Shipbucket

NSWE CL'30 updated, added to first page, along with some history \ geography blurb.

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695

Good morning all,

Well, I've been tinkering with a light carrier and thought I'd get some comment. Thanks once again to ezgo for help on the concept. I'll post the picture and some blurb underneath:



This is the WIP of NSWE's light fleet carrier in initial as built configuration. While NSWE will probably have a few escort carriers for keeping both internal and external commercial traffic safe, this carrier is intended to keep up with NSWE's warships.

By the time the initial production run of the CL-1930 class completed, NSWE planners had become sufficiently interested in the aircraft carrier concept to order some designs drawn up. The hull and plant of the CL-1930 were chosen as NSWE, still encumbered by WNT \ LNT limits, didn't have the tonnage to take a straight copy of the Graf Zeppelin, also, NSWE's naval dockyards, the primary construction site for the CL-1930 class, had become quite efficient at building these hulls by this point and were able to turn a hull around in relatively short time.

The CVL-1935 (I'm guessing it'd take until 1935 or so to construct 20 CL-1930) holds approximately 30 aircraft, once again, NSWE's preferred pusher-prop canard-configuration types for the most part, and the hull really is mostly CL-1930. The plant is exactly the same, the belt is the same, the barbettes are there but are not as thick - fuel storage is in 'X' barbette, elevators are in 'A' and 'Y' barbettes. In the CVL-1935's as-built configuration, the command spaces at the front are split by the catapult machinery, flight deck ops to port and slightly aft, navigation bridge starboard and forward, so the people driving the ship can see left.

I'm still not precisely sure how to refit this ship in later life. Ezgo's made some compelling points for a significant rebuild to add a bridge structure above the flight deck and get more hangar space, which would then let me do something with the funnels, which I'm less than entirely satisfied with (Ezgo was suggesting something like the Casablanca-class) - they're good points, but I'm honestly not sure how stable such a significant rebuild would be, and I'm not confident in my ability to get SpringSharp to model carrier construction well enough to even notice if I'm turning it into something too top-heavy.

I'd appreciate comment, both on the initial WIP and options for rebuilding.

Regards,
Adam

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695

Good afternoon all,

I'd like to present some further WIPpery - please see below, but also, an important question - the idea for this one, though none of the pixels, comes from Radome and Krakatoa's Fairey Falcon. Is credit due?



This is one of NSWE's pre-WWII and early-WWII interceptors, the Jagdflugzeug Korps: Modell 1938 Ausführung März 1938, generally known in service as the Jagdkugel Modell A, this particular one is a Jagdkugel Modell A2, the -A2 being almost the same as the A1, just with revisions to the size and share of the control surfaces - two rudders allows the area for the area for the rudder to be cut back a little and more allocated to the ailerons. (I just realised I didn't change the name from the other one. Rats.) - one of the first fighters produced by NSWE, this one has some flaws. In an attempt to simplify construction, the rear engine mount and cowling from the observation craft have been used, however, the shorter fighter doesn't have the mass forward to balance this well and as a result the design is quite tail-heavy. This also prevents the design from using heavier, more powerful engines, for fear of exacerbating the balance issue. Later designs abandoned the observation plane's cowling and engine mount, bringing the engine entirely within the structure and cooling it with ducts, allowing the wings and tail structure to be mounted further back. Armament is quite heavy for the period, 2 x 7.92mm machine guns (not Zwilings, just 2 MGs) and 2 x 20mm cannon, all situated in the nose.

Any good?

Regards,
Adam

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695

Very nice work on the fighter! Looks interesting!

_________________
Salide - Denton - The Interrealms

I am not very active on the forums anymore, but work is still being done on my AUs. Visit the Salidan Altiverse Page on the SB Wiki for more information. All current work is being done on Google Docs.
If anyone wishes for their nations to interact with the countries of the Salidan Altiverse, please send me a PM, after which we can further discuss through email.

You don't need to credit me.

That is an interesting looking design apdsmith.is it one or two crew? Just the canopy looks big enough for two.

