Shipbucket

Just for fun, I've designed some ships in a WWII where the Royal Navy somehow decided not to concentrate on soon to be obsolete battleship production and instead made panzerschiffe-style cruisers armed with big guns. As this is just an excuse to draw something different I'm not too interested in the political conditions and restraints that would affect these ideas, but I would like them to be fairly feasible and seaworthy. Any input in this department from people in the know would be appreciated!!

CA1 Armament:
2 x Twin 13.5" Mk.V
4 x Twin 4" Mk.XIX DP
2 x Quad 2 pound AA
21" Torpedo Tubes


CA2 Armament
2 x Twin 14" Mk.II
4 x Twin 4" Mk.XIX DP
3 x Quad 2 pound AA

_________________

Jabba's Worklist

I like the first one the best. Then again, I've always been a huge fan of Courageous and Glorious (failures though they were...).

All good vessels however I believe the RN would likely have only used the same guns and turrets from vessels scrapped to meet the Washington limitations to save on costs. That helps limit down the possibilities as to what you can and can't use.

_________________
"The first rule is not to lose; The second rule is not to forget the first rule"

Quite true. I had considered this; the main armaments for these designs are interchangable at this stage, partly as particularly large guns may require inefficient beam dimensions for 'cruiser' hull designs.

_________________

Jabba's Worklist

Yeah. That is one reason why for Sieran my original 12" armed battlecruiser has now shrunk to a 9.45" armed cruiser killer to better suit its required role as well as having the 'high' speed (32-33kts) it needs and good protection against the 8" guns of the Mogamis, the most likely opponents.

In the RNs case, these ships of yours I can't help imagine would have found monitor like roles rather than being true fleet units. At their size I can't imagine them having enough displacement for good armour protection.

_________________
"The first rule is not to lose; The second rule is not to forget the first rule"

Doubt the RN trying this idea but it's Personal Design
I'd think they might also use the 15/42 Mk. I instead of 14 inch Mk. VII for CA2

I love the single ended design. I can only imagine how useful a couple of ship like that would have been to the Australians during the night battles of the Solomans campaign in 42-43.

What sort of displacement would you be looking at for this ship? I know Glorious and Courageous suffered damage from their own guns at the Second Battle of Heligoland Bight due to having too much gun on too lightly built a hull. Glorious actually had to do time in the dockyards as a result.

Have you considered going with a single quad 14" turret instead of the two twin 14" turrets? that would let you beef up the hull around the guns and concentrate your armor to keep the displacement down while retaining structural integrity and heavy armaments. It might result in the ship being a bit broad of beam. The single ended layout would let you put the turret nearly amidships so you could probably get away with a hull shape similar to that of the German Panzerschiffe. It wouldn't win any beauty contests but it would still give you a cruiser killer.

Reallly neat! I like the CA1 best.

_________________
Worklist

"If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done." ~Ludwig Wittgenstein

Nice designs Jabba, but here are some points
The CA1 design should have bridge wings to the bridge. As it is now they are lacking. I believe the searchlight on the mast is not customarily carried by RN ships. Also I don't think you'll have torpedo tubes on ships of this kind (at least not in the 1920's or 1930's)
On the CA1 design the 4" guns should be 2 on each side with no super firing mountings above the main armament. Also, the bows on CA1 is too long, and I suggest moving everything forward and work in a hangar with athwart-ship catapult (like on the HMS Belfast)
The CA2 design although looks odd (by virtue of it being single ended, like HMS Rodney) the AA armament of 4" is badly placed with no guns for forward AA firing arcs. I also think that placing the quadruple .5" guns on the platform of the funnel is bad, because of ammunition supply. Again the bows of the ship is too long and empty and you can add a hangar and catapult if you move everything forward.
Note that I'm not suggesting to shorten the ships as it will hamper their hydrodynamics.

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

I think it would be attractive to make it six barrels for the main artillery. Only four is very little for properly ranging in on targets(one of the many failures of the Outrageous class).