1935 mountings would have had to be fitted, four abeam the after funnel superstucture, and two abeam turret II. Four fire control directors, equipped with a two-meter range finder and linked to the mountings by a RPC system driven by Sautter-Hallé electric servo-motors, were intended to be installed, two, for the forward mountings, abaft turret II, one deck higher, and two for the after mountings, abeam the mountings, one deck higher. This 37 mm battery would have been complemented by six or eight 13.2 mm Hotchkiss quadruple MG mountings, CAQ Model 1929, on the upper platforms of the forward and after tower.[59]
The most conspicuous difference in the Richelieu profile with the Dunkerque, was the mounting of the fire control director system aft, not on a separate tower located behind the funnel, but on a kind of mack, so that the funnel opening was taken out obliquely aft underneath the control position tower.[60]
Otherwise, the fire control director system was closely modeled as on Dunkerque.
Three fire control directors were mounted one over the other atop the fore tower, with, bottom up, the director A, for the main artillery, with a 14-meter triple stereoscopic OPL (Optique de Précision de Levallois-Perret) range finder, and for the 152 mm artillery, two fire control directors, with, in the director 2, in central position, for anti-ship gunnery, a 8-meter double stereoscopic OPL range finder, and in the director 1, in upper position, for anti-aircraft gunnery, a 6-meter double stereoscopic OPL range finder.
The same noteworthy weight accumulation in the hights of the fore tower, as on Dunkerque, proved to be a shortcoming, when the Richelieu was torpedoed at Dakar, as a whiplash effect on the main mast around which they were mounted, provoked more serious avaries on the directors of the fore tower, than on the after tower, which was however nearer of the torpedo explosion.[61]
On the after tower, there was only the auxiliary director for the 152 mm artillery (director 3) with a 6-meter double stereoscopic OPL range finder. The auxiliary director for the main artillery, (director B), was between the funnel and the axial aft 152 mm turret, with an 8-meter double stereoscopic OPL rangefinder.
All the directors were gastight and were fitted with light steel plating against the MG attacks of strafing aircraft.
Each main artillery turret was fitted with a 14-meter double stereoscopic OPL range finder, as each 152 mm turret, with a 8-meter double stereoscopic OPL range finder. Two directors with a 3-meter OPL range finder provided for the flag staff, were installed on the wings of the admiral’s bridge.
When the 100 mm AA battery was fitted, they were replaced by directors fitted with a 4-meter OPL range finder for the fire control of this battery. Two directors also fitted with 4-meter range finder were then mounted on the navigation bridge, one deck lower. There was also a 3-meter SOM (Société d'Optique et de Mécanique de haute précision) stereoscopic «tactical» range finder atop the bridge.
As on the Dunkerque class battleships, the directors provided raw target data to the transmitting station located beneath the armored decks, with continuous transmission to the director and the guns.[62]
Look out and target designation facilities were similar in principle to those of Dunkerque. The lower lookout station (veille basse) for close-range contacts was on platform 3 of the fore tower. The middle level (veille éloignée) for both surface and aerial contacts was on plateform 6, and the upper look out station (veille haute) was primarily for spotting torpedoes and mines on platform 9.[63]
For night firing, there were five 1.20 m searchlight projectors, one atop the admiral's bridge, and two on either side of the funnel structure.[64]
As on Dunkerque, aircraft installations (aircraft hangar, crane and two catapults, for four seaplanes) were fitted on Richelieu's stern. The materiels were the same, 22 m trainable catapults operated with compressed air, which could launch a 3.5 tons aircraft at 103 km/h, a recovery crane with a capacity of 4.5 tons. The aircraft were hull seaplanes Loire 130 type, single-engined (720 hp Hispano-Suiza 12-cylinder liquid cooled) with a 3,500 kg weight, a 210 km/h maximum speed, a 165 km/h cruise speed at 1,500 m, two 75 mm MG and two 75 kg bombs.
The differences in aircraft facilities with Dunkerque resulted of the disposition of the Sural boilers, three side by side on the boilers rooms, instead of two, so there was only one boiler room under the funnel, instead of two. Consequently, the aft 152 mm turret on center line,(turret VII), was on frame 68.85, on Richelieu, versus on frame 44.30, on Dunkerque, as the aft lateral secondary turrets were respectively on frame 54,45, versus 53.30[65] · .[66] Incidentally, turret VII was abaft turrets V and VI, on Dunkerque, which corresponded to the French traditional mode of turret numerotation, from bow to stern, but turrets V and VI were abaft turret VII on Richelieu. With 36,50 m on the quarterdeck between the aviation hangar and the stern, on Richelieu, instead 30 m on Dunkerque, this enabled a second catapult to be worked in, the catapults being offset to port and starboard en échelon with an elevator between them . The planes were moved on rails from the hangar to the elevator where they were placed on both catapults.
Two planes were to be stowed in the 25 m long hangar, on the same level, wings folded, in line, instead to be placed on the two platforms of a two-tiers hangar lift, and two on the catapults, wings deployed.[67]
On Richelieu, the weight of protection was 16,045 tons, and corresponded to 39;2 % in the weight distribution, for a 40,927 tons «normal» displacement, with 2,905 tons of fuel (half of full load).[68] This figure may be compared to those given for Dunkerque, 35,9 %, or Strasbourg, 37,3 %, but with a 30,750/31,570 tons «normal» displacement, with 2,860 tons of fuel (¾ of full load).[69] The comparison with foreign battleships is more difficult to set up. The figures given for the Iowa class battleships are 18,700 tons for the protection weight and 41,6 % of 45,000 tons «standard» displacement,[70] which corresponds for Richelieu to 42,19 % of «standard» displacement. For Bismarck, the figures are 17,258 tons or 17,540 tons for the protection weight, and from 43,92 % to 41,28 %, as the percentage is calculated with 39,931 tons «light» displacement or 41,781 tons «standard» displacement[40] · [71]. As all these figures are very near one another, it is clear that they are all superior to those given for the King George V class battleships, 12,500 tons and 34,80 %[72], or for the Littorio class battleships with 13,600 tons weight of protection and 36 % of 37,750 tons standard displacement[73].
