What's your choice for best CA and CL

I am partial toward the Japanese ships not because I am half Japanese but they had great ships. Even the US navy took notice of them. However for CA I really like the Boston class she a big one and the navy tried to combine the characteristics of Royal Navy ships and Japanese which they considered the most capable and made her to be able to go all out on those ships, pulse she just looks good too. Then for CL I really like the Cleveland class they say her design was heavily based on Japanese ships of the time they again wanted her to be able to best what the navy considered of the best of ships of other navies. By the end of the war US ships of just about every class were superior to other nations, our ship and war industrial programs were far outpacing all other nations combined in both quantity and quality. Our technology was far ahead of everyone especially in electronic warfare sonar, radar, radio communication. The computer fire control system for the Iowa class originally the first analog system filled a large warehouse and we made it small enough to fit in a relatively small room. Lol now you can wear one as a wrist watch. The US has since the war prided itself for advanced technology. The Russians for years would steal or salvage our planes and other equipment to study and reverse engineer or just plain copy. I read during Vietnam we would retrieve downed Russian aircraft as well to keep appraised of Russian technology. There was a salvaged mig 21 they were going over and they were surprised that the control actuators were copies of the f4 I fact the report said they were so exact that you could have switched them out for ours. They said on previous planes they were much larger and heavier probably why the Russians liked them saved on weight and resources. The Russians have copied a lot of our tech, too bad when the ayatollah took over in Iran that we didn't send in a strike mission and bomb all the f14s that were there. The Iranians gave one to the Russians and they reversed engineered our long range targeting and tracking system which they now have in the mig31. The pentagon says its old and now obsolete and the newer one is much better, but the thing is they Russians might be still trying to make their own system work if they hadn't got their hands on one. The Iranians are building their own planes now they have a growing aerospace industry. Their new plane is having lots of problems but sooner or later they will,resolve the issues. They started with rebuilding the old f5s they bought from us when the shah was around, and now are building their own new replacements. I wonder if they reverse engineer the f14 as well as they really like that plane and they are getting old and we won't sell them any parts or plans. The hesh I think the first plane is called hesh one is basically a f5 copy little changed, the two is interesting with the v tail, but I read their having lots of problems with the three, it a radical design I really not liking the look of it. It has a rather odd wing design. They say it flies just not very well at this time. They put millions into this I wonder will,they just give up,and start from scratch or keep at it and resolve issues just to show they can do it.
Got a bunch of f5 dml kits back when they were dirt cheap been messing with one to make a hash two. Stole the tail from another kit might have to cast a new tail or just make a couple from plastic sheet.

 

I would agree with Baltimore and Cleveland as the best, not surprising since they were among the last and largest WWII cruisers. Cleveland was the largest "light" cruiser, and I never have understood what about the Hipper class required over 14,000 tons. Notably of course the Americans had the best antiaircraft armament, which proved to be critical for WWII ships, and their super-heavy main battery shells outgunned other 6" and 8" cruisers.

I don't find them particularly attractive, with their high, slab-sided hulls, but they were functional, providing aircraft hangars aft; and the high freeboard was valuable for both seakeeping and survivability. Although they could carry four aircraft in the hangar, they rarely did, but the space came in handy when extra personnel accommodations were needed for wartime crew increases.

The Cleveland design was derived from the Brooklyn which was conceived to match the Japanese Mogami class with their fifteen 6.1". Aside from the number and caliber of guns, I am not aware of any features based on the Japanese design. The Mogamis were an overly ambitious and ultimately unsuccessful attempt to put fifteen 6.1" on a cruiser; they had to be reconstructed and enlarged to accommodate it - and then reconstructed again to carry ten 8". AFAIK two major reconstructions in five years is a record, of sorts; none of the American cruisers had to go through anything like that.

 

I agree our AA was the best the loading systems really were ingenious that they allowed for a high continuous fire the 1.1 and 40 Pom Pom was a ingenious design a rail feed that held clips of rounds as the clips slid down more clips could be dropped in. That was the thing I noticed was wrong in the movie Yamato you have loaders three one for each gun of the triple mount they watch the mags when the mag empties the pull it out slam another in that takes too much time and interrupts the firing. Plus we had a great rate of fire with our five inch guns the Japanese had a rather slow rate I think they say it had to do with the loading system it was partially auto loading the electric rammer so we're slow to cycle. Thanks for your input have a great year

 

Takao for the 8-inch guns and Brooklyn for the 6-inchers.

 

I second the Baltimore class for heavy and Cleveland for light.

"... the Cleveland class they say her design was heavily based on Japanese ships of the time..." This isn't correct as I understand it, to expand on what Carroade posted, the Brooklyn's were in response to the Mogami's, they were not based upon the Mogami's. The Brooklyn class was the basis for both the Wichita class and Cleveland class. The Wichita was the basis for the Baltimore class, so it could be argued that the Brooklyn was an important design.

 

It is ironic that most of our WWII-era cruisers were based on responding to something the Japanese built to evade treaty restrictions but did not actually want, a large 6" gun cruiser. Doubly ironic that the Brooklyns and Clevelands turned out to be very effective, especially in night action which came to characterize most surface battles.

The British Town class were also a response to the Mogami; the RN's preference was for classic light cruisers like the Leander or Arethusa. The Condottieri and La Galissonniere classes also exemplified the theoretical ideal, unmarred by treaty peculiarities. And the only 6" ships the Japanese built because they really wanted them were the Aganos and Oyodo.

 

The Japanese heavy cruiser classes were considered among the best and great looking ships as well. Unfortunately Japanese antiaircraft fire just couldn't beat off our planes. Too bad they didn't have guns like our 40 mm boffors that they say was the most outstanding AA gun of the war accounting for more kills than any other gun. Even the Japanese five inch AA had a much lower fire rate than our five in hers with Manuel loading in fact they say the auto loading system was the reason for the slow fire rate once the rounds were put on the loading ramps the electric rammer so we're very slow in loading and then retracting back. Also the amount of carrier aircraft we could put into action and the quality of our pilots just overwhelmed the IJN. The whole heavy cruiser fleet were great looking ships but the thing that stands out about the Takao class is the long main bridge structure with that angled face makes you think she's armored for a frontal attack.

 

Baltimore for the heavies and Brooklyn for the CLs. There's just something I love about the idea of sending 100 6" shells/minute downrange.

 

You got it. Especially if 8- and 6-inchers team up to strike the world's most heavily armored battleship (pound-for-pound) deaf, dumb, and blind.

The Clevelands may be better on paper but the Brooklyns were right there where the action was needed.