|
Post by babylon218 on Apr 12, 2017 13:49:10 GMT -6
That Louisville class is a pretty good design for an armored cruiser. Balances respectable firepower with speed, armor, and more importantly, is affordable. The 2nd biggest reason why I think ACs tend to get knocked (after the BC cruiser battle problem) is that a lot of designs tend to be BC lights, which is fine, but tends to drive up the displacement, and the cost. How much did they cost to build? Since the USA is one of those "we have too few CAs", affordability becomes a big consideration. The Louisvilles cost approximately $48,000,000 each and took 24 months each to build (before modifiers, etc.). By comparison, the Rochesters each cost $57,500,000 and took 25 months. The Two Northamptons each cost $53,000,000 at launch, with their final designs costing $53,500,000 for Rochester and £53,700,000 for New York. The Independence Class cost $60,400,000. Overall, I think I agree with you on the Louisville. In hindsight, I think I would have pulled off the aft turret on the Rochesters and reduced their tonnage. EDIT: Just did some testing on the Louisville design. Turns out just adding as much armour as I did to the Rochester added almost $10,000,000 to the cost! With two triple turrets forward and one aft, improved director and 12 4-inch guns in 4 triple mounts, the Louisville comes to around $48-49,000,000. Not that much of a price difference and on the same displacement.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Apr 12, 2017 11:51:51 GMT -6
As promised, here are some more of my designs from that US Game: The Louisville-Class was designed in parallel with the Northampton to replace the older pre-dreadnought Armoured Cruisers. They were designed to operate as Fleet Heavy Cruisers and as patrol cruisers, with the speed (28 knots) to keep up with enemy raiders and the firepower and armour (8 8-inch guns and 6/5 inches of belt armour) to fight contemporary Heavy Cruisers. The class proved effective as a support cruiser and interceptor, with the U.S.S. Frederick supporting the U.S.S. New York (Northampton-Class) in raiding shipping off the French Coast, covering the New York as it disengaged following an error in judgement causing the pair to come under fire from a French patrol for 10 minutes without returning fire. The Independence-Class was a light Battlecruiser based on the Northampton-Class following the New York's promising performance off the French Coast. 1,000 tons larger, the Independence was to receive a boosted secondary armament, a 28-knot speed to allow it to keep up with opposing cruisers, and heavier armour. She was effectively designed as a 'cruiser-killer' with the speed and protection to escape or avoid heavier opposing forces. When the game ended in January 1926, the first of the two ships was slated to launch in mid-1928, with the second ship, U.S.S. Concorde, following in January 1929. Encouraged by the success of the Louisville-Class and the effectiveness with which it and the Northamptons operated in tandem, the Rochester-Class was designed in parallel with the Independence-Class to further boost the heavy cruiser fleet. Armed with 12 8-inch guns, a formidable secondary armament of 12 4-inch guns in triple turrets, and sets of above-water torpedo launchers, these ships were partly designed in response to the 'Northampton-likes' of other navies. Now unencumbered by the constraints of the London Naval Treaty of 1917, the Rochesters would have displaced 16,000 tons. At the end of the game, the two initial ships of the class (Rochester and Brooklyn) were scheduled for December 1926 and January 1927 respectively. The London Naval Treaty effectively ended the race for Battlecruisers. In this game, for what ever reason, GB designed a "Battle-Cruiser" early on which was really more of a Fast Battleship, and that set everyone else off building ships to match. After the treaty expired, technology had advanced to the point where such ships were properly being designated Battleships and battle-cruiser construction slowed to a crawl.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Apr 12, 2017 9:00:10 GMT -6
What role does she actually fill? It looks like a good cruiser, but she will probably suffer the same problems as the historical Blucher. I would tend to drop the guns to 8", thin out the belt and increase her speed. 26kts is the problematical speed you really want to avoid for heavy scouts (other than early BC's), because you have invested a lot of weight for the speed without actually being able to match or outrun likely opponents. By the time you build her, CA's would likely be relegated to the colonies, and she isn't fast enough to catch the fastest of the raiders she would encounter. If you want a pocket BC, up the tonnage and giver her more speed. Just make sure she doesn't try and slug it out with a real BC. Her role was essentially stop-gap. When the Treaty came into effect, I had 2 true BCs and 2 more building (trying to rapidly catch up with other powers). So, with my BC line heavily handicapped versus every other nation I was likely to face, I needed a ship which could fill the role of fleet scout and coastal raider without getting blown to pieces by enemy BCs. The Northamptons were the result. I was so short on BC tonnage to begin with, I was more concerned about making sure these ships could take hits than I was about making sure they could catch up. For the job of the traditional Heavy Cruiser, I designed the Louiseville-Class. The two designs actually complemented each other very well in the war with France. As for raider intercepts, even 2 knots slower than most CLs and CAs at the time, she can keep her guns on target long enough to get some hits in, and with 10" and 12" guns (1917 and 1918 versions, respectively), it only takes a couple of hits to bring enemy ships to a standstill. Finally, the treaty meant that just about every other nation was forced to build CAs instead of BCs anyway (and a lot were essentially copies of these). However, as you say, they were no substitute for a true BC and were too slow for a fleet CA. That's why I scrapped the last two ships of the class on the slips when war with France broke out in favour of a new BC. But I was so pleased with the class that I decided to use the design as a basis for a new class of 'light' BC, which I'll dig up later.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Apr 5, 2017 17:36:55 GMT -6
Now nearing the end of a game as USA, and this particular design is one I'm really proud of: In 1917, the Treaty of London limited all Warship construction to 15,000t and a maximum armament of 10". In response, the DNC ordered the development of a ship which took the treaty terms to their absolute limit. The Northampton-Class were effectively designed as 'Pocket Battlecruisers', with a top speed of 26 knots, 11" of belt armour, an all-or-nothing armour scheme, and 6 10" Rifles mounted in two triple turrets, with the intention to up-gun the ship to 4 12" rifles at a later date. In 1918, a short war with France abrogated the treaty and allowed the Navy to take the USS Northampton and USS New York in hand for re-arming. Due to weight limits, two secondary guns had to be removed from each ship, bringing their total down to 10 6" guns; their torpedoes were removed and they received engine 'modernisation' as well as modern fire directors. Two additional Northamptons laid down before the war were cancelled in favour of a new full Battlecruiser. Above: USS Northampton following her 1918 rebuild.In 1924, during the Third Franco-American War, USS Northampton and the Louisville-Class Heavy Cruiser USS Frederick commenced a coastal raid against French shipping of the Bordeaux coastline. The Northampton performed admirably, her 12-inch guns and high speed allowing her to engage numerous targets before disengaging. However, when the task force encountered a French patrol led by the French Heavy Cruiser Montcalm (a Solferino-Class: effectively a response to the Northampton design with a 9" belt and 6 10" guns in 3 twin turrets), a delay in releasing the task force from orders to hold fire (because I'm special that way ) resulted in Northampton taking heavy damage and a torpedo hit before she and Frederick finally returned fire. Once Northampton began firing however, the Montcalm took serious damage and was forced to disengage. Northampton successfully disengaged from the action with the courageous defence of the Frederick. Despite the heavy damage and the technical defeat inflicted on the Northampton, the Navy Department was sufficiently impressed with the 'pocket battlecruisers' that the next month the USS Independence was ordered. This ship was to be armed with 4 12" rifles in 2 twin turrets; two triple deck-mounted torpedo launches, 12 6" secondary guns in 4 triple turrets, and a speed of 28 knots. It would also receive stronger armour.
|
|