The British King George V class battleships and HMS Vanguard will have had a thicker armored belt than Richelieu (356 mm), but their turrets will have been less protected (330 mm), as the horizontal armor (152 mm) will have been equivalent,[75] but their command spaces will have been only protected against splinters.[76]
The U.S. Navy battleships will have had an equivalent armored belt (330/340 mm) as Richelieu, on the North Carolina and South Dakota classes, and a little less thick (310 mm) on the Iowa class. The main artillery turret protection was less thick (406 mm) on the North Carolina class, equivalent (430 mm) on the Iowa class, and thicker (457 mm) on the South Dakota class. The horizontal armor was a little less thick (104 mm) on the North Carolina class, equivalent (127/165 mm) on the South Dakota and Iowa classes. The conning tower was better protected, with 406 mm on the North Carolina and South Dakota classes, and with 445 mm on the Iowa class.[77]
The Italian Littorio had a thicker armored belt (350 mm) than Richelieu, but otherwise, they were less protected, with 350 mm on the main artillery turrets, 260 mm on the conning tower, 50 mm on the upper armored deck et 100 mm on the main deck.[78] The German Bismarck class battleships had a less thick armor than Richelieu on the main artillery turrets (356 mm), thicker on the conning tower(356 mm), equivalent for the armored belt (320 mm), and for the horizontal armor(80 mm + 115 mm).[38]
As on Dunkerque, the underwater protection consisted in a «sandwich» of void spaces, light bulkheads, liquid loading compartments or compartments filled with rubber-based water-excluding compound (ébonite-mousse), and a heavy internal holding bulkhead to absorb the explosion of a torpedo head.
The compartment outboard of the inclined armor belt had a maximum depth of 1.5 m, and had a filling of ébonite mousse. Inboard this compartement, there was a 18 mm bulkhead, inclosing a void compartment 0.9 m deep, then an oil fuel bunker 3.4 m deep (0.5 m less than on Dunkerque), then a 10 mm bulkhead, containing a void compartement 0.67 m deep, backed by a 30 mm torpedo bulkhead of special steel. The maximum depth was around 7 meters.[79] The reduction of 0.5 m comparing with Dunkerque was necessary to accommodate three boilers side by side in the boiler rooms.
This figure of 7 m width was impressive, compared with the 4.10 m on King George V, 5 m on Scharnhorst,or 6 m on Bismarck.[80] The Italian Littorio class battleships had a peculiar underwater protection system, designed by the Italian chief designer, Generale Ispettore del Genio Navale Pugliese, which incorporated a cylindrical expansion space of 3.8 m diameter. During the British aircraft attack of the Italian battleship fleet in Taranto, on November 11, 1941, it did not succeed to avoid the sinking of Littorio in shallow water. But the Achilles' heel of battleships facing torpedo attacks was their vitals which could not be protected, as Bismarck's rudder in May 1941, or Richelieu's shaft, at Dakar, in 1940, or HMS Prince of Wales's shaft off Kuantan, in December 1941.
The French designers of Richelieu had various constraints: a 33.5 m beam to accommodate the barbettes of four 380 mm gun turrets, a 245 m long hull, limited by the length of the Navy shipbuilding infrastructures, thus a ratio length/beam of 7.3. All this induced a machinery developing 150,000 shp[81], to reach the 29.5/30 knots, requested by the Trench Navy Board. It was then the greatest machinery power installed on a battleship. It will have been surpassed only on U.S. Navy Iowa class battleships in 1943-1944. An equivalent speed had been reached, with less power (144,000 hsp) on HMS Hood[82], but with a 262 m hull, a 42,000 tons displacement, and a ratio length/beam of 8, but without shipbuilding restraint nor any displacement Treaty limit. All British or U.S. battleships, built in the late 1930s, having to respect the 35,000 tons displacement limit had a speed of 29 knots (King George V class), or 28 knots (North Carolina or South Dakota classes), they were 225 m or 215 m long, with a propulsion plant developing respectively 110,000, 120,000, or 130,000 shp[83] · [84]. The Italian Littorio class battleships reached 30knots, with a 230 m hull and 140,000shp[85]. The German battleship Bismarck had a 29 knots speed with 138,000 shp[38], and reached 31 knots with 150,000 shp forcing[71], but her ratio length/beam, was only 6.9 as she had, for the same hull length as Richelieu, a wider beam (36 m).
The propulsion was assured by six Indret boilers, and four Parsons turbines. The boilers were of a new type, so-called «suralimenté», which meant pressure-fired, thence the abbreviation of Sural boilers. These boilers were operated at a pressure of 27 kg/cm² (350°C), as on Dunkerque, but forced circulation and pressure firing resulted in steam production per m³ well in excess of conventional boilers (14.4 kg/m³)[86]. They were 6.30 m long versus 5.33 min on Dunkerque, 4.65 m heigh versus 5.34 m, and moreover 4;50 m wide versus 6.50 m. Thence, due to the 2-meter greater beam of Richelieu, it was possible to install three boilers side by side in two boiler rooms, instead of three rooms, as on Dunkerque. Boiler Room 1 was underneath the fore tower, with, from starboard to port, boilers n°10, n°11, and n°12, followed by the forward Engine Room housing the geared turbines for the wing shafts. Boiler Room 2 directly underneath the funnel, with boilers n°20, n°21, and n°22, produced the steam for the turbines of the center shafts, in aft Engine Room. A 18 mm bulkhead separated the forward Engine Room from the Boiler Room 2, dividing the machinery plant in two independent units.
