View source for Engineering:Cruiser

A '''cruiser''' is a type of [[Engineering:Warship|warship]]. Modern cruisers are generally the largest ships in a fleet after [[Engineering:Aircraft carrier|aircraft carrier]]s and amphibious assault ships, and can usually perform several  operational roles from search-and-destroy to [[Engineering:Ocean escort|ocean escort]] to sea denial.

The term "cruiser", which has been in use for several hundred years, has changed its meaning over time. During the [[Age of Sail]], the term ''cruising'' referred to certain kinds of missions—independent scouting, commerce protection, or raiding—usually fulfilled by [[Engineering:Frigate|frigate]]s or [[Engineering:Sloop-of-war|sloops-of-war]], which functioned as the ''cruising warships'' of a fleet.

In the middle of the 19th century, ''cruiser'' came to be a classification of the ships intended for cruising distant waters, for [[Social:Commerce raiding|commerce raiding]], and for scouting for the battle fleet. Cruisers came in a wide variety of sizes, from the medium-sized [[Engineering:Protected cruiser|protected cruiser]] to large [[Engineering:Armored cruiser|armored cruiser]]s that were nearly as big (although not as powerful or as well-armored) as a pre-dreadnought [[Engineering:Battleship|battleship]].<ref>{{cite book |last = Keegan |first = John |title = The Price of Admiralty |publisher = Viking |date =1989 |location =New York |page =[https://archive.org/details/priceofadmiralty00keeg/page/277 277] |isbn =0-670-81416-4 |url = https://archive.org/details/priceofadmiralty00keeg/page/277 }}</ref> With the advent of the dreadnought battleship before [[Social:World War I|World War I]], the armored cruiser evolved into a vessel of similar scale known as the [[Engineering:Battlecruiser|battlecruiser]]. The very large battlecruisers of the World War I era that succeeded armored cruisers were now classified, along with dreadnought battleships, as [[Engineering:Capital ship|capital ship]]s.

By the early 20th century, after World War I, the direct successors to protected cruisers could be placed on a consistent scale of warship size, smaller than a battleship but larger than a [[Engineering:Destroyer|destroyer]]. In 1922, the Washington Naval Treaty placed a formal limit on these cruisers, which were defined as warships of up to 10,000 tons [[Engineering:Displacement (ship)|displacement]] carrying guns no larger than 8&nbsp;inches in [[Engineering:Caliber (artillery)|calibre]]; whilst the 1930 London Naval Treaty created a divide of two cruiser types, [[Engineering:Heavy cruiser|heavy cruiser]]s having 6.1 inches to 8 inch guns, while those with guns of 6.1 inches or less were [[Engineering:Light cruiser|light cruiser]]s. Each type were limited in total and individual tonnage which shaped cruiser design until the collapse of the treaty system just prior to the start of World War II. Some variations on the Treaty cruiser design included the German {{sclass|Deutschland|cruiser|0}} "pocket battleships", which had heavier armament at the expense of speed compared to standard heavy cruisers, and the American {{sclass|Alaska|cruiser|4}}, which was a scaled-up heavy cruiser design designated as a "cruiser-killer".

In the later 20th century, the obsolescence of the battleship left the cruiser as the largest and most powerful [[Engineering:Surface combatant|surface combatant]] ships (as opposed to the [[Social:Aerial warfare|aerial warfare]] role of [[Engineering:Aircraft carrier|aircraft carrier]]s). The role of the cruiser varied according to ship and navy, often including air defense and shore bombardment. During the [[History:Cold War|Cold War]] the Soviet Navy's cruisers had heavy [[Engineering:Anti-ship missile|anti-ship missile]] armament designed to sink NATO carrier task-forces via saturation attack. The U.S. Navy built guided-missile cruisers upon destroyer-style hulls (some called "[[Engineering:Destroyer leader|destroyer leader]]s" or [[Engineering:Frigate#Guided-missile role|"frigates"]] prior to the 1975 reclassification) primarily designed to provide air defense while often adding anti-submarine capabilities, being larger and having longer-range [[Engineering:Surface-to-air missile|surface-to-air missile]]s (SAMs) than early ''Charles F. Adams'' guided-missile destroyers tasked with the short-range air defense role. By the end of the Cold War the line between cruisers and destroyers had blurred, with the {{sclass|Ticonderoga|cruiser|0}} cruiser using the hull of the {{sclass|Spruance|destroyer|0}} destroyer but receiving the cruiser designation due to their enhanced mission and combat systems.

{{As of|2023}}, only two countries operated active duty vessels formally classed as cruisers: the United States and Russia. These cruisers are primarily armed with guided missiles, with the exceptions of the [[Engineering:Aircraft cruiser|aircraft cruiser]] {{ship|Russian aircraft carrier|Admiral Kuznetsov||2}}. {{ship|BAP|Almirante Grau|CLM-81|6}} was the last gun cruiser in service, serving with the Peruvian Navy until 2017.

Nevertheless, other classes in addition to the above may be considered cruisers due to differing classification systems. The US/NATO system includes the [[Engineering:Type 055 destroyer|Type 055]] from China<ref name="oni_2020_PLAN_ID_Guide">{{Cite report |author=United States Navy Office of Naval Intelligence |date=19 February 2020 |title=PLA Navy Identification Guide |url=https://www.oni.navy.mil/Portals/12/Intel%20agencies/China_Media/2020_China_Recce_Poster_UNCLAS.jpg?ver=2020-02-19-081430-327 |access-date=29 July 2020 |df=dmy-all }}</ref> and the ''[[Engineering:Kirov-class battlecruiser|Kirov]]'' and ''[[Engineering:Slava-class cruiser|Slava]]'' from Russia.<ref name="oni_2020_RFN_ID_Guide">{{Cite report |author=United States Navy Office of Naval Intelligence |author-link=Office of Naval Intelligence |date=19 February 2020 |title=Russian Federation Navy: 2019 Recognition and Identification Guide |url=https://www.oni.navy.mil/Portals/12/Intel%20agencies/russia/Russia_Ship_Silhouettes_Unclassified.jpg?ver=2020-02-19-081844-763 |access-date=30 March 2021 |df=dmy-all }}</ref> International Institute for Strategic Studies' "The Military Balance" defines a cruiser as a surface combatant displacing at least 9750 tonnes; with respect to vessels in service as of the early 2020s it includes the Type 055, the ''Sejong the Great'' from [[Earth:South Korea|South Korea]], the ''Atago'' and ''Maya'' from Japan and the Flight III ''Arleigh Burke'', ''[[Engineering:Ticonderoga-class cruiser|Ticonderoga]]'' and ''[[Engineering:Zumwalt-class destroyer|Zumwalt]]'' from the US.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Military Balance 2022 |url=https://www.iwp.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/The-Military-Balance-2022.pdf |work=International Institute for Strategic Studies |date=28 February 2022 |access-date=16 June 2023 }}</ref>

==Early history==
The term "cruiser" or "cruizer"<ref>The alternative spelling could be found at least as late as 1900: Jackie Fisher wrote "We a require an increase.... in all classes of cruizer" in a letter dated 20th Feb 1900. Mackay, R. ''Fisher of Kilverstone'', p. 242.</ref> was first commonly used in the 17th century to refer to an independent warship. "Cruiser" meant the purpose or mission of a ship, rather than a category of vessel. However, the term was nonetheless used to mean a smaller, faster warship suitable for such a role. In the 17th century, the [[Engineering:Ship of the line|ship of the line]] was generally too large, inflexible, and expensive to be dispatched on long-range missions (for instance, to the Americas), and too strategically important to be put at risk of fouling and foundering by continual patrol duties.<ref>{{Cite book|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Fp63wWByImQC&q=cruiser+etymology&pg=PA80|title=The Language of Sailing|last=Mayne|first=Richard|date=2000|publisher=Taylor & Francis|isbn=978-1-57958-278-4|pages=80|language=en|chapter=cruiser}}</ref>

The Dutch navy was noted for its cruisers in the 17th century, while the Royal Navy—and later French and Spanish navies—subsequently caught up in terms of their numbers and deployment. The British Cruiser and Convoy Acts were an attempt by mercantile interests in Parliament to focus the Navy on commerce defence and raiding with cruisers, rather than the more scarce and expensive ships of the line.<ref>Rodger, N. A. M.: ''The Command of the Ocean, A Naval History of Britain 1649–1815''. Allen Lane, London, 2004. {{ISBN|0-7139-9411-8}}</ref> During the 18th century the frigate became the preeminent type of cruiser. A frigate was a small, fast, long range, lightly armed (single gun-deck) ship used for scouting, carrying dispatches, and disrupting enemy trade. The other principal type of cruiser was the sloop, but many other miscellaneous types of ship were used as well.

==Steam cruisers==
During the 19th century, navies began to use steam power for their fleets. The 1840s saw the construction of experimental steam-powered frigates and sloops. By the middle of the 1850s, the British and U.S. Navies were both building steam frigates with very long hulls and a heavy gun armament, for instance {{USS|Merrimack|1855|6}} or {{HMS|Mersey|1858|2}}.<ref>Parkes, p.8</ref>

The 1860s saw the introduction of the [[Software:Ironclad|ironclad]]. The first ironclads were frigates, in the sense of having one gun deck; however, they were also clearly the most powerful ships in the navy, and were principally to serve in the line of battle. In spite of their great speed, they would have been wasted in a cruising role.<ref>Parkes, p.17</ref>

The French constructed a number of smaller ironclads for overseas cruising duties, starting with the {{ship|French ironclad|Belliqueuse||2}}, commissioned 1865. These "station ironclads" were the beginning of the development of the armored cruisers, a type of ironclad specifically for the traditional cruiser missions of fast, independent raiding and patrol.
[[File:PostcardMarco Polo.jpg|thumb|''[[Italian cruiser Marco Polo|Marco Polo]]'', the Royal Italian Navy's first armored cruiser]]
The first true armored cruiser was the Russian {{ship|Russian cruiser|General-Admiral||2}}, completed in 1874, and followed by the British {{HMS|Shannon|1875|2}} a few years later.

Until the 1890s armored cruisers were still built with masts for a full sailing rig, to enable them to operate far from friendly coaling stations.<ref>Hill, Richard: ''War at Sea in the Ironclad Age''. Cassell, London, 2000. {{ISBN|0-304-35273-X}}.</ref>

Unarmored cruising warships, built out of wood, iron, steel or a combination of those materials, remained popular until towards the end of the 19th century. The ironclad's armor often meant that they were limited to short range under steam, and many ironclads were unsuited to long-range missions or for work in distant colonies. The unarmored cruiser—often a [[Engineering:Screw sloop|screw sloop]] or screw frigate—could continue in this role. Even though mid- to late-19th century cruisers typically carried up-to-date guns firing explosive [[Engineering:Shell (projectile)|shell]]s, they were unable to face ironclads in combat. This was evidenced by the clash between {{HMS|Shah|1873|6}}, a modern British cruiser, and the Peruvian [[Engineering:Monitor (warship)|monitor]] ''Huáscar''. Even though the Peruvian vessel was obsolete by the time of the encounter, it stood up well to roughly 50 hits from British shells. 
==Steel cruisers==
{{main|Protected cruiser}}[[File:Cruiser_Aurora.jpg|thumb|The Russian protected cruiser {{ship|Russian cruiser|Aurora||2}}]]In the 1880s, naval engineers began to use [[Chemistry:Steel|steel]] as a material for construction and armament. A steel cruiser could be lighter and faster than one built of iron or wood. The ''Jeune Ecole'' school of naval doctrine suggested that a fleet of fast unprotected steel cruisers were ideal for [[Social:Commerce raiding|commerce raiding]], while the [[Engineering:Torpedo boat|torpedo boat]] would be able to destroy an enemy battleship fleet.

Steel also offered the cruiser a way of acquiring the protection needed to survive in combat. Steel armor was considerably stronger, for the same weight, than iron. By putting a relatively thin layer of steel armor above the vital parts of the ship, and by placing the coal bunkers where they might stop shellfire, a useful degree of protection could be achieved without slowing the ship too much. Protected cruisers generally had an armored deck with sloped sides, providing similar protection to a light armored belt at less weight and expense.

The first protected cruiser was the Chilean ship ''Esmeralda'', launched in 1883. Produced by a shipyard at Elswick, in Britain, owned by [[Company:Armstrong Whitworth|Armstrong]], she inspired a group of protected cruisers produced in the same yard and known as the "Elswick cruisers". Her [[Engineering:Forecastle|forecastle]], [[Engineering:Poop deck|poop deck]] and the wooden board deck had been removed, replaced with an armored deck.

''Esmeralda''{{'}}s armament consisted of fore and aft 10-inch (25.4&nbsp;cm) guns and 6-inch (15.2&nbsp;cm) guns in the midships positions. It could reach a speed of {{convert|18|kn|km/h|0}}, and was propelled by steam alone. It also had a displacement of less than 3,000 tons. During the two following decades, this cruiser type came to be the inspiration for combining heavy artillery, high speed and low displacement.

===Torpedo cruisers===
{{main|Engineering:Torpedo cruiser}}
The torpedo cruiser (known in the Royal Navy as the [[Engineering:Torpedo gunboat|torpedo gunboat]]) was a smaller unarmored cruiser, which emerged in the 1880s–1890s. These ships could reach speeds up to {{convert|20|kn|km/h|0}} and were armed with medium to small calibre guns as well as torpedoes. These ships were tasked with guard and reconnaissance duties, to repeat signals and all other fleet duties for which smaller vessels were suited. These ships could also function as flagships of torpedo boat flotillas. After the 1900s, these ships were usually traded for faster ships with better sea going qualities.

===Pre-dreadnought armored cruisers===
{{main|Engineering:Armored cruiser}}
Steel also affected the construction and role of armored cruisers. Steel meant that new designs of battleship, later known as [[Engineering:Pre-dreadnought battleship|pre-dreadnought battleship]]s, would be able to combine firepower and armor with better endurance and speed than ever before. The armored cruisers of the 1890s and early 1900s greatly resembled the battleships of the day; they tended to carry slightly smaller main armament ({{convert|7.5|to|10|in|mm|adj=on}} rather than 12-inch) and have somewhat thinner armor in exchange for a faster speed (perhaps {{convert|21|to|23|kn|km/h}} rather than 18). Because of their similarity, the lines between battleships and armored cruisers became blurred.

==Early 20th century==
{{see also|Engineering:Scout cruiser}}
Shortly after the turn of the 20th century there were difficult questions about the design of future cruisers. Modern armored cruisers, almost as powerful as battleships, were also fast enough to outrun older protected and unarmored cruisers. In the Royal Navy, Jackie Fisher cut back hugely on older vessels, including many cruisers of different sorts, calling them "a miser's hoard of useless junk" that any modern cruiser would sweep from the seas. The [[Engineering:Scout cruiser|scout cruiser]] also appeared in this era; this was a small, fast, lightly armed and armored type designed primarily for reconnaissance. The Royal Navy and the Italian Navy were the primary developers of this type.

===Battle cruisers===
{{main|Battlecruiser}}The growing size and power of the armored cruiser resulted in the battlecruiser, with an armament and size similar to the revolutionary new dreadnought battleship; the brainchild of British admiral Jackie Fisher. He believed that to ensure British naval dominance in its overseas colonial possessions, a fleet of large, fast, powerfully armed vessels which would be able to hunt down and mop up enemy cruisers and armored cruisers with overwhelming fire superiority was needed. They were equipped with the same gun types as battleships, though usually with fewer guns, and were intended to engage enemy capital ships as well. This type of vessel came to be known as the ''battlecruiser'', and the first were commissioned into the Royal Navy in 1907. The British battlecruisers sacrificed protection for speed, as they were intended to "choose their range" (to the enemy) with superior speed and only engage the enemy at long range. When engaged at moderate ranges, the lack of protection combined with unsafe ammunition handling practices became tragic with the loss of three of them at the Battle of Jutland. Germany and eventually Japan followed suit to build these vessels, replacing armored cruisers in most frontline roles. German battlecruisers were generally better protected but slower than British battlecruisers. Battlecruisers were in many cases larger and more expensive than contemporary battleships, due to their much larger propulsion plants.

