|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
those last changes (around the 16th) made this article bloody good. Nice work.
Light Cruisers were never redesignated CA as far as I know. There is no mention of this in hazegray.org's or the USN's online transcriptions of DANFS or in Janes Fighting Ships 1964-65. Light and Heavy Cruisers that were partly converted to missile ships were redesigndated CAG or CLG. Light or heavy cruisers that had all main gun armament removed were redesignated CG. All guided missle ships were given a number in the new CG hull series.
Several ships (CL24-33) were redesignated CA due to the 1931 Treaty.
A number of Destroyer Leader or Frigate(DL) ships were originally to be designated as CLK Hunter Killer Cruisers Hunter-Killer Cruisers: CLK 1 NORFOLK (became DL-1) CLK 2 NEW HAVEN (never completed)
Years later several DLG and DLGN's were redesignated CG when the Navy stopped using the DL designation.
My understanding is that, from the signing of the Washington Naval Treaty, the only difference between a light cruiser and a heavy cruiser was in the armamemnt. Both were limited to 10,000 tonnes displacement. Light cruisers mounted turrets with 3 x 6" guns. Heavy cruisers mounted turrets with 2 x 8" guns. Geo Swan (talk) 21:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, but that was just Admiral Fisher being duplicitous. The Glorious class were really "light battlecruisers"... Getztashida (talk) 11:47, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
to my knowledge, the term light cruiser appeared to indicate the turbine-powered cruisers: these engines were too high to be housed below a protection deck and this made the vertical protection necessary. I feel that light reflected at first the fact that these engines were tested on small cruisers. pietro188.8.131.52 (talk) 14:27, 16 January 2017 (UTC)