Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 3 of 3  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page « 1 2 3
Author Message
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 2nd, 2012, 8:04 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
British 5/70? Why?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
klagldsf
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 2nd, 2012, 8:26 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm
I know speaking on someone's behalf is bad form, but I'm guessing because it was a medium-caliber British naval rifle that was considered available when these designs were first drafted.

At least, IMHO, it makes a little more sense than an obsolete, high-mannage requirement WWII-era weapon that likely would've been pulled from a vessel in the process of scrapping.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 2nd, 2012, 8:54 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
The 5/70 (actually, its 5/56 descendant) was cancelled in 1953. I don't know when these were first discussed by the Canadians, but I'd guess it was after that.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
sailor82
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 2nd, 2012, 11:27 pm
Offline
Posts: 101
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:17 pm
Location: Virginia
Previous drawings updated.

To be honest, I have no idea what gun mount they were trying to portray. If it was a 5"/38 Mk.38 it would be outdated by the 1960's.

Below is another option with the twin 120mm Bofors.

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 3rd, 2012, 12:28 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
sailor82 wrote:
Previous drawings updated.

To be honest, I have no idea what gun mount they were trying to portray. If it was a 5"/38 Mk.38 it would be outdated by the 1960's.
The 5"/38 had the advantage of numbers, still being useful as an anto-surface mount, and cost (it would have been cheep).

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
bezobrazov
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 3rd, 2012, 3:23 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3406
Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:20 pm
You may want to refer to the redesigned underwater hull of the real Tribal-class that I made a short while ago.

_________________
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]
sailor82
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 3rd, 2012, 10:51 am
Offline
Posts: 101
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:17 pm
Location: Virginia
Updated previous drawings ... Thanks Bezobrazov!

My intent is to stay faithful to the original drawing, yet show a design lineage to the Tribal class.
Quote:
The 5"/38 had the advantage of numbers, still being useful as an anto-surface mount, and cost (it would have been cheep).
True, but I would think the manning for the gun mount would be a factor against as well as maintenance issues that can come up from "used" surplus.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 3rd, 2012, 11:55 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Indeed. Even though the RDN received the guns for the Peder Skram class for free, the cost of refurbishing them and maintaining them meant that it would have been cheaper to buy the twin 120mm Bofors gun.

_________________
“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]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: Canadian DDG 1960 ProjectPosted: January 3rd, 2012, 5:16 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
Thiel wrote:
Indeed. Even though the RDN received the guns for the Peder Skram class for free, the cost of refurbishing them and maintaining them meant that it would have been cheaper to buy the twin 120mm Bofors gun.
Try telling that to the politicians that authorize the procurement.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 3 of 3  [ 29 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 17 guests


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


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