===Light cruisers===
[[File:USS Huntington (CL-107) at Naples, Italy, circa in August 1948 (NH 93200).jpg|thumb|[[Fargo-class cruiser|''Fargo''-class cruiser]]]]
{{main|Engineering:Light cruiser}}

At around the same time as the battlecruiser was developed, the distinction between the armored and the unarmored cruiser finally disappeared. By the British {{sclass2|Town|cruiser (1910)|4}}, the first of which was launched in 1909, it was possible for a small, fast cruiser to carry both belt and deck armor, particularly when turbine engines were adopted. These light armored cruisers began to occupy the traditional cruiser role once it became clear that the battlecruiser squadrons were required to operate with the battle fleet.

===Flotilla leaders===
{{main|Engineering:Flotilla leader}}
Some light cruisers were built specifically to act as the leaders of flotillas of destroyers.

===Coastguard cruisers===
[[File:Romanian gunboat Grivița at Nicopol, 1913.jpg|thumb|Romanian coastguard cruiser ''Grivița'']]
These vessels were essentially large coastal patrol boats armed with multiple light guns. One such warship was ''Grivița'' of the Romanian Navy. She displaced 110 tons, measured 60 meters in length and was armed with four light guns.<ref>John Evelyn Moore, ''Jane's Fighting Ships of World War I'', Military Press, 1990, p. 295</ref>

===Auxiliary cruisers===
{{main|Engineering:Auxiliary cruiser}}

The auxiliary cruiser was a merchant ship hastily armed with small guns on the outbreak of war. Auxiliary cruisers were used to fill gaps in their long-range lines or provide escort for other cargo ships, although they generally proved to be useless in this role because of their low speed, feeble firepower and lack of armor. In both world wars the Germans also used small merchant ships armed with cruiser guns to surprise Allied merchant ships.

Some large liners were armed in the same way. In British service these were known as Armed Merchant Cruisers (AMC). The Germans and French used them in World War I as raiders because of their high speed (around 30&nbsp;knots (56&nbsp;km/h)), and they were used again as raiders early in World War II by the Germans and Japanese. In both the First World War and in the early part of the Second, they were used as convoy escorts by the British.

===World War I===
Cruisers were one of the workhorse types of warship during World War I. By the time of World War I, cruisers had accelerated their development and improved their quality significantly, with drainage volume reaching 3000–4000 tons, a speed of 25–30 knots and a [[Engineering:Caliber|calibre]] of 127–152&nbsp;mm.

==Mid-20th century==
[[File:Armando Diaz AllenGren3.jpg|thumb|right|Italian cruiser {{ship|Italian cruiser|Armando Diaz||2}}.]]

Naval construction in the 1920s and 1930s was limited by international treaties designed to prevent the repetition of the [[Engineering:Dreadnought|Dreadnought]] arms race of the early 20th century. The Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 placed limits on the construction of ships with a standard displacement of more than 10,000 [[Ton|ton]]s and an armament of guns larger than 8-inch (203&nbsp;mm). A number of navies commissioned classes of cruisers at the top end of this limit, known as "treaty cruisers".<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 2, 167</ref>

The London Naval Treaty in 1930 then formalised the distinction between these "heavy" cruisers and light cruisers: a "heavy" cruiser was one with guns of more than 6.1-inch (155&nbsp;mm) calibre.<ref>Friedman cruisers, p. 164</ref> The Second London Naval Treaty attempted to reduce the tonnage of new cruisers to 8,000 or less, but this had little effect; Japan and Germany were not signatories, and some navies had already begun to evade treaty limitations on warships. The first London treaty did touch off a period of the major powers building 6-inch or 6.1-inch gunned cruisers, nominally of 10,000 tons and with up to fifteen guns, the treaty limit. Thus, most light cruisers ordered after 1930 were the size of heavy cruisers but with more and smaller guns. The Imperial Japanese Navy began this new race with the {{sclass|Mogami|cruiser|4}}, launched in 1934.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 190</ref> After building smaller light cruisers with six or eight 6-inch guns launched 1931–35, the British Royal Navy followed with the 12-gun {{sclass|Southampton|cruiser|4}} in 1936.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 30–31</ref> To match foreign developments and potential treaty violations, in the 1930s the US developed a series of new guns firing "super-heavy" armor piercing ammunition; these included the 6-inch (152&nbsp;mm)/47 caliber gun Mark 16 introduced with the 15-gun {{sclass|Brooklyn|cruiser|1}}s in 1936,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_8-55_mk12-15.php|title=USA 8"/55 (20.3 cm) Marks 12 and 15|website=www.navweaps.com – NavWeaps}}</ref> and the 8-inch (203&nbsp;mm)/55 caliber gun Mark 12 introduced with {{USS|Wichita|CA-45|6}} in 1937.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_6-47_mk16.php|title=USA 6"/47 (15.2 cm) Mark 16|website=www.navweaps.com – NavWeaps}}</ref><ref>Friedman cruisers, pp. 217–220</ref>

===Heavy cruisers===
{{see also|Engineering:Heavy cruiser}}
[[File:USS Salt Lake City (CA-25) during the early 1930s.jpg|thumb|[[USS Salt Lake City (CA-25)|USS ''Salt Lake City'' (CA-25)]]]]
The heavy cruiser was a type of cruiser designed for long range, high speed and an armament of naval guns around 203&nbsp;mm (8&nbsp;in) in calibre. The first heavy cruisers were built in 1915, although it only became a widespread classification following the London Naval Treaty in 1930. The heavy cruiser's immediate precursors were the light cruiser designs of the 1910s and 1920s; the US lightly armored 8-inch "treaty cruisers" of the 1920s (built under the Washington Naval Treaty) were originally classed as light cruisers until the London Treaty forced their redesignation.<ref>Bauer and Roberts, pp. 136–138</ref>

Initially, all cruisers built under the Washington treaty had torpedo tubes, regardless of nationality. However, in 1930, results of war games caused the US [[Organization:Naval War College|Naval War College]] to conclude that only perhaps half of cruisers would use their torpedoes in action. In a surface engagement, long-range gunfire and destroyer torpedoes would decide the issue, and under air attack numerous cruisers would be lost before getting within torpedo range. Thus, beginning with {{USS|New Orleans|CA-32|6}} launched in 1933, new cruisers were built without torpedoes, and torpedoes were removed from older heavy cruisers due to the perceived hazard of their being exploded by shell fire.<ref>Friedman cruisers, p. 150</ref> The Japanese took exactly the opposite approach with cruiser torpedoes, and this proved crucial to their tactical victories in most of the numerous cruiser actions of 1942. Beginning with the {{sclass|Furutaka|cruiser|4}} launched in 1925, every Japanese heavy cruiser was armed with {{convert|24|in|adj=on}} torpedoes, larger than any other cruisers'.<ref name=Watts1>Watts, pp. 79–114</ref> By 1933 Japan had developed the Type 93 torpedo for these ships, eventually nicknamed "Long Lance" by the Allies. This type used compressed oxygen instead of compressed air, allowing it to achieve ranges and speeds unmatched by other torpedoes. It could achieve a range of {{convert|22000|m|yd}} at {{convert|50|kn}}, compared with the US Mark 15 torpedo with {{convert|5500|m|yd}} at {{convert|45|kn}}. The Mark 15 had a maximum range of {{convert|13500|m|yd}} at {{convert|26.5|kn}}, still well below the "Long Lance".<ref>{{cite web | title = Torpedo History: Torpedo Mk15 | url = http://www.history.navy.mil/museums/keyport/html/part2.htm | access-date = 25 May 2016 | archive-date = 15 September 2014 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20140915054904/http://www.history.navy.mil/museums/keyport/html/part2.htm | url-status = dead }}</ref> The Japanese were able to keep the Type 93's performance and oxygen power secret until the Allies recovered one in early 1943, thus the Allies faced a great threat they were not aware of in 1942. The Type 93 was also fitted to Japanese post-1930 light cruisers and the majority of their World War II destroyers.<ref name=Watts1/><ref name=Watts2>Watts, pp. 124–158</ref>

Heavy cruisers continued in use until after World War II, with some converted to guided-missile cruisers for air defense or strategic attack and some used for shore bombardment by the United States in the Korean War and the Vietnam War.

===German pocket battleships===
The German {{sclass|Deutschland|cruiser|4}} was a series of three ''Panzerschiffe'' ("armored ships"), a form of heavily armed cruiser, designed and built by the German Reichsmarine in nominal accordance with restrictions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles. All three ships were launched between 1931 and 1934, and served with Germany's Kriegsmarine during [[Social:World War II|World War II]]. Within the Kriegsmarine, the Panzerschiffe had the propaganda value of capital ships: heavy cruisers with battleship guns, torpedoes, and scout aircraft. (The similar Swedish ''Panzerschiffe'' were tactically used as centers of battlefleets and not as cruisers.) They were deployed by Nazi Germany in support of the German interests in the Spanish Civil War. Panzerschiff ''Admiral Graf Spee'' represented Germany in the 1937 Coronation Fleet Review.

The British press referred to the vessels as pocket battleships, in reference to the heavy firepower contained in the relatively small vessels; they were considerably smaller than contemporary battleships, though at 28 knots were slower than battlecruisers. At up to 16,000 tons at full load, they were not treaty compliant 10,000 ton cruisers. And although their displacement and scale of armor protection were that of a heavy cruiser, their {{convert|280|mm|abbr=on}} main armament was heavier than the {{convert|203|mm|abbr=on|0}} guns of other nations' heavy cruisers, and the latter two members of the class also had tall conning towers resembling battleships. The Panzerschiffe were listed as Ersatz replacements for retiring Reichsmarine coastal defense battleships, which added to their propaganda status in the Kriegsmarine as Ersatz battleships; within the Royal Navy, only battlecruisers HMS ''Hood'', HMS ''Repulse'' and HMS ''Renown'' were capable of both outrunning and outgunning the Panzerschiffe. They were seen in the 1930s as a new and serious threat by both Britain and France. While the Kriegsmarine reclassified them as heavy cruisers in 1940, ''Deutschland''-class ships continued to be called ''pocket battleships'' in the popular press.

===Large cruiser===
The American {{sclass|Alaska|cruiser|4}} represented the supersized cruiser design. Due to the German [[Engineering:Deutschland-class cruiser|pocket battleships]], the {{sclass|Scharnhorst|battleship|4}}, and rumored Japanese "super cruisers", all of which carried guns larger than the standard heavy cruiser's 8-inch size dictated by naval treaty limitations, the ''Alaska''s were intended to be "cruiser-killers". While superficially appearing similar to a battleship/battlecruiser and mounting three triple turrets of 12-inch guns, their actual protection scheme and design resembled a scaled-up heavy cruiser design. Their hull classification symbol of CB (cruiser, big) reflected this.<ref>Friedman cruisers, pp. 286–305</ref>

===Anti-aircraft cruisers===
A precursor to the anti-aircraft cruiser was the Romanian British-built protected cruiser ''Elisabeta''. After the start of World War I, her four 120&nbsp;mm main guns were landed and her four 75&nbsp;mm (12-pounder) secondary guns were modified for anti-aircraft fire.<ref>John Evelyn Moore, ''Jane's Fighting Ships of World War I'', Military Press, 1990, p. 294</ref>

The development of the anti-aircraft cruiser began in 1935 when the Royal Navy re-armed {{HMS|Coventry|D43|6}} and {{HMS|Curlew|D42|6}}. Torpedo tubes and {{convert|6|in|mm|adj=on|0}} low-angle guns were removed from these World War I light cruisers and replaced with ten {{convert|4|in|mm|adj=on|0}} high-angle guns, with appropriate fire-control equipment to provide larger warships with protection against high-altitude bombers.<ref>Friedman, Norman "Anti-Aircraft Cruisers: The Life of a Class" ''United States Naval Institute Proceedings'' January 1965 p. 86</ref>

A tactical shortcoming was recognised after completing six additional conversions of {{sclass2|C|cruiser|1}}s. Having sacrificed anti-ship weapons for anti-aircraft armament, the converted anti-aircraft cruisers might themselves need protection against surface units. New construction was undertaken to create cruisers of similar speed and displacement with dual-purpose guns, which offered good anti-aircraft protection with anti-surface capability for the traditional light cruiser role of defending capital ships from destroyers.

The first purpose built anti-aircraft cruiser was the British {{sclass|Dido|cruiser|4}}, completed in 1940–42. The US Navy's {{sclass|Atlanta|cruiser|0}} cruisers (CLAA: light cruiser with anti-aircraft capability) were designed to match the capabilities of the Royal Navy. Both ''Dido'' and ''Atlanta'' cruisers initially carried torpedo tubes; the ''Atlanta'' cruisers at least were originally designed as destroyer leaders, were originally designated CL ([[Engineering:Light cruiser|light cruiser]]), and did not receive the CLAA designation until 1949.<ref>Friedman cruisers, pp. 224–229</ref><ref>Bauer and Roberts, p. 150</ref>

The concept of the quick-firing dual-purpose gun anti-aircraft cruiser was embraced in several designs completed too late to see combat, including: {{USS|Worcester|CL-144|6}}, completed in 1948; {{USS|Roanoke|CL-145|6}}, completed in 1949; two {{sclass|Tre Kronor|cruiser|2}}s, completed in 1947; two {{sclass|De Zeven Provinciën|cruiser|2}}s, completed in 1953; {{ship|French cruiser|De Grasse|C610|2}}, completed in 1955; {{ship|French cruiser|Colbert|C611|2}}, completed in 1959; and {{HMS|Tiger|C20|6}}, {{HMS|Lion|C34|6}} and {{HMS|Blake|C99|6}}, all completed between 1959 and 1961.<ref>Friedman, Norman "Anti-Aircraft Cruisers: The Life of a Class" ''United States Naval Institute Proceedings'' January 1965 pp. 96–97</ref>

Most post-World War II cruisers were tasked with air defense roles. In the early 1950s, advances in aviation technology forced the move from anti-aircraft artillery to anti-aircraft missiles. Therefore, most modern cruisers are equipped with surface-to-air missiles as their main armament. Today's equivalent of the anti-aircraft cruiser is the '''guided-missile cruiser''' (CAG/CLG/CG/CGN).

