|
Post by babylon218 on Nov 26, 2017 18:12:58 GMT -6
KAW would also like to present a tender for the BB-1915 competition, as an alternative to our Schlactkreuzer 1915 proposal: Schlactschiff 1915 is largely identical to Schlactkreuzer 1915, with the following notable differences: - Main armament increased to 10 13" guns, with the two lower turrets configured as triples.
- Armour has been increased by 1/2" on the belt and turret faces.
- Speed has been reduced to 24kn, which is still comparable to many of the world's battlecruisers and superior to most dreadnoughts (that we know of).
- These changes allowed a reduction in tonnage to 32,500t, reducing monthly costs to 3.7Mn marks. Construction time remains unchanged.
While Krupp-Allington Werft remains confident in our CC-1915 proposal, if the ICN values armour and firepower over speed, we believe this design will serve the Empress well.
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Nov 26, 2017 18:19:51 GMT -6
Did I prompt this?
If so Huzzah
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Nov 27, 2017 6:09:32 GMT -6
Did I prompt this? If so Huzzah Yep. I forgot just how much I could fit onto a standard BB in terms of armour and firepower. The one problem with all this is whatever happens, the fleet is either gonna have a BB which outpaces the existing BB (by quite a long way, at that) or a BC which outpaces the existing BC.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Nov 27, 2017 15:46:10 GMT -6
Hamson would like to present design for DD1915 competition. We analyze needs of Imperial China for destroyer and draw several designs. We defined anticipated needs for new destroyer: - covering main force from destroyers and enhance defence against cruiser attacks - torpedo attacks - defence of convoys from raiders, especially cruisers - hunting scout cruisers - fight with enemy destroyers We found out that standard destroyer with costs between 3.5 to 4 M would not meet all creteria, especially convoy defence against cruisers, defence of main force against cruiser attacks and hunting enemy cruisers. So we propose completely new design of destroyer that can be built in 11 months with costs of 5.1 M - flotilla leader. The main specifications are: speed: 32 knotsbroadside: 6x6", - same firepower that of Fei Yun class cruiser but almost 5 times cheaper torpedoes: 6 mountsOur opinion is that higher costs are reasonable as each of these flotilla leaders can fight any 2-3 destroyers at time because of firepower of 6" guns and can even fight most enemy cruisers alone as their speed secures they choose range of fight and with excelent british 6" guns with range of 14.000 yards. We suggest that Imperial Navy should have for each 3 destroyers 1 flotilla leader. We are working on battleship and battlecruiser design and dispatch them in time. DD1915_Hamson_update.40d (5.16 KB) edit: drawing of the ship edit2: updated design
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Nov 27, 2017 16:48:18 GMT -6
The one problem with all this is whatever happens, the fleet is either gonna have a BB which outpaces the existing BB (by quite a long way, at that) or a BC which outpaces the existing BC. I'm not all that bothered by the one-knot speed difference between Kai Chi and the proposed battlecruisers. The four-knot speed difference between Kwang-Chou-Wan and the proposed fast battleships is a bit more of an issue, though on the other hand modernizing the battle line is probably going to be the next priority anyways since the pre-treaty battleship Chen Yuen, the pre-treaty but treaty-compliant coastal battleship Pan Chao, and the treaty battleship Tian Dan are probably all about due for replacement, and rebuilding Kwang-Chou-Wan for ~24 knots might not be too expensive to consider doing post-war (it looks like it'd run to ~32M over 12 months right now). Still, it's probably also time to do something about the 23- and 24-knot armored cruisers, and I'll also need to decide what to do about the raiding fleet soon because it's starting to look like the existing cruisers (especially the Cheng Hos) are too slow to continue in service for much longer. Regardless, modernizing the battle line is a project for the future; we might get started on it with this design competition if I like the battleship submissions more than the battlecruiser submissions, but I don't intend to take any of the existing battleships out of service for extensive reconstruction or scrapping for the duration of the war.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Nov 28, 2017 12:03:15 GMT -6
The one problem with all this is whatever happens, the fleet is either gonna have a BB which outpaces the existing BB (by quite a long way, at that) or a BC which outpaces the existing BC. I'm not all that bothered by the one-knot speed difference between Kai Chi and the proposed battlecruisers. The four-knot speed difference between Kwang-Chou-Wan and the proposed fast battleships is a bit more of an issue, though on the other hand modernizing the battle line is probably going to be the next priority anyways since the pre-treaty battleship Chen Yuen, the pre-treaty but treaty-compliant coastal battleship Pan Chao, and the treaty battleship Tian Dan are probably all about due for replacement, and rebuilding Kwang-Chou-Wan for ~24 knots might not be too expensive to consider doing post-war (it looks like it'd run to ~32M over 12 months right now). Still, it's probably also time to do something about the 23- and 24-knot armored cruisers, and I'll also need to decide what to do about the raiding fleet soon because it's starting to look like the existing cruisers (especially the Cheng Hos) are too slow to continue in service for much longer. Regardless, modernizing the battle line is a project for the future; we might get started on it with this design competition if I like the battleship submissions more than the battlecruiser submissions, but I don't intend to take any of the existing battleships out of service for extensive reconstruction or scrapping for the duration of the war. I do not think that spending money to refit armored cruisers are cost effective. To increase speed of Nan Chen to 28 knots, you need 29M (for 29 knots even 43 M) with maintanence costs of 270k. For Ning Hai refit is even more costly, 36 M to 28 knots. To build brand new cruiser with same tasks (overrun light cruisers built now even in future) with 29 knots, 9x8", 8x4" guns, basic torpedo protection, AoN protection from 6" guns from 8.000 yards, you need only 39M with maintanence 204k. Your ships after refit are unable to fight new armored cruisers and old ones will be scrap early. Its pretty clear that with even lower cost you get ship that are better suited for the needed tasks and still cheaper. I think it will be very similar for the battleship refit. Right know it is impossible to increase her speed to 24 knots without heavy sacrifice (technology improvement of machinery is not signaficant yet) and considerably costs of 30M. For cost around 110M you can build battleship with double firepower and much better armor scheme (AoN, 3" deck, around 14" belt and turret armor) meaning you have 2 ships with triple firepower and better surviability that refitting old ships.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Nov 28, 2017 16:19:56 GMT -6
I have no intention of rebuilding Nan Chen, Ning Hai, or Ping Hai for higher speeds. 'Doing something' about them will mean building replacements of some kind and withdrawing the old cruisers from service.