In each Engine Room, there were two sets of turbines, each driving a four-bladed propeller with a diameter of 4,88 m. Each set comprised a single High Pressure (27 kg/cm²) turbine, a Medium Pressure (10 kg/cm²) turbine, and Low Pressure forward and reverse turbines (1.25 kg/cm²and 4 kg/cm²). Four turbo generators, each of 1500 kW, were distributed, for two of them, in the forward engine room, and, for the after pair, in a separate compartment directly abaft the main machinery spaces, adjacent of the magazines for the after 152 mm turrets.
The maximum fuel load for peace-time cruising was 5,866 tons, but in wartime, this figure was reduced to 4,700 tons, to maximise the effectiveness of the underwater protection system, as filling the liquid loading compartments to the brim create additional pressure on bulkheads, instead of absorbing the pressure of explosion. The radius was 9,850 nmi at 16 knots, 8250 nmi at 20 knots, and 3,450 nmi at 30 knots.
During speed trials, in April 1940, developing 123,000 shp, 30 knots were maintained, with near 42,000 tons displacement, and in June, 32 knots were maintained during 3h30, with 43,800 tons displacement and 155,000 shp, and 32.68 knots were reached with 179,000 shp forcing[87].
In 1937, Italy ordered two more Vittorio Veneto class battleships, to be laid down in 1938. The French reaction was to order two more battleships of the Richelieu class, with an improved design, as the French naval building capacities necessitated some delay in order to have these units laid down.
The second London naval disarmament conference failure had marked the end of the international naval armament limitation policy. Japan had withdrawn from the conference on January 15, 1936. Italy also declined to sign the treaty. A so-called "escalator clause" had been included at the urging of the American negotiators, allowing the signatory countries of the Second London Treaty (France, the United Kingdom and the United States) to raise the battleship main artillery caliber limit from 14 inches (356 mm) to 16 inches (406mm), and the limit for battleship displacement from 35,000 tons to 45,000 tons, if Japan or Italy still refused to sign after April 1, 1937[88]. Ultimately the U.S.A. adopted 16-inch guns for their new fast battleship classes[89], whereas the United Kingdom chose to respect the Second London Naval Treaty limitations for the King George V class battleships. Germany was not concerned, as she had not been invited to the second London naval disarmament conference, but officially the battleships Bismarck and Tirpitz did have 380mm guns and 35,000 tons. France decided to respect the limitation of 35,000 tons and 380 mm, as long as no continental European power had overtaken them[88][90]. Bearing such considerations in mind, the new Chief of the Navy General Staff (Chef d'Etat-major Général de la Marine), Admiral Darlan, ordered, in December 1937, a study of new designs for two battleships[91], as the Dunkerque trials were allowing a more critical regard of her design, especially her all forward quadruple turret main artillery, and her dual purpose (anti-aircraft and anti-ship) secondary artillery of relatively light caliber[92].
Three projects were studied, the first (project A) with the same quadruple arrangement forward as the Richelieu, but different secondary artillery dispositions, the second (project B) with one quadruple turret forward and one quadruple turret aft, the third (project C) with two fore triple turrets and one triple turret aft, in each case with a 380 mm caliber. The project C was leading to an excess of 5,000 tons over the limit of 35,000 tons, so it was not proposed to the Chief of Navy General Staff[93].
In June 1938, the French Admiralty's choice was tightly linked with the necessity of a maximum use of the shipyards where very large ships could be built. The Salou graving dock n°4, in Brest Navy Yards, was intended to be ready for a new battleship building in January 1939, when Richelieu had to be floated out, as all other building for large ships were in use. On the Caquot dock, Jean Bart was being built and expected to be launched in August 1939, on N°1 slipway in Penhoët Shipbuilding Yards, in Saint-Nazaire, where SS Normandie and Strasbourg had been built, Joffre aircraft carrier was being built from November 1938, till 1941. Consequently, it was not possible to let the Salou building dock empty for at least six months, waiting to start building a Project B design battleship, as it necessitated at least one year to come up with definitive drawings, after it had been ordered. Thence the Project A design was chosen for the first battleship to be laid down in the Salou building dock. The Caquot dock could then be used for the second battleship to be laid down[94].
Admiral Darlan chose the project A variant 2 for the first ship of the second pair of Richelieu class to be laid down; she received the name of «Clemenceau». He chose the project B variant 3ter for the second ship, a design in which he was much involved, and named her «Gascogne», the French province where he was born[95], meaning too that this new battleship was a transition ship to a new battleship class named again from province names[96].
When, in the summer of 1939, the French intelligence services warned the French Admiralty that the keels of two German battleships had been laid down, supposed to be of 40,000 tons tonnage and with 406 mm guns, but actually Plan Z H-39 class battleships, it was decided to design a ship free of the limitations of 35,000 tons and 380 mm. On the basis of the studies of the 1938 Project C, new battleship designs emerged, which led to the so-called «Province» or later Alsace class battleships[97] which were never even ordered.