Hi Krakatoa,

It's actually intended to be an attempt to get better visibility out of a razorback-style canopy - it's still not got a view on the 6, but it's got a bit more around that, but, now you mention it, that'd make a tolerable trainer. So far, I'm thinking that some or all of the subsequent fighters will have the ability (not installed on all, even if all have the capability) to mount trapeze gear on the razorback bit for the Zeppelins, along with more the option of conventional landing gear - either outrigger wheels like the Harrier or full-on undercarriage - in the wings in addition to the lower-fin mounted units, as even though they're canted out about thirty degrees, that's still a very narrow undercarriage track and it would kill too many novice pilots to just leave it like that. Those that don't require the additional undercarriage (Zeppelin or land runway-based) could have some 7.92mm in the wings instead, as the nose would be taken up by 3 x 20mm for taking on fighters or 2 x 30mm for going after bombers. I'd hoped to get 1 x 7.92 + 1 x 37mm AT in there as well, but the weight looks to be double that of 2 x 30mm, so that'll probably have to wait for a twin-engine aircraft.

Regards,
Adam

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695

Good morning all,

Please find below one of NSWE's inter-war and early-war interceptors, the Jagdflugzeug Korps: Modell 1938, generally known in service as the Jagdkugel, until it's retroactively re-named to the Jagdkugel Modell A with the introduction of the B model.



This particular model is an A2 model, the main differences between A2 and A1 being changing the areas of the rudder, elevator and ailerons and switching the A1's MG17 7.92mm machine guns for an early version of the MG131 13mm machine gun in an attempt to balance the aircraft better. The aircraft's balance was a persistent problem with the Model A, mainly as a result of re-use of the engine mounting and cowling from the 1937 "Greenhouse", forcing the wings forward without the Greenhouse's mass forward to balance the weight of the engine, leaving the aircraft quite tail-heavy. This, combined with the narrow-track undercarriage, made the Model A difficult to fly and to land, though experienced pilots were reported to value the heavy armament of 2 machine guns and 2 20mm cannon in the nose, eliminating any convergence issues and allowing accurate long-range shooting. The Model A was retired from front-line service quite quickly once the war started, as balance issues rendered any attempt to upgrade the type's Modula 9-1 engine unflyable, limiting it to an 850kW single-row radial at best, simply not sufficient to engage in combat. Known for murdering novice pilots, the Model A wasn't relegated to training roles and was simply scrapped once the Model B was available in sufficient numbers to replace it.

I hope the top and bottom views work, what do we think?

Regards,
Adam

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695

Good afternoon all,

It's been a while, but I've been busy creating NSWE's answer to the Maus, the Säbelzahntiger (Sabre-toothed tiger). Like the Maus, NSWE's super-heavy tank is necessarily intended for low volume production, the initial production run is for twelve hulls only, only half of those destined to become tanks, but after NSWE's surrender, one of the Säbelzahntiger is ceded to Denton as a part of NSWE's war reparations, requiring NSWE to build another to keep the same numbers. Due to the tank's immense size and weight cementing it's fundamentally defensive purposes, NSWE is permitted to finish one more, bringing the total production run to 13. In addition to six of the Säbelzahntiger pictured here, NSWE also created three ammunition carriers \ recovery vehicles and three heavy mobile AA, the Gabelblitzschlags, equipped with Wasserfall missiles and a 37mm rotary cannon for close-in defence. The twelve vehicles are split across NSWE's three main island groups (Pepys, Thompson and the Falklands), two Säbelzahntiger, one ammunition carrier and a Gabelblitzschlags each.

