Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 5 of 15  [ 143 posts ]  Go to page « 13 4 5 6 715 »
Author Message
waritem
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 30th, 2018, 7:41 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 354
Joined: August 4th, 2011, 6:37 am
Location: France
What a wonderful ship Charguizard!...............
I hope my workload will leave me enaught time to post something before the end of april.
But it will be very difficult not to be influenced by your exellent design..................................

_________________
"You can rape history, if you give her a child"
Alexandre Dumas

JE SUIS CHARLIE


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 30th, 2018, 8:37 am
Offline
Posts: 7233
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
Given the very long shafts due to the location of the engine rooms and the widely spread turrets out, the de Villers probably has a less optimal and quite vulnerable propulsion, but for sheer crazy Frenchness and originality it takes some beating. The drawings themselves are gorgeous to look at.

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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Keisser
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 30th, 2018, 9:09 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 177
Joined: May 24th, 2016, 11:26 am
pepembr_mb wrote: *
I put the wight at 10.000 metric tons at normal displacement, that's why I marked the crazy SpringSharp remarks. All gun mounts weights since the late 1800's are know. I think SpringSharp developers could include them at their database.
Well, your SpringSharp report is screwed up a bit anyways. I would suggest you to get good with this program before talking about its flaws. Also, put some logic. You said that you took hull of Exeter - good. But then you say one crucial thing - you took a larger hull of Exeter but you did not took larger displacement since it is limited. Thats the biggest flaw of your idea in general. Enlargening the hull strongly requires enlargening of displacement - otherwise your ship looses composite strength gradually.
And not to mention other mistakes you did - they were mentioned by several people already.

_________________
«A sea is not a barrier, a sea is a road, and those who try to use the sea as an instrument of isolation soon realize their foe has already put the sea into his own service.». - Alfred Thayer Mahan.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
MihoshiK
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 30th, 2018, 10:14 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1035
Joined: October 16th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: In orbit, watching you draw.
Contact: Website
Good grief, Charguizard pretty much blew everything else out of the water, and there were already a few very commendable ships in here!

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...
[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Garlicdesign
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 30th, 2018, 12:12 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1071
Joined: December 26th, 2012, 9:36 am
Location: Germany
Hi everyone!

Charguizard, I have to say that I only very rarely break into an involuntary smile when I see a new drawing, but this one certainly had that effect.

Greetings
GD


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 30th, 2018, 4:05 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Hood wrote: *
Given the very long shafts due to the location of the engine rooms and the widely spread turrets out, the de Villers probably has a less optimal and quite vulnerable propulsion, but for sheer crazy Frenchness and originality it takes some beating. The drawings themselves are gorgeous to look at.
This was exactly my reaction.

Beautiful drawing and extraordinarily French.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
BB1987
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 30th, 2018, 8:46 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2818
Joined: May 23rd, 2012, 1:01 pm
Location: Rome - Italy
*applause*

_________________
My Worklist
Sources and documentations are the most welcome.

-Koko Kyouwakoku (Republic of Koko)
-Koko's carrier-based aircrafts of WWII
-Koko Kaiun Yuso Kaisha - KoKaYu Line (Koko AU spinoff)
-Koko - Civil Aviation


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
reytuerto
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 30th, 2018, 10:14 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1647
Joined: February 21st, 2015, 12:03 am
Hi, Char! Magnificent raider! Very well designed, and nicely done! And with a french flavor as intense as a roquefort cheese (well, roquefort cheese+carmenere wine I mean ;) )!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 31st, 2018, 12:00 pm
Offline
Posts: 7233
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
Thought I would throw my hat into the ring with a modified never-were design.

Essex Class
[ img ]
HMS Essex, in 1933

For the two heavy cruisers to follow the Northumberland sub-class of the Counties, their Lordships demanded increased fighting power. Using savings in construction had meant the previous ships had completed light and progressively fittings had been added. It was thought possible to fit an extra 8in turret to increase the broadside weight. The quarterdeck was lowered to save weight and the extra turret fitted behind 'A' and 'B' turrets. An improved tower superstructure, based on that of those of the capital ships, was also fitted to improve the bridge spaces.
The design was approved and HMS Essex and Durham were laid down in 1930. Both luckily were spared from the spending cuts as the Great Depression began to bite and were commissioned in June and September 1933 respectively.


Displacement
10,000 tons (standard)

Dimensions
Length: 600ft (oa), 593ft (wl)
Beam: 68ft 6in
Draught: 16ft

Armament
5x2 8in Mk.II turrets (130 rpg)
4x1 4in QF Mk.V HA mounts (200 rpg)
2x8 2pdr Mk.M pom-pom mounts (1,000 rpg)
2x4 21in torpedo-tube mountings (9 reload torpedoes)
2x Hawker Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft

Armour
No belt armour
Magazines: 3in box protection (top and sides)
Main turrets: 1in
Deck: 1 3/8in

Machinery & Performance
80,000shp steam turbines
Speed: 32kts (standard displacement)
Endurance: 9,100nm at 16kts

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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
pepembr_mb
Post subject: Re: Treaty Cruiser Design ChallengePosted: March 31st, 2018, 3:48 pm
Offline
Posts: 172
Joined: December 15th, 2016, 12:17 pm
Keisser wrote: *
pepembr_mb wrote: *
I put the wight at 10.000 metric tons at normal displacement, that's why I marked the crazy SpringSharp remarks. All gun mounts weights since the late 1800's are know. I think SpringSharp developers could include them at their database.
Well, your SpringSharp report is screwed up a bit anyways. I would suggest you to get good with this program before talking about its flaws. Also, put some logic. You said that you took hull of Exeter - good. But then you say one crucial thing - you took a larger hull of Exeter but you did not took larger displacement since it is limited. Thats the biggest flaw of your idea in general. Enlargening the hull strongly requires enlargening of displacement - otherwise your ship looses composite strength gradually.
And not to mention other mistakes you did - they were mentioned by several people already.
Wrong! Exeter was a 8,390 long standard tons cruiser. I put the standard displacement at 10,000 standard tons in a larger hull with almost the same armament.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 5 of 15  [ 143 posts ]  Return to “Drawing Challenges” | Go to page « 13 4 5 6 715 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


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


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