Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 2 of 3  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page « 1 2 3 »
Author Message
Portsmouth Bill
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: December 3rd, 2012, 6:45 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3220
Joined: August 16th, 2010, 7:45 am
Location: Cambridge United Kingdom
Very interesting, and well rendered; and not a design I've come across before. :)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Vice Admiral MTG
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: December 13th, 2012, 12:41 am
Offline
Posts: 7
Joined: November 21st, 2012, 1:54 am
Nice post WW-2 design, but are the two turrets use the quadruple design in order to keep the maximum firepower of 8x2 main guns? I like to see if the main armament would be 18"/50 guns instead of 16"/55.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
klagldsf
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: December 13th, 2012, 2:24 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm
Not necessarily; like I said, "final" plans for HMS Lion completely deleted the aft main turret. A drawing of it is in the "What-If" database.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
William Walker
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: June 4th, 2013, 9:17 pm
Offline
Posts: 15
Joined: June 4th, 2013, 8:56 pm
Yes very interesting. It wasn't really a battleships as the turrets were built for shorebombardment and it was going to have less armour protection. It is what I would call a Mobile Artillary Ship. I have plans to build a small version for the currently Royal Navy as class of two ships based on the Invincible class hull with 2 turrents for 4 13 inch heavy guns with new shells for shore bombardment. However in my "Dream Navy" I have a ships just like this but with modern systems, helicopters, VLS and so on.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
jabba
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: June 5th, 2013, 7:16 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1012
Joined: April 14th, 2011, 5:00 pm
Location: Under your kitchen sink...
Nice.

_________________
[ img ]
Jabba's Worklist


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Sumeragi
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: January 20th, 2015, 2:56 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 136
Joined: December 22nd, 2014, 10:38 am
Can someone tell me the various electronics that are on this ship? I'm interested in the development of postwar British radar and electronics.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: January 20th, 2015, 1:31 pm
Offline
Posts: 7233
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
No problem:

Main directors: Type 274 (the later single dual-array version)
Secondary directors: US Mk 37 upgraded with Type 275 (as was done to Vanguard)
AA directors: Close-Range Blind-Firing (CRBF) directors (the number of the radar it contains escapes my memory at the moment)
Mainmast: Type 280 air-search radar
Foremast: not sure what the thingy is on top (I cut it from Bombhead's Vanguard I think), some kind of HF/DF array? Lower down on the platform is Type 277P height-finding/ surface search radar.

Please note the RN Radars part sheet now has updated versions of all of these parts.
These are all late-war items of equipment, CRBF just early post-war.

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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Sumeragi
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: January 20th, 2015, 2:05 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 136
Joined: December 22nd, 2014, 10:38 am
Interesting, so the British put the main director below the secondary, while the US did the opposite?

Know what kind of differences that makes?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
JSB
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: January 20th, 2015, 2:57 pm
Offline
Posts: 1433
Joined: January 21st, 2014, 5:33 pm
I think its maybe just a carry on from the RN planing to fight at closer ranges pre radar (so lower is ok) and then not changing/swaping them round later as that would cost money ? (not sure, that or saving weight if the main is heavier ?)

JSB


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945Posted: January 21st, 2015, 9:06 am
Offline
Posts: 7233
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
That seems to have been standard practice since the 1920s, especially with the introduction of the tower superstructure.

I think the reason is twofold; better unobstructed arcs for the HACS or HA director of whatever type) and to lessen the topweight as the director towers were quite heavy two-storey structures.

_________________
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 2 of 3  [ 21 posts ]  Return to “Never-Built Designs” | Go to page « 1 2 3 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


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


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