A land of giants !

Thanks for the feedback.

Quote:

1. I think you have an appropriate amount of AA for a 1935 design, I would reduce the amount of superstructure amidships. The superstructure just looks too big to me, especially amidships. Personally I would reduce the entire superstructure by one deck at a minimum.

I agree and will modify my superstructure, apart from

Quote:

and maybe use that as the boat deck or put the hanger and catapult there

that would just stop mine from being different and

Quote:

4. boats on the stern where the crane is makes sense

so will keep it.

Quote:

2. I'd go with an external belt, its easier to repair, but may cause slightly more drag. 18 degrees is a lot, Hood only had 12, the more its angled the shorter it is. portholes look good forward and aft of the belt

I used the G3 for the 14inch at 18 degrees (I was thinking that a internal belt would allow a 2 inch decaping layer and 12 inch belt (due to belts not scaling properly above 12-14 inch's not sure but something about heat treating ?) ) and my belt is 20.5 feet deep (well more as it can thin at the bottom) so dont think its an issue! v14feet on G3. and I would like the 18 degrees as in this land of giants we have to expect hits by 16 or 18inch guns. I agree with with easyer to repair etc so not total sure on this one

Quote:

3. I would have a full railing, maybe check the other British ships with 4.5" guns on the main sight and see what they have.

They don’t have a railing in the way, its just mine has such large arcs that it will mean next to no side rail over most of the length. (5.25 do but they are taller)

Quote:

5. you could consider adding some medium sized guns like 6 or 8 inches. the 4.5 is a good AA gun but it would be underpowered against the big axis destroyers and Nelson, G-3 and N-3 all had at least a 6" secondary.

I thought that no RN (or USN) BB after Nelson had none Dual purpose secondary's (all 4.5 ,5 , or 5.25) so not going to 6 or 8 (unless I’m allowed XXVI

). and the 4.5 (Navweps says 1935 design for MKI) are better that 5.25 (at least MKI for AA (which I think is the bigger threat ?))

Thanks JSB

You are correct about the dual purpose secondaries and I agree with you that the 4.5 is the best RN DP gun, but it was far less effective against surface ships than against aircraft. Since all of your main battery is forward I think it would make sense to have something bigger than a 4.5 back aft. Even though that is uncommon for a RN ship in the 30's it is the norm on ships with the battery concentrated forward.

_________________
"All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity, but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." Thomas Edward Lawrence, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom

Quote:

Having had a look at Navweps

KVG real 5.25 [(7 - 8 rounds per minute)x(36.3 kg) = 254 or 290 Kg/Gun/Min] x 16 guns = 4640 kg/min with 128 shells (8 rpm)

USN BB's 5 [(15 - 22 rounds per minute)x(25.0 kg) = 375kg/gun/min or 550 if using ready ammo ?] x 20 guns = 7500 with 300 shells (15 rpm)

MY Ship 4.5 [(12 rounds per minute per gun)x(24.95 kg) = 299.4kg/gun/min] x 24 guns = 7185 Kg/min 288 shells

Yammato
12 × (6.1 in) [(5 - 6 rounds per minute x 55.87 kg)= 279.35 or 335.22KG/G/M ] = 4022.64 Kg/m with 72 shells
12 × (5.0 in) [(14 rounds per minute initially, 8 rounds per minute sustained x 23.0 kg) 184 or 322 KG/G/M] = 2208 Kg/m with 96 shells (8rpm)
Total = 6230.64 KG/M with 168 shells

Not sure if my ship is to bad in comparison (Ok v surface and good v AA ?)(I don’t like the 5.25 as I think number of shells will make up for individual size and through weight is much higher due to faster firing rate) and apart from swapping to us 5inch (or XXVI style stuff) I’m not getting better.
As to no rear guns does it matter ? my 4.5's have good arcs (with 12 guns able to fire directly to the rear and the other can shoot towards the rear quarters).
Thanks JSB

your design does have good firing arcs and ultimately its up to you, but in my opinion the 4.5" does not have enough stopping power against ships, it may deter a destroyer, but probably not a cruiser. I would want 6" guns back there. granted few battleships ever used their secondaries v surface ships and aircraft turned out to be the main threat but if this is being designed in the early 1930's they dont know that.

Quote:

but in my opinion the 4.5" does not have enough stopping power against ships, it may deter a destroyer, but probably not a cruiser. I would want 6" guns back there. granted few battleships ever used their secondaries v surface ships and aircraft turned out to be the main threat

My problem is that short of going for something make-believe (something large 6+ AND fast firing ie XXVI) no secondary battery is going to beat a cruiser and still be any good v AA ? Yamato only has 12 (max 9 on one target) 6inch guns and that’s less than most 6inch cruisers let alone big 8inch ones so we will need to use our main battery (or supporting ships). To match a Hipper class we would need 8 guns (able to bear on each side so probably more !) and I think that will eat up to much displacement (that could just go for more useful things like main guns etc ?).

As to rear arcs I don’t think this matters much as I don’t think this ship is really built to run away

.
JSB

[ Hum having re looked at spring sharp I can put in 6 (2x3 super-firing (with only 4ich turret faces)) 8ich guns on the stern for an extra 675t I’m starting to think this may be worth it ? I much prefer this to 5.25 or 6ich if we are engaging a cruisers, but would we really be just willing to match when we could use the main guns ? remember I don’t think the RN is going to refight Jutland and the closer threat of the KN hasn’t got the ships, the RM will be a chasing battle and IJN is a long way away worst case (would 6 guns really stop a Takao-class ?]

i agree with your assessment that the biggest threat to your stern is a japanese ca. i would much rather be keeping them at extreme torpedo range or beyond with a few 7.5" or 8" guns than let them close to 4.5" range before torpedoing you when your main guns are engaging another target.

Except for the badge, what am I creditting of

_________________
Work in progress:
DD County Class PNS Babur (1982)(PAK)
FF Type 21 Class D182 PNS Babur (2000)(PAK)
All relevant Coat of Arms

Just the badge, I will update it when I get my computer working again and post my updated ship.
JSB

Shipbucket

Who is online