Lion Class Battlecruiser - Construction

Construction

Only Lion was completed to the original design, which had the foremost funnel placed between the forward superstructure and the tripod foremast. This meant that hot clinker and flue gases from the boilers made the spotting top on the foremast completely unworkable when the ships were steaming at high speed, that the upper bridge could easily be rendered uninhabitable, depending on the wind, and that the signal flags and halyards were at risk of burning. Both ships were altered to correct this problem, Lion before she commissioned, and Princess Royal as she was fitting out, at a total cost of £68,170. The fore funnel was replaced and moved aft, the original fore and mainmasts exchanged position, although the foremast was now just a pole mast, not a tripod, the spotting tower at the rear of the conning tower was removed, the conning tower enlarged, the 9-foot Argo rangefinder was moved from the foremast spotting top to the roof of the conning tower, and all the funnels were raised to the same height. The two four-inch guns mounted above the forward group of casemates were enclosed in casemates of their own to protect the gun crews from weather and enemy action as part of these modifications.

Although the standard British practice was to quote the cost without armament, the data available for the Lions includes guns.

Name Builder Engine-builder Laid down Launched Completed Cost
BNA (1914) Parkes
Lion Devonport Dockyard Vickers,
Parsons turbines
29 September 1909 6 August 1910 May 1912 £2,086,458 * £2,086,458 **
Princess Royal Vickers, Barrow Vickers,
Parsons turbines
2 May 1910 24 April 1911 November 1912 £2,092,214 * £2,089,178 **

* = estimated cost, including guns

** = including guns

Read more about this topic:  Lion Class Battlecruiser

Famous quotes containing the word construction:

    No real “vital” character in fiction is altogether a conscious construction of the author. On the contrary, it may be a sort of parasitic growth upon the author’s personality, developing by internal necessity as much as by external addition.
    —T.S. (Thomas Stearns)

    There is, I think, no point in the philosophy of progressive education which is sounder than its emphasis upon the importance of the participation of the learner in the formation of the purposes which direct his activities in the learning process, just as there is no defect in traditional education greater than its failure to secure the active cooperation of the pupil in construction of the purposes involved in his studying.
    John Dewey (1859–1952)

    There’s no art
    To find the mind’s construction in the face:
    He was a gentleman on whom I built
    An absolute trust.
    William Shakespeare (1564–1616)