View source for Tiger-class cruiser

{{short description|Class of British light cruisers}}
{{distinguish|Tiger-class battlecruiser}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=June 2020}}
{{Use British English|date=January 2015}}
{|{{Infobox ship begin}}
{{Infobox ship image
| Ship image = Engels vlootbezoek aan Rotterdam De Engelse kruiser Tiger loopt binnen, Bestanddeelnr 915-5467.jpg
| Ship image size = 300px
| Ship caption = {{HMS|Tiger|C20|6}} in 1963 before conversion
}}
{{Infobox ship class overview
| Name = ''Tiger'' class
| Builders = 
| Operators = {{navy|United Kingdom}}
| Class before = {{sclass|Minotaur|cruiser|4||1943}}
| Class after = None
| Subclasses = 
| Cost = 
| Built range = 1941–1961
| In service range = 
| In commission range = 1959–1979
| Total ships building = 
| Total ships planned = 
| Total ships completed = 3
| Total ships cancelled = 
| Total ships active = 
| Total ships laid up = 
| Total ships lost = 
| Total ships retired = 3
| Total ships preserved = 
}}
{{Infobox ship characteristics
| Hide header = 
| Header caption = 
| Ship class = [[Light cruiser]]
| Ship tonnage = 
| Ship displacement = 11,700 tons (12,080 tons after conversion of ''Blake'' and ''Tiger'')
| Ship length = {{convert|555.5|ft|m|abbr=on}}
| Ship beam = {{convert|64|ft|m|abbr=on}}
| Ship height = 
| Ship draught = {{convert|23|ft|m|abbr=on}}
| Ship power = {{convert|80000|shp|MW|abbr=on|lk=in}}
| Ship propulsion = *Four [[Admiralty boiler|Admiralty-type three drum boiler]]s
* Four shaft Parsons [[steam turbines]]
| Ship speed = {{convert|31.5|kn|lk=in}}
| Ship range = {{convert|8000|nmi|lk=in|abbr=on}} at {{convert|16|kn}}
| Ship endurance = 
| Ship test depth = 
| Ship boats = 
| Ship capacity = 
| Ship troops = 
| Ship complement = 716 (''Tiger'' and ''Blake'': 885 post-conversion)
| Ship crew = 
| Ship time to activate = 
| Ship sensors = *'''''Tiger'' and ''Blake'' post-conversion''':
* 1 × Type 965 air-surveillance radar with outfit AKE(1) aerial
* 1 × Type 992Q target-indication radar
* 2 × Type 903 gunfire-control radars ([[MRS-3|MRS 3 system]])
* 2 × Type 904 Seacat fire-control radars (GWS 22 system)
| Ship EW = 
| Ship armament = *'''As built''':
* 2 × twin [[QF 6-inch Mark N5 gun]]s
* 3 × twin [[QF 3-inch Mark N1 gun]]s
*'''''Tiger'' and ''Blake'' post-conversion''''':
* 1 × twin 6-inch Mk. N5 guns
* 1 × twin 3-inch N1 guns
* 2 × quad [[Seacat (missile)|SeaCat missile]] launchers - 42 Sea Cat SAM
| Ship armour = * [[Belt armor|Belt]] {{convert|3.5|-|3.25|in|mm|abbr=on}}
* [[Bulkhead (partition)|Bulkhead]]s {{convert|2|-|1.5|in|mm|abbr=on}}
* [[gun turret|Turret]]s {{convert|2|-|1|in|mm|abbr=on}}
* Crowns of engine room and [[Magazine (artillery)|magazine]]s {{convert|2|in|mm|abbr=on}}
| Ship aircraft = *'''''Tiger'' and ''Blake'' post-conversion''':
* 4 × [[Westland Wessex]] [[helicopter]]s
* Later replaced by:
* 4 × [[Westland Sea King]] helicopters
| Ship aircraft facilities = 
| Ship notes = 
}}
|}

The '''''Tiger'' class''' were a class of three British warships of the 20th century and the last all-gun [[cruiser]]s of the [[Royal Navy]]. Construction of three {{sclass|Minotaur|cruiser|0||1943}} cruisers (under the names ''Blake'', ''Defence'' and ''Bellerophon'') began during [[World War II]] but, due to post-war [[austerity]], the [[Korean War]] and focus on the [[Royal Air Force]] over the surface fleet, the hulls remained unfinished. Against a background of changing priorities and financial constraints, approval to complete them to a modified design was given in November 1954 and the three ships – {{HMS|Tiger|C20|2}}, {{HMS|Lion|C34|2}} and {{HMS|Blake|C99|2}} – entered service from March 1959.

In January 1964, due to postponement of the Escort Cruiser programme, the cruisers were approved for conversion into helicopter-carrying cruisers. At first they were intended to carry four [[Westland Wessex]] helicopters for [[amphibious operations]] and [[anti-submarine warfare|anti-submarine protection]] operating "[[East of Suez]]" then four [[Westland Sea King]]s for anti-submarine work. The conversion of ''Blake'' and ''Tiger'', carried out between 1965 and 1972, was more expensive and time-consuming than expected and, with the [[HM Treasury|UK Treasury]] opposing each cruiser's conversion, the conversion of ''Lion'' was cancelled and she was scrapped in 1975, having been used for spares for her [[sister ship]]s.

Described in one book as "hideous and useless hybrids" after conversion<ref>{{Cite book |first1=P |last1=Smith |first2= J |last2=Dominy |title=Cruisers in Action 1939–1945 |publisher=William Kimber |date=1981 |location=London |page=240 |isbn=978-0718302184}}</ref> and with limited manpower, resources, and better ships available, ''Tiger'' and ''Blake'' were decommissioned in the late 1970s and [[Reserve Fleet (United Kingdom)|placed in reserve]].  ''Blake'' was [[Ship breaking|scrapped]] in 1982 and ''Tiger'' in 1986.