Firstly, I was only looking at rebuilding Kwang-Chou-Wan as a way to ballpark whether or not a 24kn battleship might be a reasonable part of the new construction program. Even as a wealthy power like the USA, I'd probably keep a ship like Kwang-Chou-Wan in service into the late 1920s or early 1930s, and I see no reason to replace it any sooner than that as a very poor power like Chin China, but since I don't have any battleships comparable to Kwang-Chou-Wan I would very much prefer for Kwang-Chou-Wan to be capable of working with whatever new ships I build without handicapping the new ships too severely. That means that either the new ships should be no more than a knot or two faster than Kwang-Chou-Wan or I need to be able to rebuild Kwang-Chou-Wan to within a knot or two of the new ships' speeds at a reasonable cost.
Secondly, if we accept the figures of 110M/ship over 30 months for a ~24kn modern battleship and 30M over 12 months to rebuild Kwang-Chou-Wan for ~24kn, then I'd point out that the 80M saved by rebuilding rather than replacing Kwang-Chou-Wan would go a long ways towards replacing the three 23-24kn armored cruisers or one of the three battleships that I most want to replace, or even towards adding a fifth battleship or another battlecruiser to the fleet. Yes, replacing Kwang-Chou-Wan is probably the better option in the long run, but Chin China's budget is rather limited and modernizing the battle line isn't the only expensive project I would like to accomplish in the reasonably near future. If modernizing the battle line involves increasing its speed to ~24 knots then rebuilding rather than replacing Kwang-Chou-Wan cuts the total cost of the modernization program by roughly one fifth.
Regardless, that's a decision for another day, and as I said in the design competition statement I'd somewhat prefer a battlecruiser to a battleship anyways. It's far too early to settle on a winner for the current design competition, and even if it was not I have no intention of taking Kwang-Chou-Wan out of service for a year to make it compatible with ships I don't yet have while there is a war going on.
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Nov 29, 2017 6:06:13 GMT -6
Our destroyer design features a balanced gun and torpedo armament, with a fast speed and good range. 1100 tons - medium range Speed: 33 knots Guns: 5x4 inch (quality 1) - four gun broadside Torpedoes: 6x18 inch in two triple launchers Cost: $355k for 11 months Our battle-cruiser design features a strong main battery, good range, with decent armor and speed. 32,100 tons - medium range Speed: 27 knots Belt armor: 12.5 inches tapering to 3.5 inches Deck armor: 3 inches tapering to 1.5 inches Conning tower armor: 12.5 inches Turret armor: face - 12.5 inches, top - 3 inches Casement armor: 3.5 inches Torpedo protection - 1 Guns: 9x13 inch in triple turrets (ABV) with Director FC Secondaries: 16x4 inch (quality 1) in casemates Cost: $3.825M for 30 months We also submit a battleship design for your consideration. She sacrifices speed for increased main battery armament and better armor protection. 38,000 tons - medium range Speed: 22 knots Belt armor: 12.5 inches tapering to 4.5 inches Deck armor: 3.5 inches tapering to 2 inches Conning tower armor: 12.5 inches Turret armor: face - 12.5 inches, top - 3.5 inches Casement armor: 4.5 inches Torpedo Protection - 1 Guns: 12x13 inch in triple turrets (ABVY) with Director FC Secondaries: 16x4 inch (quality 1) in casemates Cost: $4.336M for 30 months DD1915.40d (5.05 KB) BB1915.40d (4.99 KB) BC1915.40d (4.96 KB)
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Nov 29, 2017 12:34:34 GMT -6
This round makes me want to see what a more American BC might look like...
I.e. less belt armor.
Maybe a 12x12 in gun arrangement with 10 inch belt armor (or less). The ship shouldn't be capable of engaging 'in-line', which hinders it's usefulness to Chin China...but as a thought experiment for my future games...
