Shipbucket

Very nice display Shigure, all your ships have very elegant lines. I sometimes get the feeling tat they look a decade too modern for the year they are depicted (might be those sterns! ), but that may as well just being a trait of your AU, and it is not that of a big issue to me.

_________________
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

Thanks for the compliments you two!

_________________

Juno class heavy cruiser



Designed as a response to the Myoko class cruisers, the Juno class had a substantial firepower improvement over the previous Cascadia class, bringing her six guns to nine. She was able to retain her speed of 33 knots and her 100mm belt. Displacing only 9000 tonnes, there was still room for improvement and the navy was not yet satisfied with this new class, still being weaker than their Japanese counterparts, and very unbalanced. They were however happy with her level of firepower, as it would be carried onto further classes, while her armor would be improved with subsequent classes.

Career wise the Junos were possibly the unluckiest class in the navy, Suki and Sage were torpedoed during the surprise attack on Port Isla, whilst Juno was sunk by cruiser Haguro during the Battle of the Java Sea. Cora was the only member of the class to survive, serving in both theaters of war.

Displacement - 9100 tonnes
Main battery - 3x3 203mm/55
Secondary battery - 8x1 127mm/50
Armor - 100mm main belt
Speed - 33 knots
Range - 8000nm at 16 knots







Ships in class

Juno - Sunk in action, 1941
Cora - Scrapped, 1947
Suki - Torpedoed, 1940
Sage - Torpedoed, 1940

_________________

Nice, the last one definitely needs a stronger foremast to support the heavy radars though. Otherwise looks good.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

Removed for being outdated.

_________________

Good stuff man, I am surprised you aren't getting more comments. All these drawings are well done, perfectly within the style, and (for the most part) realistic and well thought out. My few complaints are pretty technical things like mast width etc which you've sorted out.

Good work overall.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

Speaking for myself, I have little to say. They're excellent drawings.

I think it's harder to get much appreciation for the nature of a historical AU (c.f. leut_east's splendid modern-day Australian forces). Too much scrolling from page to page to try to remember what changed when!

I only think the cruiser-and-above ships are a little lacking in stern buoyancy

Thanks for the compliments.

However I'm not sure what you mean by the stern buoyancy.

_________________

I do it simple:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buoyancy

Nice work here

_________________
best regards
Martin

~~Normerr~~FD stuff~~