Talk:Fast battleship

message: Welcome to the Fast battleships Talk Page. I created this stub because the concept of fast battleships is referred to in a number of existing articles, notably Battlecruisers, without any provision for the reader to follow up the concept. Once it actually says something useful, I will link it into the Battlecruiser, Battleship and ship class articles.
This is my first Wikipedia article, so if I am not yet up to speed on Wikipedia editing practice, please help me to learn.
Enjoy! 
John Moore 309 13:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

message: There appear to be four schools of thought on this subject.
*All battleships designed and completed in the 1930s or 1940s (i.e from Littorio and Dunkerque onwards) are “fast battleships”, by virtue of speeds (27+ knots) much greater than those of the battleships retained from the pre-treaty era.
:: Well yes. Except that perhaps there could be an argument that the Montana wasn't a fast battleship, because it was specifically designed to give up speed for extra protection. Perhaps their cancellation is proof of the next argument? Nloth 00:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Could anyone seriously make the argument that the Iowa class were battlecruisers? (!) Nloth 00:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hey, this is Wikipedia - of course someone cares! Nloth 00:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

text:  That sounds good to me - but you'll need to find external references for these four arguements. Nloth 00:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

text:  Actually, after more thought it would probably make sense to divide the table into two tables - for pre and post Washington Treaty ships. Nloth 03:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fast battleships after the Washington Treaty?

message: Can anyone find any examples of contemporary usage, official or semi-official, of the term "fast battleship"? As far as the RN goes, I have looked up the on-line resources given at Battle of Jutland and on the HMS Hood association website . As far as I can see Jellicoe and Beatty just referred to the Queen Elizabeths by that name, or collectively as the 5th Battle Squadron, whereas the term battlecruiser (usually rendered as battle cruiser) is used routinely. Even in the 1930s, British design documents for the new Capital Ship programme generally refer to the fastest designs as battlecruisers
, . A Google search returns mostly references to USN ships, although it also uncovers a well-balanced discussion at . My guess is that the term originated in the US in the 30s or 40s, to distinguish new battleship construction from the much slower ships inherited from the pre-Treaty period. It should be noted that, unlike the RN, the USN consistently segregated its “fast” and  “slow” battleships; where mobility was needed, as at Midway, the slow battleships were simply not deployed.
John Moore 309 13:43, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Fast battleships" as official usage: Help needed!

message: Why are the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau referred to as the Gneisenau class?  I've never seen a reputable reference source list them as such, I've always seen them listed as the Scharnhorst class.  Furthermore, when you go to the linked page on the class, there are no references cited to back this up.  On the other hand, one of the preeminent works on the class, Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II, refere to them as the Scharnhorst class, along with every other book I've ever read or own.  What's the deal here? --Dukefan73 11:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are also called the Scharnhorst class in my own usual source, Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships. I called them the Gneisenau class because that is what the class is called in the Gneisenau class battlecruiser Wikipedia article. The talk page for that article includes an extended discussion of whether the class should have been named for Scharnhorst or Gneisenau. Had I taken part in the debate, I would have "voted" for Scharnhorst, but since the article has now been established for some time, I thought it best to go with the (presumed) consensus. Feel free to reopen the debate there, if you wish; if you want a really exciting life, you can re-open the debate as to whether they were battlecruisers or battleships! Regards, John Moore 309 17:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Washington Treaty Era

message: If everyone's okay with it, I'd like to add a section on the German Battlecruisers.  There are a number of published sources with suggest that the Germans were actually trying to build "fast battleships" when they designed their Battlecruisers, and even if we do not except the completed vessels as fast battleships, the unbuilt Mackensen and Ersatz Yorcktypes almost certainly justify the moniker, whilst the L20 design was very clearly an attempt at a fast battleship in the vein of the Queen Elizabeths or Nagatos.  Getztashida 23:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: German Battlecruisers

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fast battleship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070524042930/http://www.merselkebir.org/lesnavires.htm to http://www.merselkebir.org/lesnavires.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:31, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article is misleading in treating "fast battleship" as a generic description of a battleship that happens to be fast, although literally I suppose that is accurate.  But the term was really used at the time only for the U.S. battleships of the North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa classes, and the planned but never-built Montana class.  Other navies had battleships that were faster than the North Carolinas, South Dakotas, and Montanas, but it was only the U.S. Navy that regularly used the term "fast battleship" and that treated these ships as a distinct sub-group of the battleship category (although it did not create a separate type designation or hull-number sequence for them).  It was only the USN that drew a clear line between old and new (fast) battleships in its organizational (i.e. battleship divisions and squadrons) structure, and its task force composition and employment.Keacla1 (talk) 17:07, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Fast Battleship" Is Really a Strictly USN Term 

message: The text says:
:Based on combat reports, Jellicoe erroneously credited the German König-class battleships with 23 knots (43 km/h), which would mean that Queen Elizabeths, which were good for just 24 knots (44 km/h), would be in serious danger if they were surprised by a battlefleet headed by these ships.[12]
The footnote-link with Jellicoe's report mentions the speed of 23 knots, but who says it was "erroneously credited"? How fast were they in fact? --Andreas (talk) 11:39, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The speed of the König-class at Skagerrak