|
Post by aeson on Jan 12, 2018 11:03:49 GMT -6
Design Competition 11, Part 1: BB1929 or CC1929 .... and be armored to resist 15" gunfire. Our designers would like to know in what ranges Admiralty prefers the immunity of armored box? Is 16.000-20.000 yards preferred or have Admiralty something a little different in mind? 16-20kyd is fine.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 12, 2018 15:08:47 GMT -6
Design Competition 11, Part 2: CL1929
I would like to see proposals for a modern light cruiser with a broadside of at least nine 6" or fifteen 5" guns and at least six torpedoes in above-water tubes. The design speed should be at least 30 knots, and the ship should also be capable of carrying at least 30 mines. Other qualities are at the designer's discretion. Hamson designers provide several sketches, each one for another purposes. What Chinese Admiralty expected from this ships. Which mission should they accomplish? Some of the sketches are only a little expensive, however according principles are classified as CA even if their armor is CL class.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jan 12, 2018 18:12:12 GMT -6
Hamson designers provide several sketches, each one for another purposes. What Chinese Admiralty expected from this ships. Which mission should they accomplish? Some of the sketches are only a little expensive, however according principles are classified as CA even if their armor is CL class. I want them primarily for engaging other CLs, with fleet scout/screen duty and minelaying as secondary missions.
|
|
cnw
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by cnw on Jan 16, 2018 7:08:38 GMT -6
HES won't be entering competitions as long as a state of war exists between China and Great Britain.
His Majesty's government tends to consider providing technical assistance in such causes to be treason.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 16, 2018 13:06:10 GMT -6
Hamson engineers prepared the first design which is consided as very cost efficient however it was found impossible to completely fulfill requirements of Chinese Admiralty. However we think that the design is so well prepared and these ships could be very usefull to Chinese Navy. So before we discard the design because not fulfilment of minimal request we would like to ask Chinese admiralty if the requirement of mines is asboslute and Chinese Admiralty is willing to think about this design. We also add some comments of these design. We are convinced that 5" and 6" guns become so powerfull that even 3" armor is not usefull on cruiser design. So with this principle all or nothing we design these ship with minimal armor, high firepower and be as cheap as possible as we know that chinese navy budget is limited.
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Jan 18, 2018 13:49:39 GMT -6
Hmm.
Risk of magazine explosions on these designs very high...
Might revisit CFS design shortly.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 18, 2018 14:00:44 GMT -6
Hmm. Risk of magazine explosions on these designs very high... Might revisit CFS design shortly. 2" of armor will not deflect hits either.
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Jan 18, 2018 17:57:26 GMT -6
Hmm. Risk of magazine explosions on these designs very high... Might revisit CFS design shortly. 2" of armor will not deflect hits either. Turret armor can be as thick as I want...
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 19, 2018 2:04:32 GMT -6
2" of armor will not deflect hits either. Turret armor can be as thick as I want... That is right. Try to do same cruiser with turret armor proof against 6" guns. You will end with cruiser with displacement over 5000 tons and more than double the costs. I used some guns without armor on some of my cruisers and so far 6" cruisers sometimes blow up, 5" gun cruiser I do not remember any example of it. Nevertheless it is not often worth increased costs of cruisers, especially later in the game where penetration is much higher. As always, any design has pros and cons.
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Jan 19, 2018 7:27:22 GMT -6
Turret armor can be as thick as I want... That is right. Try to do same cruiser with turret armor proof against 6" guns. You will end with cruiser with displacement over 5000 tons and more than double the costs. I used some guns without armor on some of my cruisers and so far 6" cruisers sometimes blow up, 5" gun cruiser I do not remember any example of it. Nevertheless it is not often worth increased costs of cruisers, especially later in the game where penetration is much higher. As always, any design has pros and cons. Of course the ship is going to be large...I'm talking about redoing my ship design (initial design is 7700 tons), not yours.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 19, 2018 15:46:28 GMT -6
Hamson investors are happy to be able to invest to new company Hamson Chine. We provide China Admiralty with our offer to Design Competition 11, Part 1: BB1929 or CC1929.
We go through all design of all nations and we found out that todays battleships has usually speed of 27 knots and above. So we think battleship with 24 knots is absolute and as Chinese navy are not the largest one we should the way to go is speed over 30 knots. This ship should easily fight another battlecruiser in 1 vs. 1 combat, has ability to tactically decide battle with her speed, has enough armor to deflect capital ships guns at certain range and has a lot of guns able to penetrate battlecruiser armor an has ability and still be dangerous to armor of battleships. The ship could be used during fleet battle but using her speed to operate indepently and catch and fight weak part of enemy fleet. So we design battlecruiser which will be faster than any launched capital ship, have armor to resist heavy guns and. Speed: 31 knots Guns: 4x3x13" Sec. Guns 10x2x4" guns for anti DD purposes - no need of heavier armnament as their speed Belt and turret armor: 16" Deck armor: 4" Torpedo protection: 2 - should be enough as their speed should not allow enemy destroyers to close fast enough This ships are designed to use in:- independent operation against BC - supporting fleet actions - cruiser and rider killer BC_01.40d (4.96 KB)
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 19, 2018 16:02:16 GMT -6
We offer our design in Design Competition 11, Part 2: CL1929.
After study of foreign design we come to conclusion that cheap cruiser with much higher firepower than todays usual 4x2x6" guns could be used. We however think that 5" guns has enough penetrating power to cruiser armor and that higher rate of fire is advantage. So we choose to use 6x3x5" guns as main armnament. We were unable to fit requested 30 mines on that design without efficiency. We try to add 8 mines however we do not think 40 % increase of cost is worth 8 more mines. We do not think that armor could deflect todays 5" and 6" guns which are commonly used. So we instead focuse on cheap design which allow Chinese navy to obtain more number of cruisers. Cruiser design has:main guns: 6x3x5" speed: 30 knots torpedo tubes: 6 (3 port and 3 starboard) belt armor: 1" Costs: only 10 M
The ship are designed to use:
- fleet scout (she is small, more difficult to hit by heavy units) - anti-cruiser role (18x5" guns vs. 8x6" guns on foreign designs) - anti DD role supporting fleet (18x5" guns are optimal) - supportin mining operation (cost effective per 1 mine) CL_03.40d (5.08 KB) Edited: update of cruiser design by changing armor scheme to narrow belt as it has more sense with minimal armor, cramped accodomation, adding R triple turret (increasing firepower by 20 % for costs of 5 %. We thought it is better than increase speed to 31 knots), rearanged torpedo tubes.
|
|
|
Post by cv10 on Jan 19, 2018 17:11:02 GMT -6
FCM presents it's designs to the Imperial Navy for consideration. The only thing we would like to enumerate is that our FCM-Martinique light cruiser design is equal to the speed of the fastest light cruiser in either the British or Russian Navy. FCM-Bourbon Battleship (BB) FCM-Martinique Light Cruiser
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jan 20, 2018 10:38:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Jan 20, 2018 16:00:04 GMT -6
Oh. I had thought that the deadline was a Sunday again (apparently I need to learn to read). Nevertheless, I have a BC design mostly done already, so I'll be posting that. I'll also try to get a CL in, but if nobody else needs time don't wait for me on that.
|
|