==World War II==
Cruisers participated in a number of surface engagements in the early part of World War II, along with escorting carrier and battleship groups throughout the war. In the later part of the war, Allied cruisers primarily provided anti-aircraft (AA) escort for carrier groups and performed shore bombardment. Japanese cruisers similarly escorted carrier and battleship groups in the later part of the war, notably in the disastrous Battle of the Philippine Sea and Battle of Leyte Gulf. In 1937–41 the Japanese, having withdrawn from all naval treaties, upgraded or completed the ''Mogami'' and {{sclass|Tone|cruiser|4}}es as heavy cruisers by replacing their {{convert|6.1|in|mm|abbr=on|0}} triple turrets with {{convert|8|in|mm|abbr=on|0}} twin turrets.<ref>Watts, pp. 99–105</ref> Torpedo refits were also made to most heavy cruisers, resulting in up to sixteen {{convert|24|in|mm|abbr=on}} tubes per ship, plus a set of reloads.<ref>Watts, pp. 79–105</ref> In 1941 the 1920s light cruisers {{ship|Japanese cruiser|Ōi||2}} and {{ship|Japanese cruiser|Kitakami||2}} were converted to [[Engineering:Torpedo cruiser|torpedo cruiser]]s with four {{convert|5.5|in|mm|abbr=on}} guns and forty {{convert|24|in|mm|abbr=on|0}} torpedo tubes. In 1944 ''Kitakami'' was further converted to carry up to eight ''Kaiten'' [[Engineering:Human torpedo|human torpedo]]es in place of ordinary torpedoes.<ref>Watts, pp. 70–73</ref>

Before World War II, cruisers were mainly divided into three types: heavy cruisers, light cruisers and auxiliary cruisers. Heavy cruiser tonnage reached 20–30,000 tons, speed 32–34 knots, endurance of more than 10,000 nautical miles, armor thickness of 127–203&nbsp;mm. Heavy cruisers were equipped with eight or nine {{convert|8|in|mm|abbr=on|0}} guns with a range of more than 20 nautical miles. They were mainly used to attack enemy surface ships and shore-based targets. In addition, there were 10–16 secondary guns with a caliber of less than {{convert|130|mm|in|abbr=on}}. Also, dozens of automatic antiaircraft guns were installed to fight aircraft and small vessels such as torpedo boats. For example, in World War II, American Alaska-class cruisers were more than 30,000 tons, equipped with nine {{convert|12|in|mm|abbr=on|0}} guns. Some cruisers could also carry three or four seaplanes to correct the accuracy of gunfire and perform reconnaissance.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Stille |first=Mark |title=Imperial Japanese Navy Heavy Cruisers 1941–45. |publisher=Osprey Publishing |year=2014 |pages=38–40}}</ref>

Together with battleships, these heavy cruisers formed powerful naval task forces, which dominated the world's oceans for more than a century. After the signing of the Washington Treaty on Arms Limitation in 1922, the tonnage and quantity of battleships, aircraft carriers and cruisers were severely restricted. In order not to violate the treaty, countries began to develop light cruisers. Light cruisers of the 1920s had displacements of less than 10,000 tons and a speed of up to 35 knots. They were equipped with 6–12 main guns with a caliber of 127–133&nbsp;mm (5–5.5 inches). In addition, they were equipped with 8–12 secondary guns under 127&nbsp;mm (5&nbsp;in) and dozens of small caliber cannons, as well as torpedoes and mines. Some ships also carried 2–4 seaplanes, mainly for reconnaissance. In 1930 the London Naval Treaty allowed large light cruisers to be built, with the same tonnage as heavy cruisers and armed with up to fifteen {{convert|155|mm|in|abbr=on}} guns. The Japanese ''Mogami'' class were built to this treaty's limit, the Americans and British also built similar ships. However, in 1939 the ''Mogami''s were refitted as heavy cruisers with ten {{convert|203|mm|in|abbr=on}} guns.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lacroix |first=Eric |title=Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War |last2=Wells II |first2=Linton |publisher=Naval Institute Press |year=1997 |pages=331–332}}</ref>

===1939 to Pearl Harbor===
In December 1939, three British cruisers engaged the German "pocket battleship" ''Admiral Graf Spee'' (which was on a commerce raiding mission) in the Battle of the River Plate; German cruiser Admiral Graf Spee then took refuge in neutral [[Place:Montevideo|Montevideo]], Uruguay. By broadcasting messages indicating capital ships were in the area, the British caused ''Admiral Graf Spee''{{'}}s captain to think he faced a hopeless situation while low on ammunition and order his ship scuttled.<ref>Churchill 1948, pp. 525–526</ref> On 8 June 1940 the German capital ships {{ship|German battleship|Scharnhorst||2}} and {{ship|German battleship|Gneisenau||2}}, classed as battleships but with large cruiser armament, sank the aircraft carrier {{HMS|Glorious}} with gunfire.<ref>Howland, p. 52</ref> From October 1940 through March 1941 the German heavy cruiser (also known as "pocket battleship", see above) {{ship|German cruiser|Admiral Scheer||2}} conducted a successful commerce-raiding voyage in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans.<ref>Rohwer, pp. 48–65</ref>

On 27 May 1941, {{HMS|Dorsetshire|40|6}} attempted to finish off the German battleship {{ship|German battleship|Bismarck||2}} with torpedoes, probably causing the Germans to scuttle the ship.<ref>Kennedy, p. 204</ref> ''Bismarck'' (accompanied by the heavy cruiser {{ship|German cruiser|Prinz Eugen||2}}) previously sank the battlecruiser {{HMS|Hood}} and damaged the battleship {{HMS|Prince of Wales|53|6}} with gunfire in the Battle of the Denmark Strait.<ref>Kennedy, p. 45</ref>

On 19 November 1941 {{HMAS|Sydney|D48|6}} sank in a mutually fatal engagement with the German raider ''Kormoran'' in the Indian Ocean near Western Australia.

===Atlantic, Mediterranean, and Indian Ocean operations 1942–1944===
Twenty-three British cruisers were lost to enemy action, mostly to air attack and submarines, in operations in the Atlantic, Mediterranean, and Indian Ocean. Sixteen of these losses were in the Mediterranean.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.naval-history.net/WW2aBritishLosses10tables.htm|title=1945|website=www.naval-history.net}}</ref> The British included cruisers and anti-aircraft cruisers among convoy escorts in the Mediterranean and to northern Russia due to the threat of surface and air attack. Almost all cruisers in World War II were vulnerable to submarine attack due to a lack of anti-submarine sonar and weapons. Also, until 1943–44 the light anti-aircraft armament of most cruisers was weak.

In July 1942 an attempt to intercept Convoy PQ 17 with surface ships, including the heavy cruiser ''Admiral Scheer'', failed due to multiple German warships grounding, but air and submarine attacks sank 2/3 of the convoy's ships.<ref>Rohwer, pp. 175–176</ref> In August 1942 ''Admiral Scheer'' conducted Operation Wunderland, a solo raid into northern Russia's Kara Sea. She bombarded Dikson Island but otherwise had little success.<ref>Zetterling and Tamelander, pp. 150–152</ref>

On 31 December 1942 the Battle of the Barents Sea was fought, a rare action for a Murmansk run because it involved cruisers on both sides. Four British destroyers and five other vessels were escorting Convoy JW 51B from the UK to the Murmansk area. Another British force of two cruisers ({{HMS|Sheffield|C24|6}} and {{HMS|Jamaica|44|6}}) and two destroyers were in the area. Two heavy cruisers (one the "pocket battleship" ''Lützow''), accompanied by six destroyers, attempted to intercept the convoy near [[Earth:North Cape (Norway)|North Cape]] after it was spotted by a U-boat. Although the Germans sank a British destroyer and a minesweeper (also damaging another destroyer), they failed to damage any of the convoy's merchant ships. A German destroyer was lost and a heavy cruiser damaged. Both sides withdrew from the action for fear of the other side's torpedoes.<ref>{{cite web |last=Kappes |first=Irwin J. |date=23 February 2010|title=Battle of the Barents Sea |publisher=German-Navy.De |url=http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/articles/feature5.html |access-date=29 May 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110607120149/http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/articles/feature5.html |url-status=live |archive-date=7 June 2011}}</ref>

On 26 December 1943 the German capital ship ''Scharnhorst'' was sunk while attempting to intercept a convoy in the Battle of the North Cape. The British force that sank her was led by Vice Admiral Bruce Fraser in the battleship {{HMS|Duke of York|17|6}}, accompanied by four cruisers and nine destroyers. One of the cruisers was the preserved {{HMS|Belfast|C35|6}}.<ref>Garzke and Dulin, pp. 167–175</ref>

''Scharnhorst''{{'}}s sister ''Gneisenau'', damaged by a mine and a submerged wreck in the Channel Dash of 13 February 1942 and repaired, was further damaged by a British air attack on 27 February 1942. She began a conversion process to mount six {{convert|38|cm|abbr=on}} guns instead of nine {{convert|28|cm|abbr=on}} guns, but in early 1943 Hitler (angered by the recent failure at the Battle of the Barents Sea) ordered her disarmed and her armament used as coast defence weapons. One 28&nbsp;cm triple turret survives near [[Place:Trondheim|Trondheim]], Norway.<ref>Garzke and Dulin, pp. 148–150</ref>

===Pearl Harbor through Dutch East Indies campaign===
The attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 brought the United States into the war, but with eight battleships sunk or damaged by air attack.<ref>Morison vol III, p. 158</ref> On 10 December 1941 HMS ''Prince of Wales'' and the battlecruiser {{HMS|Repulse|1916|6}} were sunk by land-based torpedo bombers northeast of Singapore. It was now clear that surface ships could not operate near enemy aircraft in daylight without air cover; most surface actions of 1942–43 were fought at night as a result. Generally, both sides avoided risking their battleships until the Japanese attack at Leyte Gulf in 1944.<ref>Morison vol III, pp. 188–190</ref><ref>Morison vol XII</ref>

Six of the battleships from Pearl Harbor were eventually returned to service, but no US battleships engaged Japanese surface units at sea until the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal in November 1942, and not thereafter until the Battle of Surigao Strait in October 1944.<ref name=FriedBat1>Friedman battleships, pp. 345–347</ref> {{USS|North Carolina|BB-55|6}} was on hand for the initial landings at Guadalcanal on 7 August 1942, and escorted carriers in the Battle of the Eastern Solomons later that month. However, on 15 September she was torpedoed while escorting a carrier group and had to return to the US for repairs.<ref name=FriedBat1/>

Generally, the Japanese held their capital ships out of all surface actions in the 1941–42 campaigns or they failed to close with the enemy; the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal in November 1942 was the sole exception. The four {{sclass|Kongō|battlecruiser|0}} ships performed shore bombardment in Malaya, Singapore, and Guadalcanal and escorted the raid on Ceylon and other carrier forces in 1941–42. Japanese capital ships also participated ineffectively (due to not being engaged) in the Battle of Midway and the simultaneous Aleutian diversion; in both cases they were in battleship groups well to the rear of the carrier groups. Sources state that {{ship|Japanese battleship|Yamato||2}} sat out the entire Guadalcanal campaign due to lack of high-explosive bombardment shells, poor nautical charts of the area, and high fuel consumption.<ref name=G&D54>Garzke and Dulin (1985), p. 54</ref><ref name="jackson128">Jackson (2000), p. 128</ref> It is likely that the poor charts affected other battleships as well. Except for the ''Kongō'' class, most Japanese battleships spent the critical year of 1942, in which most of the war's surface actions occurred, in home waters or at the fortified base of Truk, far from any risk of attacking or being attacked.

From 1942 through mid-1943, US and other Allied cruisers were the heavy units on their side of the numerous surface engagements of the Dutch East Indies campaign, the Guadalcanal campaign, and subsequent Solomon Islands fighting; they were usually opposed by strong Japanese cruiser-led forces equipped with Long Lance torpedoes. Destroyers also participated heavily on both sides of these battles and provided essentially all the torpedoes on the Allied side, with some battles in these campaigns fought entirely between destroyers.

Along with lack of knowledge of the capabilities of the Long Lance torpedo, the US Navy was hampered by a deficiency it was initially unaware of—the unreliability of the Mark 15 torpedo used by destroyers. This weapon shared the Mark 6 exploder and other problems with the more famously unreliable Mark 14 torpedo; the most common results of firing either of these torpedoes were a dud or a miss. The problems with these weapons were not solved until mid-1943, after almost all of the surface actions in the Solomon Islands had taken place.<ref name=BuOrd1>Rowland and Boyd, pp. 93–94</ref> Another factor that shaped the early surface actions was the pre-war training of both sides. The US Navy concentrated on long-range 8-inch gunfire as their primary offensive weapon, leading to rigid battle line tactics, while the Japanese trained extensively for nighttime torpedo attacks.<ref name=FriedCru1>Friedman cruisers, pp. 312–315</ref><ref name=FriedDes1>Friedman destroyers, pp. 168–172</ref> Since all post-1930 Japanese cruisers had 8-inch guns by 1941, almost all of the US Navy's cruisers in the South Pacific in 1942 were the 8-inch-gunned (203&nbsp;mm) "treaty cruisers"; most of the 6-inch-gunned (152&nbsp;mm) cruisers were deployed in the Atlantic.<ref name=FriedCru1/>

===Dutch East Indies campaign===
Although their battleships were held out of surface action, Japanese cruiser-destroyer forces rapidly isolated and mopped up the Allied naval forces in the Dutch East Indies campaign of February–March 1942. In three separate actions, they sank five Allied cruisers (two Dutch and one each British, Australian, and American) with torpedoes and gunfire, against one Japanese cruiser damaged.<ref>The British cruiser was {{HMS|Exeter|68|2}}, which previously engaged ''Graf Spee''.</ref> With one other Allied cruiser withdrawn for repairs, the only remaining Allied cruiser in the area was the damaged {{USS|Marblehead|CL-12|6}}. Despite their rapid success, the Japanese proceeded methodically, never leaving their air cover and rapidly establishing new air bases as they advanced.<ref>Morison vol. III, pp. 292–293</ref>

===Guadalcanal campaign===
After the key carrier battles of the Coral Sea and Midway in mid-1942, Japan had lost four of the six fleet carriers that launched the Pearl Harbor raid and was on the strategic defensive. On 7 August 1942 US Marines were landed on Guadalcanal and other nearby islands, beginning the Guadalcanal campaign. This campaign proved to be a severe test for the Navy as well as the Marines. Along with two carrier battles, several major surface actions occurred, almost all at night between cruiser-destroyer forces.

'''Battle of Savo Island'''<br />
On the night of 8–9 August 1942 the Japanese counterattacked near Guadalcanal in the Battle of Savo Island with a cruiser-destroyer force. In a controversial move, the US carrier task forces were withdrawn from the area on the 8th due to heavy fighter losses and low fuel. The Allied force included six heavy cruisers (two Australian), two light cruisers (one Australian), and eight US destroyers.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/Savo/Quantock/#page4|title=HyperWar: Disaster at Savo Island, 1942|website=www.ibiblio.org}}</ref> Of the cruisers, only the Australian ships had torpedoes. The Japanese force included five heavy cruisers, two light cruisers, and one destroyer. Numerous circumstances combined to reduce Allied readiness for the battle. The results of the battle were three American heavy cruisers sunk by torpedoes and gunfire, one Australian heavy cruiser disabled by gunfire and scuttled, one heavy cruiser damaged, and two US destroyers damaged. The Japanese had three cruisers lightly damaged. This was the most lopsided outcome of the surface actions in the Solomon Islands. Along with their superior torpedoes, the opening Japanese gunfire was accurate and very damaging. Subsequent analysis showed that some of the damage was due to poor housekeeping practices by US forces. Stowage of boats and aircraft in midships hangars with full gas tanks contributed to fires, along with full and unprotected ready-service ammunition lockers for the open-mount secondary armament. These practices were soon corrected, and US cruisers with similar damage sank less often thereafter.<ref name=FriedDmg1>Friedman cruisers, pp. 316–321</ref> Savo was the first surface action of the war for almost all the US ships and personnel; few US cruisers and destroyers were targeted or hit at Coral Sea or Midway.

'''Battle of the Eastern Solomons'''<br />
On 24–25 August 1942 the Battle of the Eastern Solomons, a major carrier action, was fought. Part of the action was a Japanese attempt to reinforce Guadalcanal with men and equipment on [[Engineering:Troopship|troop transports]]. The Japanese troop convoy was attacked by Allied aircraft, resulting in the Japanese subsequently reinforcing Guadalcanal with troops on fast warships at night. These convoys were called the "Tokyo Express" by the Allies. Although the Tokyo Express often ran unopposed, most surface actions in the Solomons revolved around Tokyo Express missions. Also, US air operations had commenced from Henderson Field, the airfield on Guadalcanal. Fear of air power on both sides resulted in all surface actions in the Solomons being fought at night.