Given the immense costs of running these vehicles, they were generally intended for use in environments too hostile for even other tanks to survive - the fuel necessary to move one of these monsters would suffice to move 7 Tiger IIs a similar distance - generally limiting their participation in combat to a last line of defence or to engage the main body of an enemy's force - when designing the Säbelzahntiger, the Heer Bau Amt, having just witnessed the destruction of the joint Argentinian \ NSWE expeditionary force by Denton 17-pdr-equipped tanks, specified the machine to not only survive fire from the capable guns they had already seen, but also the next generation of guns sure to be in development. In fact, they overstepped the mark somewhat, as Säbelzahntiger's armour was sufficient to survive - just - a hit from it's own 128mm APDS shells (the designs for these were shipped to Germany, but weren't used, Germany lacking both the materials, which NSWE consistently struggled to get through, and the requirement, as the PaK 44 with standard APCBC-HE ammunition was more than a match for the tanks fielded in the ETO). Until such time as an enemy breakthrough to counter developed or the enemy's main body was identified, the Säbelzahntiger's role was intended to be that of a self-propelled gun, using the 24km range of it's twin KwK 44, it's radio-location equipment (located at the rear of the turret) and it's cut-down Naval gunfire director (located at the front right of the turret, across from the gunner), the "Einzel Tachymetrische Lösung Berechnung Kanone Ausblick" to land shells accurately on target. The gunfire director was also designed to accept inputs from the gunner's sights and rangefinder, allowing the gunner to hold a target in focus and centred in the reticule, which the director would then move to provide accurate offsets for range, elevation and target motion, allowing for approximately 90% accuracy at 1,500-2,000m range on the first shot in exercises (although this was anticipated to be lower in combat). The director, a product of NSWE's naval engineering, was inherently designed to hold a target vector and concurrently calculate gunnery solutions for all specified weaponry, allowing it to serve for the twin KwK 44 in both indirect and direct fire modes, for HE, APCBC-HE and APDS ammunition, the KwK 42 with it's varied ammunition load - this gun in particular excelled in testing, fed by a five-round autoloading drum generally loaded with mixture of APDS and APCBC-HE, the sheer mass of the tank meant that even firing rapidly, the gun's aim was stable enough to riddle anything that closed inside the KwK 44's preferred range with holes - and even the co-axial MG131 13mm machine gun, though the gunnery director wasn't able to perform a similar role for the cupola-mounted two MG131 that were expected to perform most of the AA work in practice.

Statistics:

• Length: 13.95m;
  Width: 5.73m;
  Height: 4.1m;
  Weight: 491.8 tonnes;
  Crew: 11
  • Bow Compartment:
    • Driver
      Engineer
      Assistant Engineer / Bow Gunner
    Turret:
    • Commander
      Gunner
      Radio Operator
      Left Cartridge Loader
      Left Shell Loader
      Right Cartridge Loader
      Right Shell Loader
      Centre Loader
  Armour:
  • 240mm (turret front) (+internal mantlet, 240mm + 120mm turret armour over mantlet) - partial 360mm effective;
    240mm (lower glacis) (30 degree slope) - 280mm effective;
    190mm (upper glacis) (60 degree slope) - 380mm effective;
    190mm (turret sides and rear) - (partial 12 degree slope) (partial 30 degree slope) - 195 - 220mm effective
    165mm (hull sides) (partial 30 degree slope) - 165 - 190mm effective;
    160mm (hull rear) (partial 35 degree slope) (partial 30 degree slope) - 185 - 195 mm effective.
  Main armament:
  • 2 x 128mm KwK 44 L/55 (140 rounds);
    1 x 75mm KwK 42 L/70 (150 rounds);
  Secondary armament:
  4 x 13mm MG131 (4,000 rounds);
  Engine: 4 x Modula-9D-3, 7,366hp (5.49MW);
  Power-to-weight: 14.98 hp/tonne (11.17 kW/t);
  Suspension: Torsion bar;
  Ground Clearance: 0.4m;
  Fuel Capacity: 12,800L (3,380 US Gal) (including 1975L (520 US Gal) in external tank);
  Operational Range: 270km (170 miles);
  Speed: 28mph.

This is largely finished, but I thought I'd get any final comments (apart from "this is monstrously impractical", which I already know ) - what do we all think?

Regards,
Adam

EDIT: PS, I'm an idiot - many thanks to Ezgo once again for his help on what turned out to be a real grind of a spec.

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695

Mein gott!

The scary thing is, this is actually one of the smaller versions that ended up specified. I had to go to some cutaways of the P&W R-4360 engine to see why it (and therefore my scaling for the Modula-9D-3) were so damned tall (the engines are mounted vertically, those four circles forward of the turret) - this thing goes into an H-class spiral of more weight, more track area needed, more tank, more armour, more weight very, very easily. Part of the reason for the massive, massive tracks is that rather than the Maus' 20-odd psi of ground pressure this thing "only" had a ground pressure of 14.1 (I was aiming for 15, came under at my last run through the figures and thought "You know what? It's good enough, I'm keeping it!"), which is still very high, but tolerable - the Tiger II has a ground pressure of 10.7 or so, so it's ballpark, at least. At one point, on one of the earlier, taller variations, I figured out that every half-meter plug I added to length added tonnes of armour to this beast - Total armour weight on this, the small version, is something like 227,500kg.

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695