|
Post by dohboy on Jun 14, 2020 7:58:59 GMT -6
Just a bit of information. The word "conning tower" in the ship design is actually incorrect. It should be superstructure which by definition is the parts of a ship built above its hull and main desk. Uh... the conning tower is the part of the superstructure that is armored. Apples and seeds.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jun 14, 2020 8:09:17 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by dohboy on Jun 14, 2020 8:14:37 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by durhamdave on Jun 15, 2020 5:20:21 GMT -6
Conning towers were also the heavily armoured command stations on many battleships and armoured cruisers. They were cramped with limited visibility and were not always used. The KGV class for example only had 4.5in of armour on them as practical experience in WWI RN officers never used them. It turns out that modern submarines technically don't have conning towers either, the term referring to structures which had pressurised compartments. Modern subs have Fins/Sails (RN/USN).
|
|
|
Post by polygon on Jun 16, 2020 12:37:39 GMT -6
It's pretty clear that "conning tower" doesn't armor the entire superstructure, both because you'll find penetrating superstructure hits no matter how well armored the conning tower is, and because if you tried putting 16" of armor across the entire superstructure, most ships would become submarines themselves.
Question for the thread: do double turrets retain advantages over triple and quad turrets even after reliable triple/quad tech?
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Jun 16, 2020 19:33:43 GMT -6
if you tried putting 16" of armor across the entire superstructure, most ships would become submarines themselves. Welllll... They might not necessarily become submarines, but the keel might decide to pursue its childhood dream of being a superstructure, and the superstructure might realize that keels get shot at a lot less, and they might have a talk and decide to switch jobs.
|
|
|
Post by polygon on Jun 16, 2020 20:10:25 GMT -6
I wanted to try designing in French. Unfortunately not legal for legacy fleet France Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jun 16, 2020 21:09:27 GMT -6
I wanted to try designing in French. Unfortunately not legal for legacy fleet France If you're willing to use 7" or lighter guns, you can make that legal. Also, what ship is that based on?
|
|
|
Post by polygon on Jun 16, 2020 21:41:04 GMT -6
I wanted to try designing in French. Unfortunately not legal for legacy fleet France If you're willing to use 7" or lighter guns, you can make that legal. Also, what ship is that based on? Design stereotypes of ugly French ships with casemates and turrets jutting off every which way , particularly the aesthetic achieved by their patchwork fleet predreadnoughts
|
|
lucur
Junior Member
Posts: 72
|
Post by lucur on Jun 17, 2020 0:03:18 GMT -6
Question for the thread: do double turrets retain advantages over triple and quad turrets even after reliable triple/quad tech? Double turrets still get better accuracy as far as i am aware. And even with advanced tech triples will jam more often than doubles. Therefore triples and quads enjoy a far larger rate of fire per weight invested. For small calibres (6" and down) you can't get DP main armament in triples and quads.
|
|
|
Post by polygon on Jun 17, 2020 14:45:19 GMT -6
Question for the thread: do double turrets retain advantages over triple and quad turrets even after reliable triple/quad tech? Double turrets still get better accuracy as far as i am aware. And even with advanced tech triples will jam more often than doubles. Therefore triples and quads enjoy a far larger rate of fire per weight invested. For small calibres (6" and down) you can't get DP main armament in triples and quads. I'd love to see stats on that. I'm a sucker for accuracy. More hits are better hits!
|
|
|
Post by polygon on Jun 17, 2020 19:26:26 GMT -6
I have no idea how to balance or design a missile cruiser. Is this too much gun? Not enough gun? Too many planes (4)? Not enough torpedo defense? Do I want a lot of launchers or is one fine? Missiles are heavy. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jun 17, 2020 19:34:09 GMT -6
I have no idea how to balance or design a missile cruiser. Is this too much gun? Not enough gun? Too many planes (4)? Not enough torpedo defense? Do I want a lot of launchers or is one fine? Missiles are heavy. I don't know how many missiles that can be available to install, however, historical information says that most heavy cruisers after refit and installation of missiles, eliminated the guns. Here is a photo the USS Chicago after her five year refit as a guided missile cruiser. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Chicago_(CA-136)#/media/File:USS_Chicago_CG-11_commissioning_1964.jpgAfter refit, here her armament 2 x twin RIM-8 Talos SAM launchers (104 missiles) 2 x twin RIM-24 Tartar SAM launchers (84 missiles) 1 x Mk-16 ASROC 8-tube launcher 2 x 5"/38 caliber gun Mk 24[3] -mounted on the main deck, amidship www.navsource.org/archives/04/136/04011130.jpg2 x triple Mk-32 torpedo tube Update: I put together my version of a Chicago class Guided Missile Cruiser. I hope you like it. Personally, I would reduce the primaries to 5 inch. but it doesn't really matter to me. The missile control for this number of missiles is exceeded, but what the heck. If you build something similar, reduce the missile batteries to one forward and one aft. I don't really know how many but I suspect it is two. Anyway it is fun.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jun 17, 2020 21:09:36 GMT -6
I went ahead and designed another Guided Missile cruiser that is legal and can be built. Some explanations on my design logic. 1. I don't need conning tower armor, this isn't a 1940's battleship. It is a waste of tonnage. 2. I have turrets, but I don't need real heavy armor. 3. I don't have secondaries, so I don't need secondary armor. 4. By reducing the armor to realism, I now have a 38 knot, guided missile cruiser with two SAM missile launchers. The missiles in this era are semi-active homing missiles which means they have to have a conical radar antenna to send out a beam to guide the missile to the target. They are not, fire and forget. So, they are limited by the number of missile homing radars they can provide the space for. Anyway, I like this design.
|
|
|
Post by polygon on Jun 17, 2020 21:23:47 GMT -6
I went ahead and designed another Guided Missile cruiser that is legal and can be built. View AttachmentSome explanations on my design logic. 1. I don't need conning tower armor, this isn't a 1940's battleship. It is a waste of tonnage. 2. I have turrets, but I don't need real heavy armor. 3. I don't have secondaries, so I don't need secondary armor. 4. By reducing the armor to realism, I now have a 38 knot, guided missile cruiser with two SAM missile launchers. The missiles in this era are semi-active homing missiles which means they have to have a conical radar antenna to send out a beam to guide the missile to the target. They are not, fire and forget. So, they are limited by the number of missile homing radars they can provide the space for. Anyway, I like this design. I have one criticism and that is the wing turrets. You're getting a 4 gun broadside out of 8 guns. Now obviously the 6" guns are a secondary weapon compared to the missile launchers, but why not have ABXY turrets, and missile launchers in the Q and R positions? You'd double your broadside for the same weight.
|
|