'''Battle of Cape Esperance'''<br />
The Battle of Cape Esperance occurred on the night of 11–12 October 1942. A Tokyo Express mission was underway for Guadalcanal at the same time as a separate cruiser-destroyer bombardment group loaded with high explosive shells for bombarding Henderson Field. A US cruiser-destroyer force was deployed in advance of a convoy of US Army troops for Guadalcanal that was due on 13 October. The Tokyo Express convoy was two seaplane tenders and six destroyers; the bombardment group was three heavy cruisers and two destroyers, and the US force was two heavy cruisers, two light cruisers, and five destroyers. The US force engaged the Japanese bombardment force; the Tokyo Express convoy was able to unload on Guadalcanal and evade action. The bombardment force was sighted at close range ({{convert|5000|yd|m}}) and the US force opened fire. The Japanese were surprised because their admiral was anticipating sighting the Tokyo Express force, and withheld fire while attempting to confirm the US ships' identity.<ref>Morison vol. V, pp. 156–160</ref> One Japanese cruiser and one destroyer were sunk and one cruiser damaged, against one US destroyer sunk with one light cruiser and one destroyer damaged. The bombardment force failed to bring its torpedoes into action, and turned back. The next day US aircraft from Henderson Field attacked several of the Japanese ships, sinking two destroyers and damaging a third.<ref>Morison vol. V, p. 169</ref> The US victory resulted in overconfidence in some later battles, reflected in the initial after-action report claiming two Japanese heavy cruisers, one light cruiser, and three destroyers sunk by the gunfire of {{USS|Boise|CL-47|2}} alone.<ref name=FriedDmg1/> The battle had little effect on the overall situation, as the next night two Kongō-class battleships bombarded and severely damaged Henderson Field unopposed, and the following night another Tokyo Express convoy delivered 4,500 troops to Guadalcanal. The US convoy delivered the Army troops as scheduled on the 13th.<ref>Morison vol. V, p. 171</ref>

'''Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands'''<br />
The Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands took place 25–27 October 1942. It was a pivotal battle, as it left the US and Japanese with only two large carriers each in the South Pacific (another large Japanese carrier was damaged and under repair until May 1943). Due to the high carrier attrition rate with no replacements for months, for the most part both sides stopped risking their remaining carriers until late 1943, and each side sent in a pair of battleships instead. The next major carrier operations for the US were the carrier raid on Rabaul and support for the invasion of Tarawa, both in November 1943.

'''Naval Battle of Guadalcanal'''<br />
The Naval Battle of Guadalcanal occurred 12–15 November 1942 in two phases. A night surface action on 12–13 November was the first phase. The Japanese force consisted of two Kongō-class battleships with high explosive shells for bombarding Henderson Field, one small light cruiser, and 11 destroyers. Their plan was that the bombardment would neutralize Allied airpower and allow a force of 11 transport ships and 12 destroyers to reinforce Guadalcanal with a Japanese division the next day.<ref name=MorNvlGuad1>Morrison vol. V, pp. 254–274</ref> However, US reconnaissance aircraft spotted the approaching Japanese on the 12th and the Americans made what preparations they could. The American force consisted of two heavy cruisers, one light cruiser, two anti-aircraft cruisers,<ref>Although these ships were designated light cruisers at the time, the term "anti-aircraft" is used to distinguish them from larger London Treaty light cruisers.</ref> and eight destroyers. The Americans were outgunned by the Japanese that night, and a lack of pre-battle orders by the US commander led to confusion. The destroyer {{USS|Laffey|DD-459|6}} closed with the battleship {{ship|Japanese battleship|Hiei||2}}, firing all torpedoes (though apparently none hit or detonated) and raking the battleship's bridge with gunfire, wounding the Japanese admiral and killing his chief of staff. The Americans initially lost four destroyers including ''Laffey'', with both heavy cruisers, most of the remaining destroyers, and both anti-aircraft cruisers damaged. The Japanese initially had one battleship and four destroyers damaged, but at this point they withdrew, possibly unaware that the US force was unable to further oppose them.<ref name=MorNvlGuad1/> At dawn US aircraft from Henderson Field, {{USS|Enterprise|CV-6|6}}, and Espiritu Santo found the damaged battleship and two destroyers in the area. The battleship (''Hiei'') was sunk by aircraft (or possibly scuttled), one destroyer was sunk by the damaged {{USS|Portland|CA-33|6}}, and the other destroyer was attacked by aircraft but was able to withdraw.<ref name=MorNvlGuad1/> Both of the damaged US anti-aircraft cruisers were lost on 13 November, one ({{USS|Juneau|CL-52|2}}) torpedoed by a Japanese submarine, and the other sank on the way to repairs. ''Juneau''{{'}}s loss was especially tragic; the submarine's presence prevented immediate rescue, over 100 survivors of a crew of nearly 700 were adrift for eight days, and all but ten died. Among the dead were the five Sullivan brothers.<ref>Kurzman</ref>

The Japanese transport force was rescheduled for the 14th and a new cruiser-destroyer force (belatedly joined by the surviving battleship {{ship|Japanese battleship|Kirishima||2}}) was sent to bombard Henderson Field the night of 13 November. Only two cruisers actually bombarded the airfield, as ''Kirishima'' had not arrived yet and the remainder of the force was on guard for US warships. The bombardment caused little damage. The cruiser-destroyer force then withdrew, while the transport force continued towards Guadalcanal. Both forces were attacked by US aircraft on the 14th. The cruiser force lost one heavy cruiser sunk and one damaged. Although the transport force had fighter cover from the carrier {{ship|Japanese aircraft carrier|Jun'yō||2}}, six transports were sunk and one heavily damaged. All but four of the destroyers accompanying the transport force picked up survivors and withdrew. The remaining four transports and four destroyers approached Guadalcanal at night, but stopped to await the results of the night's action.<ref name=MorNvlGuad1/>

On the night of 14–15 November a Japanese force of ''Kirishima'', two heavy and two light cruisers, and nine destroyers approached Guadalcanal. Two US battleships ({{USS|Washington|BB-56|2}} and {{USS|South Dakota|BB-57|2}}) were there to meet them, along with four destroyers. This was one of only two battleship-on-battleship encounters during the Pacific War; the other was the lopsided Battle of Surigao Strait in October 1944, part of the Battle of Leyte Gulf. The battleships had been escorting ''Enterprise'', but were detached due to the urgency of the situation. With nine 16-inch (406&nbsp;mm) guns apiece against eight 14-inch (356&nbsp;mm) guns on ''Kirishima'', the Americans had major gun and armor advantages. All four destroyers were sunk or severely damaged and withdrawn shortly after the Japanese attacked them with gunfire and torpedoes.<ref name=MorNvlGuad1/> Although her main battery remained in action for most of the battle, ''South Dakota'' spent much of the action dealing with major electrical failures that affected her radar, [[Engineering:Fire-control system|fire control]], and radio systems. Although her armor was not penetrated, she was hit by 26 shells of various calibers and temporarily rendered, in a US admiral's words, "deaf, dumb, blind, and impotent".<ref name=MorNvlGuad1/><ref name="FriedBat1"/> ''Washington'' went undetected by the Japanese for most of the battle, but withheld shooting to avoid "friendly fire" until ''South Dakota'' was illuminated by Japanese fire, then rapidly set ''Kirishima'' ablaze with a jammed rudder and other damage. ''Washington'', finally spotted by the Japanese, then headed for the Russell Islands to hopefully draw the Japanese away from Guadalcanal and ''South Dakota'', and was successful in evading several torpedo attacks. Unusually, only a few Japanese torpedoes scored hits in this engagement. ''Kirishima'' sank or was scuttled before the night was out, along with two Japanese destroyers. The remaining Japanese ships withdrew, except for the four transports, which beached themselves in the night and started unloading. However, dawn (and US aircraft, US artillery, and a US destroyer) found them still beached, and they were destroyed.<ref name=MorNvlGuad1/>

'''Battle of Tassafaronga'''<br />
The Battle of Tassafaronga took place on the night of 30 November – 1 December 1942. The US had four heavy cruisers, one light cruiser, and four destroyers. The Japanese had eight destroyers on a Tokyo Express run to deliver food and supplies in drums to Guadalcanal. The Americans achieved initial surprise, damaging one destroyer with gunfire which later sank, but the Japanese torpedo counterattack was devastating. One American heavy cruiser was sunk and three others heavily damaged, with the bows blown off of two of them.<ref>Morison vol. V, pp. 299–307</ref> It was significant that these two were not lost to Long Lance hits as happened in previous battles; American battle readiness and damage control had improved.<ref name=FriedDmg1/> Despite defeating the Americans, the Japanese withdrew without delivering the crucial supplies to Guadalcanal. Another attempt on 3 December dropped 1,500 drums of supplies near Guadalcanal, but Allied strafing aircraft sank all but 300 before the Japanese Army could recover them. On 7 December [[Engineering:PT boat|PT boat]]s interrupted a Tokyo Express run, and the following night sank a Japanese supply submarine. The next day the Japanese Navy proposed stopping all destroyer runs to Guadalcanal, but agreed to do just one more. This was on 11 December and was also intercepted by PT boats, which sank a destroyer; only 200 of 1,200 drums dropped off the island were recovered.<ref>Morison vol. V, pp. 318–321</ref> The next day the Japanese Navy proposed abandoning Guadalcanal; this was approved by the Imperial General Headquarters on 31 December and the Japanese left the island in early February 1943.<ref>Evans and Tanaka, pp. 208–209</ref>

===Post-Guadalcanal===
After the Japanese abandoned Guadalcanal in February 1943, Allied operations in the Pacific shifted to the New Guinea campaign and isolating Rabaul. The Battle of Kula Gulf was fought on the night of 5–6 July. The US had three light cruisers and four destroyers; the Japanese had ten destroyers loaded with 2,600 troops destined for Vila to oppose a recent US landing on Rendova. Although the Japanese sank a cruiser, they lost two destroyers and were able to deliver only 850 troops.<ref name=MorVI-1>Morison, vol. VI</ref> On the night of 12–13 July, the Battle of Kolombangara occurred. The Allies had three light cruisers (one New Zealand) and ten destroyers; the Japanese had one small light cruiser and five destroyers, a Tokyo Express run for Vila. All three Allied cruisers were heavily damaged, with the New Zealand cruiser put out of action for 25 months by a Long Lance hit.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 30</ref> The Allies sank only the Japanese light cruiser, and the Japanese landed 1,200 troops at Vila. Despite their tactical victory, this battle caused the Japanese to use a different route in the future, where they were more vulnerable to destroyer and PT boat attacks.<ref name=MorVI-1/>

The Battle of Empress Augusta Bay was fought on the night of 1–2 November 1943, immediately after US Marines invaded Bougainville in the Solomon Islands. A Japanese heavy cruiser was damaged by a nighttime air attack shortly before the battle; it is likely that Allied airborne radar had progressed far enough to allow night operations. The Americans had four of the new {{sclass|Cleveland|cruiser|0}} cruisers and eight destroyers. The Japanese had two heavy cruisers, two small light cruisers, and six destroyers. Both sides were plagued by collisions, shells that failed to explode, and mutual skill in dodging torpedoes. The Americans suffered significant damage to three destroyers and light damage to a cruiser, but no losses. The Japanese lost one light cruiser and a destroyer, with four other ships damaged. The Japanese withdrew; the Americans pursued them until dawn, then returned to the landing area to provide anti-aircraft cover.<ref>Morison, vol. VI, p. 322</ref>

After the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands in October 1942, both sides were short of large aircraft carriers. The US suspended major carrier operations until sufficient carriers could be completed to destroy the entire Japanese fleet at once should it appear. The Central Pacific carrier raids and amphibious operations commenced in November 1943 with a carrier raid on Rabaul (preceded and followed by Fifth Air Force attacks) and the bloody but successful invasion of Tarawa. The air attacks on Rabaul crippled the Japanese cruiser force, with four heavy and two light cruisers damaged; they were withdrawn to Truk. The US had built up a force in the Central Pacific of six large, five light, and six [[Engineering:Escort carrier|escort carrier]]s prior to commencing these operations.

From this point on, US cruisers primarily served as anti-aircraft escorts for carriers and in shore bombardment. The only major Japanese carrier operation after Guadalcanal was the disastrous (for Japan) Battle of the Philippine Sea in June 1944, nicknamed the "Marianas Turkey Shoot" by the US Navy.

===Leyte Gulf===

The Imperial Japanese Navy's last major operation was the Battle of Leyte Gulf, an attempt to dislodge the American invasion of the Philippines in October 1944. The two actions at this battle in which cruisers played a significant role were the Battle off Samar and the Battle of Surigao Strait.

'''Battle of Surigao Strait'''<br />
The Battle of Surigao Strait was fought on the night of 24–25 October, a few hours before the Battle off Samar. The Japanese had a small battleship group composed of {{ship|Japanese battleship|Fusō||2}} and {{ship|Japanese battleship|Yamashiro||2}}, one heavy cruiser, and four destroyers. They were followed at a considerable distance by another small force of two heavy cruisers, a small light cruiser, and four destroyers. Their goal was to head north through Surigao Strait and attack the invasion fleet off Leyte. The Allied force, known as the 7th Fleet Support Force, guarding the strait was overwhelming. It included six battleships (all but one previously damaged in 1941 at Pearl Harbor), four heavy cruisers (one Australian), four light cruisers, and 28 destroyers, plus a force of 39 PT boats. The only advantage to the Japanese was that most of the Allied battleships and cruisers were loaded mainly with high explosive shells, although a significant number of armor-piercing shells were also loaded. The lead Japanese force evaded the PT boats' torpedoes, but were hit hard by the destroyers' torpedoes, losing a battleship. Then they encountered the battleship and cruiser guns. Only one destroyer survived. The engagement is notable for being one of only two occasions in which battleships fired on battleships in the Pacific Theater, the other being the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal. Due to the starting arrangement of the opposing forces, the Allied force was in a "crossing the T" position, so this was the last battle in which this occurred, but it was not a planned maneuver. The following Japanese cruiser force had several problems, including a light cruiser damaged by a PT boat and two heavy cruisers colliding, one of which fell behind and was sunk by air attack the next day.<ref name=MorXII-1>Morison vol. XII</ref> An American veteran of Surigao Strait, {{USS|Phoenix|CL-46|6}}, was transferred to Argentina in 1951 as {{ship|ARA|General Belgrano||2}}, becoming most famous for being sunk by {{HMS|Conqueror|S48|6}} in the Falklands War on 2 May 1982. She was the first ship sunk by a nuclear submarine outside of accidents, and only the second ship sunk by a submarine since World War II.<ref>Kemp, p. 68</ref>

'''Battle off Samar'''<br />
At the Battle off Samar, a Japanese battleship group moving towards the invasion fleet off Leyte engaged a minuscule American force known as "Taffy 3" (formally Task Unit 77.4.3), composed of six escort carriers with about 28 aircraft each, three destroyers, and four destroyer escorts. The biggest guns in the American force were [[5"/38 caliber gun|{{convert|5|in|abbr=on|0}}/38 caliber guns]], while the Japanese had {{convert|14|in|abbr=on|0}}, {{convert|16|in|abbr=on|0}}, and {{convert|18.1|in|abbr=on|0}} guns. Aircraft from six additional escort carriers also participated for a total of around 330 US aircraft, a mix of F6F Hellcat fighters and TBF Avenger torpedo bombers. The Japanese had four battleships including ''Yamato'', six heavy cruisers, two small light cruisers, and 11 destroyers. The Japanese force had earlier been driven off by air attack, losing ''Yamato''{{'}}s sister {{ship|Japanese battleship|Musashi||2}}. Admiral Halsey then decided to use his Third Fleet carrier force to attack the Japanese carrier group, located well to the north of Samar, which was actually a decoy group with few aircraft. The Japanese were desperately short of aircraft and pilots at this point in the war, and Leyte Gulf was the first battle in which ''kamikaze'' attacks were used. Due to a tragedy of errors, Halsey took the American battleship force with him, leaving San Bernardino Strait guarded only by the small Seventh Fleet escort carrier force. The battle commenced at dawn on 25 October 1944, shortly after the Battle of Surigao Strait. In the engagement that followed, the Americans exhibited uncanny torpedo accuracy, blowing the bows off several Japanese heavy cruisers. The escort carriers' aircraft also performed very well, attacking with machine guns after their carriers ran out of bombs and torpedoes. The unexpected level of damage, and maneuvering to avoid the torpedoes and air attacks, disorganized the Japanese and caused them to think they faced at least part of the Third Fleet's main force. They had also learned of the defeat a few hours before at Surigao Strait, and did not hear that Halsey's force was busy destroying the decoy fleet. Convinced that the rest of the Third Fleet would arrive soon if it hadn't already, the Japanese withdrew, eventually losing three heavy cruisers sunk with three damaged to air and torpedo attacks. The Americans lost two escort carriers, two destroyers, and one destroyer escort sunk, with three escort carriers, one destroyer, and two destroyer escorts damaged, thus losing over one-third of their engaged force sunk with nearly all the remainder damaged.<ref name=MorXII-1/>