On Clemenceau, the main artillery arrangement was fitted as it has been done on Richelieu and Jean Bart. But the 152 mm battery would have been consisted of four triple turrets of 152 mm caliber, two amidships (one on each side), and two aft in superfiring position. Admiral Darlan, Chief of the Navy General Staff, considered that the three 152 mm turrets battery aft, on Richelieu, was a mistake, as two turrets in centerline position provided the same broadside of six guns, and saving nearly 300 tons, allowed to have six more 100 mm AA turrets. Two 100 mm AA turrets would have been positionned in front of the fore tower in superfiring position abaft the fore 380 mm turret, and four turrets, abeam the funnel and the axial aft 152 mm turrets, and abaft the 152 mm amidships turrets[98]. As the fire arcs of the 152 mm turrets amidships were intended to be mainly directed forewards, the 100 mm AA battery would have been prevented enough for their blast effects. Moreover these 100 mm turrets would have been fully enclosed, with a 30 mm plating against splinters. This new model of turrets was known as the 100 mm CAD Model 1937, and so called «mine swepper sloop type», as it was intended to be installed on the Elan and Chamois mine sweeper sloop classes, on Le Fier destroyer class too, and as secondary battery on the De Grasse cruiser class, to be commissionned in the late 1930s, or early 1940s.[99]
But this new arrangement had some consequences. The second aft turret in superfiring position had a greater part of its barbette above the main armored deck, and necessitated more 100 mm plating. Thence the armour thickness of the 152 mm turret faces wad reduced to 116 mm (instead of 130 mm), as the armored belt was reduced to 320 mm, and the rear plates of the main turrets to 250 mm. The auxiliary fire control director abaft the funnel, for the 380 mm battery, was to be mounted from two to three metres higher than in the preceding units, necessitating a greater height for the funnel[100]. Two more fire control directors with OPL 5-meter stereoscopic range finders, for the 100 mm AA battery, would have been installed on sides of the fore tower. Thence, to save weight, particularly in the heights, the fire control director, for the 152 mm battery in anti-ship purpose, on Richelieu in central position on the fore tower, would have not been installed, but the two remaining fire control directors, for 152 mm battery, on the aft tower and on the fore tower in upper position , would have been fitted with a stereoscopic 8-meter OPL range finder[101]. With these arrangements, improved anti-ship and anti-aircraft artillery in regard of which was intended to be originally fitted on the pair Richelieu-Jean Bart, Clemenceau would have marked a progress, relatively to her predecessors[102].
Last consequence, the center line arrangement of the 152 mm turrets aft placed the extreme aft turret (turret VI) in frame 54,45,[103] as, on Richelieu, the extreme aft turret (numbered turret VII), in center line position, was on the frame 68,85. Thus, the aviation hangar would have been shortened for nearly fifteen meters. But the suppression of the lateral turrets aft, which were, on Richelieu precisely on the frame 54,45,[65] allowed to have a broader hangar. The two sea planes intented to be sheltered, wings folded, in the hangar, would have been accommodated, side by side, instead of in line. Otherwise, the aviation facilities would have been the same as on Richelieu[104].
The short-range anti-aircraft battery would have had to be constituted of six twin ACAD Mode 1935 mountings, installed, with their fire control directors, nearly on the same positions as on the Richelieu, but the two forward mountings were abeam the after end of barbette for turret II, and for the four after mountings, one deck higher. New quadruple «37 mm zénithaux» mountings, intended to be use against dive-bombing aircraft, would have had to be installed on each side of the quarterdeck, near the aviation hangar.
The most conspicuous feature of Gascogne is the return to a main artillery arrangement with a four-380 :mm gun turret aft. This rearrangement of armament also resulted a shift of superstructures forward so that these were now mounted almost exactly midships and no longer at a considerable distance aft of the midship position as in the first units of the Richelieu class[100].
The Gascogne secondary artillery would have been consisted of three triple turrets of 152 mm caliber, all on axial line, two in superfiring position forward and one between the funnel and the aft 380 mm turret, with eight anti-aircraft dual mountings of 100 mm caliber, on sides.
As the magazines of 152 mm guns were near of the magazines of the main artillery turrets, which constituted an increased risk, the armour of the 152 mm turrets had to be improved. First, in July 1938, it was proposed to increase the turret armor thickness to 190 mm on faces (instead of 130 mm), 120 mm on roofs, and 100 mm on sides (instead of 70 mm), the barbettes remaining to 100 mm. In February 1939, a «rebalancing» was proposed, with a thickness of 150 mm for the barbette, 155 mm for the turret face, from 135 mm to 85 mm for the turret sides. A thinner upper armoured deck had been considered, reducing its thickness to 150–140 mm, instead of 170–150 mm[105], but there is no proof that such a decision was actually taken, beyond a S.T.C.N. recommendation dated March 5, 1938[106].
The 100 mm AA battery had to be increased from six to eight CAD Model 1937 fully inclosed turrets. In the December 1938 designs, aircraft installations were intended to be fitted at the ship's center, with trainable catapults between the fore tower and the funnel, and a hangar at the base of the after tower, but the consequences in positionning the 100 mm AA battery too near of the main and secondary batteries, resulted, in February 1939, in positioning again the aircraft installations at the ship's stern. A single catapult would have had its pedestal countersunk in the quarterdeck, with an internal hangar in a recess under the first deck, with a lift to hoist the seaplanes to the level of the first deck[107] in order to avoid the blast effects of the rear 380 mm turret firing, which had caused to position one deck higher the aft 381 mm turret, on the Vittorio Veneto class battleships. The hull seaplanes would have been of a new twin-motored type, Farman/NCAC NC 420, with an increased radius, whose prototype was almost complete in June 1940, but never flew[96]. Two seaplanes would have been stowed in the hangar in line, and a third one would have been parked on rails, on the quarterdeck, at starbord of the aviation hangar.
The eight 100 mm CAD Model 1937 turrets would have been positionned in four groups of two, amidships, in the «four corners» of the superstructure. Each group of two turrets would have had a fire control director, with a 5-meter OPL range finder, for the forward groups, on each side of the fore tower, and for the aft turret groups, atop of the after tower. Thus, the secondary director for 152 mm battery, would have been suppressed, and the fire control direction of the secondary battery insured by the upper director of the fore tower, for anti-ship gunnery, and by the directors of the 100 mm battery, for anti-aircraft gunnery.
The six 37 mm AA Model 1935 mountings would had to be installed with four mountings abeam the forward turret, two on the forecastle and two a little abaft and one deck higher, with their directors amidships, between the fore and the aft tower, and the two after mountings would have been positionned abeam the after sperstructure with their directors a little forwards, one deck higher. The «37 mm zénithaux» quadruple mountings would have had to be repositionned amidships between the fore and after towers, because, on the quarterdeck, as on Clemenceau, they would have been excessively exposed to the blast from the aft main turret[108].
