|
Post by babylon218 on Aug 23, 2017 12:14:41 GMT -6
KAW is prepared to unveil its tenders for the Chinese 1901 shipbuilding contest, starting with the Battleship A proposal. As the needs of the Dowager Empress' navy are broadly similar to those of the German Reich - namely, defending home shores from a more powerful ocean-going fleet such as Japan, we have delivered a heavily-armoured battleship. She has a top speed of 19kn and a belt armour 10" thick amidships and 4.5" thick at the ends, with a deck between 1-2" thick, 11" armoured turrets with 2" roofs and 4" armour on the casemates. The ship is armed with 4 11" rifles in two turrets, 12 6" guns on the casemate deck for close-range combat and 20 4" guns for torpedo boat defence. The 4" guns will ensure the destruction of large torpedo boats or destroyers with the added bonus that they can penetrate the armour of protected cruisers at close range, providing the Schlactschiff 1901A with a heavy battery with which to pummel its enemies, while being sufficiently armoured to receive an even greater pummelling in return. Construction is estimated to last 29 months at a cost of 1.7M marks per month.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Aug 23, 2017 12:21:05 GMT -6
Secondly is KAW's Coastal Monitor tender: the 10,000 ton Kustenmonitor 1901B: The Kustenmonitor 1901B is armed with 2 10" rifles, 6 6" guns and 18 4" guns, making it a significant threat even to heavier battleships. It is one knot slower than Schlachtshiff 1901A, but retains a broadly similar armour scheme, with the extended belt dropping to 4" and the turret faces reduced to 10". This design remains a serious concern for any fleet which it should face, and can be available in 28 months for 1.2M marks per month.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Aug 23, 2017 12:29:21 GMT -6
Finally, KAW submits its offer for an ocean-going TBD, known as Zerstorer 1901A: This is a standard German-type Destroyer in arrangement, with 2 guns and 3 torpedo tubes; two of which are positioned either side of the bridge superstructure to allow them to fire ahead to an extent, with the third positioned between the aft funnel and compass platform with clear arcs of fire either side. The artillery of this boat is comprised of two 4" rifles, giving it a significant firepower advantage over its foes. Mess space is reduced and engines optimised for high-speed running, allowing a top speed of 28kn. Like the schlactschiff offerings above, this design is intended for duties close to the mainland and carries insufficient fuel for travelling between theatres in wartime. Attachments:Zerstorer 1901A.40d (4.97 KB)
|
|
cnw
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by cnw on Aug 23, 2017 13:17:15 GMT -6
The Humber Estuary Shipbuilding Co. presents its entries in these design competitions. First entry is for the B1901A specification. A 14 500t battleship armed with four 12" guns placed in twin turrets and a sizeable secondary and tertiary batteries, with heavy armor protection and capable of 19kt top speed. Note that the ship has no torpedo armament and limited range, but neither of those should limit their utility to Chinese navy in any way. Second entry is for the B1901B specification for coastal defense ship. Armed with four 10" guns, strong secondary and tertiary batteries, heavily armored and with 19kt capability, the low price is a fair compensation for its limited seakeeping capabilities. Similarly to previous design, we at HES consider torpedoes to be a weapon that is best left to specialized ships. Third entry is for the DD1901A specification, and features a 27kt ship armed with three torpedo tubes (one of them centerline) and a pair of 4" guns.