==Design and commissioning==
{{See also|Minotaur-class cruiser (1943)}}
The three light cruisers that become the ''Tiger'' class came out of an order for eight 64-foot broad beam Modified and Improved [[Fiji-class cruiser|''Fiji''-class]] cruisers as an immediate response to the [[Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor]] and the invasions [[Japanese invasion of Thailand|of Siam]] and [[Battle of Malaya|of British Malaya]] in December 1941.<ref>{{harvnb|Moore|1997 |p=45}}</ref><ref name="Brown 2000 78–9 & 206">{{harvnb|Brown|2000|pp=78–9 & 206}}</ref> The order was part of the Royal Navy 1941 supplementary shipbuilding programme and 1942 estimates in April 1942 <ref>{{harvnb|Moore|1997 |pp=45–49}}</ref><ref name="Brown 2000 78–9 & 206"/> They were slightly improved models of the ''Ceylon'' (or ''Uganda'') sub-group of the ''Fiji''-class  ordered in late 1939 and the 63-foot beam ''Minotaur'' group ordered in the 1941 Royal Navy programme. HMS ''Defence'', ''Bellerophon'', ''Blake'' and ''Hawke'' were begun as ''Minotaur''-class cruisers{{Efn|The ''Minotaur'' design was itself a development of the ''Fiji'' (also known as Crown Colony) class}} {{efn|When ''Minotaur'' was transferred to the [[Royal Canadian Navy]] and renamed ''Ontario'', the class was known as the ''Swiftsure'' class after the first of the class to be launched.}} in 1941–43 with three triple 6-inch gun turrets in 1944. Production of the [[1942 Design Light Fleet Carrier]]s was given priority from August 1942 by the Future Building Committee{{sfn|Moore |1997 ||p= 47-50}} and in August 1942, four unnamed ''Minotaur'' cruisers were cancelled and their machinery, builders and building slips reallocated to light fleet carriers. ''Bellerophon'' (which became'' Tiger'' in 1945) had been ordered in May 1941 and [[Keel laying|the keel laid down]] at (Browns Clydebank yard) with ''Swiftsure'' and ''Minotaur'' in October 1941. ''Blake''{{'}}s keel was started at Fairfields in August 1942. While the building schedules of ''[[HMCS Ontario (C53)|Minotaur]]'', ''[[HMS Swiftsure (08)|Swiftsure]]'' and ''Defence'' were unaffected; construction of ''Blake'' and ''Tiger'' slowed; ''Hawke'' was not laid down until July 1943 and the eighth was never started. The priority of the light [[fleet carrier]]s, anti-submarine escorts, the battleship ''[[HMS Vanguard (23)|Vanguard]]'' at [[John Brown & Company|Browns]], and the large fleet carrier HMS ''Africa'' (a [[Malta-class aircraft carrier|''Malta''-class carrier]]), ordered from [[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company|Fairfield]] effectively suspended work on ''Bellerophon'' and ''Blake''{{Efn|''Blake'' was renamed ''Tiger'' in 1944 before reverting back to ''Blake'' in 1945}} from March 1944 to July 1945. Work on ''Defence'' was delayed by industrial relations, strikes, conditions, sub-standard facilities and low quality steel at [[Scotts Shipbuilding and Engineering Company|Scotts, Greenock]].{{sfn|Moore |1997 |p= 49}} The problems at Scotts and concern over the delay to ''Defence'' and the ''Tiger''-class led the [[Director of Naval Construction]] to visit Scotts' yard in August 1943 with work stopped by striking riveters, carpenters and shipwrights <ref>Moore (1997) p 49-50</ref> It was planned to launch ''Defence'' in April 1944 to complete in July 1945, for ''Hawke'' to launch in 1944 and commission mid-1945, with ''Blake'' and ''Tiger'' commissioning mid-1946. However only ''Minotaur'', ''Swiftsure'' and {{HMS|Superb|25|2}} were completed by late 1945. '' Defence'', well advanced in construction, was placed in reserve without armament fitted and spent eight years moored offshore in [[Gareloch]].

===Design changes===
In March 1943 it was decided to upgrade the main armament from the Mk XXIII (re-designated post war in Arabic numerals as "Mark 23") triple 6-inch turret to the [[Dual-purpose gun|dual purpose]] (DP) electrically-powered Mk XXIV (Mark 24) triple 6-inch{{efn|A full electric powered turret had been fitted in {{HMS|Diadem|84|2}} in 1944 and, with power ramming, the shells fired at consistent intervals and it had sufficient training and elevation speed to have some dual purpose capability against jet aircraft and early [[guided missile]]s.{{citation needed|date=April 2023}} }} on five cruisers ordered or under construction: ''Blake'', ''Hawke'', ''Tiger'', ''Defence'' and ''Bellerophon''.{{sfn|Moore |1997 |p= 50}} The guns in the new Mk 24 turret could reach a maximum of 60 degrees of elevation giving some anti-aircraft capability. The three more complete ''Minotaur'' cruisers, HMS ''Minotaur'', ''Swiftsure'' and ''Superb'' would complete with the Mk 23 turret. In January 1943 it was decided to increase the [[Beam (nautical)|beam]] of ''Bellerophon'' to {{Convert|64|ft|m|abbr=on}}.{{sfn|Moore |1997|p=48-49}}

By late 1943 the effective defeat of German surface forces and the large American cruiser construction programme made the cruiser requirement less urgent. The planned delivery of fleet carriers, [[1942 Design Light Fleet Carrier|the light fleet carriers]], [[escort carrier]]s and the new [[Battle-class destroyer]]s in 1944-45 made limiting the manpower requirements and future building programme an absolute priority for Churchill by October–December 1943 <ref>{{cite book |last=Bell |first=Christopher M. |title=Churchill and Sea Power |date=2013 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978019969357-3 |pages=302–3}}</ref> The RN had more cruisers and refitted cruisers than it had crew for and as a result two new classes of 5.25-inch gun cruisers -  five 7,000 ton with three twin 5.25-inch turrets and the N2 class{{Efn|Four twin 5.25-inch DP turrets on a ''Fiji'' size hull with compact destroyer powertrain and more armour and fuel}} - were cancelled by February 1944. ''Tiger''-class construction was slowed and periodically suspended and new class of large ''Neptune''-class cruisers (to be armed with the same Mk 24 turrets as the Tigers and have a second battery of [[QF 4.5-inch Mk I – V naval gun|QF 4.5-inch Mk V{{Efn|Later renamed as "Mark 6" guns}}]] guns ordered for the [[Daring-class destroyer (1949)|''Daring''-class destroyers]]{{Efn|The ''Daring''s were not completed until after the war}}) were delayed. Two new cruisers were passed to the RCN as Canada was seen as the UK's vital wartime ally; HMS ''Minotaur'' and the {{sclass|Fiji|cruiser|0}} cruiser {{HMS|Uganda|66|2}}{{efn|At the time of the agreement in 1943 ''Uganda'' was undergoing repair and refit in the USA}} were gifted to Canada in April 1944 and  ''Minotaur'' was handed over on schedule to the RCN in June 1945.<!-- It was the first British cruiser with both Type 275/274 "lock and follow", air- and surface- fire control and quadruple 40 mm Bofors guns. [citation needed]  -->

