|
Post by dorn on May 10, 2019 9:35:26 GMT -6
I'm not certain I will have time today, so don't wait for me. Real life strikes again. I will not continue during weekend, you have time
|
|
|
Post by janxol on May 11, 2019 4:31:20 GMT -6
Alright, I got some time today, so here it goes: Cyanide Shipyards presents two battleship designs for consideration.
The half-sisters of B3 and B4 design. Designed to withstand long range fire from foreign battleships these ships feature superior deck armor and decent belt protection with AoN armor design, while the all-forward armament configuration allows to save weight. B3 Vengeance is equipped with 9 15 inch guns, whoch should be capable of dealing with any foreign battleships currently in service. Alternatively, for additional punch in long-range engagements these ships were designed for, the B4 Dominion is equipped with 16 inch guns, losing one barrel in the rearmost turret to compensate for added weight.
Additional note about designs that were rejected internally:
The B1 Emperor was rejected as being in essence nothing more than costlier version of the B4. The B2 - Vanguard was faster, smaller and cheaper than the remaining designs and as such was rejected as being closer to the battlecruiser type. The design might be re-used if admiralty requires a battlecruiser.
Here are the proposals: (they both use the same picture)
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 12, 2019 10:32:40 GMT -6
Thanks all participant for designs.
Congratulation Balsa construction for awarding design Admiral Hood.
HMS Admiral Hood will be laid down in November 1921, Admiral Pellew will be laid down in February 1921.
Runner up: Queen Maryyemo, janxol - You probably forget that Royal Navy ask for design for 2 battleship. Your designs were good however not within possible budget of Royal Navy.
Some comments to design: Admiral Hood was choosen as optimal budget per ship should be around 4.5M per month and is powerful enough to fight any commissioned battleship or capital ships under construction.
Queen Mary: a little more powerful design than Admiral Hood however Royal Navy does not think it could bring enough advantages for increased price Phobos, Phaeton: excellent designs only budget unwise. Secondary armament a little scarce Vengeance, Dominion: good designs only budget unwise. And Royal Navy thinks that turret protection could be issue as 14" armour on turrets protect just aroun 19,000 yards against 15" guns. 14" belt is not as issue as ship rolls and can have different angle to comming fire however turrets are always firing at direction of enemy. Strong deck armour could be wise against potential air threat but we are not aware of any enemy air power. And in case of hit by enemy fire we think it is unlikely that enemy can hit our ships at range of 25,000 yards.
|
|
|
Post by janxol on May 12, 2019 12:32:23 GMT -6
I didn't catch you want two ships, thought its two designs, so my bad on that. Regarding deck armour, my late game designs usually have 5-6 in deck armor and I keep them fighting at extremely long range (I rarely come closer than 20 000 yards, unless visibility is crap). Before i adopted that method, I tended to lose a lot of ships to plunging fire.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 12, 2019 13:35:15 GMT -6
I didn't catch you want two ships, thought its two designs, so my bad on that. Regarding deck armour, my late game designs usually have 5-6 in deck armor and I keep them fighting at extremely long range (I rarely come closer than 20 000 yards, unless visibility is crap). Before i adopted that method, I tended to lose a lot of ships to plunging fire. In my experience, AI ships has less accuracy in long range and added to overall low accuracy at these ranges, chance to get hit is low. So as long as you protect your turrets, it should be no problem as capital ship should handle some penetrating hits. And at that time AI ships has usually much more issues with long range hits, especially against UK having heavier guns thus better penetration. And deck armour is the heavist part of the ship thus enough deck armour to 20-22000 yards is usually enough. 6" deck is overkill as you protect ship at all ranges against own guns however you protect ship only over 19000 yards from belt hits. This is dangerous if weather is not so good.
You can do as you said - fight only over 20000 yards however it suits better for nations fighting superior enemy as battles are overall less lethal.
|
|
|
Post by janxol on May 12, 2019 15:18:43 GMT -6
There are many ways to play I suppose. And I am indeed playing nations with smaller budgets all the time, so it might also influence my designs. Anyway, looking forward to the next design request.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 14, 2019 9:10:25 GMT -6
There are many ways to play I suppose. And I am indeed playing nations with smaller budgets all the time, so it might also influence my designs. Anyway, looking forward to the next design request. You are completely right.
I just do not mix different strategies it usually does not work well.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 14, 2019 10:02:52 GMT -6
End of peace
11/1921 – Balsa Construction has expanded docks to 43,000 tons 11/1921 – HMS Admiral Hood is laid down by Balsa Construction 11/1921 – There has been uprising in Africa country. Prime Minister has decided to sent expedition force led by HMS Queen Elizabeth to evacuate our nationals and protect our interests. 12/1921 – Double gun mounts for light cruisers were proposed by one of our Admirals 12/1921 – Great Britain declares war on Russia 12/1921 – Battle of Ösel – sunk 2 battleships, cruiser and 3 destroyers As contact was made just before sunset British Admiral pushed with superior force of 2 battleships HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Geryon and 2 battlecruisers HMS Indefatigable and HMS Invincible against 2 Russian battleships. He disabled all battleship before sunset however 1 Russian torpedo find HMS Invincible however ship was in no danger of sinking. During battle enemy was able only make 5 heavy hits to HMS Queen Elizabeth, one of the hit destroyed forward A turret in range of 13000 yards.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 14, 2019 10:17:12 GMT -6
Royal Navy at war
Russian fleet 3 battlecruisers: 2 old battlecruisers (weaker that any of British ones), 1 more modern battlecruiser (better than Incomparable class) 2 cruisers (Rhynda class, 27 knots, broadside 5x5" guns) - probably equal to our weaker Persis class 6 modern destroyers 1 minesweeper 57 submarines: main threat
Free budget: 2 M per month (probably a little more)
Options: - cancel the second battleship of Admiral Pellow class - new large destroyers - new small destroyers for convoy escort - new minesweepers
I would like your suggestions and opinions.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on May 14, 2019 11:22:45 GMT -6
Looking over the destroyers in service with the other powers, I don't see any strong reason to build a lot of large destroyers immediately, and between your twenty remaining 500- and 600-ton destroyers and your thirty 200t minesweepers I'd say you've got a reasonably adequate ASW/CP force, so a large program of minesweepers and destroyer escorts seems unnecessary. I'd say lay down Admiral Pellew as planned so that you can retire Dreadnought and Resolution, and use remaining funds on a small group of large modern destroyers.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 14, 2019 12:39:56 GMT -6
Looking over the destroyers in service with the other powers, I don't see any strong reason to build a lot of large destroyers immediately, and between your twenty remaining 500- and 600-ton destroyers and your thirty 200t minesweepers I'd say you've got a reasonably adequate ASW/CP force, so a large program of minesweepers and destroyer escorts seems unnecessary. I'd say lay down Admiral Pellew as planned so that you can retire Dreadnought and Resolution, and use remaining funds on a small group of large modern destroyers. You are probably right. In this case, it could be best not to build anything as there is no need for additional ships against Russia.
Note: I was thinking about new cruiser using double/triple turrets but than I dismiss idea as there is no need for such a cruiser. Probably I have so large fleet that only 2 nations could be a little threat.
|
|