Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 5 of 7  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page « 13 4 5 6 7 »
Author Message
trap one
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 19th, 2011, 5:18 am
Offline
Posts: 27
Joined: June 12th, 2011, 5:49 pm
Portsmouth Bill
How about her now. Admirals bridge now has external and a 40mm STAAG added for extra close in against close ASuW/AAW targets. Rather than its own director it could take target indication from the MRS 3. After all with those "Auto" guns being able to empty her magazines in minutes a pair of 40mm's would be nice to have to take care of anything too small for the 3" to bother with.


Last edited by trap one on September 1st, 2011, 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Novice
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 19th, 2011, 10:30 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 4126
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:25 am
Location: Vrijstaat
That's coming along very nice Trap One. Just remember that in the specifications the ship was NOT meant to have 40mm guns at all.
I would also change the propellers to those on the Admiral class or the ones on HMS Blake, and follow on Bombhead's suggestion as regarding the bow's rake and sheer line.

_________________
[ img ] Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Portsmouth Bill
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 19th, 2011, 5:45 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3220
Joined: August 16th, 2010, 7:45 am
Location: Cambridge United Kingdom
Yes, I would agree with Novice; but what I was refering to was refining the basic drawing, rather than adding on new guns etc. I would put as a blend of what you already have with similar ships actually built; a good case in point being the Tiger/Blake rebuild, to give an idea of how a contemporary cruiser would have looked based on this project. But as I said, it isn't crucial. :)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 20th, 2011, 9:26 am
Offline
Posts: 7232
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
Looking good. This is making excellent progressed.

The STAAG doesn't seem likely to be fitted given the ship's likely commissioning date, it is possible that Sea Cat would have been fitted on or shortly after completion like the Counties.

What's the little window for sticking up above the Sea Slug reloader?

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
meeware
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 20th, 2011, 10:37 am
Offline
Posts: 61
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 3:05 pm
I'm not sure abouyt the layout of secondary AA guns on this shup. Midships and aft seems peculiar, and the rather wide bridge wings obstruct the fire arc of the midships 3inchers. In Hood's similar ship the 3inchers are fore and aft, which leave the midships abeam stations available for seacat- a most acceptable arrangement.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
trap one
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 20th, 2011, 12:50 pm
Offline
Posts: 27
Joined: June 12th, 2011, 5:49 pm
The STAAG would be me for me an extra defense once I read about the fact the ships magazines would be emptied in minutes due to the high rate of fire they were capable of.
Novice nor were there 20mm in the specifications and there was only 4 MRS 3 in there as well. As she was purely speculation I speculated a little further.
The location of the 3" were from the original drawings and not my idea.
The window over Sea Slug loading area is also on the drawings and if I was guessing a prifly.
The propeller/rudder layout is from Bombheads 1961 HMS Blake.
As to what she would actually look like in commission well that's what I'm working on at present. All the work so far is based on the various plans, drawings and pics of the model.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
meeware
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 23rd, 2011, 2:58 pm
Offline
Posts: 61
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 3:05 pm
Certainly looking forward to you' as launched' version. You've captured the design as far as it was developed very well indeed. Further development before final construction does seem likely though, and such a large and capable vessel would surely have had a long life, with at least modifying refit at some stage.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
trap one
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 24th, 2011, 8:37 pm
Offline
Posts: 27
Joined: June 12th, 2011, 5:49 pm
My idea of how she would look on completion. With an 88' beam she should have no problem fitting 4 Wessex's in the hanger where the "Tigers" struggled.
She retains 2 x 3" turrets that are semi enclosed beneath the flight deck. With protective nets over the turret proper the barrels would be beneath the overhang until they were needed, so normal flight deck operations would not be hindered. 2 Seacat launchers and their dedicated directors replace the other set of 3" turrets and the STAAG was retained for close in protection. The 2nd 901 was moved forward to atop the bridge and thus eliminated the blind spot forward.
The 965 (single bedstead) and it's associated height finder was installed as back up to the un-reliable 984. It also allowed a form of EMCON were the long range picture was compiled by all kinds of units using the 965. With the high value units such as carriers and cruisers having the 3D 984.


Last edited by trap one on August 25th, 2011, 2:59 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
meeware
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 25th, 2011, 12:09 pm
Offline
Posts: 61
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 3:05 pm
Mmmm, very nice.

I wonder if the midships 3inchers might have made their way forward a little though, perhaps abeam the bridge? The forward super structure is very wide looking at the NMM model, and might perhaps have ended up slimmed down a little.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: RN 1950's proposed cruiser GW96APosted: August 25th, 2011, 8:11 pm
Offline
Posts: 7232
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
The 3in are too far aft, there isn't enough room in the hull below for the size of magazine required by the auto 3in guns. They could empty their magazines very qucikly.

Having 985 and 978 with the 984 makes no sense. The latter was developed as a 3-D height-finder and search radar. The Navy would not have built a shp with both but one or the other. If your worried about reliability then remove the 984 and save the weight.
STAAG and Sea Cat is also unlikley, the latter replaces the former. Four Sea Cat might work though.

Overall though it looks like a nice looking ship.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 5 of 7  [ 62 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page « 13 4 5 6 7 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]