|
|
Post by hrcak47 on Oct 11, 2018 8:32:01 GMT -6
So I had an idea about a few events that may happen in case of a player stopping the construction of a certain ship or rebuilding one into an aircraft carrier.
An event will trigger as a proposal to reuse the main gun turrets to be used for fortifications. Said fortification will be done for a third of the price, and a third of the time needed. Perhaps the battery can get the name of the unfortunate ship.
This can also be an interesting way to use treaty scrapped ships.
|
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Oct 11, 2018 18:51:40 GMT -6
Welcome to the forum hrcak47 - and good suggestion, thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Oct 11, 2018 19:59:46 GMT -6
So I had an idea about a few events that may happen in case of a player stopping the construction of a certain ship or rebuilding one into an aircraft carrier. An event will trigger as a proposal to reuse the main gun turrets to be used for fortifications. Said fortification will be done for a third of the price, and a third of the time needed. Perhaps the battery can get the name of the unfortunate ship. This can also be an interesting way to use treaty scrapped ships. I know that the 8 inch/55 guns on the Lexington and Saratoga were removed and used as coastal artillery on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. |
|
|
|
Post by pirateradar on Oct 11, 2018 21:54:28 GMT -6
I agree this would be a cool idea, and it has a strong historical basis--the 15in gun turrets intended for Scharnhorst and Gneisenau's refits were repurposed as coastal defense guns (and railway guns), and those sold to the USSR pre-war were used the same way. I believe Britain also repurposed some naval guns from scrapped ships, or guns built for ships that were cancelled before they were finished, as coastal defense guns, but I can't remember the exact case.
A separate question, though, is how balanced this would be and how often a player should be able to do it. It will become uneven if countries frequently end up with lots and lots of 12"+ defensive guns.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeb94 on Oct 12, 2018 0:31:12 GMT -6
1914 was the year Fort Drum of Manila went into service. Four 14" guns in two twin battleship mounts and a pair of casemated 6" guns on either side. The concrete battleship.  |
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Oct 12, 2018 14:51:09 GMT -6
A separate question, though, is how balanced this would be and how often a player should be able to do it. It will become uneven if countries frequently end up with lots and lots of 12"+ defensive guns. As long as you don't get a more or less completely free coastal battery out of every ship cancelled, scrapped, or converted, I don't think that it'll make enough of a difference to the cost of building up extensive coastal fortifications to allow problematic numbers of heavy coastal batteries to be built. Generally speaking, cancelling or converting ships under construction is probably not something you should want to do, and converting older ships to get a few more years of service out of them or to get a carrier relatively quickly or cheaply gives you guns which are probably lighter than what you use on current-generation heavy ships, which means that current-generation heavy ships are likely adequately protected against them.
|
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Oct 12, 2018 17:56:48 GMT -6
Historically most coastal batteries around were converted land/ship guns, so this makes total sense.
No country built tons of guns explicitly for coastal defense, at least, no super large guns.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Oct 12, 2018 19:12:31 GMT -6
I have a book titled “Fortress Europe European Fortifications of World War II. In it there are numerous references for many European countries and their fortifications using naval guns. 240-mm L/40 Naval guns for Yugoslavia, 305-mm Naval Guns for France, and two 14-inch naval guns install at Dover in 1941. The largest at Gibraltar were 9-inch guns. On the North Sea and Baltic, the German’s installed numerous 240-mm, 280-mm, 305-mm, 210-mm and 170-mm naval guns at Borkum, Kiel, Fehmarn and other locations to upgrade WW1 forts.
|
|
|
|
Post by millsian on Oct 13, 2018 6:16:57 GMT -6
Don’t forget the 15” at Dover and Singapore
The 18” on the WW1 monitors ( and fishers follies) was installed on the monitor in a coast defense mount so I assume there were thoughts about using in that role.
Even with radar the guns at Dover didn’t hit much and didn’t get any hits at all during the Chanel Dash
|
|
|
|
Post by jeb94 on Oct 13, 2018 23:59:50 GMT -6
There is also the numerous 16"/50 guns of the US Army's Coast Artillery Corps. These were the M1919 Army designed gun and the Mark II and III naval guns used for coast defense by the US Army. The M1919 was the nations 2nd 16" gun design after the one off M1895. The Mk II and II naval guns were originally built for the SoDak 1 battleships and the upgunned Lexington battlecruisers. Due to a miscommunication they were too heavy to be used for the Iowas so many found their way to the Army. Not all were mounted.  |
|
|
|
Post by director on Oct 14, 2018 21:53:34 GMT -6
And poor 'Gneisenau' had her turrets removed and relocated to land defenses in Norway. They were supposed to be replaced with twin 15" turrets but the ship was so badly damaged she was scrapped instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Oct 15, 2018 10:00:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by pirateradar on Oct 15, 2018 10:22:13 GMT -6
As I understand it, these are the double 15" turrets intended for Gneisenau's planned-but-never-executed refit, while her original triple 11" turrets were sent to Norway after the decision was made to discontinue surface raiding. E: apologies if I read your post wrong and you were adding information instead of disagreeing with director. German guns definitely ended up as coastal defense in both Denmark and Norway, and interestingly seem to have been operated for at least some time after the war as well--though I imagine they were pointing the wrong way! |
|
|
|
Post by cv10 on Oct 15, 2018 10:46:02 GMT -6
And poor 'Gneisenau' had her turrets removed and relocated to land defenses in Norway. The Ceaser turret at the Austrått Fort near Trøndelag is a rather interesting site to behold. The Norwegians did a nice job of maintaing the turret and surrounding facilities. The barrack and the ammunition room are both open to the public. I certainly would not want to have tried to force my way into Trondheim Fjord up against that. |
|
|
|
Post by tbr on Oct 15, 2018 17:21:40 GMT -6
Yes, I also enjoyed my visit there a few years back. Things to keep in mind which made this single turret way more effective than on ship:
1) dispersed and hardened ultre-long baseline fire control at very high "eye height" with fully pre-planned ballistic tables 2) Very high elevation (up to 40°) available 3) large roomy magazine (compared to shipboard) leads to higher "real" sustained ROF
Of course, the real answer to the entire installation would have been air attack...
The Ceaser turret at the Austrått Fort near Trøndelag is a rather interesting site to behold. The Norwegians did a nice job of maintaing the turret and surrounding facilities. The barrack and the ammunition room are both open to the public. I certainly would not want to have tried to force my way into Trondheim Fjord up against that. |
|