|
|
cnw
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by cnw on Aug 23, 2017 13:21:27 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 23, 2017 13:31:03 GMT -6
the torpedo tubes on cnw's DD are HIV
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Aug 23, 2017 21:54:51 GMT -6
Clark Family Shipbuilding submit the following designs from the United States: B1901A: First Class Battleship Heavy battleship design, with sufficient range to project power beyond the three fleet anchorages of the Chinese navy (medium range). The design is optimized to deliver rate of fire, and her armor scheme is the most modern design available. Speed: 19 knots - matches current battle-line speed Belt armor: 8 inch, tapering to 3 inch Deck armor: 3 inch, tapering to 1 inch Conning tower armor: 10 inch Turret face armor: 10 inch, with 3 inch roof Secondary armor: 3 inch casemates, adding additional armor strength to the belt. Guns: 4x10 in guns in twin turrets (A/Y) Secondaries: 22x6 in guns in casemates Cost: $1.610m over 29 months B1901B: A heavy monitor design, capable of surviving any punishment enemy coastal guns can dish out. Speed: 17 knots, short ranged Belt armor: 9.5 inch, tapering to 3.5 inch Deck armor: 3.5 inch, tapering to 1 inch Conning tower armor: 13 inch Turret face armor: 13 inch, with 3.5 inch roof Secondary armor: 3.5 inch casemates, adding additional armor strength to the belt. Guns: 2x12 in guns in single turrets (A/Y) Secondaries: 10x7 in guns in casemates Tertiaries: 18x6 in guns Cost: $1.656m over 29 months DD1901A: An ocean going destroyer for your consideration. Speed: 29 knots, range sufficient to accompany the B1901A ships. Guns: 2x3 in guns in single turrets (A/Y) Torpedoes: 2x18 in torpedo tubes (2 centerline tubes) Cost: 187k for 9 months B1901A.40d (4.9 KB) B1901B.40d (4.9 KB) DD1901A.40d (4.71 KB)
|
|
cnw
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by cnw on Aug 24, 2017 0:50:37 GMT -6
the torpedo tubes on cnw 's DD are HIV Wha... Oh.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Aug 25, 2017 18:41:35 GMT -6
Err, executor, you know the coastal defence ship was supposed to be the "budget" option, yes?
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 25, 2017 18:51:28 GMT -6
for the low price of 20 billion dollars I will give sell you a (space) battleship
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Aug 25, 2017 20:16:49 GMT -6
Singing; "...Our, Star Blazers..."
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 25, 2017 20:23:14 GMT -6
Singing; "...Our, Star Blazers..." over 5000 atomic warheads, and if the crew is killed the AI takes over
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Aug 25, 2017 20:27:09 GMT -6
Err, executor, you know the coastal defence ship was supposed to be the "budget" option, yes? Feel free not to buy it then. It is, however, a budget ship for the future. She is eminently survivable and won't be unusable in five years.
|
|
|
Post by cv10 on Aug 25, 2017 21:44:53 GMT -6
Err, executor, you know the coastal defence ship was supposed to be the "budget" option, yes? Feel free not to buy it then. It is, however, a budget ship for the future. She is eminently survivable and won't be unusable in five years. For what it's worth, my design is only marginally cheaper than his, and I'd make the same remark about it being survivable and, I hope, useable in 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Aug 27, 2017 13:52:37 GMT -6
The Imperial Chinese Navy would like to thank all participating shipyards for their submissions, and is pleased to announce that orders will be placed with Krupp-Allington Shipyards for one ship built to their Schlactshiff-1901A proposal, to be named Yueh Fei, with Humber Estuary Shipbuilding for one ship built to their HES B1901B proposal, to be named Pan Chao, and with Kiangnan Shipyard for four ships built to their D1901A proposal, to be named Lei Chung, Kuang Heng, Kuang Li, and Kuang Keng. Honorable mentions go to Clark Family Shipbuilding and Blohm und Voss for their B1901A proposals, which were the runners-up in the first class battleship category; the CFS B1901A proposal lost out to the KAW B1901A proposal's superior armament and armor for similar cost while the Blohm und Voss proposal lost out to the KAW B1901A's lower pricetag for an only slightly inferior combination of armor and armament. Blohm und Voss also gets an honorable mention for its B1901B and DD1901A proposals, which were runners-up in those competitions. I'm not sure that the superior armor protection would not have been better value for money than HES's 2x2 10" armament and I was a bit leery of the high monthly cost imposed by Britain's shorter construction times, but all the same I feel that the HES proposal offers a better balance of armor protection, armament, and cost than the others. As far as the DD1901A competition goes, all the proposals were fairly similar except for the Blohm und Voss entry; unfortunately for Blohm und Voss, financial considerations lead me to order just four destroyers and the Blohm und Voss ships are too radical a departure from our current destroyer force for me to be happy with only a handful. Had I felt that there was room in the budget for six or more destroyers in addition to the two battleships, I probably would have gone ahead and ordered them, but the Navy's reserve funds are already projected to drop below ¥4.7M before any of the current construction projects complete, and I want to have enough funds available to order another dock expansion and maybe purchase technology if it's offered. I will also say that I was tempted to lay down a couple ships to the Kiangnan Shipyard B1901B design since I've never played with battleships that small before, but as they're objectively the least capable of any of the proposed vessels and as they take by far the longest time to build (34 months as opposed to 25-29 months for any of the other coastal or first-class battleship proposals) I just couldn't justify it despite the short-term economy they offer.
|
|