Jean-Paul Binot wrote:
Moreover, the contribution of the US Navy to the war in the Mediterranean was limited. Should the ships have changed owners, the British would have insisted to get them. Ultimately, by that late in the war, there was only very limited use for battleships, especially non-standard ones.
Why would the British insist on getting both of them? Had they both been overhauled, isn't it likely that it would have been done in the US? Also, wouldn't the ammunition/spare parts be made in the US? If so then it seems highly unlikely that the British would have been in position to demand both. I agree that it is logical for both to serve together, as shipping ammunition/parts too two separate bases of operation make little sense. Furthermore, why would the British even desire them? As you alluded too, by the time they'd be ready for service all but Gneisenau and Tirpitz were left to oppose the Royal Navy in the Atlantic/Med.
Jean-Paul Binot wrote:
In the end, both Italian battlewagons lingered in a lake in Egypt and could not even be returned to the post war Italian fleet due to Soviet opposition, which was very sad indeed as they were fine looking ships.
I have to agree with you there.
Jean-Paul Binot wrote:
Should you wish to stay within plausible boundaries, I would suggest you consider a limited modernization in the US along similar lines to what was done to the Richelieu (modern light AA, radar, deletion of aircraft and aviation facilities) and little else. And the ships should remain under the Italian flag (but with USN or RN camouflage!).
This is probably what I'll end up doing, but once I get the kit in hand I might be too tempted to do something more drastic.

Painting her in MS22 also means that I wont have to buy new paints!