===Wartime cruiser production===
The US built cruisers in quantity through the end of the war, notably 14 {{sclass|Baltimore|cruiser|0}} heavy cruisers and 27 ''Cleveland''-class light cruisers, along with eight ''Atlanta''-class anti-aircraft cruisers. The ''Cleveland'' class was the largest cruiser class ever built in number of ships completed, with nine additional ''Cleveland''s completed as light aircraft carriers. The large number of cruisers built was probably due to the significant cruiser losses of 1942 in the Pacific theater (seven American and five other Allied) and the perceived need for several cruisers to escort each of the numerous {{sclass|Essex|aircraft carrier|2}}s being built.<ref name=FriedCru1/> Losing four heavy and two small light cruisers in 1942, the Japanese built only five light cruisers during the war; these were small ships with six {{convert|6.1|in|mm|abbr=on|0}} guns each.<ref>Watts, pp. 109–113</ref> Losing 20 cruisers in 1940–42, the British completed no heavy cruisers, thirteen light cruisers ({{sclass|Fiji|cruiser|5}} and {{sclass|Minotaur|cruiser (1943)|5}} classes), and sixteen anti-aircraft cruisers (''Dido'' class) during the war.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 33–35</ref>

==Late 20th century==
[[File:Kirov-class battlecruiser.jpg|thumb|Russian Navy battlecruiser of the {{sclass|Kirov|battlecruiser|4}}, {{ship|Soviet cruiser|Frunze||2}}]]

The rise of air power during World War II dramatically changed the nature of naval combat. Even the fastest cruisers could not maneuver quickly enough to evade aerial attack, and aircraft now had torpedoes, allowing moderate-range standoff capabilities. This change led to the end of independent operations by single ships or very small task groups, and for the second half of the 20th century naval operations were based on very large fleets believed able to fend off all but the largest air attacks, though this was not tested by any war in that period. The US Navy became centered around carrier groups, with cruisers and battleships primarily providing anti-aircraft defense and shore bombardment. Until the Harpoon missile entered service in the late 1970s, the US Navy was almost entirely dependent on carrier-based aircraft and submarines for conventionally attacking enemy warships. Lacking aircraft carriers, the Soviet Navy depended on anti-ship cruise missiles; in the 1950s these were primarily delivered from heavy land-based bombers. Soviet [[Engineering:Submarine-launched cruise missile|submarine-launched cruise missile]]s at the time were primarily for land attack; but by 1964 anti-ship missiles were deployed in quantity on cruisers, destroyers, and submarines.<ref name=ConwaysASCM>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 350–354</ref>

===US cruiser development===
The US Navy was aware of the potential missile threat as soon as World War II ended, and had considerable related experience due to Japanese ''kamikaze'' attacks in that war. The initial response was to upgrade the light AA armament of new cruisers from 40&nbsp;mm and 20&nbsp;mm weapons to twin 3-inch (76 mm)/50 caliber gun mounts.<ref>Friedman cruisers, pp. 361–362</ref> For the longer term, it was thought that gun systems would be inadequate to deal with the missile threat, and by the mid-1950s three naval SAM systems were developed: Talos (long range), Terrier (medium range), and Tartar (short range).<ref name=FriedCruMis1>Friedman cruisers, pp. 378–382</ref> Talos and Terrier were nuclear-capable and this allowed their use in anti-ship or shore bombardment roles in the event of nuclear war.<ref>Friedman destroyers, p. 301</ref> Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Arleigh Burke is credited with speeding the development of these systems.<ref>Friedman destroyers, pp. 293–294</ref>

Terrier was initially deployed on two [[Engineering:Boston-class cruiser|converted ''Baltimore''-class cruisers]] (CAG), with conversions completed in 1955–56.<ref name=FriedCruMis1/> Further conversions of six ''Cleveland''-class cruisers (CLG) ({{sclass|Galveston|cruiser|5}} and {{sclass|Providence|cruiser|5}} classes), redesign of the {{sclass|Farragut|destroyer (1958)|4}} as guided-missile "frigates" (DLG),<ref>Friedman destroyers, pp. 297–298</ref> and development of the {{sclass|Charles F. Adams|destroyer|0}} DDGs<ref>Bauer and Roberts, p. 211</ref> resulted in the completion of numerous additional guided-missile ships deploying all three systems in 1959–1962. Also completed during this period was the nuclear-powered {{USS|Long Beach|CGN-9|6}}, with two Terrier and one Talos launchers, plus an ASROC anti-submarine launcher the World War II conversions lacked.<ref name=RegisterCG1>Bauer and Roberts, pp. 153–155</ref> The converted World War II cruisers up to this point retained one or two main battery turrets for shore bombardment. However, in 1962–1964 three additional ''Baltimore'' and {{sclass|Oregon City|cruiser|0}} cruisers were more extensively converted as the {{sclass|Albany|cruiser|4}}. These had two Talos and two Tartar launchers plus ASROC and two 5-inch (127&nbsp;mm) guns for self-defense, and were primarily built to get greater numbers of Talos launchers deployed.<ref name=RegisterCG1/> Of all these types, only the ''Farragut'' DLGs were selected as the design basis for further production, although their {{sclass|Leahy|cruiser|0}} successors were significantly larger (5,670 tons standard versus 4,150 tons standard) due to a second Terrier launcher and greater endurance.<ref name=RegisterDLG1>Bauer and Roberts, pp. 213–217</ref><ref>Friedman destroyers, pp. 300–304</ref> An economical crew size compared with World War II conversions was probably a factor, as the ''Leahy''s required a crew of only 377 versus 1,200 for the ''Cleveland''-class conversions.<ref>Bauer and Roberts, pp. 154, 214</ref> Through 1980, the ten ''Farragut''s were joined by four additional classes and two one-off ships for a total of 36 guided-missile frigates, eight of them nuclear-powered (DLGN). In 1975 the ''Farragut''s were reclassified as guided-missile destroyers (DDG) due to their small size, and the remaining DLG/DLGN ships became guided-missile cruisers (CG/CGN).<ref name=RegisterDLG1/> The World War II conversions were gradually retired between 1970 and 1980; the Talos missile was withdrawn in 1980 as a cost-saving measure and the ''Albany''s were decommissioned. ''Long Beach'' had her Talos launcher removed in a refit shortly thereafter; the deck space was used for Harpoon missiles.<ref>Friedman cruisers, p. 398, 422</ref> Around this time the Terrier ships were upgraded with the [[Engineering:RIM-67 Standard|RIM-67 Standard]] ER missile.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 552</ref> The guided-missile frigates and cruisers served in the Cold War and the Vietnam War; off Vietnam they performed shore bombardment and shot down enemy aircraft or, as Positive Identification Radar Advisory Zone (PIRAZ) ships, guided fighters to intercept enemy aircraft.<ref>Friedman cruisers, pp. 398–400, 412</ref> By 1995 the former guided-missile frigates were replaced by the {{sclass|Ticonderoga|cruiser|1}}s and {{sclass|Arleigh Burke|destroyer|1}}s.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 580–585</ref>

The U.S. Navy's guided-missile cruisers were built upon destroyer-style hulls (some called "destroyer leaders" or "frigates" prior to the 1975 reclassification). As the U.S. Navy's strike role was centered around aircraft carriers, cruisers were primarily designed to provide air defense while often adding anti-submarine capabilities.<ref>{{Cite journal |year=1984 |title=A fully illustrated guide to Modern Cruisers |journal=War Machine |location=London |publisher=Orbis Publishing |volume=3 |issue=30}}</ref> These U.S. cruisers that were built in the 1960s and 1970s were larger, often nuclear-powered for extended endurance in escorting nuclear-powered fleet carriers, and carried longer-range surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) than early ''Charles F. Adams'' guided-missile destroyers that were tasked with the short-range air defense role. The U.S. cruiser was a major contrast to their contemporaries, Soviet "rocket cruisers" that were armed with large numbers of anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) as part of the combat doctrine of saturation attack,<ref name=":0">Gardiner and Chumbley (1995)</ref> though in the early 1980s the U.S. Navy retrofitted some of these existing cruisers to carry a small number of Harpoon anti-ship missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles.<ref name=":1">Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 581–585</ref>

The line between U.S. Navy cruisers and destroyers blurred with the {{sclass|Spruance|destroyer|4}}. While originally designed for anti-submarine warfare, a ''Spruance'' destroyer was comparable in size to existing U.S. cruisers, while having the advantage of an enclosed hangar (with space for up to two medium-lift helicopters) which was a considerable improvement over the basic aviation facilities of earlier cruisers. The ''Spruance'' hull design was used as the basis for two classes; the {{sclass|Kidd|destroyer|4}} which had comparable anti-air capabilities to cruisers at the time, and then the DDG-47-class destroyers which were redesignated as the ''Ticonderoga''-class guided-missile cruisers to emphasize the additional capability provided by the ships' Aegis combat systems, and their flag facilities suitable for an admiral and his staff. In addition, 24 members of the ''Spruance'' class were upgraded with the vertical launch system (VLS) for Tomahawk cruise missiles due to its modular hull design, along with the similarly VLS-equipped ''Ticonderoga'' class, these ships had anti-surface strike capabilities beyond the 1960s–1970s cruisers that received Tomahawk armored-box launchers as part of the New Threat Upgrade. Like the ''Ticonderoga'' ships with VLS, the ''Arleigh Burke'' and {{sclass|Zumwalt|destroyer|4}}, despite being classified as destroyers, actually have much heavier anti-surface armament than previous U.S. ships classified as cruisers.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}
[[File:Garibaldi_Taranto_10_giugno_68.jpg|thumb|Italian cruiser ''Giuseppe Garibaldi'']]
Following the American example, three smaller light cruisers of other NATO countries were rearmed with anti-aircraft missiles installed in place of their aft armament: the Dutch ''De Zeven Provinciën'', the Italian ''Giuseppe Garibaldi'', and the French ''Colbert''.<ref name=":16">Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 109, 199, 272</ref> Only the French ship, rebuilt last in 1972, also received Exocet anti-ship missile launchers and domestically produced [[Engineering:Masurca|Masurca]] anti-aircraft missiles.<ref name=":16" /> The others received American Terrier missiles, with ''Garibaldi'' uniquely among surface ships also being armed with Polaris strategic missile launchers, although these were never actually carried.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 199</ref> In the Soviet Navy, only one cruiser, ''Dzerzhinsky'', of [[Engineering:Sverdlov-class cruiser|Project 68bis]], was similarly rearmed with anti-aircraft missiles.<ref name=":17">Biereżnoj, pp. 2–3</ref> The M-2 missiles used on it, adapted from the land-based S-75, proved ineffective as a naval system, and further conversions were abandoned.<ref name=":18">Asanin, pp. 6–7</ref> Another cruiser of this project, ''Admiral Nakhimov'', was used for testing anti-ship missiles but never entered service in this role.<ref name=":18" /> The British considered converting older cruisers to guided-missile cruisers with the [[Engineering:Seaslug (missile)|Seaslug]] system but ultimately did not proceed.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 504</ref> Several other classical cruisers from various countries were rearmed with short-range anti-aircraft systems requiring fewer modifications, such as [[Engineering:Seacat (missile)|Seacat]] or Osa-M, but since these were intended only for self-defense, they are not considered guided-missile cruisers (e.g., the Soviet ''Zhdanov'' and ''Admiral Senyavin'' of Project 68U).<ref name=":17" /> The Peruvian light cruiser ''Almirante Grau'' (formerly the Dutch ''De Ruyter'') was rearmed with eight Otomat anti-ship missiles at the end of the 20th century, but these did not constitute its primary armament.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pacholski |first=Łukasz |year=2017 |title=Koniec epoki krążowników artyleryjskich |journal=Morze |language=pl |volume=III |issue=25 |page=26 |issn=2543-5469}}</ref>

====US Navy "cruiser gap"====

Prior to the introduction of the ''Ticonderoga''s, the US Navy used odd naming conventions that left its fleet seemingly without many cruisers, although a number of their ships were cruisers in all but name. From the 1950s to the 1970s, US Navy cruisers were large vessels equipped with heavy, specialized missiles (mostly surface-to-air, but for several years including the Regulus [[Engineering:Nuclear weapon|nuclear]] cruise missile) for wide-ranging combat against land-based and sea-based targets. Naming conventions changed, and some guided-missile cruisers were classified as frigates or destroyers during certain periods or at the construction stage.<ref name=":0" /> All save one—USS ''Long Beach''—were converted from World War II cruisers of the ''Oregon City'', ''Baltimore'' and ''Cleveland'' classes. ''Long Beach'' was also the last cruiser built with a World War II-era cruiser style hull (characterized by a long lean hull);<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/historic-navy-cruiser-uss-long-beach-to-be-auctioned-as-scrap-metal-by-government-liquidation-starting-tuesday-july-10-159701705.html|title=Historic Navy Cruiser, USS Long Beach, To Be Auctioned As Scrap Metal By Government Liquidation Starting Tuesday, July 10|date=12 June 2012|publisher=PR Newswire|access-date=26 January 2016}}</ref><ref name="auctioned2012">{{cite news|last=Censer|first=Marjorie|title=Historic nuclear cruiser headed to scrap heap|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/navy-auctions-uss-long-beach-historic-nuclear-cruiser-off-for-scrap/2012/09/18/7dd244b8-dccf-11e1-9974-5c975ae4810f_story.html|access-date=18 September 2012|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=18 September 2012}}</ref> later new-build cruisers were actually converted frigates (DLG/CG {{USS|Bainbridge|DLGN-25|6}}, {{USS|Truxtun|DLGN-35|6}}, and the ''Leahy'', {{sclass|Belknap|cruiser|5}}, {{sclass|California|cruiser|5}}, and {{sclass|Virginia|cruiser|5}} classes) or uprated destroyers (the DDG/CG ''Ticonderoga'' class was built on a ''Spruance''-class destroyer hull).<ref name=":1" />

Literature sometimes considers ships as cruisers even if they are not officially classified as such, primarily larger representatives of the Soviet large anti-submarine ship class, which had no equivalent in global classification.<ref name=":8">Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 380–382</ref> Ultimately, after the 1975 classification reform in the US, larger ships were called cruisers, slightly smaller and weaker fleet escorts were called destroyers, and smaller ships for ocean escort and anti-submarine warfare were called frigates.<ref name=":9">Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 551–555, 580</ref> However, the size and qualitative differences between them and destroyers were vague and arbitrary.<ref name=":9" /> With the development of destroyers, this distinction has blurred even further (for example, the American ''Arleigh Burke''-class destroyers, complementing the ''Ticonderoga''-class cruisers as the core of US Navy air defense, have displacements up to 9,700 tons and nearly equal combat capabilities, carrying the Aegis system and similar missiles, albeit in smaller numbers; similarly for Japanese destroyers).<ref name=":10">Lipiecki, p. 8</ref><ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 592</ref><ref name=":27">{{Cite journal |last=Lipiecki |first=Sławomir |year=2019 |title=Japońska tarcza. Niszczyciele rakietowe typu Maya |journal=Morze, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |volume=7-8 |pages=17–18}}</ref>

Frigates under this scheme were almost as large as the cruisers and optimized for anti-aircraft warfare, although they were capable anti-surface warfare combatants as well. In the late 1960s, the US government perceived a "cruiser gap"—at the time, the US Navy possessed six ships designated as cruisers, compared to 19 for the Soviet Union, even though the USN had 21 ships designated as frigates with equal or superior capabilities to the Soviet cruisers at the time.  Because of this, in 1975 the Navy performed a massive redesignation of its forces:<ref name=":9" />
* CVA/CVAN (Attack Aircraft Carrier/Nuclear-powered Attack Aircraft Carrier) were redesignated CV/CVN (although {{USS|Midway|CV-41|6}} and {{USS |Coral Sea|CV-43|6}} never embarked anti-submarine squadrons).
* DLG/DLGN (Frigates/Nuclear-powered Frigates) of the ''Leahy'', ''Belknap'', and ''California'' classes along with USS ''Bainbridge'' and USS ''Truxtun'' were redesignated CG/CGN (Guided-Missile Cruiser/Nuclear-powered Guided-Missile Cruiser).
* ''Farragut''-class guided-missile frigates (DLG), being smaller and less capable than the others, were redesignated to DDGs ({{USS|Coontz|DDG-40|6}} was the first ship of this class to be re-numbered; because of this the class is sometimes called the ''Coontz'' class);
* DE/DEG (Ocean Escort/Guided-Missile Ocean Escort) were redesignated to FF/FFG (Guided-Missile Frigates), bringing the US "Frigate" designation into line with the rest of the world.