A proposal was made in 1944 and again in February 1945 for two new cruisers and two light aircraft carriers to be delivered to the [[Royal Australian Navy]]; the UK offering HMS ''Defence'' and ''Blake''<ref>Moore.  (1997) p50-51</ref><ref>ADM 205/1944 & CAB 66/2/1945( Cabinet papers)</ref>{{full citation needed|date=July 2023}}. The offer was delayed because Australia also had a manpower problem; by mid-1945 the manpower issue had not resolved and the Allies had overwhelming naval superiority and the idea was dropped.{{sfn|Gill|1968|pp=472}}{{efn|. In 1944 little work had been done on the offered cruisers other than to launch ''Defence'' in September 1944.{{citation needed|date=May 2023}} }} The RAN determined the service life of its two County-class heavy cruisers could be extended to 1950-54.{{citation needed|date=July 2023}}

In 1944–45, the RN, CNS and government thought the merging of the cruiser and destroyer categories{{Efn|by expanding the new large Battle-class and Daring-class destroyers to 3,500 tons to allow for three twin 4.5-inch turrets and office space for radar data processing}}  was too early, expensive and radical.{{citation needed|date=July 2023}}{{efn|By mid-1945, the UK was facing severe constraints caused by [[Lend-Lease]] payments leading to [[Social history of Postwar Britain (1945–1979)#Age of Austerity|period of fiscal austerity]]. Among other effects, this led in September 1945 to the cancellation of a batch of 25 US-built [[List of World War II British naval radar|Mk 37 Type 275]] radar-assisted gunnery systems which affected ships including the ''Tiger'' class.}} With the planned {{sclass|Neptune|cruiser|4}} cancelled, the suspended ships were the only cruiser hulls available and worth considering for rearmament. By 1946, nine Mk 24 turrets were 75–80% complete with three further turrets partially complete for use with the ''Tiger'' cruisers. These turrets were a more advanced version of the wartime Mk&nbsp;23 triple {{convert|6|in|adj=on}}. The new Mk&nbsp;24 6-inch mounts were interim electric turrets with [[Glossary of British ordnance terms#RPC|remote power-control]] and power-worked breech. The ''Tiger'' design, like ''Superb,'' had a broader beam - a foot wider at {{convert|64|ft|m|abbr=on}} [[Beam (nautical)|beam]] - than ''Swiftsure'' on which to accommodate the larger turrets though it was preferred to complete ''Superb'' with the older Mk 23 turrets in 1945{{Citation needed|date=May 2023}}.

It was decided to mothball the three incomplete ''Tiger''s in November 1947 as the aircraft carriers ''[[HMS Eagle (R05)|Eagle]]'' and ''[[HMS Centaur (R06)|Centaur]]'' had priority.<ref>N. Friedman. ''British Cruisers'' (2010) p 251</ref> The ''Tiger''s were maintained as in some ways they were newer hulls  with  better internal and underwater protection, subdivision and compartments taking advantage of the removal of the hangar and X turret, [[Combat information center|Action Information centre]], more light AA,  pumps and electric generating capacity.<ref>Friedman. (2010)</ref>{{page needed|date=July 2023}}

Another two ''Tiger''-class cruisers were cancelled. ''Hawke'' was laid down in July 1943, and ''Bellerophon'' possibly had a [[keel]] laid down. Work on all the cruisers other than ''Superb'' stopped after mid-1944.{{efn|''Janes Fighting Ships 1944–45'', states that ''Hawke'' was laid down in August 1944<ref>{{cite book|title=Janes Fighting Ships 1944–45 |orig-date= 1944/46 |edition=Reprint |publisher= Low and Sampson |date=1978 |page=39}}</ref> as a ''Tiger''}} .''Hawke'' was suspended in January 1945,<ref>J. Colledge & Warlow. David & Charles. Newton Abott (1969) p259</ref> and broken up in 1947 in the [[Portsmouth dockyard]] although her boilers and machinery were complete, and her new 6-inch guns close to completion.{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012|page= 19}}

===Delay and redesign===
The [[Third Churchill ministry|second Churchill government]], elected in 1951, favoured the RAF and reduced the naval budget. With the RN priority being anti-submarine frigates, the restart of work on the ''Tiger'' cruisers (and reconstructions of other cruisers) was delayed by three years to 1954.  The original decision to delay the ''Tiger''s in the late 1940s had been to reassess cruiser design and the provision of effective anti-aircraft (AA) fire-control to engage jet aircraft which was beyond UK industrial capability at the time.{{sfn|Barnett|2001 |pp=122, 347}} Consequently, higher priority was given to the battleship {{HMS|Vanguard|23|6}}, the [[Battle-class destroyer]]s and the two new {{sclass|Audacious|aircraft carrier|0}} aircraft carriers ({{HMS|Eagle|R05|2}} and {{HMS|Ark Royal|R09|2}}) for allocation of 26 US-supplied medium-range anti-aircraft gun directors (which had been delivered under Lend-Lease in 1944/5)<ref>{{citation |first=P |last=Marland |contribution=Post War Fire Control in the RN |title=Warship 2014 |publisher=Conway |location= London |date=2014 |page=149}}</ref> The US version of the Type 275 High Altitude/Low Altitude DCT were stabilised and could track multiple air targets of Mach 1.5+. These US directors were superior to the British built Type 275 which was the only medium-range AA fire control until 1955 and could barely distinguish [[transonic]] targets at Mach 0.8.<ref>{{cite book|first1=P |last1= Hodges |first2= N |last2= Friedman |title=Destroyer Weapons of WW2 |publisher=Conway Maritime |date=1979 |location=London |pages=101–103}}</ref> The 1947–49 period saw a peace dividend, and frigate construction became the priority in the [[Korean War]].{{sfn|Friedman|2010 |p= }}{{page needed|date=December 2020}}

