WesWorld

I agree too, the minimalist CA design looks the best. The temptation with CAs is to overcook things by adding larger guns and more armour than necessary.

The DD46 looks good too. The rapid firing of the 110mm would probably compensate for the fairly small calibre, at least for fleet DDs.

I notice the last two CA designs have no CT armor while the DD has absolutely no armor at all, are these deliberate design choices?

The freeboard on the can looks really excessive. It's higher than a good number of cruisers and capital ships.

The armor bits could be errors. With the guns on the DD, as they are now, I consider them to be open and exposed.

Not sure about the use of the high seaboat rating on the DD design. As Rocky indicated, the freeboard is excessive an you could easily cut it down a bit.

I'll just point out that Canada has the big 9.2" armed frigates. The 8" cruiser might be cheaper but won't stand a chance against the bigger Canadian ships.

Quoted from "Desertfox"

I'll just point out that Canada has the big 9.2" armed frigates. The 8" cruiser might be cheaper but won't stand a chance against the bigger Canadian ships.

That's true - but if Nordmark's fighting Canada, they'd probably never even get to encounter a Canadian ship, since the Brits would bottle the RNN up in Norway for the duration. Even the mere threat of the Royal Navy cutting sea-lines of communication behind a Nordish fleet in the North Atlantic would probably be paralytic to Nordish naval strategy in this case. So regardless of what Canada has, it's really a non-entity so far as Nordish planning is concerned.

On that basis, though, there'd be little point in building a Nordish navy at all.

There is of course the Coldmere Protocol signed between Nordmark, Germany and the UK...

Quoted

Article Five: The High Contracting Parties each recognize the right of the other contracting parties to self-defense if attacked by an aggressor.

Article Six: The High Contracting Parties will each refrain from supporting any such aggressor nation, but may maintain a stance of neutrality or active co-belligerency as it sees fit.

... so if Canada is the aggressor nation or Nordmark can convince the UK that Canada is the aggressor nation and that Nordmark is justified in defending themselves from Canadian aggression, that would take the RN out of the equation.

[General Melchett]"And leave little Johnny Canuck to take on the Viking hordes alone? Are you mad, sir?"[/General Melchett]

Quoted

Article Six: The High Contracting Parties will each refrain from supporting any such aggressor nation, but may maintain a stance of neutrality or active co-belligerency as it sees fit.

It is possible, but highly unlikely that Canada would attempt aggressive actions against Nordmark without first ascertaining the position of the Crown. However, if Canada chose to behave as a mad dog, I could see Britain maintaining a certain sense of neutrality. The Coldmere Protocol does not require them to be neutral, but if gives Britain a justification to do so if it wished to. But then, there is that whole Commonwealth and NATO thing...

As for Canada's big frigates, Foxy is quite correct that they would outgun an 8-inch cruiser; but if you plan to deal with them, it is far better to build something that outguns them... which Nordmark is addressing in a different manner, with its decision to focus on aircraft carriers.

One of the Nordish Royal Navy's predicted roles is acting in concert with the Royal Navy of the United Kingdom, and with other allies. In that role, even in its reduced state, it's hardly anything to sneeze at. Aggression from Canada is likely to be dealt with by exerting diplomatic pressure on and through London... The scenario that actually gives Nordish planners cold sweats is a sudden heating of the Russian border. Which has a lot to do with why the Navy's shrinking...

Anyway. The high freeboard was a reaction to the constant complaining about how earlier Nordish DD designs were inadequate seaboats; trialling a 1m reduction still produces an excellent seaboat, so I'm going to take five minutes or so after posting this to throw things and rant about Springsharp's fucking illogic. The absence of Conning Tower armor on the CA is a deliberate design decision, brought on by skepticism that they'd actually be used as much as by weight-waving. The absence of mount armor on the DD is an oversight, corrected thus:



DD46, Nordmark Fleet Destroyer laid down 1946

Displacement:
2,221 t light; 2,445 t standard; 2,833 t normal; 3,143 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
402.06 ft / 393.70 ft x 39.37 ft x 16.40 ft (normal load)
122.55 m / 120.00 m x 12.00 m x 5.00 m

Armament:
8 - 4.33" / 110 mm guns (4x2 guns), 44.09lbs / 20.00kg shells, 1946 Model
Automatic rapid fire guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
16 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (4x4 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.89kg shells, 1946 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships
Weight of broadside 384 lbs / 174 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 750
8 - 24.0" / 610 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0.98" / 25 mm 0.59" / 15 mm -
2nd: 0.59" / 15 mm 0.39" / 10 mm -

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 47,261 shp / 35,257 Kw = 34.00 kts
Range 2,500nm at 24.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 698 tons

Complement:
193 - 252

Cost:
£2.014 million / $8.056 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 53 tons, 1.9 %
Armour: 21 tons, 0.7 %
- Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 21 tons, 0.7 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 1,158 tons, 40.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 830 tons, 29.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 613 tons, 21.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 160 tons, 5.6 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
1,014 lbs / 460 Kg = 25.0 x 4.3 " / 110 mm shells or 0.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.25
Metacentric height 1.9 ft / 0.6 m
Roll period: 12.1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 62 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.45
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.23

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.390
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 22.99 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 65 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Forecastle (15 %): 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Mid (50 %): 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Stern: 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Average freeboard: 17.67 ft / 5.39 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 157.5 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 89.5 %
Waterplane Area: 9,848 Square feet or 915 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 96 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 41 lbs/sq ft or 199 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.50
- Longitudinal: 2.37
- Overall: 0.59
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is cramped
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

5 tons general search radar
2 tons navigational radar
3 tons fire control radar
3 tons fire control computers
4 tons electronic-suite generators

48 tons torpedoes and support equipment

9 tons sonar
40 tons 80x depth charges and launching racks
20 tons 20x depth charges and forward throwing launchers

26 tons unplanned kipple allowance

Quoted

[General Melchett]"And leave little Johnny Canuck to take on the Viking hordes alone? Are you mad, sir?"[/General Melchett]

"General Melchett, we meet again."

