Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 2 of 6  [ 59 posts ]  Go to page « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »
Author Message
Krakatoa
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 25th, 2016, 8:21 am
Offline
Posts: 2504
Joined: July 1st, 2014, 12:20 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact: Website
For the Sunnyland the first thing I notice is you have 275,000shp to fit between the 'B' barbette and the 'X' barbette, then you are going to exhaust that power through that one little stack where you might need 3 or 4 of that size. To push 82,500 tons at 32 knots might take a bit more than 275,000shp. You have another bad mix of armament, the 203mm are a complete waste of time, space and tonnage.

Trying for too much. By the time that monster is built, the aircraft carrier is already King. You could have built two of the Midway Class CV's which would sink your ship before you ever saw them. Thinking of huge battleships finished the moment the aircraft carrier shows what it can do. Even the Japanese did not bother finishing the Shinano as a battleship but converted it to an aircraft carrier.



The SKC/34 11" is the gun on the Scharnhorst not the gun on your ship.

this is your gun = http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_11-40_skc04.htm

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Keisser
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 25th, 2016, 8:43 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 177
Joined: May 24th, 2016, 11:26 am
Krakatoa wrote:
For the Sunnyland the first thing I notice is you have 275,000shp to fit between the 'B' barbette and the 'X' barbette, then you are going to exhaust that power through that one little stack where you might need 3 or 4 of that size. To push 82,500 tons at 32 knots might take a bit more than 275,000shp. You have another bad mix of armament, the 203mm are a complete waste of time, space and tonnage.
Understood! I would add more exhausting tubes. About the machinery, I dont know hou to relocate it.
Krakatoa wrote:
Trying for too much. By the time that monster is built, the aircraft carrier is already King. You could have built two of the Midway Class CV's which would sink your ship before you ever saw them. Thinking of huge battleships finished the moment the aircraft carrier shows what it can do. Even the Japanese did not bother finishing the Shinano as a battleship but converted it to an aircraft carrier.
Yep. We may also remember a defeat of British "Z" group (sinking of the Repule and Prince of Wales by Japanese planes). But in order to avoid misunderstanding, I need to explane our universe's shipbuilding nuances wider. What shall I do to get a permission for creation a topic in "AU designs"?
Krakatoa wrote:
The SKC/34 11" is the gun on the Scharnhorst not the gun on your ship.
this is your gun = http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_11-40_skc04.htm
Oh, my mistake.
Krakatoa wrote:
[ img ]
Thanks!

_________________
«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]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 25th, 2016, 9:57 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 9102
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
Krakatoa wrote:
The 11" are not big enough to damage ships of similar size or most smaller battleships either. Anything with 10" of armour would feel comfortable facing a ship with 11" guns. A ship with 8x14" guns, 12x5.9", 4x3.4"AA, 14" belt armour and 3.9" deck would be far superior to what you have now.
Wikipedia says that 28 cm SKC/34 penetrates a 20" armour at 8 km distance, I used this information.[/quote]

- the 28CM SKC/34 (the guns on Scharnhorst) Is way more modern guns than, those guns you want on you'r ships.
- When engaging an Battleship, they often tend to engage on an long range.... more than 8 km range. Battleships and Dreadnoughts tend to be able to fire at a 20 km range or more and deal more damage. Just a perfect "lucky" shoot from an 15" guns is more than enough to destroy any other ships (For example HMS Hood)
- Dreadnought and Battleships during that era, was all about how got the biggest guns that could deal most damage, but also be able to withstand the biggest guns an enemy might have.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Keisser
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 26th, 2016, 3:43 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 177
Joined: May 24th, 2016, 11:26 am
Okay then, now I made a new dreadnought, trying to take into account criticism of my earlier designs... I made this one. Now with those boats! :D
[ img ]
HISMS Miugi. SprinSharp says:
Displacement: 30 122 t standard; 33 645 t normal; 36 463 t full load
Length: 175 m (waterline), beam 28 m.
Armament: 5x2 305 mm/50 cal guns; 16 152 mm/45 cal guns; 8x2 76 mm/60 cal dual purpoise guns; 4x3 25 mm AA guns and twin 127 mm dual purpoise gun.
Weight of broadside: ~5 t
Armour: 305 mm main belt, 203 mm ends, 127 mm upper, 152 mm bulge, 127 mm torpedo bulkheads, 381-508 mm main guns, 254 mm conning towers, 40 mm deck.
Machinery: coal/oil fired boilers, steam turbines, direct drive, 2 shafts, 64 329 ihp = 24,00 kts
Range: 9 500nm at 14,00 kts
Bunker: 6 341 tons (65% coal)
Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship: 66x305 mm shells or 10,4 torpedoes
Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space.
Excellent accommodation and workspace room.
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform.
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily.

_________________
«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.


Last edited by Keisser on May 27th, 2016, 3:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 26th, 2016, 7:06 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
The lone secondary mount on the stern does not make a great deal of sense to me.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
BB1987
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 26th, 2016, 9:03 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2818
Joined: May 23rd, 2012, 1:01 pm
Location: Rome - Italy
All the anti-air armament is a bit of a mix between 1910s, 1930s and 1940s Japanese mounts.
Personally I'd land both the lone 127mm gun at the stern and the shielded 76mm ones, replacing them al with the high-angle 76mm guns seen on the conning tower. The 25mm machine guns are also a mid-to-late 30s weapons, I'd replace them too with twin or single 13mm ones or even single 40mm

Most Japanese guns are available on this sheet:
http://i.imgur.com/0YFUpr8.png

Lastly, above the forward conning tower it appears you have a type-91 main gun director with a 3,5m rangefinder fitted on top of it. That fit would not work like that, morover, the Type 91 was a mid-to-late 30s system too, I'd just ditch that while keeping the 3,5m rangefinder

_________________
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]
bezobrazov
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 26th, 2016, 10:08 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3406
Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:20 pm
You write it has four shafts. But your drawing only shows two... I would strongly like to adjoin other esteemed bucketeers in their advice to you and also like to urge you to be more detailed oriented. It's often in the details that you either fail or succeed.

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Keisser
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 27th, 2016, 3:41 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 177
Joined: May 24th, 2016, 11:26 am
Okay, thanks for your opinion, I'll work on it.

_________________
«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]
Keisser
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 27th, 2016, 3:42 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 177
Joined: May 24th, 2016, 11:26 am
bezobrazov wrote:
You write it has four shafts. But your drawing only shows two...
Corrected.

_________________
«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]
apdsmith
Post subject: Re: Dreadnoughtization succesPosted: May 27th, 2016, 3:16 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 855
Joined: August 29th, 2013, 5:58 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Hi Keisser,

I think the issue is that your design shows only two shafts. Everything I'm aware of from that sort of time would require four shafts to move a ship of that size.

Regards,
Adam

Edit: English, apparently I don't speak it...

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.
[ img ]
NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695


Last edited by apdsmith on May 27th, 2016, 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 2 of 6  [ 59 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests


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


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