By 1949 two alternative fits for the ''Tiger''s had been drawn up, one as anti-aircraft cruisers with six twin [[3"/70 Mark 26 gun|3-inch 70 calibre]] and one with two twin [[QF 6-inch Mark N5 gun]]s (Mark 26 automatic mountings) and three twin 3-inch/70s. Both were designed primarily for high-level anti-aircraft defence and largely intended as a replacement for the 5.25-inch and 4.5-inch turrets on battleships and old fleet carriers. The rapid-fire automatic twin 3-inch and 6-inch were designed on a post-war philosophy that the first 20 seconds of anti-jet aircraft and anti-missile engagement were critical and that the twin 3-inch firing at 240 rounds per minute would successfully engage six air targets in 20-second bursts. Sustained fire capability for [[naval gunfire support|naval gunfire support of ground forces]] (NGS) was not a design requirement. The automatic twin 6-inch guns for the secondary role of [[Commerce raiding|defence of and attack on trade]] also had some very high level (up to 8-mile altitude) anti-aircraft capability. In historical terms it represented a light armament and similar US weapons introduced on {{USS|Worcester|CL-144|6}} had experienced considerable problems with jamming and had performed below expectation.<ref>{{cite book|first=N. |last=Friedman |title=US Cruisers. An Illustrated design history |publisher=Arms & Armour |location=London |date=1985 |page=357}} & {{cite book |first=N. |last=Friedman |title=US Naval Weapons. Gun, Missile, Mine & Torpedo from 1883 to present |date=1983|pages=70–1}}</ref> A third lower-cost option of fitting two Mk&nbsp; XXIV turrets in 'A' and 'B' positions, two semi-automatic Mk 6 twin 4.5-inch{{efn|as used on ''Daring''-class}} in 'X' and 'Y' positions and a twin (Mark VI) or single (Mark V) 4.5-inch on each flank was considered at the start of the Korean War. This could not have been completed before 1953 {{sfn|Brown |Moore|2012|p=47}} as an immediate surface fighting response to a Soviet ''[[Sverdlov-class cruiser|Sverdlov-]]''[[Sverdlov-class cruiser|class]] cruiser{{Citation needed|date=May 2023}} and would have required a crew of 900+.{{sfn|Friedman|2010|p=371–7}}  Further the RN 4.5-inch DP gun was not a good postwar AA weapon.,{{sfn|Friedman|2010|p=371–7}} the six Mk&nbsp;24 DC-powered turrets were unfinished and complex (with two pairs of Type 274 and Type 275 directors{{efn|The first reliable British produced 275M directors were fitted in 1956, in {{HMS|Royalist|89|2}} and in [[Whitby-class frigate|Type 12 frigates]], 14 years after the introduction of the US Mk 37 DCT.<ref>{{Cite book  |first= Correlli  |last= Barnett  |title= The Verdict of Peace: Britain between her Yesterday and the Future |publisher= MacMillan |location= London |year= 2001|pages= 47, 321}}</ref> and UK needed US-supplied and paid for directors}}) [[Direct current|DC]] wiring had been removed from the ''Tiger'' class in 1948 and so the Mk 24 was not suitable for fast completion of the class.{{sfn|Walters|2021|p=22-27}} There was a strong desire that the new cruisers should have AC power, not DC or dual systems.{{sfn|Murfin|2010|p= 57}}

There was great doubt of the merits of completing the ''Tiger''s, given that Soviet [[Tupolev Tu-95]] "Bear" turboprop and [[Tupolev Tu-16]] "Badger" jet bombers flew faster and higher than anticipated which added to the argument for missile equipped-ships for anti-aircraft defence. The {{sclass|Sverdlov|cruiser|4}} with 6.9-inch thick armour, speed and range also outclassed the ''Tiger''s. Even six-inch bombardment was increasingly unacceptable to the Royal Navy after Korea and was allowed only on the first day of [[Operation Musketeer (1956)|Operation Musketeer]] after strong political opposition.{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}} The RN staff were completely divided over the development of new AA guns larger than 4-inch post war. [[Charles Lillicrap]], the [[Director of Naval Construction]] in 1946, saw the new automatic 3-inch/70 as eliminating the need for the new Mk 26 DP 6-inch guns, as the guns fulfilled the AA requirement.{{sfn|Moore|2006|p= 41, 42 – line 2}} That and the fact the new twin 3-inch/70 and twin Mk 26 6-inch were six years from being tested led to both ''Tiger''s and ''Minotaur''s being suspended in 1947 and slowed work on the new 6-inch (and proposed new 5-inch) guns. The proven Mk 23 seemed more than adequate and its efficiency was improved in the 1950s.{{efn|The [[Naval Battle of Guadalcanal]] action against Japanese cruisers suggested that manually operated 6-inch triples at low elevation could sustain high rates of fire of 8–10 rounds per minute in combat situation.{{citation needed|date=August 2022}} HMS ''Bermuda'' in 1960 achieved 12 rounds per minute at low elevation at close range and with higher barrel-wear.{{citation needed|date=August 2022}} The USN maintained the similar {{sclass|Cleveland|cruiser|4}} triple 6-inch turret on its post-war missile conversions, including {{USS|Galveston|CL-93|6}}, which maintained half its original 6- and 5-inch armament with twin [[RIM-8 Talos]] [[surface-to-air missile]] launchers and was more capable than HMS ''Tiger''.{{citation needed|date=August 2022}} }}

===Revised design===
In 1954 construction of the three ships was approved to the 1948 design mounting new automatic 6-inch and 3-inch guns. This was a controversial{{Citation needed|date=May 2023}} decision, made to avoid ordering larger cruisers or new aircraft carriers of questionable utility at immense cost{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}}. Against the apparent [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] threat of {{sclass|Sverdlov|cruiser|5}} cruisers acting as raiders against merchant vessels, the ''Tiger''s lacked the range <ref>{{Cite web |last=Clarke |first=Alexander |date=12 May 2014 |title=Sverdlov Class Cruisers, and the Royal Navy's Response |url=https://globalmaritimehistory.com/sverdlov_class_rn_response/ |access-date=2023-03-16 |website=Global Maritime History}}</ref> and armament to challenge the Soviet ships, on paper, while other RN officers thought a couple of ''Daring''s or [[Leopard-class frigate|Type 41 frigate]] anti-aircraft frigates were all that was needed to challenge the inexperienced Russian crews{{Citation needed|date=May 2023}}. Cruisers were better deterred and sunk by aircraft carriers operating [[Hawker Sea Hawk]] and [[de Havilland Sea Venom]] strike aircraft.{{sfn|Moore|2006|pp=43–44}}{{efn|Australia had {{HMAS|Melbourne|R21|6}} with Sea Venoms,{{sfn|Friedman|2016|p= 174}} Canada {{HMCS|Bonaventure}} with [[McDonnell F2H Banshee]] fighters and India had {{INS|Vikrant|1961|6}} (formerly HMS ''Hercules'')  with Sea Hawks and French [[Bréguet 1050 Alizé]] - all three were wartime [[1942 Design Light Fleet Carrier]]s built for modern jet aircraft}}