Also, a series of Patrol Frigates of the {{sclass|Oliver Hazard Perry|frigate|4}}, originally designated PFG, were redesignated into the FFG line. The cruiser-destroyer-frigate realignment and the deletion of the Ocean Escort type brought the US Navy's ship designations into line with the rest of the world's, eliminating confusion with foreign navies. In 1980, the Navy's then-building DDG-47-class destroyers were redesignated as cruisers (''Ticonderoga'' guided-missile cruisers) to emphasize the additional capability provided by the ships' Aegis combat systems, and their flag facilities suitable for an admiral and his staff.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}

===Soviet cruiser development===
In the Soviet Navy, cruisers formed the basis of combat groups. In the immediate post-war era it built a fleet of gun-armed [[Engineering:Sverdlov-class cruiser|light cruisers]], but replaced these beginning in the early 1960s with large ships called "rocket cruisers", carrying large numbers of anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) and anti-aircraft missiles. The Soviet combat doctrine of saturation attack meant that their cruisers (as well as destroyers and even missile boats) mounted multiple missiles in large container/launch tube housings and carried far more ASCMs than their NATO counterparts,<ref name=":252">Asanin, pp. 17–19</ref> while NATO combatants instead used individually smaller and lighter missiles (while appearing under-armed when compared to Soviet ships).<ref name=":1" />

In 1962–1965 the four {{sclass2|Kynda|cruiser|1}}s entered service; these had launchers for eight long-range [[Engineering:SS-N-3 Shaddock|SS-N-3 Shaddock]] ASCMs with a full set of reloads; these had a range of up to {{convert|450|km}} with mid-course guidance.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 380</ref> The four more modest {{sclass2|Kresta I|cruiser|1}}s, with launchers for four SS-N-3 ASCMs and no reloads, entered service in 1967–69.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 381</ref> In 1969–79 Soviet cruiser numbers more than tripled with ten {{sclass2|Kresta II|cruiser|1}}s and seven {{sclass2|Kara|cruiser|1}}s entering service. These had launchers for eight large-diameter missiles whose purpose was initially unclear to NATO. This was the SS-N-14 Silex, an over/under rocket-delivered heavyweight torpedo primarily for the anti-submarine role, but capable of anti-surface action with a range of up to {{convert|90|km}}. Soviet doctrine had shifted; powerful anti-submarine vessels (these were designated "Large Anti-Submarine Ships", but were listed as cruisers in most references) were needed to destroy NATO submarines to allow Soviet [[Engineering:Ballistic missile submarine|ballistic missile submarine]]s to get within range of the United States in the event of nuclear war. By this time Long Range Aviation and the Soviet submarine force could deploy numerous ASCMs. Doctrine later shifted back to overwhelming carrier group defenses with ASCMs, with the ''Slava'' and ''Kirov'' classes.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 345, 381–382</ref>

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Russian cruiser ''Moskva'' of Project 1164 became the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet and in 2022 participated in the invasion of Ukraine, shelling and blockading the coast, but was subsequently sunk by anti-ship missiles.<ref name=":28">{{Cite web |date=2022-04-15 |title=What is the significance of the Moskva sinking? |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/15/explainer-what-is-the-significance-of-the-moskva-sinking |access-date=2024-05-21 |website=aljazeera.com}}</ref>

===Current cruisers===
[[File:PLANS Nanchang (DDG-101) 20210319.jpg|thumb|China's latest [[Engineering:Type 055 destroyer|Type 055 destroyer]] has been classified by the United States Department of Defense as a cruiser because of its large size and armament.]]
The end of the [[History:Cold War|Cold War]] and the subsequent reduction of military rivalry led to significant reductions in naval forces. This reduction was more pronounced in the Soviet Navy, which was mostly taken over by Russia. Faced with severe financial difficulties, Russia was forced to decommission most of its ships in the 1990s or send them for extended overhauls. The most recent Soviet/Russian rocket cruisers, the four {{sclass|Kirov|battlecruiser|2}}<nowiki/>s, were built in the 1970s and 1980s. One of the ''Kirov'' class is in refit, and 2 are being scrapped, with the {{ship|Russian battlecruiser|Pyotr Velikiy||2}} in active service. Russia also operates two {{sclass|Slava|cruiser|2}}<nowiki/>s and one ''Admiral Kuznetsov''-class carrier which is officially designated as a cruiser, specifically a "[[Engineering:Aircraft cruiser|heavy aviation cruiser]]" ({{langx|ru|тяжелый авианесущий крейсер}}) due to her complement of 12 [[Engineering:P-700 Granit|P-700 Granit]] supersonic AShMs. In 2022, the cruiser ''Moskva'' of Project 1164 sank after being hit by a Ukrainian missile.<ref name=":28" />

Currently, the ''Kirov''-class heavy missile cruisers are used for command purposes, as ''Pyotr Velikiy'' is the [[Company:Flagship|flagship]] of the Northern Fleet. However, their air defense capabilities are still powerful, as shown by the array of point defense missiles they carry, from 44 [[Engineering:9K33 Osa#Variants|OSA-MA]] missiles to 196 [[Engineering:Tor missile system#3K95 Kinzhal (naval variant)|9K311 Tor]] missiles. For longer range targets, the S-300 is used. For closer range targets, [[Engineering:AK-630|AK-630]] or Kashtan CIWSs are used. Aside from that, ''Kirov''s have 20 [[Engineering:P-700 Granit|P-700 Granit]] missiles for anti-ship warfare. For target acquisition beyond the [[Physics:Radar horizon|radar horizon]], three [[Engineering:Helicopter|helicopter]]s can be used. Besides a vast array of armament, ''Kirov''-class cruisers are also outfitted with many sensors and communications equipment, allowing them to lead the fleet.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}

The United States Navy has centered on the aircraft carrier since World War II. The ''Ticonderoga''-class cruisers, built in the 1980s, were originally designed and designated as a class of destroyer, intended to provide a very powerful air-defense in these carrier-centered fleets.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}} As of 2020, the US Navy still had 22 of its newest ''Ticonderoga''-class cruisers in service.<ref name=":10" /> These ships were continuously upgraded, enhancing their value and versatility. Some were equipped with ballistic missile defense capabilities (Aegis BMD system).<ref name=":10" /> However, no new cruisers of this class were being built. In the 21st century, there were design efforts for futuristic large cruisers provisionally designated as [[Engineering:CG(X)|CG(X)]], but the program was canceled in 2010 due to budget constraints.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Larter |first=David |date=2020-06-26 |title=Congress aims to strip funding for the US Navy's next-gen large surface combatant |url=https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/06/25/congress-aims-to-strip-funding-for-the-us-navys-next-generation-large-surface-combatant/ |access-date=2024-05-21 |website=Defense News |language=en}}</ref>

Formally, only the aforementioned ships are classified as cruisers globally. The latest American futuristic large destroyers of the ''[[Engineering:Zumwalt-class destroyer|Zumwalt]]'' class, despite their displacement of approximately 16,000 tons and armament with two large-caliber (155&nbsp;mm) guns traditionally associated with cruisers, are classified as destroyers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lipiecki |first=Sławomir |year=2016 |title=Niszczyciele typu Zumwalt. Okręty ery kosmicznej. Część 1 |journal=Morze, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |volume=XXI |issue=176 |pages=18–19}}</ref> Literature often emphasizes that these ships are essentially large cruisers.<ref>Lipiecki, pp. 38–39</ref> Similarly, Japanese large missile destroyers of the ''Kongō'' class, with a displacement of 9,485 tons and equipped with the Aegis system (derived from the ''Arleigh Burke''-class destroyers), are sometimes referred to as cruisers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Schiele |first=Marcin |year=2000 |title=Japońskie fregaty rakietowe typu Murasame |journal=Morza, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |location=Warsaw |publisher=Magnum X |volume=V |issue=20 |page=12}}</ref> Their improved versions, the ''Atago'' and ''Maya'' classes, exceed 10,000 tons.<ref name=":27" /> Japan, for political reasons, does not use the term "cruiser" or even "destroyer", formally classifying these ships as missile escorts with hull numbers prefixed by DDG, corresponding to guided-missile destroyers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Wieliczko |first=Leszek |year=2017 |title=Flota Wschodzącego Słońca |journal=Morze, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |volume=XXI |issue=181 |page=37 |issn=1426-529X}}</ref> These Japanese destroyers also provide ballistic missile defense.<ref>Lipiecki, p. 34</ref>

Outside the US and Soviet navies, new cruisers were rare following World War II. Most navies use guided-missile destroyers for fleet air defense, and destroyers and frigates for cruise missiles. The need to operate in task forces has led most navies to change to fleets designed around ships dedicated to a single role, anti-submarine or anti-aircraft typically, and the large "generalist" ship has disappeared from most forces. The United States Navy and the Russian Navy are the only remaining navies which operate active duty ships formally classed as cruisers. Italy used {{ship|Italian cruiser|Vittorio Veneto|550|2}} until 2003 (decommissioned in 2006) and the aircraft cruiser {{ship|Italian aircraft carrier|Giuseppe Garibaldi|551|2}} until 2024; France operated a single helicopter cruiser until May 2010, {{ship|French cruiser|Jeanne d'Arc|R97|2}}, for training purposes only. While Type 055 of the Chinese Navy is classified as a cruiser by the U.S. Department of Defense, the Chinese consider it a guided-missile destroyer.<ref>{{Cite web|title=2017 China Military Power Report|url=https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2017_China_Military_Power_Report.PDF|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170828190843/https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2017_China_Military_Power_Report.PDF|url-status=dead|archive-date=August 28, 2017|website=dod.defense.gov}}</ref>
[[File:Bow view of USS Spruance (DD-963) and USS Ticonderoga (CG-47) at Naval Station Norfolk on 8 October 1983 (6397938).jpg|thumb|[[Ticonderoga-class cruiser|''Ticonderoga''-class]] cruiser's design was based on that of ''Spruance''-class [[Engineering:Destroyer|destroyer]].]]
In the years since the launch of {{USS|Ticonderoga|CG-47|2}} in 1981, the class has received a number of upgrades that have dramatically improved its members' capabilities for anti-submarine and land attack (using the Tomahawk missile). Like their Soviet counterparts, the modern ''Ticonderoga''s can also be used as the basis for an entire battle group. Their cruiser designation was almost certainly deserved when first built, as their sensors and combat management systems enable them to act as flagships for a surface warship flotilla if no carrier is present, but newer ships rated as destroyers and also equipped with Aegis approach them very closely in capability, and once more blur the line between the two classes.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}

===Aircraft cruisers===
[[File:Carrier Baku.jpg|thumb|Soviet Navy's [[Soviet aircraft carrier Baku|''Admiral Gorshkov'']], Sold to India as INS ''Vikramaditya''.]]
{{main|Engineering:Aircraft cruiser}}

From time to time, some navies have experimented with aircraft-carrying cruisers. One example is the Swedish {{ship|HSwMS|Gotland|1933|2}}. Another was the Japanese ''Mogami'', which was converted to carry a large floatplane group in 1942. Another variant is the ''helicopter cruiser''. The further development of helicopter cruisers led to the creation of ships formally classified only as cruisers but significantly larger and effectively light aircraft carriers. In the Soviet Union, a series of unusual hybrid ships of Project 1143 (''Kiev'' class) were built in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Initially classified as anti-submarine cruisers, they were ultimately designated as "heavy [[Engineering:Aircraft cruiser|aircraft cruiser]]s". These ships combined the architecture of cruisers and aircraft carriers and were armed with long-range anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles along with a deck for vertical take-off and landing aircraft.<ref name=":23">Biereżnoj, pp. 8–10</ref> Their full displacement of approximately 43,000 tons is typical for aircraft carriers.<ref name=":23" /> By hosting several helicopters, their primary mission was also anti-submarine warfare.<ref name=":23" /> The last example in service was the Soviet Navy's {{sclass|Kiev|aircraft carrier|4}}, whose last unit {{ship|Soviet aircraft carrier|Admiral Gorshkov||2}} was converted to a pure aircraft carrier and sold to [[Place:India|India]] as {{ship|INS|Vikramaditya}}. The Russian Navy's {{ship|Russian aircraft carrier|Admiral Kuznetsov||2}} is nominally designated as an aviation cruiser but otherwise resembles a standard medium aircraft carrier, albeit with a [[Engineering:Surface-to-surface missile|surface-to-surface missile]] battery. The Royal Navy's aircraft-carrying {{sclass|Invincible|aircraft carrier|4}} and the Italian Navy's aircraft-carrying {{ship|Italian aircraft carrier|Giuseppe Garibaldi|551|2}} vessels were originally designated 'through-deck cruisers', but were since designated as small aircraft carriers<ref>{{Cite web |title=Portaeromobili (LHA) Classe Garibaldi |url=https://www.marina.difesa.it/noi-siamo-la-marina/mezzi/forze-navali/Pagine/Garibaldi.aspx |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201112025717/https://www.marina.difesa.it/noi-siamo-la-marina/mezzi/forze-navali/Pagine/Garibaldi.aspx |archive-date=2020-11-12 |access-date=2020-11-01 |website=Marina Militare |language=it}}</ref> (although the 'C' in the pennant for ''Giuseppe Garibaldi'' indicated it retained some status as an aircraft-carrying cruiser). It was armed with missiles, but these were short-range self-defense missiles (anti-aircraft Aspide and anti-ship Otomat) and did not match the significance of its aviation capabilities.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 204</ref> Similarly, the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force's {{sclass|Hyūga|helicopter destroyer|0}} "helicopter destroyers" are really more along the lines of helicopter cruisers in function and aircraft complement, but due to the Treaty of San Francisco, must be designated as destroyers.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/meet-helicopter-cruiser-half-aircraft-carrier-45482 |work=National Interest |accessdate=14 June 2023 |title=Meet the Helicopter-Cruiser: The Half Aircraft Carrier |date=23 February 2019 |author=David Axe }}</ref> 