Laid down in October 1935, Richelieu was floated out the Salou n°4 graving dock, on January 17, 1939 to be fitted out in the Laninon n°9 dock in the Brest Navy Yards. The 43 m bow section and the 8 m stern section, built separately, had to be assembled there[109][110], as the Salou building dock was only 200 m long. Thirty-nine months between laying down and launching was not an impressive performance, as two years only had been necessary for Strasbourg. King George V and Prince of Wales laid down on January 1, 1937 were launched respectively in February and May 1939, Vittorio Veneto and Littorio laid down on October 28, 1934, were launched on July 25 and August 22,1937. This long delay was the consequence of the difficult social climate in France, in 1936, but also of the British Government representations, which urged a slowing down of construction, as following the 1922 Treaty of Washington and 1930 Treaty of London, France would have had to expect January 1, 1937, to order new 30,000 tons battleships.
One year later, in January 1940, the last 380 mm barrel had been installed, as, in April 1940, the first three 100 mm turrets, and the starboard catapult. In April 1940, first speed trials were carried out, and during one hour 30 knots were maintained developing 123,000 shp. In late April and early May, the three last 100 mm turrets were embarked, the fire control directors for the main and secondary batteries fitted atop the towers,and the 152 mm guns installed in the after turrets.
On June 13, during the full power speed trials, 32 knots were maintained during three and half hours developing 155,000 shp, and 32.6 knots reached developing 175,000 shp. The day after, the gunnery trials were carried out, six shots being fired for each 380 mm and 100 mm guns, «without major damage», but the main battery replenishment system gave concern, as a quarter of an hour was necessary to hoist one shell and its powder charges from the magazine to the barrel.
On June 15, the French Admiralty placed Richelieu under Admiral de Laborde, Amiral Ouest, C. in-C. French Navy at Brest, with order to prepare to send the battleship to the Clyde. On July 18, in the early morning, new orders were received to provide a colonial withdrawal. Due to the advance of German troops, the battleship left Brest bound for Dakar on June 18, at 16.00, escorted by destroyers Fougueux and Frondeur. Richelieu had on board, for her main artillery, 250 shells but powder charges for only 48 rounds, and no munition of 152 mm[111] · [112] On June 20, the escort was replaced off Cape St. Vincent (Portugal), by the destroyer Fleuret and Richelieu reached Dakar on June 23[113] · [114].
In these late days of June 1940, at Dakar, the authorities, Léon Cayla, Gouverneur Général de l'A.O.F., highest administrative authority in French West Africa, Rear Admiral Plançon, Flag Officer, French Navy West Africa, or the town authorities, were prone to continue to fight against Germany, together with the British: the aircraft carrier HMS Hermes was moored in the inner harbour. Captain Marzin, aware of the signature of the Franco-German Armistice, and having received instructions from Admiral Darlan that his ship remained under the French flag, otherwise he had to scuttle her or to flee to the U.S.A., determined to escape what he considered as a British «mouse trap». Thence, against the advice of Gouverneur Général Cayla, who considered this departure as a «desertion»[115], he decided to return to Casablanca, on June 25, escorted by the destroyer Fleuret, which was accompanying Richelieu since five days, and Rear Amiral Plançon warned the Amiral Afrique, Flag Officer at Casablanca, that « Richelieu and Fleuret have left Dakar, steering «probably» towards you ».
Knowing this, the British Admiralty, fearing Richelieu returned to France, ordered HMS Hood and HMS Ark Royal to leave Gibraltar to intercept her off the Canaries Islands, and the French Admiralty, fearing the battleship joined the British, summoned Captain Marzin to return to Dakar, which he did obediently, arriving on June 27, shadowed by HMS Dorsetshire, as HMS Hermes has left. Richelieu moored in the roadstead, in order not to be blocked in the harbour, and this was a correct decision as the gun attack on Mers-el-Kébir showed it. Moreover, some cargo ships under British flag having been being seized, Captain Marzin obtained they were moored on either sides of Richelieu, but primarily on port, to protect the battleship from a aircraft torpedo attack, coming from North-East.
On July 7, the day after the air attack against Dunkerque at Mers-el-Kebir, the sloop HMS Milford transmitted by W/T an ultimatum from Captain Onslow, Commanding Officer of HMS Hermes, provisionnally ranked Rear Admiral, in identical terms as the one of Mers-el-Kébir. There was no answer from the French authorities, but, knowing since Mers-el-Kébir that such a British ultimatum was not a bluff, Captain Marzin decided to leave in the early morning to try to gun HMS Hermes or her escort cruisers. During the night, a commando of Royal Marines, under Lieutenant-Commander Bristowe, succeeded to drop furtively, from a fast motor boat, four depth grenades under the stern of Richelieu, but the grenades did not explode. Nevertheless, Lieutenant-Commander Bristowe received the DSO.
At about 05.00 British Summer Times (GMT+1), six torpedo bombers Fairey Swordfish, from the HMS Hermes 814th Squadron FAA, under Lieutenant-Commander Luard, attacked Richelieu on port, under the fire of AA MG of the battleship and of the colonial sloop Bougainville. Richelieu was stricken, surprisingly, on starboard aft, either because a torpedo with a magnetic warhead has passed under the kell before exploding[116], or because one of the aircraft has attacked on starboard[117], contrarily to what the British asserted. As the explosion was extremely violent, it was conjectured that the impact on the ship was magnified by the shallow water in which she was moored, with less than five metres of water under the keel, and that a torpedo, hitting the depth charges laid earlier in the night, made them explode. The main fire control directors atop the fore tower were lifted out of their tracks, damaging them, because of the whiplash effect on the mast around which they were placed[61]. The starbord shafts were badly damaged, the outter one being distorted, and the inner one blocked. A breach 9.3 metres long and 8.5 metres high was opened in the hull, and there was a rapid flooding of the compartments abaft the after armored bulkward, and even in the armored citadel, through the cable tunnels which were no more waterthight. On July 9, Captain Onslow radioed to Admiral Plançon that he sincerely expressed the hope that the operation he had undertaken with much grief, the day before, did not caused any killed nor wounded among the officers and crews[118]. This was fortunately the case.