The November 1954 cabinet meeting deciding the fate of the Royal Navy took six hours.{{clarify|reason= Is this shorter than expected, or surprisingly long? Is the length of the meeting even relevant|date=July 2023}} Churchill was determined to limit the defence budget with a view to developing nuclear weapons and less vulnerable RAF aircraft.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Philip |last1=Ziegler |author-link=Philip Ziegler |title=Mountbatten: the Official biography |edition=2 |publisher=Orion |date=2001 |isbn=978-1842122969 }}{{page needed |date= June 2016}}</ref>
The completion of the ''Tiger''s was approved in July 1954 with them now seen as "escort and anti-aircraft support for convoys and carrier task groups", the Royal Navy estimating completion in three years for £6 million each compared with five years and £12m for a new cruiser design.{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012|pp=23–29}}<!-- 217-218 in ebook --> The new automatic twin 6-inch and twin 3-inch dual-purpose guns were approved for production.  The modernised ''Tiger''s were an interim measure with the expectation that guided missile equipped ships were "at least ten years away".{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012|pp=217-218}}<!--ebook numbering --> The [[1957 Defence White Paper]] under [[Duncan Sandys]] proposed to reduce the number of large ships in the RN fleet;<ref>"Statement on Defence 1957. Outline of Future Policy". White Paper. HMSO. 15 March 1957, pp. 7–8, s15.</ref> the ''Tiger''s, ''Swiftsure'' and ''Superb'' {{efn|modernisation of '' Superb'' was cancelled that year and it was decommissioned in November 1957. ''Superb'' received a refit from January 1955 to April 1956 to be available for the [[Suez Crisis|Suez operation]]. The reconstruction of ''Swiftsure'' as a fourth ''Tiger'' was structurally complete by June 1959 but its new armament had been sold to the [[Royal Canadian Navy]] (RCN) and Chile, and it was not worth fitting recycled 4-inch and 40 mm armament. ''Swiftsure'' was scrapped in 1962 after numerous RN proposals to convert it to a missile cruiser or helicopter carrier. Converting into a small flat-deck aircraft carrier was considered.}} would enter service as interim anti-aircraft ships, until the {{sclass2|County|destroyer}}s were commissioned and the two Second World War cruisers, {{HMS|Belfast||6}} and {{HMS|Bermuda|52|6}} were mothballed.{{Citation needed|date=August 2022}}

==Initial service==
The reconstruction involved the stripping out of the superstructure and most of the services. Equipment was replaced or modified to operate on AC electrical power.{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012|pp=217-218}}<!--ebook numbering -->
''Tiger'' was completed in  Jan 1959, ''Lion'' (formerly ''Defence'') in 1960 and ''Blake'' in March 1961.{{sfn|Colledge|Warlow|2006|p=41}} Actual costs were £13 to 15 million per ship, partly due to inflation.{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012|pp=219-220}}<!--ebook numbering -->

While outwardly identical, the three ''Tiger''s were each very different in their electrics. ''Blake'' was essentially an experimental ship with all-electric turrets able to engage Mach 2.5 air targets but was put in reserve in 1963 for lack of technical staff.<ref name=HCVote>{{citation |title=Vote 1. Pay, etc., of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines |volume=674 |url=https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1963/mar/18/vote-1-pay-etc-of-the-royal-navy-and#S5CV0674P0_19630318_HOC_476 |author=Civil Sea Lord Lord Ewing |work= House of Commons Debates |date=18 March 1963 |at=145}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|first=D. |last=Healey |title=Time of my Life |publisher= Norton |year=1989 |location=NY |page= 275}}</ref> {{HMS|Lion|C34|2}} had deteriorated after eight years in [[Gareloch]] before reconstruction and had to be withdrawn from operations "[[East of Suez]]" in 1963 due to boiler, mechanical and armament problems. While the electric 3-inch/70 AA systems were excellent they required intensive maintenance and excessive manpower and fitters, the twin Mk 26 6-inch automatic guns were a 'disaster' constantly jamming and rarely fulfilling their basic 30 second burst fire min capability <ref>{{cite book |first= P |last=Marland |entry=Postwar Weapons in the Royal Navy |title=Warship 2015 |editor-first1=John |editor-last1=Jordan |publisher= Conway |date=2015 |location=London |isbn=978-1-8448-6276-4 |pages=144–148, 149}}</ref>  {{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012|p=48}}  HMNZS {{HMS|Royalist|89|2}}, with some Royal Navy crew, was reactivated as a surface escort for carrier groups in Southeast Asia in 1964 to deter the threat of [[Indonesian cruiser Irian|the ''Sverdlov'' cruiser bought by Indonesia]] and in 1965 to support the amphibious carriers with air defence and general fleet support. By 1966 ''Royalist'', like ''Blake'' and ''Lion'', was unsustainable in the last year of the [[Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation|Indonesia-Malaya confrontation]]. The large {{sclass|Daring|destroyer|5||1949}}s were refitted (from 1961) with MRS3 fire-control to provide a substitute for the ''Tiger''s; their three turrets giving them an advantage over the ''Tiger''.{{citation needed|date=August 2022}}

In early December 1966, ''Tiger'' hosted an abortive series of meetings between the prime minister, [[Harold Wilson]] and [[Ian Smith]], prime minister of [[Rhodesia]] after the latter's unilateral declaration of independence. The two men boarded the ship while she was anchored in [[Algeciras Bay]]. ''Tiger'' then sailed eastwards into the Mediterranean, returning at the end of the week to [[Gibraltar]] where both men disembarked to return to their respective countries.<ref>{{cite news |title=Rhodesia: A Dramatic Meeting |url=https://time.com/archive/6833453/rhodesia-a-dramatic-meeting/ |magazine=[[Time Magazine]] |date=9 December 1966 |access-date=27 June 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |page=52 |title=Tiger, Lion & Blake, 1942-1986, the Royal Navy's Last Cruisers |first1=Neil |last1=McCart |date= 1999 }}</ref>

