Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 2 of 4  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page « 1 2 3 4 »
Author Message
Rhade
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 9th, 2011, 4:54 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2804
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 12:45 pm
Location: Poland
Whey you say northern Europe I think more of Sweden, Norway, Finland or maybe even Denmark ...

_________________
[ img ]
Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
bezobrazov
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 9th, 2011, 5:40 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3406
Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:20 pm
For post WW1-era ARCs and a new kind of heavy cruiser ersatz for BCs, take a look in my "Royal Hellenic Navy's Cruiser Force" in the Alternate Universe main thread. Hopefully that can infuse you with ideas!

_________________
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]
Portsmouth Bill
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 9th, 2011, 5:44 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3220
Joined: August 16th, 2010, 7:45 am
Location: Cambridge United Kingdom
Sorry Zephyr, I have completely misread this post, I actually thought it was your take on a RN capital ship; instead its an AU in another dimension. I will quietly leave the room :oops:

(note to Self, 'why do you persist in sticking your oar in, when your time can be so more pleasurably spent drawing ships?'. Um...? answer to self: 'yep your right, time to back off big time!')


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Zephyr
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 9th, 2011, 7:05 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA
Portsmouth Bill wrote:
Sorry Zephyr, I have completely misread this post, I actually thought it was your take on a RN capital ship; instead its an AU in another dimension. I will quietly leave the room :oops:

(note to Self, 'why do you persist in sticking your oar in, when your time can be so more pleasurably spent drawing ships?'. Um...? answer to self: 'yep your right, time to back off big time!')
Back off? Why? I was issuing the backstory to help inspire ideas, not discourage them, and to give a clearer picture of the reasoning behind the ship design.

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Zephyr
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 9th, 2011, 8:13 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA
Version 3.

I added a few things to it like rails and boats. I also added some ports back in because it seems that most ships of that era had them, so it just kinda followed in my mind that this one ought have some too.

[ img ]

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 10th, 2011, 12:41 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Rhade wrote:
Whey you say northern Europe I think more of Sweden, Norway, Finland or maybe even Denmark ...
None of those had the resources to opperate one of these.
They simply require too much manpower and other resources.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Rhade
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 10th, 2011, 8:56 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2804
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 12:45 pm
Location: Poland
Thats why Thiel my friend I say that northern Europe is not a good customer for this kind of ship. ;)

_________________
[ img ]
Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 10th, 2011, 10:56 am
Offline
Posts: 7233
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
Thiel's efforts have made a ship that looks much more plausible, a kind of mini-QE but its still something that looks more like a 1913-15 concept than a 1920s one. The RN would not have built a battlecruiser like this in the 20s, one could think perhaps more of a mini G3 or Nelson. Even the concept of a 'small' battlecruiser is flawed given the huge space needed for boilers and tubines etc.
However as an armoured cruiser (go for 9.2in guns) this would make more sense, esp if there is no Washington Treaty.

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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Zephyr
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 10th, 2011, 12:27 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA
Hood wrote:
Thiel's efforts have made a ship that looks much more plausible, a kind of mini-QE but its still something that looks more like a 1913-15 concept than a 1920s one. The RN would not have built a battlecruiser like this in the 20s, one could think perhaps more of a mini G3 or Nelson. Even the concept of a 'small' battlecruiser is flawed given the huge space needed for boilers and tubines etc.
However as an armoured cruiser (go for 9.2in guns) this would make more sense, esp if there is no Washington Treaty.
OK, I'll say this one....more....time....

1.) This is NOT the Royal Navy of Great Britain. This is an AU fictitious nation called Grays Harbor.

2.) Why is size such a frelling issue here? This ship is virtually the same size as the German Deutschlands, and last time I checked, all their machinery fit just fine.

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: HMS Matchless (UKGH AU)Posted: December 10th, 2011, 1:01 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Because Deutschland carried 6 11in guns in two turrets, while Matchless carries 6 12in guns in three.
As a result the machinery spaces are 60 ft shorter.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 2 of 4  [ 33 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page « 1 2 3 4 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


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


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