Shipbucket

I just don't want to be a total hindsight RN w***, with hindsight you could build a much better ship but would it be realistic for a ship commissioned in 1916 ? (ie started pre war instead of the Rs)

Things like,
- above deck guns (and not in triples)
- vanguard bow (with bulbous bow under it)
- super firing turrets
- Queen Anns bridge
- transom stern
-......... etc.

Does that make sense ?
JSB

I really don't see what the problem is. It was a well recognised fact that casemates were pretty much useless in any sort of weather. The 5.5" came about in 1913 so it fits the time-frame for a 1916 commissioning just fine. Hell there are casemates on the main deck OTL so why not put them all there, anything to make them worth putting on in the first place rather than just the prestige of having a huge but useless secondary battery...

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire

Then why did the RN use them on the QEs and Rs ?
They didn't OTL swap to upper deck guns till R&R and the LLC and Hood, all of them are war time designs unless I'm mistaken ?

JSB

Because the 6" was the prevailing gun at that time. The 5.5" was pressed into service outside of the normal means of development. That's not to say the 5.5" is a better or poorer gun than the 6", just different.

May 1916 shows Royal Oak with main deck casemates...

If for some strange reason you're dead set upon having casemates why not integrate the fore and aft groups into the barbettes of B and X turrets so your secondary battery is all on the main deck?

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire

I willing to change if its not to good for a ship laid down in 1913/14 ? just tried to keep what the Rs had in OTL but faster.
(Hoods 1937 Royal Oak still has 6inch casements even after it got 4inch on deck ?)

anyway a WIP of the 39 version (any feed back before I do the details would be cool, I need to start using layers rather than paint )


JSB

IIRC the 5.5-inch was fitted to "Furious" as they were available (from a Greek order that was never delivered). The Admiralty was quite interested to see how they compared to the 6-inch gun...

Hence me saying. "Pressed into service outside of normal means"...

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire

But its still a war time designed ships (laid down 8 June 1915) rather than a R replacement ( 12 November 1913 - 15 January 1914)

That may not be much time but I think its to much hindsight to be realistic pre war ?

JSB

I agree both ships look very nice, the WW2 rebuild version especially so.

If its a 1913-14 design then I'm guessing the 6in casemate would be used. When Renown and Repulse were converted into a battlecruiser design the 6in was ditched in favour of 4in triple mounts. The 6in had by then been recognised as a poor anti-destroyer weapon, its rate of fire was too low and the low casemates made things worse. The 4in was deemed to lack hitting power at far enough ranges to keep the destroyers from launching torpedoes. A triple mount was though to offer much more bang but it was a cumbersome mount to operate and probably worse than a casemate. The shielded 5.5in was available and used on Hood, but it offered a mid-size weapon that had been lacking before. Lighter but with a good punch.

As to this design the casemate layout should be grouped together more. I don't want to get too technical as this a personal design but it might help refine things. Generally casemates form an armoured battery with armoured roof, walls and internal dividing walls. Generally when two or more casemates were used (fore and aft) in RN practice they were linked by an upper belt the same thickness so there was no weaker section between them. QE and Rs were quite compact ships and this worked well. Foreign naves like the French and Russians spread the casemates much further, sometimes in small groups. The IJN often spread theirs out too but often still within a larger defined battery. Your design does remind me of Japanese practice but there are large unarmoured gaps between the casemates (this has to be to avoid weight). I wonder how much the increasing length of ships like Renown and Repulse and the Admirals contributed to the ditching of the casemate as it no longer made sense to group the casemate and spread ones were too heavy. This might have played as big a role as the anti-destroyer factors mentioned above in the move to upper-deck mounts.

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

Ok I have modified the 6 inch guns, front ones are now in shields on deck and shortened the casements.

And do feel free to rip it apart Hood, even if it is a personal design I would love to know anything wrong with it.....

JSB