The battleship was towed in the inner harbour, and pumping out began immediatly with some difficulties, as pumps powerful enough for this operation were not easily available, and no graving dock was able to accomodate Richelieu, at Dakar[119].
Despatched by Vichy authorities, Admiral de Laborde arrived for inspection on July 14, 1940. In three days, the Governor General and the Naval Commander, suspected of pro-British sympathies were removed from their posts, Governor General Cayla was sent to Madagascar, Rear Admiral Plançon was replaced temporarily by Rear Admiral Platon, and on August 17 by Rear Admiral Landriau. Pierre Boisson, Gouverneur Général de l'A.E.F. (French Equatorial Africa), who had been formerly Gouverneur Général de l'A.O.F. (1938-1939) arrived at Dakar in late July, in charge of both French West and French Equatorial Africa.
During July and August, sommary repair of Richelieu began. The objectives were to control the flooding, and thus repair the hull, and insure that the main and second batteries of Richelieu were able to fire with efficiency as soon as possible. Thence, to patch the breach in the hull, a mattress 11.5 meters square reinforced with steel strands was fabricated and put in place in early September, and the Dakar D.C.N. (Direction des Constructions Navales) dockyard began the construction of a steel cofferdam, to be plced in October as the remainig water could be pumped out. For the artillery, the servants of the turret I (380 mm) were sent to man the two 240 mm guns of the coast defence battery of Cape Manuel, the most southern promontory of Cape Verde peninsula. Turrets II (380 mm) and VII (152 mm axial) only could be manned, and this last one for anti-ship fire only, as N°1 fire control director, for 152 mm turrets in anti-aircraft purpose was never put in servic. As only less than two hundreds SD21 powder charges had been embarked in Brest, the eight hundreds powder charges with SD19 propellant for Strasbourg 330&nbp;mm guns left stored at Dakar the previous year, were reconditionned in 600 powder charges for 380 mm guns.
In late July, the Free French forces took control of three (Middle Congo, Oubangui-Chari, and Chad) of the four colonies of French Equatorial Africa, and Sir Winston Churchill and General de Gaulle decided to organize an operation (Operation Menace) to rally similarily the French West Africa. The Force M left Liverpool on August 26,1940 to Freetown (Sierra-Leone). In the mean time, the Vichy authorities obtained the authorization from the German Armistice commission to send, on September 9, from Toulon towards Libreville (Gabon) three lightcruisers, and three large destroyers, Force Y, under Rear Admiral Bourragué. Intercepted by British cruisers in the Bay of Benin, Admiral Bourragué, with two cruisers, Georges Leygues, flagship, and Montcalm, found finally refuge at Dakar. On September 21, Vice Admiral Lacroix, formerly Flag Officer of the 1st Light Squadron, on the destroyer Mogador damaged at Mers-el-Kébir, was fown to Dakar to replace Rear Admiral Bourragué.
On September23, 1940, the Anglo-Free French force arrivedDakar during an attempt of landing by an (Operation Menace). On this occasion, she luckily did not receive but light damages, as she was near missed by some 250 British 381 mm shells fired by HMS Barham and HMS Resolution.[120][110] But using her main artillery against British ships, especially battleship HMS Barham, she suffered severe damage to three barrels of her main artillery. This was first traced to the use of a wrong type of propellant (SD19 powder from 800 Strasbourg powder charges stored in Dakar, in replacement of SD21 powder of her own few powder charges). During 1941, an inquiry commission, whose chairman was Admiral de Penfentenyo concluded to a misconception of the shell base.[121]
Temporary repairs were completed in Dakar, some light anti-aircraft mountings were added as the 152 mm turrets were not able to fire on aerial aims, and in April 1941, Richelieu was the first French battleship fo be fitted with French early radar (designated as "electro-magnetic detection devices"). On April 24, 1941, Richelieu could sail at 14 knots (26 km/h), on three engines, the fourth propeller having been removed. During July 1941, three Loire 130 seaplanes were shipped.[122]
In November 1942, Allied forces successfully landed near Casablanca, Oran and Algiers. Soon afterwards French forces in West Africa joined the Allies, and the decision was made to refit Richelieu with the help of the United States. The two aircraft catapults, the twin 37 mm AA mountings and the 13.2 mm MG, intended to be replaced during the refitting, were removed.[123]
Richelieu left Dakar, on January 30, 1943, together with the cruiser Montcalm and reached New York on February 11, for refitting at the New York Navy Yard.[124]
For the main artillery, the four barrels fitted on Jean Bart had been shipped from Casablanca to replace the three ruined barrels of the Richelieu upper turret. The fourth barrel was used for trials on the Dalhgren shooting range.[123]
The space freed up on the stern by the removal of aircraft installations was used to mount 40 mm anti-aircraft guns on the rear deck. The overall anti-aircraft armament was massively reinforced, with forty-eight Oerlikon 20 mm AA guns in single mount replacing the original 13.2 mm Hotchkiss machine guns, and fourteen quad Bofors 40 mm mountings replacing the original 37 mm semi-automatic guns. Adoption of US-pattern secondary batteries made providing ammunition easier; a special factory had to be assembled to manufacture ammunition of the appropriate calibre for the main battery. The uppermost range finder for the 152 mm artillery on the fore tower, which had never been put in service, was removed, and the rear mast was shortened. Two radar devices were fitted for air and surface warning purposes, but it had not been possible for the U.S. Navy to provide radars for gunnery practice purposes. All these modifications increased the deplacement by 3,000 tons. After sea trials (with a maximum speed of 30.2 knots) the refit was declared complete on 10 October 1943.[125][126]
Richelieu joined the British Home Fleet from November 1943 to March 1944, being fitted during this period with some radar supplementary devices, some of British origins. Later she joined the British Eastern Fleet, take part to a shore bombardment of Sabang on 19 April 1944, and continued to provide fire support in Eastern waters until September, when she left for France. After about a week in Toulon, she sailed for Casablanca, where she arrived on 10 October 1944, for careening. She was refitted in Gibraltar in January 1945, and rejoined the Eastern Fleet in March 1945, till the end of the war against Japan.[125] After V-J Day, during the 1945 four last months, Richelieu took part in the return of French forces to Indochina, particularly at Nha Trang, with her Fusiliers Marins landing party, and delivering gun support. When Richelieu left for France, the crew received congratulations from General Leclerc, then French Commanding General, Indochina.[127][128]