Hmm.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Nov 29, 2017 14:31:52 GMT -6
Hamson Ltd. would like to offer you battlecruiser design. When we compared Imperial Navy against another navies we could see lack of resources to build same number of capital ships as other countries. So we can see essencial that the battlecruiser design need to be able to operate against battleships. We choose 7x16" as main guns as they are capable to penetrate battleship armor even in long distance and enemy battlecruiser armor at any distance and still their firepower is 40 % higher than your previous battlecruiser. Her armor uses AoN as your first battlecruiser however we put quite a lot of additional armor everywhere enhancing her defence capabilities. She is able to withstand hits from her own guns over 12.000 yards . No capital ship can damage her if she make enough distance, even Incompareble class battlecruisers with 12x15" guns. Our analysis show she can handle any 2 enemy capital ships at once without sigificant damage. For that purpose we put 110 ammo per main gun. Ship has 20x4" guns for defence against destroyers with basic torpedo protection as her speed is main defence against destroyers and she should be screened by destroyers. We have thought of variant 8x16" for exchange of 0.5" belt, turet and deck armor but as more ships with heavy guns are designed and penetration power and long range accuracy increases so much we think that investment in armor is the way to go. belt armor: 15" deck armor: 4" turret armor: 15.5", 5" on top main guns: 7x16"secondary guns: 20x4" speed: 27 knots costs: 132.6M construction time: 27 months The price of the ships is high however if you take into considaration her speed, firepower and armor protection you find that the ship will be your best investment. And as advantage we are able to build the ship in 27 months. In any case of you financial difficulties we offer suspension of work free of charge. BC1915_Hamson.40d (4.96 KB)
|
|
cnw
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by cnw on Nov 29, 2017 14:53:30 GMT -6
Humber Estuary Shipbuilding would like to introduce its entries in the 1915 design competitions. 1) the DD1915 entry is a compromise between gun armament, torpedo armament, speed and economy, so that even Chin China can build them in reasonable numbers. The only major limitation is limited range, which was deemed acceptable given the deployment practices of the Chinese navy. Displacement
| 1000 t
| Propulsion
| 32kt, standard plant
| Gun Armament
| 5× 4in QF BL Q1 guns, 4 gun broadside
| Torpedo Armament
| 18" torpedoes in 2 triple centerline launchers
| Unit cost
| 3.4 million
| Build time
| 10 months
|
2) The CC1915 entry is an evolution of the earlier CC1912 design, currently in service with the Chinese navy as the Kai Chi. A deployment alongside that ship has been considered very likely, so both the speed and main armament caliber have been retained. The principal improvements are stronger armor protection and main armament (eight guns in four turrets). Displacement
| 33 500 t
| Propulsion
| 27kt, standard plant
| Armor protection
| 13" belt, 14" turrets, 3" deck
| Armament
| 8× 15" BL guns (four twin turrets), secondary 12× 6" QF BL in single pedestal mounts
| FCS
| Mk1 Director, 2 positions
| Unit cost
| 119.6 million
| Build time
| 27 months
|
3) the BB1915 entry is more of a proof of concept, taking the basic CC1915 layout and trading speed for armor protection. Our design team was tempted to include the new 16" guns here, but that proposal was rejected in favor of retaining ammo commonality with the Kai Chi, also this sort of armament would mean either undesirable compromise in armor protection or similarly undesirable increase in displacement. Displacement
| 33 500 t
| Propulsion | 23kt, standard plant
| Armor protection
| 15,5" belt and turrets, 3" deck
| Armament
| 8× 15" BL guns (four twin turrets), secondary 14× 6" QF BL in single pedestal mounts
| FCS | Mk1 Director, 2 positions
| Unit price
| 114.5 million
| Build time
| 27 months
|
|
|
cnw
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by cnw on Nov 29, 2017 14:55:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Nov 30, 2017 12:45:19 GMT -6
We would like to inform you that after long discussion we updated our destroyer designed (updated in original posts). We dismissed 3" guns and replace them with additional 3 torpedo mounts. We can offer you our battleship design. We think that our battlecruiser design is way to go however we would like to offer you alternative with completely different approach. We offer you battleship with cost only 78M. We choose 7x15" with excelent range and penetration and armor to defend against her own guns on only 22.900 displacement. We think that this ship even quite cheap will be best ship in the world when she is commisioned. She is designed with AoN armor to fight between above 12.000 yards, ideally above 15.000 yards. main guns: 7x15"sec. guns: 20x4" belt armor: 13" deck armor: 3.5" turret armor: 14", 4.5" on topspeed: 20 knots costs: 78 M
We would like to mention that design costs is cheaper and you can buy 2 of these ships only for 156 M which is still affordable for your budget. BB1915_Hamson.40d (4.95 KB)
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Nov 30, 2017 15:01:35 GMT -6
As one of the German yards I am finding it massively irritating that we are still stuck on friggin 13" guns
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Nov 30, 2017 15:32:38 GMT -6
As one of the German yards I am finding it massively irritating that we are still stuck on friggin 13" guns Agreed. Someone should really give the Krupps a copy of Weber's Protestant Work Ethic.
|
|