=== Strike cruisers ===
[[File:Cruiser_Kynda.jpg|thumb|Cruiser ''Grozny'' of [[Engineering:Kynda-class cruiser|Project 58]]]]
[[File:Kirov-class_battlecruiser.jpg|thumb|Heavy nuclear cruiser ''Frunze'' of [[Kirov-class battlecruiser|Project 11442]] – visible vertical missile launchers]]
An alternative development path for guided-missile cruisers was represented by ships armed with heavy long-range anti-ship missiles, primarily developed in the Soviet Union with a focus on combating aircraft carriers.<ref name=":252"/> Starting in 1962, four ships of [[Engineering:Kynda-class cruiser|Project 58]] (NATO designation: ''Kynda'') entered service. They were armed with eight P-35 missile launchers with a range of 250&nbsp;km and a twin launcher for M-1 Volna anti-aircraft missiles.<ref>Asanin, pp. 32–35</ref> With a moderate full displacement of 5,350 tons, they were initially intended to be classified as destroyers but ultimately entered service as guided-missile cruisers.<ref>Biereżnoj, p. 6</ref> During this period, designs for larger cruisers, such as Project 64 and the nuclear-powered Project 63 (with 24 anti-ship missiles), were also developed. However, their construction was abandoned due to high costs and vulnerability to air attacks due to the shortcomings of available anti-aircraft missiles.<ref name=":252"/>

The next built type was four ships of [[Engineering:Kresta I-class cruiser|Project 1134]] (NATO designation: ''Kresta I'') with a displacement of 7,500 tons, equipped with four P-35 anti-ship missile launchers and two Volna anti-aircraft missile launchers.<ref name=":82">Gardiner & Chumbley, pp. 380–382</ref> These were transitional types with lesser strike capabilities and were initially classified as large anti-submarine ships but were reclassified as guided-missile cruisers in 1977.<ref>Biereżnoj, pp. 13–14</ref>

In the 1980s, before the dissolution of the Soviet Union, only three guided-missile cruisers of the new generation [[Engineering:Slava-class cruiser|Project 1164]] (''Slava'' class) with a full displacement of 11,300 tons were completed out of a longer planned series. They carried 16 Bazalt anti-ship missile launchers and eight vertical launchers for long-range Fort anti-aircraft missiles.<ref name=":24">Biereżnoj, pp. 7–8</ref> The pinnacle of development for cruisers designed to engage surface ships, while also protecting fleet formations from aircraft and submarines, was the four large nuclear-powered cruisers of [[Engineering:Kirov-class battlecruiser|Project 1144]] (''Kirov'' class) from the 1980s. These were officially classified as "heavy nuclear guided-missile cruisers".<ref name=":24" /> With a full displacement of up to 25,000 tons, they were armed with 20 [[Engineering:P-700 Granit|Granit]] heavy anti-ship missile launchers, 12 vertical launchers for long-range Fort anti-aircraft missiles, and short-range missiles.<ref name=":4">Rochowicz, pp. 26–27</ref> For anti-submarine warfare, they were equipped with rocket-torpedo launchers and three helicopters, and their crew numbered up to 744 people.<ref name=":4" /> In English-language literature, they are sometimes referred to as "[[Engineering:Battlecruiser|battlecruiser]]s", although this designation lacks official justification.<ref name=":82" />

The ship ''Muntenia'', with a displacement of 5,790 tons, was constructed and built in Romania in the 1980s. It was initially somewhat ambitiously designated as a light helicopter cruiser but was reclassified as a destroyer in 1990, along with a name change.<ref>{{Cite web |title=ISTORIC Distrugătorul Mărăşeşti. Asul de treflă al Marinei Regale Române |url=https://www.navy.ro/despre/organizare/istoricF111.php |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181111043710/http://www.navy.ro/despre/organizare/istoricF111.php |archive-date=2018-11-11 |website=Forțele Navale Române |language=Romanian}}</ref> The ship and its classification reflected the ambitions of dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu amid limited industrial capabilities. It carried eight Soviet [[Engineering:P-15 Termit|P-20M]] medium-range anti-ship missiles but lacked anti-aircraft missile armament and was equipped with two light helicopters without means for long-range anti-submarine warfare.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Grotnik |first=Tomasz |year=2007 |title=Mărăşeşti. Stara fregata w nowej roli |journal=Nowa Technika Wojskowa |language=pl |publisher=Magnum-X |volume=10 |pages=77–82}}</ref>

==Operators==
{{Update|date=August 2023}}
Few cruisers are still operational in the world's navies. Those that remain in service today are:
* {{navy|Greece}}: The cruiser {{ship|Greek cruiser|Georgios Averof||2}} is kept in ceremonial commission as the flagship of the Hellenic Navy due to her historical significance.
* {{navy|Russia}}: 2 {{sclass|Kirov|battlecruiser|4}} and 2 {{sclass|Slava|cruiser|0}} guided-missile cruisers, the heavy aviation cruiser {{ship|Russian aircraft carrier|Admiral Kuznetsov||2}}; the cruiser {{ship|Russian cruiser|Aurora||2}} was ceremonially recommissioned as the flagship of the Russian Navy due to her historical significance.
* {{navy|United States}}: 7 {{sclass|Ticonderoga|cruiser|0}} guided-missile cruisers in service. 15 more in the Reserve Fleet.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nvr.navy.mil/nvr/getHulls.htm?hullType=CG+47 |work=NVR Online |accessdate=17 October 2025 |title=Ship Class - CG 47}}</ref>

The following is laid up:
* {{navy|Ukraine}}: The cruiser {{ship|Ukrainian cruiser|Ukraina||2}} is a ''Slava''-class cruiser that was under construction during the breakup of the Soviet Union. Ukraine inherited the ship following its independence. Progress to complete the ship has been slow and has been at 95% complete since circa 1995. It is estimated that an additional US$30&nbsp;million are needed to complete the ship, and in 2019 Ukroboronprom announced that the ship would be sold.<ref name="pravda.com.ua">{{Cite web |date=2019-09-19 |title=Новий глава Укроборонпрому задумав продати крейсер "Україна" |trans-title=The new head of Ukroboronprom is thinking to sell the cruiser "Ukraina" |url=https://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2019/09/20/7226884/ |access-date=2023-12-07 |website=Ukrainska Pravda |language=uk}}</ref> The cruiser sits docked and unfinished at the harbor of Mykolaiv in southern Ukraine.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://ukr.lb.ua/news/2019/09/2/437888_abromavichus_proponuie_prodati.html|title=Абромавичус пропонує продати ракетний крейсер "Україна"|website=LB.ua|date=20 September 2019 }}</ref> It was reported that the Ukrainian government invested [[Finance:Ukrainian hryvnia|₴]]6.08&nbsp;million into the ship's maintenance in 2012.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://rusnavy.com/news/othernavies/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=14824 |title=Ukraine Invested UAH 6 mln in Maintenance of Ukraina Cruiser |publisher=rusnavy.com |date=9 April 2012 |access-date=6 October 2014}}</ref> On 26 March 2017, it was announced that the Ukrainian Government will be scrapping the vessel which has been laid up, incomplete, for nearly 30 years in Mykolaiv. Maintenance and construction was costing the country US$225,000 per month. On 19 September 2019, the new director of Ukroboronprom Aivaras Abromavičius announced that the ship will be sold.<ref name="pravda.com.ua" /> Her current status is unknown due to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The following are classified as destroyers by their respective operators, but, due to their size and capabilities, are considered to be cruisers by some, all having full load displacements of at least 10,000 tons:
* {{navy|China}}: The first [[Engineering:Type 055 destroyer|Type 055 destroyer]] was launched by China in June 2017 and was commissioned on 12 January 2020 (as of 2023, 8 are in service). Despite being classified as a destroyer by its operator, many naval analysts believe that it is far too large and too well equipped to be considered a destroyer, and is classified by the United States Defense Department as such.<ref>Lin, Jeffrey, and P. W. Singer (28 June 2017).  [http://www.popsci.com/china-launches-asias-biggest-post-wwii-warship "China launches Asia's biggest post-WWII warship."]  ''Popular Science'' (PopSci.com).  Retrieved 17 July 2019.</ref>
* {{navy|Japan}}: 2 {{sclass|Atago|destroyer|2}}s, 2 {{sclass|Hyūga|helicopter destroyer|2}}s, 2 {{sclass|Maya|destroyer|2}}s. Despite the official classification of these ships as destroyers, these vessels are of a displacement greater than most of the world's destroyer classes. The ''Maya''-class ships incorporate a level of armament more akin to cruisers.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://militaryleak.com/2020/01/06/japan-maritime-self-defense-force-plans-to-commission-maya-class-destroyer/ | title=Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force Plans to Commission Maya-Class Destroyer | date=6 January 2020 }}</ref> The ''Hyūga''-class ships  incorporate a level of armament more akin to helicopter cruisers than helicopter carriers.
* {{navy|South Korea}}: 4 {{sclass|Sejong the Great|destroyer|2}}s. Despite their classification as a destroyer, many naval analysts feel they are in fact cruisers due to their size and armament, which are both greater than most of the world's destroyer classes.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.military-today.com/navy/sejong_the_great_class.htm |title=Sejong the Great class - Guided missile destroyer |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170131191322/http://www.military-today.com/navy/sejong_the_great_class.htm |archive-date=31 January 2017 |url-status=dead |access-date=18 January 2017 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.bairdmaritime.com/security/naval/naval-ships/republic-of-korea-navy-takes-delivery-of-fourth-sejong-the-great-class-destroyer |accessdate=17 January 2025 |date=29 November 2024 |work=Baird Maritime |title=Republic of Korea Navy takes delivery of fourth Sejong the Great-class destroyer}}</ref>
* {{naval|United States}}: 2 {{sclass|Zumwalt|destroyer|2}}s. Even if considered a destroyer, they remain significantly larger and more capable than the only definitive cruisers in USN service, the ''Ticonderoga''-class.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.military-today.com/navy/zumwalt_class.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220328231505/http://www.military-today.com/navy/zumwalt_class.htm |url-status=dead |archive-date=March 28, 2022 |title=Zumwalt class - Guided missile destroyer |access-date=March 28, 2022 }}</ref>

==Future development==
* {{navy|China}} will add 8 more [[Engineering:Type 055 destroyer|Type 055 destroyer]]s to its fleet for a total of 16. As of 2024, 4 of these are under construction.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2024/05/dalian-shipbuilding-launches-type-055-increases-production-at-dagushan/ | title=China launches 10th Type 055 Vessel, increases production | date=28 May 2024 }}</ref>
* {{navy|Germany}} has ordered 6 F126 frigates, displacing some 10,383 tons.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.damen.com/vessels/defence-and-security/custom-built-combatants/multi-purpose-combat-ship-f126 |work=Damen |accessdate=20 January 2025 |title=Multi-Purpose Combat Ship F126}}</ref> As of 2024, 1 of these is under construction.<ref>{{Cite web |last=ES&T Redaktion |date=2024-06-04 |title=Rüstungsprojekt Fregatte F 126: Kiellegung der Baunummer 1: Fregatte "Niedersachsen" |url=https://esut.de/2024/06/meldungen/50251/ruestungsprojekt-fregatte-f-126-kiellegung-der-baunummer-1-fregatte-niedersachsen/ |access-date=2024-06-05 |website=esut.de |language=de-DE}}</ref>  It is also developing the Type F127 frigate and plans to procure 6 of these vessels.<ref>{{Cite web |title=19. Bericht des Bundesministeriums der Verteidigung zu Rüstungsangelegenheiten |url=https://www.bmvg.de/resource/blob/5820310/c30ac0f6b6437838720d9d7e1298f6a8/19-ruestungsbericht-teil-1-data.pdf |website=www.bmvg.de}}</ref> The design is expected to be a MEKO A-400 AMD, which has a displacement of 10,000 tons.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Luck |first=Alex |date=2024-11-10 |title=TKMS Shows MEKO A-400 AMD Missile Frigate At Euronaval 2024 |url=https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/euronaval-2024/2024/11/tkms-shows-meko-a-400-amd-at-euronaval-2024/ |access-date=2024-11-18 |website=Naval News |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Neue Fregatten zur Luftverteidigung {{!}} thyssenkrupp Marine Systems |url=https://www.thyssenkrupp-marinesystems.com/mekoa400amd/de/neue-fregatte |access-date=2024-11-18 |website=www.thyssenkrupp-marinesystems.com |language=de}}</ref>
* {{navy|India}} announced that between 8 and 10 ships would be built under the ''{{sclass|Project 18|destroyer|1}}''. The destroyers will displace from 10,000 to 13,000-tons.
* {{navy|Italy}} is developing its DDX destroyer project. The 2 ships will displace 10,000 tons each, making them the largest surface combatants Italy has built since World War II.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.meta-defense.fr/en/2021/09/09/do-the-future-italian-ddx-destroyers-foreshadow-an-evolution-of-combat-ships/ | title=Do the future Italian DDX destroyers foreshadow an evolution of combat ships? - Meta-Defense.fr | date=9 September 2021 }}</ref>
* {{navy|Japan}}: announced that it would build 2 guided-missile cruisers, nominally called Aegis system equipped vessels, each displacing 20,000 tons.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://news.usni.org/2022/09/06/japan-to-build-two-massive-20000-ton-missile-defense-warships-indian-carrier-commissions | title=Japan to Build Two 20,000-ton Missile Defense Warships, Indian Carrier Commissions | date=6 September 2022 }}</ref>
* {{navy|Russia}} is to build an unknown number of ''Lider''-class destroyers. At 19,000 tons of displacement<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mil.today/2019/Navy36/|title=Russian Future Destroyer "Grown Up" to 19,000 Tons|website=mil.today|date=26 February 2019|access-date=19 January 2020}}</ref> they will more than double the displacement of existing {{sclass|Slava|cruiser|1}}s.
* {{navy|South Korea}} will add 2 more ''Sejong the Great''-class destroyers to its fleet.
* {{navy|United Kingdom}} is developing the Type 83 destroyer, likely to be larger than the [[Engineering:Type 45 destroyer|Type 45 destroyer]] it is set to replace and, in terms of displacement, possibly in the 10,000 tonne range.<ref name="TNI1">{{cite news |last1=Roblin |first1=Sebastien |date=31 March 2021 |title=Britain's Mysterious Type 83 Destroyer: A Navy Super Weapon? |work=[[Social:The National Interest|The National Interest]] |url=https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/britain%E2%80%99s-mysterious-type-83-destroyer-navy-super-weapon-181651 |access-date=3 September 2021 |archive-date=25 September 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210925125439/https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/britain%E2%80%99s-mysterious-type-83-destroyer-navy-super-weapon-181651 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=9 June 2023 |title=Options for the Royal Navy's Future Air Dominance System and the Type 83 destroyer |url=https://www.navylookout.com/options-for-the-royal-navys-future-air-dominance-system-and-the-type-83-destroyer/ |website=Navy Lookout |access-date=12 June 2023 |archive-date=12 June 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230612093353/https://www.navylookout.com/options-for-the-royal-navys-future-air-dominance-system-and-the-type-83-destroyer/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Analysis at 'DefenceConnect' of a BAE concept for the class stated that their proposal displaced at least 11,810 tons.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kuper |first=Stephen |date=2023-06-07 |title=I spy with my little eye: BAE presentation reveals interesting next-gen Destroyer concept |url=https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/12103-bae-presentation-reveals-interesting-next-gen-destroyer-concept |access-date=2023-07-22 |website=www.defenceconnect.com.au |archive-date=22 July 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230722130028/https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/12103-bae-presentation-reveals-interesting-next-gen-destroyer-concept |url-status=live }}</ref>
* {{navy|United States}} currently has 1 ''Zumwalt''-class destroyer undergoing sea trials and is developing its DDG(X) project to replace the aging [[Engineering:Ticonderoga-class cruiser|''Ticonderoga''-class cruiser]]s. Displacing 12,000 tons, much greater than their predecessors, the DDG(X) ships will be cruisers in all but name.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/02/08/the-us-navy-is-building-cruisers-its-just-not-calling-them-that/?sh=7acbe9535e52 | title=The U.S. Navy is Building Cruisers—It's Just Not Calling Them That | website=Forbes }}</ref>