==Conversions==
[[File:HMS Blake (C99) and USS Nimitz (CVN-68) underway in the English Channel on 4 October 1975 (K-110412).jpg|thumb|right|''Blake'' operating in the [[English Channel]] with {{USS|Nimitz}} in 1975]]

By 1964 the Conservative Government and half the naval staff saw the ''Tiger''s as no longer affordable or credible in the surface combat or fleet air defence role and would have preferred to decommission them but given they were technically only three years old and built at immense expense, scrapping them was politically difficult.<ref>Hobbs (2015) p264</ref>

There were financial pressures in the RN due to the cost of the planned [[CVA-01]] aircraft carriers and the Escort Cruiser programme (four helicopter carrier vessels each armed with [[Sea Dart]] anti-aircraft and [[Ikara (missile)|Ikara]] anti-submarine weapons operating four "[[Boeing CH-47 Chinook|Chinook type]]" helicopters and having emergency accommodation for 700 troops).{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012 |p= 265}}<!-- ebook numbering--> Cancellation of the last four of the ten planned ''County''-class guided missile destroyers{{efn|In practice only two of the ten were cancelled}} and moving two or three of the ''Tiger''s to operational reserve <ref>Hobbs. (2015) p264-5</ref> would offset the Escort cruiser cost and replacing the ''Tiger''s or fully funded the more 'conventional cruisers, intended as replacement ships in 1960 <ref>Hobbs,(2015)p 264-5</ref>  (a) modified versions of the County-class built to the same hull dimensions and armament without Seaslug, to carry 4-6 Wessex helicopters or (b) the variant models of the Counties proposed by the RAN or (3) An enlarged version of the County design built to cruiser standards with additional workshops, parts and stores carried and some armour protection with provision for three Wessex and the American Tartar system. However, the decision to build [[Polaris (UK nuclear programme)|Britain's nuclear missile submarines]] meant the Escort cruisers proposal was postponed{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012 |p= 219-220}}<!-- ebook numbering-->, with budget pressure and the fact both the available Vickers design teams and the navy's own available naval architects were now employed on the nuclear submarines.{{Efn|there was also division over whether the Escort cruisers would be small helicopter carrier cruisers or developed [[Type 82 destroyer]]s for operation East of Suez}} Though the escort cruisers were deferred, the requirement remained and conversion of the ''Tiger''s was identified as the quickest solution in 1963.{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012 |p= 219-220}}<!-- ebook numbering--> Conversion into helicopter carriers carrying [[Westland Wessex]] helicopters for [[Royal Marine Commando]] or anti-submarine work East of Suez was approved on 24 January 1964. {{sfn|Hobbs|2015 |pp=273, 585 }}

A large hangar replaced the 'Y' turret, the forward turrets were retained for shore bombardment and anti-surface vessel work. Intended to provide extra powerful vessels to support and conduct amphibious operations east of Suez where it was difficult logistically for the Royal Navy to sustain even one operational carrier and one commando carrier in 1963–64. The original plan retained the three twin 3-inch mounts with an updated sonar and radar including [[Type 965]] and replacing the Type 992 target indicator radar with the Type 993. British Army preference in 1964 with the [[Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation|Indonesian confrontation]] building was to retain the ''Tiger''s with their 6-inch guns for shore bombardment.<ref>P. Darby. ''British Defence policy East of Suez 1947–1968''. OUP & R.I.I.A. Oxford (1993) p. 268</ref>{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012 |p= 50}}<ref>DEFC 10/457 16 February 1964 and Board of Admiralty 10/63 ADM 167/162 and 1/64 ADM 167/163</ref>

Three configurations (schemes X, Y, and Z) were considered in 1965 for the conversion to helicopter carriers. X had deck space for one helicopter and a hangar for three at the cost of the rear 6-inch turret and no maintenance space, Y gave deck space for two Wessex helicopters (only one landing or taking off at a time) and hangar for four at the cost of removing the 6-inch and 3-inch armament aft, Z was same deck space and hangar capacity as Y but two helicopters could take off (or land) at once with 6-inch and 3-inch mounts removed. Z was chosen as the best option even for a projected six-year lifespan and expected to take 15 months and cost £2 million per ship. {{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012 |p=200}}<!-- ebook version--> The work would take place at the same time as refit - predicted as 15 months. The final cost was £12 million for all three (conversion and refit) and £10.5 million for the helicopters. It was recognised that 75 pilots would also be needed at a time when the FAA was already 37 pilots short.{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012 |p=201}}

To avoid the political problem of scrapping new cruisers as well as the aircraft carriers, the [[Labour government, 1964–1970|Labour Government elected in October 1964]] decided to retain large ships for command and flagship roles and accepted the RN and MoD argument that three ''Tiger'' cruisers would replace the anti-submarine warfare role previously provided by aircraft carriers. At the time the Royal Navy was mostly concentrated on [[east of Suez]] operations and the anti-submarine deterrent role was to counter slow Indonesian and Chinese diesel-powered submarines. In theory, even one ''Tiger'' could threaten the use of nuclear [[depth charge]]s and free up space on aircraft carriers for strike and air combat aircraft.{{citation needed|date=April 2022}}

The government continued the conversion of ''Tiger'' and ''Blake'' after deciding on further ship cuts and a faster phase-out of carriers in 1968. During the conversion of ''Blake'', the plan was changed to allow the cruisers to operate four more capable [[Westland Sea King]] helicopters, although only three Sea Kings could actually ever be accommodated and serviced in the new longer hangar, which forced the replacement of the side 3-inch gun mounts with less effective [[Seacat (missile)|Seacat guided weapon system]].{{sfn|Friedman|2010| p= 321}}<ref>D. Wettern. "Tiger Class" in ''Janes Defence Annual''. Janes.(1973) London</ref> The low priority given to deterrence of Soviet submarines in the Northern Atlantic by the MoD is reflected in the decision to convert a suitable anti-submarine helicopter platform, the carrier ''Hermes'' into an [[Amphibious assault ship|amphibious carrier]] ("commando carrier").{{Efn|''Hermes'' added anti-submarine helicopter capabilities in 1977{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012 |p= 205-206}}<!-- ebook numbering-->}} The later advent of the {{sclass|Invincible|aircraft carrier|1}}s would seem to add weight to this proposal.{{citation needed|date=December 2020}} ''Hermes'' and ''Bulwark'' were larger, and offered more hangar capacity. The government's priority was to arm aircraft in [[West Germany]] with tactical and thermonuclear weapons.{{citation needed|date=May 2023}} Provision of nuclear depth charges for anti-submarine, aircraft carriers, destroyers and frigates was limited, although approval for {{sclass|Leander|frigate|5}}, {{sclass|Rothesay|frigate|5}} and {{sclass2|County|destroyer|4}} ships for triggering [[Nuclear depth bomb]]s was given in 1969 and these ships offered quieter listening platforms than the ''Tiger''s.{{citation needed|date=April 2022}}

