|
Post by oldpop2000 on Mar 31, 2018 13:36:27 GMT -6
AHH! We are all aware that a hydraulic recoil system would absorb all acceleration due the firing of the gun, right? If it works properly, sure, it'll absorb most of the recoil, but Isla de Hierra and, to a lesser extent, Livorno look like they're from relatively early in the game ( Isla de Hierra could probably be built for the legacy fleet) and so their guns could conceivably not have a good recoil mechanism. Well, the game should have rudimentary recoil mechanisms in place at the start of the game. Hydraulic recoil was available before the turn of the century. It wasn't perfect but without it, there would have been no heavy naval weapons over, say 8 inches. You could be right, but it would not make any sense, personally. The first warship to substitute oil for water in the hydraulic recoil system was the USS Virginia in 1906. I believe the HMS Illustrious of the Majestic class in 1898 also had a hydraulic based recoil system.
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Mar 31, 2018 16:17:33 GMT -6
AHH! We are all aware that a hydraulic recoil system would absorb all acceleration due the firing of the gun, right? You forgot one of the oldest Tropican commandments: "Do not pay for anything, that may be done by your labourers for free". This 10 in gun has crew of 38 man total (according to design calculator), so they may stop its recoil by their bare hands, no hydraulic needed (It was included in official project documentation, but... Tropico has "endemic corruption" national trait ) "But sir, there are 20 of us left. What is our role in firing the gun?" "Right! Now you blokes here, once the Lieutenant reports 'Ready!", you all crowd between the breech and the back wall of the turret here, and all put your hands on this trunion, and when it fires - well, just ... do your best, and I'll be stepping out here for the first test. Jolly good! Carry on Lieutenant!" *runs*
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Mar 31, 2018 16:59:55 GMT -6
You forgot one of the oldest Tropican commandments: "Do not pay for anything, that may be done by your labourers for free". This 10 in gun has crew of 38 man total (according to design calculator), so they may stop its recoil by their bare hands, no hydraulic needed (It was included in official project documentation, but... Tropico has "endemic corruption" national trait ) "But sir, there are 20 of us left. What is our role in firing the gun?" "Right! Now you blokes here, once the Lieutenant reports 'Ready!", you all crowd between the breech and the back wall of the turret here, and all put your hands on this trunion, and when it fires - well, just ... do your best, and I'll be stepping out here for the first test. Jolly good! Carry on Lieutenant!" *runs* They should sing "Men of Harlech" that will bolster their morale and make them want fight to the end. It makes me want to get on the walls of Harlech castle and fight the English King. www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRtnWVvDX6k
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Mar 31, 2018 21:40:26 GMT -6
Sometimes, you've got to take things to the extreme. That 13" gun isn't a weapon, it's a propulsion system for going rapidly astern LOL. You, guys, make me think in unusual direction... So next picture is YOUR fault! Why should we slow down ship by firing Big Main Gun forward, when we can speed her up, firing astern! It is especially important for chased raiders. And don't forget, she may even hit something sometimes! (Well, she is not as spectacular as Livorno, but I hope, not less useful ) One of the three (Matsushima itself) really was designed with the main gun facing aft. Presumably it would be stationed at the rear of the line.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 1, 2018 8:19:30 GMT -6
You, guys, make me think in unusual direction... So next picture is YOUR fault! Why should we slow down ship by firing Big Main Gun forward, when we can speed her up, firing astern! It is especially important for chased raiders. And don't forget, she may even hit something sometimes! (Well, she is not as spectacular as Livorno, but I hope, not less useful ) One of the three (Matsushima itself) really was designed with the main gun facing aft. Presumably it would be stationed at the rear of the line. Possibly, remember that class was French designed and built. The aft firing gun might be better because of the extra buoyancy in the mid to aft section of the ship. the bow pitches more, the stern less, so aiming the gun is easier.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 1, 2018 11:04:08 GMT -6
I've managed to find information about the building of the Matsushima's in France. The series was designed around the Italian Lepanto series of ships. The big gun was aft on Matsushima made her a better seaboat. This was purposely done as I suspected. They never achieve their estimated speed of 17.5 knots. There were doubts about their seaworthiness and this was the reason that Matsushima was modified with her main armament facing aft and moved to the main deck. Trial speeds with either natural draught and forced draught were from 15.7 knots for the former, to 16.5 knots for the latter. She had two screws with triple expansion engines and six cylindrical boilers with 18 furnaces. The steel deck was 1.5 ins. on the slope but she also had a cellusoe belt and coal for extra protection. This protection scheme would not keep out anything above 4.7 ins. and that at long range. Note that the Royal Navy advisor to the IJN advised against these ships, and the big guns. However the IJN wanted a gun to penetrate the Chinese naval ships. The source is "The Imperial Japanese Navy" by Fred T. Jane dtd 1904
|
|
|
Post by director on Apr 1, 2018 11:14:03 GMT -6
oldpop2000 - What hydraulic recoil system? LOL Despite recoil mechanisms, ships can take structural damage (Courageous, Glorious, maybe Furious) or even move sideways in the water when guns are fired broadside: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa-class_battleshipThough if you want to see this idea taken to its logical extreme, check out Project Orion. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)Basically, you have a large, thick baseplate attached to your hull by massive shock-absorbers. Then you set off a 'small' nuke underneath - and another and another and another... It is the single best way to get massive payloads into orbit, as long as you don't care about things like environmental damage and radioactive clouds. But in an emergency it would be the best way to get hundreds of thousands of tons of cargo off earth, and out in space it is elegant and cheap, especially if you can move to fusion bombs instead of fission. The non-nuclear version was actually tested, and worked just fine (as anyone who ever put a firecracker under a can will tell you). One source credits a non-nuclear design to Robert Goddard, which is news to me. Here's a pair of links for fiction: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_Shall_Riseen.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David%27s_Spaceship
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 1, 2018 11:44:35 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by gornik on Apr 1, 2018 16:00:44 GMT -6
For those, who wants to know: Tropican-invented "Rear Gun Proplusion System" proved it's effectiveness in two wars (with Spain and Italia). Enemy raider hunters, aware of "that big barrel at cruiser's back", always begin to manoeuvre, trying to stay out of it's range. And make this till night, losing opportunity to sink my tin cans (now, in 1912, all of them still afloat). And 5 in guns are enough for Guerre de Course P.S. Tropico will never forget outstanding courage and stupidity of Rear Gun Recoil herd crewmen!