After 1946, she had the classic existence of a warship, during peacetime, alterning training times, shipping the President of the French Republic, for a visit in French West Africa colonies in 1947, manoeuvering, with the Arromanches aircraft carrier, formerly HMS Colossus, when she joined the French Navy, or officially visiting Britain or Portugal.[129] During a careening in Toulon, on 1951, she was fitted with French-built radar devices, and received one new-built 380 mm gun and three guns stored for Clemenceau, seized by the Germans, two having been installed during the war in shore batteries in Norway and in Normandy, the third having been used for trial at Meppen (Germany) in the Krupp's proving ground.[130]
Once in her career, on January 30, 1956, she manoeuvered with Jean Bart during a few hours, before being based in Brest as gunnery training school. Placed in reserve in 1958, she was, in 1968, decommissioned and sold to Italian ship scrappers.[131]
Jean Bart, laid down in December 1936, being built in the large Caquot dock in Penhoët, later named "Jean Bart dock", was expected to leave it in October 1940. In May 1940, it was decided that the uncompleted battleship had to be sent in a safer place, rather in Britain or in French Africa, out of range of the Luftwaffe. The ship was afloat in the fitting-out basin, which was however separated from the navigational channel by an earth dam. When it appeared that the Battle of France was on way to be won by the Wehrmacht, by late May, work on dredging the earth dam was begun, in order to be ready at a high tide, on June 20. Half the propulsion machinery, boilers and turbines, was fitted to be worked when necessary. On June 18, as the German Panzer divisions were approaching, the Commanding Officer was ordered to be ready to leave immediately for Casablanca or to scuttle the ship. It was not before the middle of the next night that the dredging work was finished with very narrow margins for the battleship to pass through, and in the early hours of 19 June, nearly in view of the German vanguards, Jean Bart, barely 75% completed, her steam engines never having been worked before, under the threat of German bombers, was taken out of her St. Nazaire's dock by four tugs, and reached by her own steam Casablanca, Morocco, on June 22, the average speed on the final leg of the journey reaching 22 knots.[132][133][134]
Only one of her two 380 mm main turrets had been installed by then, the guns of second turret had to be left or were lost with the sinking of the cargo shipping them. Her 152 mm (6.0 in) secondary battery was also non-installed, and it was replaced by anti-aircraft machine guns. No range finder was fitted.[31]
Jean Bart, moored in Casablanca harbour, stayed uncompleted as facilities to complete her were completely lacking.
On November 8, 1942, Allied landings in French North Africa (Operation Torch) begun. Jean Bart, with her 380 mm guns opened fire to the U.S. warships covering the landings, range finding been cooperated with the shore stations of Sidi Abderhamane and Dar Bou Azza,[135] the data being sent by phone to the battleship. But she was quickly silenced by the second hit from 406mm guns of USS Massachusetts battleship, which jammed the turret rotating mechanism on the French battleship. The sixth of the seven 406mm shells which hit her, exploded in a magazine of 152 mm turret, which was empty as these turrets had not been installed. In normal war circumstances, it would have had the most catastrophic consequences.[136] The armour weakness of these magazines was known, and wad intended to be corrected on Gascogne. On November 10, her 380 mm turret having been overhauled, Jean Bart near missed the USS Augusta, Task Force 34 flagship. Bombers from the aircraft carrier USS Ranger soon inflicted her severe damages, two heavy bombs hitting the bow and the stern, and the battleship settled into the harbor mud with decks awash.[137][138]
After the French North Africa forces joined the Allies, Jean Bart was made seaworthy to be refitted with the help of the U.S.A., as Richelieu. The wish of the French Admiralty, presented by Vice Admiral Fenard, Chief of the French Naval Mission, to complete Jean Bart in U.S. shipyards was discussed during 1943. But the U.S. Navy authorities considered the task as exceeding their capacities, for the ship was too different from the equivalent U.S. warships, and every specific materials were lacking.[139] Instead of completing her as designed, it was proposed, in May 1943 to complete her with only one main artillery turret, with 340 mm guns taken on the French battleship Lorraine which had joined the Allied forces, after she had stayed from 1940 to 1943 in Alexandria. Fifteen U.S.-built dual-purpose 127mm double turrets, sixteen Bofors 40 mm quad mountings, numerous Oerlikon 20 mm mountings, and aircraft installations for six planes (Grumman Avenger or Fairey Barracuda bombers and Hellcat or Seafire fighters), would have transformed Jean Bart into a kind of hybrid battleship-aircraft carrier. An second proposal, less expensive, always with the same main artillery turret, seventeen 127mm double turrets, and twenty Bofors quad 40 mm mountings, would have resulted in a kind of AA battleship.[140] Admiral King, Commander in Chief, United States Fleet and Chief of Naval Operations, decided finally, in March 1944, to not agree any French proposals, and Jean Bart stayed in Casablanca.[139][141]
The question of the completion of Jean Bart was once more discussed by the French Admiralty in 1945. Had she to be scrapped ? completed as a classic battleship as designed ? transformed into an aircraft carrier ? On September 21, 1945, the Higher Council of the Navy agreed rapidly she had not to be scrapped. The discussion to choose between the other possibilities seems to have been rather unsatisfying. Mr. Louis Kahn, Chief Naval Constructor, French Navy, who had designed the Joffre class aircraft carrier in the late 1930s,[142] presented a project for a transformation into an aircraft carrier operating forty/fifty four planes, for a cost of 5 billion Francs, and within a delay of five years. Some admirals, namely Admiral Fenard, formerly chief of the French Naval Mission to the U.S.A., and Admiral Nomy, who had been a Naval Aviation pilot, and will be later Chef d'Etat-major Général de la Marine (1951–1953), found surprising that so few planes were being accommodated on a ship with a displacement of 40,000 tons, as equivalent ships in other navies were operating twice more planes. In the minutes of the September 21, 1945 meeting of the Navy Higher Council, Rear Admiral Barjot wrote: "The design of aircraft carrier presented to the Council is called, by a member, "caricature" in regard to a project which would be established with the wish to create an efficient aircraft carrier...Despite the war learnings, the outdated myth of big gun goes on dominating our naval doctrine...It was surprising enough to see in 1945 the Navy General Staff supporting, doctrinally, against the aircraft carrier solution, the battleship solution".[143][144]
It is exact that the British aircraft-carrier HMS Eagle, laid down in 1942, which will be launched in 1946, with a displacement of 36,000 tons (46,000 tons full load), was by then designed for accommodating 80 planes.[145] But it would be fair to remind too that the French experience of battleship converted into aircraft carrier, Bearn, was rather unsuccessful, her slow speed, having led to use her only as aircraft transport ship.