The proposed class of four large [[Type 82 destroyer]]s (planned to accompany the CVA-01 aircraft carriers) fitted with nuclear [[Ikara (missile)|Ikara]] anti-submarine missiles could have been a more reliable nuclear deterrent,{{citation needed|date=December 2020}} but the Ikara was ultimately fitted only to carry conventional [[Mark 46 torpedo]]es and due to the [[1966 Defence White Paper]] only one Type 82 air defence destroyer, {{HMS|Bristol|D23|6}}, was built as a testbed for the weapon technologies. ''Bristol'' lacked a helicopter hangar, and was plagued by problems common with dated and complex steam propulsion.{{citation needed|date=April 2022}}

[[File:HMS Blake C99.jpg|thumb|HMS ''Blake'' approaching Portsmouh to pay off for the last time]]
With no other options, work began to convert ''Blake'' to a helicopter cruiser in 1965 and ''Tiger'' in 1968. The structural modernisation work on the hulls was difficult and expensive. However, the ships successfully served as helicopter command cruisers and provided an argument to justify the construction of their replacement, the ''Invincible''-class "through deck cruisers". ''Lion''{{'}}s conversion was cancelled due to delays and other workload in the dockyards.{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012 |p=201}}
By 1969, it was obvious that ''Blake''{{'}}s conversion was unsatisfactory. ''Lion'' remained operational until late 1965, when she was placed in reserve and used as a parts source for the conversion of ''Tiger'' and she was sold for breaking up in 1975.  The conversions left ''Tiger'' and ''Blake'' some 380 tons heavier with a full displacement of 12,080 tons and their crew complements increased by 169 to 885. Originally. ''Blake''{{'}}s conversion had been more expensive than envisaged (£5.5 million) and ''Tiger''{{'}}s £13.25 million, due to the level of inflation at the time.{{citation needed|date=April 2022}}

==Obsolescence and decommissioning==
[[File:HMS Tiger (1945) at Portsmouth Navy Day 1980 2.jpg|thumb|right|The decommissioned HMS ''Tiger'' at [[Portsmouth]] [[Navy Day#United Kingdom|Navy Days]] in 1980, showing the helicopter deck and hangar]]
[[File:HMS Tiger (1945) at Portsmouth Navy Day 1980.jpg|thumb|upright|right|HMS ''Tiger'' on the same day, showing the forward 6-inch guns which were retained in the conversion.]]

''Blake'' returned to service in 1969 and ''Tiger'' in 1972. ''Lion'' was used for spares for both of them before she was sold off and scrapped in 1975 by [[Thos. W. Ward]] at [[Inverkeithing]].<ref>Colledge & Warlow 2006 p93</ref>  Cutbacks in Royal Navy funding and manpower, under the new [[Political history of the United Kingdom (1979–present)#Conservative Government, 1979–97|Conservative government]] and the belief in the [[Hawker Siddeley Nimrod]] [[maritime patrol aircraft]] and submarines for anti-submarine operations, reduced the need for the class.{{Citation needed|date=January 2009}} The recommissioning of the carrier {{HMS|Bulwark|R08|2}} and conversion of {{HMS|Hermes|R12|2}} into a helicopter carrier, then into an anti-submarine carrier meant that they could carry twice as many Sea Kings as the ''Tiger''s further decreased their importance. In April 1978, ''Tiger'' was withdrawn from service, followed by ''Blake'' in 1979; both ships were laid up in reserve at [[Chatham Dockyard]]. When ''Blake'' was decommissioned in 1979, she was the last cruiser to serve in the Royal Navy and her passing was marked on 6 December 1979 when she fired her main guns for the last time in the [[English Channel]].{{Citation needed|date=April 2022}}

During the [[Falklands War]], ''Blake'' and ''Tiger'' were surveyed to determine their condition for reactivation. The survey determined both ships to be in good condition and they were put into dry-dock, ''Blake'' at Chatham, ''Tiger'' at Portsmouth. By mid-May, it was determined that the ships would not be completed in time to take part in the war and work ceased.{{Citation needed|date=March 2011}}

[[Chile]] showed interest in acquiring both ships, the sale did not proceed and the ships sat at anchor. ''Blake'' was sold for breaking up at the end of August 1982 and ''Tiger'' arrived at the breakers in Spain in September 1986.<ref>Colledge & Warlow 2006 p41, 352</ref>

==Ships of the class==
{|class="wikitable"
|-valign=top
! [[Pennant number|Pennant]]
! Name
! width="20%"|(a) Hull builder<br />(b) Main machinery manufacturers
! Laid down
! Launched
! Accepted into service
! Commissioned
! Decommissioned
! Estimated building cost{{efn|"Unit cost, i.e. excluding cost of certain items (e.g. aircraft, First Outfits)."<ref>Text from ''Defences Estimates''</ref> }}
|-valign=top
| C20
| {{HMS|Tiger|C20|2}} (ex-''Bellerophon'') <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| (a) & (b) [[John Brown & Company|John Brown and Co Ltd, Clydebank]].<ref name=NE1959>''Navy Estimates, 1959–60'', pages 230–1, ''List and particulars of new ships which have been accepted or are expected to be accepted into HM service during the Financial Year ended 31st March 1959''</ref>
|  1 October 1941 <ref name=Conwaysp504>Gardiner, Robert ''Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1947–1995'', pub Conway Maritime Press, 1995, {{ISBN|0-85177-605-1}} page 504.</ref>
|  25 October 1945 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
|  March 1959 <ref name=NE1959/>
|  18 March 1959 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
|  20 April 1978 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
|  £12,820,000 <ref name=NE1959/>
|-valign=top
|  C34
| {{HMS|Lion|C34|2}} (ex-''Defence'') <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| (a) [[Scotts Shipbuilding and Engineering Company|Scotts Shipbuilding & Engineering Co Ltd, Greenock]] (to launching stage)<br />(a) [[Swan Hunter & Wigham Richardson]] Wallsend-on-Tyne (for completion).<ref name=NE1961>''Navy Estimates, 1961–62'', pages 220–1, ''List and particulars of new ships which have been accepted or are expected to be accepted into HM service during the Financial Year ended 31st March 1961''</ref>
| 24 June 1942 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| 2 September 1944 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| July 1960 <ref name=NE1961/>
| 20 July 1960 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| December 1972 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| £14,375,000 <ref name=NE1961/>
|-valign=top
| C99
| {{HMS|Blake|C99|2}} (ex-''Tiger'', ex-''Blake'') <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| (a) & (b) [[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]] Govan, Glasgow.<ref name=NE1961/>
| 17 August 1942 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| 20 December 1945 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| March 1961 <ref name=NE1961/>
| 8 March 1961 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| December 1979 <ref name=Conwaysp504/>
| £14,940,000 <ref name=NE1961/>
|-
|}