==Museum ships==
As of 2019, several decommissioned cruisers have been saved from scrapping and exist worldwide as [[Engineering:Museum ship|museum ship]]s. They are:{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}
*  A floating replica of the {{ship|Chinese cruiser|Zhiyuan}} is on display in Dandong, China.
* {{ship|Greek armored cruiser|Georgios Averof}} in Athens, Greece; still active as the flagship of the Hellenic Navy
* {{ship|Russian cruiser|Aurora}} in St. Petersburg, Russia; still active as the flagship of the Russian Navy
* {{ship|Soviet cruiser|Mikhail Kutuzov}} in Novorossiysk, Russia; the last surviving {{sclass|Sverdlov|cruiser|2}}
* {{HMS|Belfast|C35|6}} in London, England
* {{HMS|Caroline|1914|6}} in Belfast, Northern Ireland; the last surviving ship from the Battle of Jutland
* {{USS|Olympia|C-6|6}} in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; the world's oldest steel-hulled warship afloat.
* {{USS|Little Rock|CL-92|6}} in Buffalo, New York
* {{USS|Salem|CA-139|6}} in Quincy, Massachusetts; the world's last heavy cruiser.
* Bow section of {{ship|Italian cruiser|Puglia||2}} in La Spezia, Italy

===Former museums===
* The {{ship|French cruiser|Colbert|C611|6}} was on display in [[Earth:Bordeaux|Bordeaux]], France until 2006, when she was forced to close due to financial difficulties. She sat in the French Navy's mothball fleet in Landevennec until she was sold for scrap in 2014.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}

==Former operators==

* {{navy|Argentina}} last cruiser, the {{sclass|Brooklyn|cruiser|2}} {{ship|ARA|General Belgrano|C-4|6}} was sunk in action during the Falklands War in 1982.
* {{navy|Austria-Hungary}} lost its entire navy following the Empire's collapse following World War I.
* {{navy|Australia}} decommissioned both its surviving {{sclass2|County|cruiser|2}}s in 1949.
* {{navy|Belgium}} returned its only cruiser, {{ship|French cruiser|D'Entrecasteaux||2}} to France following the abolition of its navy in 1920.
* {{naval|Brazil}} decommissioned its last {{sclass|Brooklyn|cruiser|2}}, ''Almirante Tamandaré'' in 1976.
* {{navy|Canada}} decommissioned HMCS ''Quebec'' in 1961.
* {{navy|Chile}} decommissioned its last {{sclass|Brooklyn|cruiser|2}}, ''O'Higgins'' in 1991.
* {{naval|Taiwan}}'s last cruiser, {{ship|Chinese cruiser|Yat Sen||2}}, was decommissioned in 1958 and sold for scrapping in 1959. This light cruiser was akin to pre-WW1 light cruisers at time of commissioning and its contemporaries were gunboats; Taiwan's penultimate cruiser was ROCS Chung King, their lone vessel in the Arethusa-class. She defected to the People's Liberation Army Navy during the Chinese Civil War in 1949.
* {{navy|Independent State of Croatia}} only cruiser, ''Znaim'' was handed over to Germany in 1943.
* {{naval|Denmark}} decommissioned its last cruiser, {{ship|HDMS|Valkyrien|1888|6}} in 1923.
* {{navy|France}} decommissioned its last cruiser, {{ship|French cruiser|Jeanne d'Arc|R97|2}} in 2010.
* {{naval|Germany}} decommissioned its last cruiser, {{ship|German training cruiser|Deutschland||2}} in 1990.
* {{navy|Greece}} decommissioned its last active duty cruiser, ''Elli'' in 1965.
* {{flagicon|Haiti}} Haitian Navy only cruiser, ''Consul Gostrück'' sank due to the inexperience of her crew in 1910.
* {{navy|India}} decommissioned its {{sclass2|Crown Colony|cruiser|2}}, {{ship|INS|Mysore|C60|6}} in 1985.
* {{naval|Indonesia}} decommissioned its only cruiser, the {{sclass|Sverdlov|cruiser|2}} RI ''Irian'' in 1972.
* {{navy|Italy}} decommissioned helicopter cruiser ''Vittorio Veneto'' in 2006 and aircraft cruiser {{ship|Italian aircraft carrier|Giuseppe Garibaldi|551|2}}<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.marina.difesa.it/uominimezzi/navi/Pagine/Garibaldi.aspx |language=it |accessdate=14 June 2023 |date=11 August 2016 |title=Garibaldi |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160811114326/http://www.marina.difesa.it/uominimezzi/navi/Pagine/Garibaldi.aspx |archive-date=2016-08-11 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39262/all-you-need-to-know-about-italys-f-35-carrier-that-just-arrived-in-the-us |work=The War Zone |accessdate=14 June 2023 |title=All You Need To Know About Italy's F-35 Carrier That Just Arrived In The US |author=Thomas Newdick |date=15 February 2021 }}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |url=https://naval-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/italy/aircraft-carrier-giuseppe-garibaldi.php |encyclopedia=Naval Encyclopedia |accessdate=14 June 2023 |title=Giuseppe Garibaldi, 1st Italian STOVL carrier |author=Dreadnaughtz |date=17 March 2023 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.modelboats.co.uk/news/article/giuseppe-garibaldi/490 |accessdate=14 June 2023 |title=Giuseppe Garibaldi |author=John Slater |date=June 2011 }}</ref> in 2024.
* {{navy|Empire of Japan}} surrendered all its remaining cruisers to the Allies following World War II.
* {{navy|New Zealand}} decommissioned its last cruiser, HMNZS ''Royalist'' in 1966.
* {{naval|Netherlands}} decommissioned its last cruiser, {{ship|HNLMS|De Zeven Provinciën|C802|6}} in 1975.
* {{naval|Pakistan}} decommissioned its only cruiser, {{ship|PNS|Babur|1956|6}} between 1982 and 1985. The ship was scrapped in 1985.
* {{navy|Peru}} decommissioned its last {{sclass|De Zeven Provinciën|cruiser|2}}, {{ship|BAP|Almirante Grau|CLM-81|6}} in 2017.
* {{navy|Poland}} returned its lone surviving {{sclass|Danae|cruiser|2}}, ORP ''Conrad'', to the United Kingdom in 1946.
* {{naval|Portugal}} decommissioned its last cruiser, NRP ''Vasco da Gama'' in 1935.
* {{navy|Kingdom of Romania}} decommissioned its only cruiser, {{ship|NMS|Elisabeta||6}} in 1929. From 1985 to 1990, the Romanian People's Navy (and subsequently, the Romanian Naval Forces) classified ''Muntenia'' as a light helicopter cruiser, but it was refitted and redesignated as a destroyer (ultimately, it was redesignated as a frigate in 2001).
* {{navy|South Africa}} decommissioned its only cruiser SATS ''General Botha'' in 1947.
* {{navy|Spain}} decommissioned its last cruiser, {{ship|Spanish cruiser|Canarias||2}} in 1977.
* {{naval|Sweden}} decommissioned its last cruiser, {{ship|HSwMS|Göta Lejon||6}} in 1971.
* {{navy|Turkey}} decommissioned its last cruiser, TCG ''Mecidiye'' in 1948; they retained a battlecruiser, TCG ''Yavuz'', which was decommissioned in 1950 and stricken from the Naval Register in 1954.
* {{navy|United Kingdom}} decommissioned its last cruiser {{ship|HMS|Blake|C99|6}} in 1979.
* {{navy|Ukrainian People's Republic}} lost its entire fleet upon its reintegration into the Soviet Union in 1921.
* {{navy|Uruguay}} decommissioned its only cruiser, ROU ''Montevideo'' in 1932.
* {{navy|Venezuela}} decommissioned its only cruiser, FNV ''Mariscal Sucre'' in 1940.
* {{navy|Kingdom of Yugoslavia}} only cruiser KB ''Dalmacija'' was captured by Germany during the Invasion of Yugoslavia in 1941.

==See also==
* [[Engineering:List of cruisers|List of cruisers]]
* [[Engineering:List of cruisers of World War I|List of cruisers of World War I]]
* List of cruisers of the Second World War
* List of ships of the Second World War

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Sources==
* {{cite book|last= Bauer|first= K. Jack|author2=Roberts, Stephen S.|title= Register of Ships of the U.S. Navy, 1775–1990: Major Combatants|publisher= Greenwood Press|year= 1991|location= Westport, Connecticut|isbn = 0-313-26202-0}}
* {{Cite book|last=Churchill|first=Winston|title=The Second World War, vol. I: The Gathering Storm|publisher =Houghton Mifflin Company|year=1948|edition=1st }}
* {{cite book|editor-last= Evans|editor-first= David C.|author1=Tanaka, Raizo |year= 1986|edition=2nd|chapter= The Struggle for Guadalcanal|title= The Japanese Navy in World War II: In the Words of Former Japanese Naval Officers|publisher=Naval Institute Press|location = Annapolis, Maryland|isbn= 0-87021-316-4}}
* {{cite book|last= Friedman|first= Norman|title= US Battleships: An Illustrated Design History|publisher= Naval Institute Press|year= 1985|location= Annapolis|isbn= 978-0-87021-715-9}}
* {{cite book|last=Friedman|first=Norman |title=U.S. Cruisers: An Illustrated Design History |publisher=Naval Institute Press |year=1984|location=Annapolis, Maryland |isbn=0-87021-718-6}}
* {{cite book|last= Friedman|first= Norman|title= US Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History|publisher= Naval Institute Press|year = 2004|location = Annapolis|isbn= 1-55750-442-3|edition= Revised}}
* {{cite book|last= Gardiner|first= Robert|author2= Gray, Randal|title= Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1906–1921|publisher= Conway Maritime Press|year= 1985|location= London|isbn = 0-85177-245-5}}
* {{cite book|last= Gardiner|first= Robert|author2= Chesneau, Roger|title= Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1922–1946|publisher= Conway Maritime Press|year= 1980|location= London |isbn= 0-8317-0303-2}}
* {{cite book|last= Gardiner|first= Robert|author2=Chumbley, Stephen|title= Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1947–1995|publisher= Conway Maritime Press|year= 1995|location= London|isbn= 1-55750-132-7}}
* {{cite book|last1= Garzke|first1= William H.|last2= Dulin|first2 = Robert O.|title= Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II|location= Annapolis, Maryland|publisher= Naval Institute Press|year= 1985|isbn= 978-0-87021-101-0|oclc = 12613723}}
* {{cite journal|last=Howland|first=Vernon W., Captain, RCN|year=1994|title=The Loss of HMS Glorious: An Analysis of the Action|journal=Warship International|publisher=International Naval Research Organization|location=Toledo, OH|volume=XXXI|issue=1|pages=47–62|url=http://www.warship.org/no11994.htm|access-date=9 June 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20010522092000/http://www.warship.org/no11994.htm|archive-date=22 May 2001}}
* {{cite book|last= Jackson|first= Robert|title= The World's Great Battleships|publisher= Thunder Bay Press|year= 2000|location= Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada|isbn= 1-89788-460-5}}
* {{cite book|last= Kemp|first= Paul|title= Submarine Action|publisher= Sutton|year= 2006|isbn= 0-7509-1711-3}}
* {{cite book|last= Kennedy|first= Kennedy|title= Pursuit: The Sinking of the Bismarck|publisher= William Collins Sons & Co Ltd|year= 1974|location= London|isbn= 0-00-211739-8}}
* {{cite book|last= Kurzman|first= Dan|year= 1994|title= Left to Die: The Tragedy of the USS Juneau|publisher= Pocket Books|location= New York|isbn= 0-671-74874-2|url= https://archive.org/details/lefttodietragedy00kurz}}
* {{Cite book|title=History of United States Naval Operations in World War II, vol. III: The Rising Sun in the Pacific, 1931 – April 1942|last=Morison|first=Samuel Eliot|publisher=University of Illinois Press|year=2001|isbn=0-252-06973-0}}
* {{Cite book | last = Morison | first = Samuel Eliot |  year = 1958 | title = History of United States Naval Operations in World War II, vol. V: The Struggle for Guadalcanal, August 1942 – February 1943 | publisher = Little, Brown and Company|location= Boston|isbn = 0-316-58305-7}}
* {{cite book|last= Morison|first= Samuel Eliot|year= 1958|title= History of United States Naval Operations in World War II, vol. VI: Breaking the Bismarcks Barrier|publisher= Castle Books|isbn= 0-7858-1307-1|url= https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780785813071}}
* {{Cite book|last= Morison|first= Samuel Eliot|orig-year= 1956|year= 2004|title= History of United States Naval Operations in World War II, vol. XII: Leyte, June 1944 – January 1945|publisher = University of Illinois Press; Reprint edition|location= Champaign, Illinois|isbn = 0-252-07063-1}}
* Parkes, Oscar ''British Battleships'' (2nd Edition). Leo Cooper, London, 1990. {{ISBN|0-85052-604-3}}.
* {{cite book|last= Rohwer|first= Jürgen|year= 2005|title= Chronology of the War at Sea, 1939–1945: The Naval History of World War Two|publisher= US Naval Institute Press|location= Annapolis|isbn= 978-1-59114-119-8|ref ={{sfnRef|Rohwer}}}}
* {{cite book|last= Rowland|first= Buford|author2= Boyd, William|title= US Navy Bureau of Ordnance in World War II|publisher= US Navy Bureau of Ordnance, Department of the Navy|year= 1954|location= Washington, DC|url= https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/007884814}}
* {{cite journal|last=Roberts|first=Stephen S.|year=1977|title=The Classification of British and French Screw Cruising Ships, 1840–1900|journal=Warship International|volume=XIV |issue=2|pages=144–156|issn=0043-0374}}
* {{cite book |last=Watts |first=Anthony J. |title=Japanese Warships of World War II |publisher=Doubleday |year=1973 |location=Garden City, New York |isbn=0-385-09189-3}}
* {{cite book|last1= Zetterling|first1= Niklas|last2= Tamelander|first2= Michael|year= 2009|title= Tirpitz: The Life and Death of Germany's Last Super Battleship|location= Havertown, PA|publisher= Casemate|isbn= 978-1-935149-18-7|ref= {{sfnRef|Zetterling & Tamelander}}}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Lipiecki |first=Sławomir |year=2020 |title=Symbol siły US Navy. Krążowniki typu Ticonderoga. Część 1 |journal=Morze, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |location=Warsaw |publisher=Magnum X |volume=XXV |issue=197}}
* {{Cite book |last=Bierieżnoj |first=Siergiej |title=Sowietskij WMF 1945-1995. Kriejsiera, bolszyje protiwołodocznyje korabli, esmincy |year=1995 |series=Morskaja Kollekcyja |language=ru |id=1/1995}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Asanin |first=Władimir |year=2007 |title=Rakiety otieczestwiennego fłota. Czast 2. Na okienaskich prostorach |journal=Tiechnika i Woorużenije |language=ru |volume=6}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Rochowicz |first=Robert |year=2018 |title=Krążowniki atomowe projektu 1144 |journal=Morze, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |location=Warsaw |publisher=Magnum X}}

==External links==
* {{cite web |url=http://www.aandc.org/research/cruisers/cr_navsea.html |title=Historical Review of Cruiser Characteristics, Roles and Missions |author1=Philip Sims |author2=Michael Bosworth |author3=Chris Cable |author4=Howard Fireman |work=SFAC Report Number 9030-04-C1 |publisher=Future Concepts and Surface Ship Design Group, Naval Sea Systems Command, United States Navy |access-date=25 March 2011 |archive-date=5 January 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080105110728/http://www.aandc.org/research/cruisers/cr_navsea.html |url-status=dead }}

{{Ship types}}
{{Warship types of the 19th & 20th centuries}}

[[Category:Cruisers|*]]
[[Category:Ship types]]

{{Sourceattribution|Cruiser}}