Shipbucket

That looks much better.

All the concerns I raised have been answered and I now look forward with interest to see the finished unit.

Hi looks better cant wait to see it.

A few Q ?
- Why the range increase ? will you need it in the Baltic ? (I would show it at much more than 14Kn, say 21+)
- Do you really want to carry mine on your best ship ? or put them on a disposable PT boat in case they get hit ? (if you defiantly have DDs/PTs near you you could drop the TTs as well ?)
- Conning towers (and belt) are thicker than the main guns faces ? (I see the reason for the belt, or at least the mags but does CT need it ?).
- are the rear turrets super-firing ? or does it work as it is on a different deck level ?

I presume you have compared with the Tre Kronor, 7650t standard 4350 range (@14) and 33 Kn at 90,000shp

JSB

I had some hullstrength left,. She is not intended for the Baltic, primary the high seas as flagship on Colonial stations or convoy Escort/ Surface raider. The Swedish empire I Think all ships must be able to carry mines, with her high speed and good fighting Power her minelaying vapiability can come in handy. I.e all IRL sedish warships can lay mines, and sweep minews (some only one ) I will adjust that
Yes the X turret is superfiring, from the higher decklevel over Y turret
Yes and no, she is modeled in Springsharp Beta 3. I want a Heavy cruiser, able to fight Hipper or Mogami.

_________________
Dieu et mon droit
Solus dux nullus ductus

Worklist
All Royal Swedish Navy units from 1522 to present

I know I should really wait to see exactly where the mines go, but ...
"Mines 2 - 661,39 lbs / 300,00 kg mines + 60 reloads - 18,306 t total in above water - Stern racks/rails"
That presents a target of about 240 square feet or 24 m2 ? Vulnerable to your opponents secondaries, even?
" I want a Heavy cruiser, able to fight Hipper or Mogami."
I think those two requirements are incompatible. Your screws and steering are far too vulnerable to a hit on the mine racks.

Mines are a bit of a Scandinavian fetish I'm afraid. We put them on just about anything including civilian ferries and Royal Yachts.
The idea is that since the mine fields were our main defensive weapon getting them laid out in a hurry made sense. Building enough dedicated minelayers would of course have been the best option, but that wasn't an economic option. Instead the idea was that each warship would bring a load out and lay them before moving on to fight the enemy. If the enemy surprised you before you'd deployed them you'd pull the lever and drop all of them in one go.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

Your'r right Thiel, I Think fitting rails are a very economic way to increase her capabilities. As she will operate in the narrow seas in the Phillipine archipelago aswell 'i Think minelaying capability isa good force multiplyer.

Here is a Movie from the IRL HSwMS Göta Lejons last voyage 1963-64 under the command of cmd Roland Engdahl. You can see her loadining and laying mines from 3min 15s.
Here

_________________
Dieu et mon droit
Solus dux nullus ductus

Worklist
All Royal Swedish Navy units from 1522 to present

Thanks, Thiel. I now understand - part of a defensive minelaying strategy, rather than a means of taking mines aggressively into enemy waters. Chacun a son gout, as I think the French say, but I'm not convinced at using such an expensive warship in that way.
" She is not intended for the Baltic, primary the high seas as flagship on Colonial stations or convoy Escort/ Surface raider"
If you aim to fight Hipper or Mogami on the high seas, I'd rather carry an extra 18tons of shells, or more counting the weight of mine rails etc. I suppose it ultimately depends on the size of your fleet and the money you are prepared to put in.

How much would a 20Kn motor ship (big stern trawler or ferry ?) cost that could carry 60 mines (or way more) is using a £5,574 million / $22,297 million warship a good idea if you have even the small risk or air attack setting hem off ?

" She is not intended for the Baltic, primary the high seas as flagship on Colonial stations or convoy Escort/ Surface raider"
- For a Raider you might want even more range (the Germans had 6,800 nmi at 20 kn)(depending on how many refuelling points you might have available in your AU ?)

JSB

20 knots? Helluva lot.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

As Thiel says "20 knots? Helluva lot." (I've also seen accounts of Hipper's cruises being cut short by her "thirsty engines", I think by their practical performance rather than their designed intention.)
Accurate range figures are hard to find, and are affected by clean bottoms, time out of dock etc. Comparing different ships it is even harder to be sure you are working on the same basis, but I think some figures I have for Crown Colony cruisers are reasonable: Uganda 8000miles at 16 knots, but Tiger as converted 3750 at 20 knots. (IIRC Tiger used about 4% of her shp to power auxiliaries, generators etc rather more than her predecessors, so that about 4000miles at 20 knots would have been the comparable figure - half that at 16 knots. RN quoted their County 8in cruisers at 12 knots, their later 6in cruisers at 16. Post WWII cruisers were expected to keep up with carrier task forces, needing 20 knots. The wartime N2 design, intended for that purpose, had max speed 28knots from 48000shp, and a quoted range estimate of 7700miles (speed not specified) while a comparable 1954 design offered 3600 at 20 knots, 5500 miles at 20 knots clean, though her 60000shp was half steam, half gas turbine, allowing the steam to be optimized for faster 20knot cruising, with a 30knot maximum.