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Apr 7, 2018 12:09:51 GMT -6
Some additional Tropico-based silliness: That's a domestically-built Tropican battle line. The armor protection of each class was even marginally adequate for the time the ships were laid down, if you take 'adequate' to be 'capable of resisting its own guns' ... although the value of that metric may be questioned as Tropico's heavy guns are among the worst in the world. Some other another 'interesting' facts: The first three classes of Tropican battleships are all over-gunned, all were built to the largest size allowed by domestic dockyards, and there have been no state-funded dock expansion programs. Oh, and the Guerreros are the first Tropican battleships not to have speed-optimized engines. Upon reflection, I probably should've built Guerrero and her sisterships as 2x3 AB or AY predreadnoughts instead of as 3x2 ABL dreadnoughts to save a bit of tonnage and to allow the secondaries to be placed in turrets rather than in casemates...
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on Apr 7, 2018 20:31:47 GMT -6
I went ahead and created a massive (for me) legacy CL line made entirely of 1x13" 2500t boats. Regrettably, these proved quite useless. Refits were done, we'll have to see how these work out. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Apr 11, 2018 7:10:36 GMT -6
It is the single best way to get massive payloads into orbit, as long as you don't care about things like environmental damage and radioactive clouds. The Orion drive proponents are generally sane enough to think you should already be in space before you start the thing up. I believe that it wouldn't actually be capable of working in an atmosphere. That's a domestically-built Tropican battle line. The armor protection of each class was even marginally adequate for the time the ships were laid down, if you take 'adequate' to be 'capable of resisting its own guns' ... It seems rather adequate to me. Honestly, I think we might all be overarmoring our predreadnoughts. Super-cruisers are surprisingly effective in the late game, perhaps teacup battleships need more consideration in the early game.
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Apr 11, 2018 9:51:33 GMT -6
It is the single best way to get massive payloads into orbit, as long as you don't care about things like environmental damage and radioactive clouds. The Orion drive proponents are generally sane enough to think you should already be in space before you start the thing up. I believe that it wouldn't actually be capable of working in an atmosphere. Nope. Initial design studies actually assumed a ground-up launch.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 11, 2018 11:23:05 GMT -6
It is the single best way to get massive payloads into orbit, as long as you don't care about things like environmental damage and radioactive clouds. The Orion drive proponents are generally sane enough to think you should already be in space before you start the thing up. I believe that it wouldn't actually be capable of working in an atmosphere. Nah, it would totally work in atmo, you can even use smaller bombs in atmo, 0.35kt at the outside instead of 15kt, the fallout can be mostly negated with higher latitude launches on graphite launch pads. and it was built from the ground up as a space launch system
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Apr 11, 2018 19:33:13 GMT -6
That's a domestically-built Tropican battle line. The armor protection of each class was even marginally adequate for the time the ships were laid down, if you take 'adequate' to be 'capable of resisting its own guns' ... It seems rather adequate to me. Honestly, I think we might all be overarmoring our predreadnoughts. Super-cruisers are surprisingly effective in the late game, perhaps teacup battleships need more consideration in the early game. The belt armor isn't exactly terrible. The problem is more that in order to make the armor and the guns fit on the displacement, the ships had to be designed with low freeboard, short range, cramped accommodations, flat deck over belt armor scheme, and (in most cases) speed priority on the engines, and are also slightly slow even for late-predreadnought period battleships. The secondary batteries are also rather lackluster, especially now that DDs of around a thousand tons are starting to show up. Oh, and the belts are narrow, though the extensions are full thickness so it doesn't matter too much. Regardless, this is the Strangest Ship Designs thread, not the Worst Ship Design thread, and 8000-11000t predreadnoughts and 15000t dreadnoughts are very definitely strange as far as my normal capital ships go. I can't say how they perform in action, because none of them have yet turned up to a battle (primarily for lack of opportunity - only one war in the 1900s that ended in a white peace only a few months after it started without any warships being sunk on either side; for that matter, I don't think any merchant ships were sunk, either, not even by surface raiders). As to the suggestion that we're over-armoring our predreadnoughts, perhaps, but it keeps them relevant longer. An ~18kn battleship with <10" belt armor is hardly anything more than a liability from the mid-1910s onwards, if not earlier.
|
|