It was decided finally to complete Jean Bart as an integral battleship, with the aim to get, in a delay of five years, a command ship, heavily anti-aircraft armed, with a capacity of naval bombing for attack against land.
Jean Bart left Casablanca in August 1945 to Cherbourg, where was, by then, the only usable French graving dock on the French Atlantic coast, and entered in one of the Brest Laninon docks only on March 1946. Work progressed slowly as the Brest Navy Yards had to be rebuilt in the meantime, after severe war destruction. The battleship emerged with a much more compact fore control tower, topped by only one range finder (Richelieu had two ones after her refit). In 1948, she received an additional bulge to limit the increase of draught, due to the planned fitting of a stronger anti-aircraft artillery; her beam reached 35,5 m.[31] After gunnery and speed sea trials during which the top speed has reached more than 32 knots,[146]
Jean Bart was officially commissioned on January 16, 1949, but the anti-aircraft short range artillery, mainly twelve 100 mm dual mountings, and fourteen Bofors licensed 57 mm dual mountings, was not fitted before 1952-1953[147] Jean Bart was admitted in active service on May 1, 1955. She shipped soon the President of the French Republic in an official visit to Copenhagen, and goes on to Oslo. On July, she take part, in New York, to ceremonies of the 175th anniversary of landing in Newport of French troops led by the Comte de Rochambeau, during the American War of Independence.[129] On October 21, in Toulon, Jean Bart succeeded to Richelieu as flagship of the South Group of Schools.[148]
During her active career, Jean Bart had a complement of 750 to 900 men, for 1500 as previewed. She reached to more than 1200 men, when she was about to be sent in operations during the crisis of Suez Canal, but even at this time, only one 380 mm turret, and the axial 152 mm turret could be manned.
In 1956, she take part to the operations off Port-Saïd, during the crisis of Suez Canal, but the French bombing support on land operations was not ensured by the four shots fired by her 380 mm guns against land, but by the French Aeronavale Corsairs, and the main operational contribution of Jean Bart was to ship the 1st Foreign Parachute Regiment from Algiers to Cyprus.[149][150]
After having fired the last French Navy 380 mm gun shots on July 1957, Jean Bart was placed in reserve, on August 1, 1957, and served as school ship for the gunnery training schools in Toulon. Afterwards, there were some projects, in 1957-1958, to modernize her anti-aircraft artillery, with new 100 mm turrets (Model 53 in place of Model 45), later to transform her into a guided missile battleship, as had been USS Mississippi, but no French-built missile was existing by then, so it was proposed to use the U.S. Terrier missile.[151] In 1964, as a command ship was looked for by the Pacific Center of Nuclear Experiments, the cruiser De Grasse was preferred to Jean Bart, more expensive to be transformed.[152]
Decommissioned in 1968, Jean Bart was scrapped on 1970, near Toulon,[153] leaving the Turkish Yavuz, formerly SMS Goeben, only survivor afloat in European waters of the battleship era.[154]
In fact, Jean Bart has been overall an experimental battleship, never fully operational, mainly because of budgetary cutbacks, but also because, when Jean Bart was completed, the battleship was no more the capital ship for the French Navy, as three aircraft carriers Arromanches, La Fayette, and Bois Belleau were operated during the 1950s, in bombing support against land in Indochina, later in Algeria or during the Suez Crisis. But finally, she was very useful post war as a testing bench for new French-built naval AA guns and radars.[153]
The third unit, Clemenceau, was laid down in the Salou graving dock, as soon as Richelieu had freed it. Work progressed slowly, as Clemenceau did not have priority in naval building, with regard to the first pair of the Richelieu class. So, in mid-1940, nearly eighteen months later, she was only 10% completed as a hull section of 130 m. Taken by the Germans as a war booty, she was registered by the Kriegsmarine as Battleship R, but the Germans never seriously considered continuation of construction work. Made buoyant, presumably in 1941, to vacate the building basin, and towed to Landevenec,[155] or moored near the submarine base,[156] this uncompleted hull was sunk, during a U.S. air raid at the beginning of the offensive to free Brest, on August 27, 1944, and scrapped post war.[157]
In the late 1950s, the name of Clemenceau was given to the first modern post war French-built aircraft carrier Clemenceau.
The fourth unit, the planned Gascogne, was intended to be laid down, in "Jean Bart dock" at Saint-Nazaire, as soon as Jean Bart had freed it. No work was ever begun, as the keel was not laid down, due to the German occupation. Just some material, predictably stored, would have been declared war booty and registered as Battleship S.[158]
Media related to [//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Richelieu_class_battleships Richelieu class battleships] at Wikimedia Commons
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||