Quoted

It is possible, but highly unlikely that Canada would attempt aggressive actions against Nordmark without first ascertaining the position of the Crown.

Well, seeing some posts, I have my doubts about that...

Quoted

The Coldmere Protocol does not require them to be neutral, but if gives Britain a justification to do so if it wished to.

Yes, but the Coldmere Protocol does require them to "refrain from supporting any such aggressor nation". The way I see it, if "Canada chose to behave as a mad dog", it will make Britain look bad if it were to support Canada against Nordmark and it will make Britain look bad if it were to support Nordmark against Canada. As you mentioned, a certain sense of neutrality would probably be the best option.

Quoted

The scenario that actually gives Nordish planners cold sweats is a sudden heating of the Russian border. Which has a lot to do with why the Navy's shrinking...

Shrinking because the Navy is melting??

Quoted from "The Rock Doctor"

On that basis, though, there'd be little point in building a Nordish navy at all.

That's a point that could realistically be made in the in-character Nordish circles, particularly if Nordmark sees Canada as a primary opponent. Nordmark's in-game industrial power is formidable and can suit a force-projection fleet, but realistically speaking, the Nordish don't have the actual strength to back it up against any prospective opponent. As Valles commented in the opener, the reserve of manpower simply isn't there.

Speaking theoretically - if Nordmark sees the Anglosphere as their most likely opponent, then a navy built on force-projection and sea control shouldn't be in the cards. They'd need to build a sea-denial navy, designed to raid the Atlantic trade routes and close the North and Baltic Seas to parry British counterattacks. Any combat versus Canadian forces would be largely incidental - essentially a heroically-doomed effort to defend Vinland and Iceland against numerically superior attackers. A Nordish commander would not be willing or able to risk major fleet units in their defense.

Quoted from "The Rock Doctor"

[General Melchett]"And leave little Johnny Canuck to take on the Viking hordes alone? Are you mad, sir?"[/General Melchett]

Exactly. You simply cannot remove the British and the rest of the Commonwealth from a Canadian-vs-Nordish equation.

Quoted from "Valles"

One of the Nordish Royal Navy's predicted roles is acting in concert with the Royal Navy of the United Kingdom, and with other allies. In that role, even in its reduced state, it's hardly anything to sneeze at. Aggression from Canada is likely to be dealt with by exerting diplomatic pressure on and through London...

That is quite proper and reasonable.

Quoted from "Valles"

The scenario that actually gives Nordish planners cold sweats is a sudden heating of the Russian border.

Millions of men! Thousands of tanks! Russian Army, strong like bear!

Except you can remove the British from the equation, if say they are busy fighting elsewhere.

Also the North Atlantic has the right kind of weather that makes it quite likely for a carrier to run into a surface combatant. And I am still not convinced that a WW carrier force can defeat a surface group, ships in WW carry significantly heavier and better AA than in OTL.

Quoted from "Desertfox"

Also the North Atlantic has the right kind of weather that makes it quite likely for a carrier to run into a surface combatant.

I agree.

Quoted from "Brockpaine"

Quoted from "Desertfox"

Also the North Atlantic has the right kind of weather that makes it quite likely for a carrier to run into a surface combatant.

I agree.

It's a viable factor. So's the fact that a viable modern battleship would be twice the size and have no smaller a crew. Nordmark isn't that rich.

Quoted

Exactly. You simply cannot remove the British and the rest of the Commonwealth from a Canadian-vs-Nordish equation.

The Commonwealth can do what they want in the conflict (most likely side with Canada regardless of who starts the fight). It's Big Momma Britain that has the diplomatic mess to deal with in case Canada starts it.

Still, it is all more a case of 'what if?' as I would assume that Canada would know to behave and if it does not, I would assume Big Momma Britain will spank Little Kid Canada before anything would get out of hand.

Quoted

Millions of men! Thousands of tanks! Russian Army, strong like bear!

Hmmm... With the 'sudden heating of the Russian border' bit, I was more expecting something like "Millions of handsome men! Thousands of beeches! Russian Army men, hot as sun!"

Quoted

Except you can remove the British from the equation, if say they are busy fighting elsewhere.

Are you saying that Australia or Mexico is going to declare war on Britain?!?

Quoted from "Rooijen10"

Quoted

Except you can remove the British from the equation, if say they are busy fighting elsewhere.

Are you saying that Australia or Mexico is going to declare war on Britain?!? 8|

There aren't many powers capable of forcing Britain to turn their eyes away from a Nordish-Canadian kerfluffle on their doorstep. In my opinion, there are in fact only two powers with the positioning and the throw weight necessary to achieve that end. Those two powers are France and Germany.

Quoted from "Brockpaine"

Quoted from "Rooijen10"

Quoted

Except you can remove the British from the equation, if say they are busy fighting elsewhere.

Are you saying that Australia or Mexico is going to declare war on Britain?!? 8|

There aren't many powers capable of forcing Britain to turn their eyes away from a Nordish-Canadian kerfluffle on their doorstep. In my opinion, there are in fact only two powers with the positioning and the throw weight necessary to achieve that end. Those two powers are France and Germany.

And since Germany is a force for peace in the world, the citizens of Toronto may sleep soundly... for tonight at least. :P

Quoted

And since Germany is a force for peace in the world, the citizens of Toronto may sleep soundly... for tonight at least.

I imagine Germany trying to conquer Canada with sausages and proper beer. Maybe Nordmark could use a similar kind of tactic to make the Canadians look the other way when it comes to Vinland.