==Notes==
{{notelist}}

== Citations ==
{{reflist}}

==References==
*{{cite book |first1= David K. |last1= Brown |first2= George |last2= Moore |title= Rebuilding the Royal Navy: Warship Design since 1945 |publisher= Seaforth Publishing |location= Barnsley, UK |date= 2012 |isbn=978-1-84832-150-2}}
*{{cite book|first=D. K. |last=Brown |title=Nelson to Vanguard. Warship Design & Development 1923-1945 |publisher=Chatham |location=London |date=2000 }}
*{{Cite Colledge2006}}
* {{cite book|first=David A. |last= Day |title=The Politics of War: Australia at War, 1939-45: From Churchill to MacArthur |publisher=Harper Collins |date=2003 |location= Sydney, New South Wales |isbn=978-0732273330 }}
*{{cite book |first1=Thomas R. |last1=Frame |first2=James V.P. |last2=Goldrick |first3=Peter D. |last3=Jones |title=Reflections on the Royal Australian Navy |publisher= Kangaroo |location=Kenthurst, NSW |date=1991 |isbn=978-0864173560 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=x47fAAAAMAAJ&q=%22Tiger-class%22 }} <!-- The proceedings of the first Australian Naval History Seminar in July 1989, review at https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3615&context=nwc-review -->
*{{cite book |first=Norman |last=Friedman |title= British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After |publisher=Seaforth |location= Barnsley |date=2010 |isbn=9781848320789}}
*{{cite book |last=Friedman |first=Norman |author-link=Norman Friedman |title=Fighters over the Fleet: Naval Air Defence from the Biplane to the Cold War |publisher= Seaforth Publishing |location= Barnsley, UK |date=2016 |isbn=978-1-84832-404-6}}
*{{citation |first=G. Hermon |last= Gill |author-link=G. Hermon Gill |title=The Royal Australian Navy, 1942-1945 |series=[[Australia in the War of 1939–1945]], Series 2 (Navy) |volume=II |location=Canberra |publisher= Australian War Memorial |date=1968 |url=https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C1417314}}
*{{cite book| editor-first=David |editor-last=Stevens |title=The Royal Australian Navy in World War II |publisher=Allen & Unwin |date=1996 |location=St.Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales |contribution=Chapter 1, Australian Naval Policy 1939–45 |first1=James |last1=Goldrick |isbn=978-1864480351 |edition=1}}
*{{cite book| editor-first=David |editor-last=Stevens |title=The Royal Australian Navy in World War II |publisher=Allen & Unwin |date=2005 |location=Crows Nest, New South Wales |contribution=Chapter 1, Australian Naval Policy 1939–45 |first1=James |last1=Goldrick |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DW9dcA1cF9EC |pages=1–20 |isbn=978-1741141849 |edition=2}}
*{{cite book |first= D |last=Hobbs |title=The British Carrier Strike Fleet after 1945 |location=Barnsley |publisher=Seaforth |date=2015 |isbn=978-1848321717}}
*{{cite book |first=George L. |last=Moore |editor-first1=David |editor-last1=McLean |editor-first2=Antony |editor-last2=Preston |contribution=Cruisers for the Royal Navy: The 1932-42 Programmes |title=Warship 1997-1998 |publisher=Conway |date=1997 |location= London |isbn=9780851777221}}
*{{cite book |first=George L. |last=Moore |editor-first1=John |editor-last1=Jordan |editor-first2=Stephen |editor-last2=Dent |contribution=Postwar cruiser design for the Royal Navy 1946–56 |title=Warship, 2006 |location= London |publisher=Conway |date=2006 |isbn=9781844860302}}
*{{cite book |first1=David |last1=Murfin |editor-first1=John |editor-last1=Jordan |editor-first2=Stephen |editor-last2=Dent |contribution=AA to AA: The Fijis Turn Full Circle |title= Warship, 2010 |location= London |publisher=Conway |date= 2010 |isbn=9781844861101 }}
*{{cite book|last1=Raven|first1=Alan|last2=Roberts|first2=John|title=British Cruisers of World War Two|publisher=Arms and Armour Press |location=London|year=1980|isbn=0-87021-922-7}}
*{{cite book |first1=Anthony |last1=Seldon |author-link=Anthony Seldon |title=Churchill's Indian Summer: Conservative Government of 1951-55 |edition=1 |publisher=Hodder & Stoughton Ltd |year=1981 |isbn=978-0340254561}}
*{{cite book |first=G.M. |last=Stephens |title=British Warship Designs Since 1906 |publisher=Ian Allan |location=London |date=1985 |isbn=978-0711015197}}
*{{cite news |first1=C. |last1=Walters |work=Ships Monthly |date=July 2021 |title=Tiger class cruisers |pages=22–27 |volume=56 |issue=7 }} <!-- These pages are the pages the article seems to have been on judging by the contents list -->

==External links==
{{Commons category|Tiger class cruiser}}
* [http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/rn/cruisers/tiger/ Tiger class cruiser],  Cruisers of the Royal Navy at Haze Gray & Underway 1945-2000
* [http://uboat.net/allies/warships/class.html?ID=186 ''Tiger'' class at Uboat.net]

{{Tiger class cruiser}}

[[Category:Tiger-class cruisers| ]]
[[Category:Cruiser classes]]
[[Category:Helicopter carrier classes]]
[[Category:Ship classes of the Royal Navy]]