WesWorld

Why don´t you go for main gun twins?

He really wants a 12 gun ship. If he was willing to settle for 8-9 guns, he'd probably just build some Ontario knockoffs (He's already using the same guns developed by Canada).

They are essentially second class battleships. I don't really think it makes sense to build such ships given the large numbers of first class battleships. There isn't really anywhere they could be used to show the flag and be useful because pretty much everyone has big proper battleships.

As a carrier escort? Limited speed, endurance and AA armament.

They would probably be fairly useful for NGFS but require very large levels of manpower.

I don't really think the RN needs, or can afford such ships. Really, I think the RN size is already pushing things even with wartime manning levels. There just aren't that many sailors to go around, especially if large numbers of escort vessels get built.

Regarding manpower, I'm planning big cruiser cutbacks and some of the 8in CA will go as well. The Kents in particular are pretty poor ships.

I'm building one squadron of these Super CA's and when other players keep harping on about 10in and 12in armed cruiser killers I think its time to raise the ante and build a ship that is powerful.

I was not thinking in terms of carrier escort, I said working with carriers. One finds the prey, the other dispatches.

Quoted

I was not thinking in terms of carrier escort, I said working with carriers. One finds the prey, the other dispatches.

I'm just wondering where the RN is likely to be operating. With Europe friendly and peaceful, no beef with Atlantis or South Africa, there's pretty much only SEA and the Indian Ocean. None of the possible enemies sit over trade routes or have many ships set up for long distance raiding.

These cruisers could be fairly useful ships, but are expensive. Still, given the preponderance of heavy cruisers, I think more fast battleships are a better solution.

Likely ships for sale from Q1/38 will be;

Light Cruisers HMS Caroline, Carysfort, Cleopatra, Comus, Cairo, Calcutta, Capetown, Carlisle and Colombo.

Destroyers HMS Tobago, Torbay, Toreador, Tourmaline, Tryphon, Turquoise, Tuscan, Tyrian, Scimitar, Scotsman, Scout, Scythe, Seabear, Seafire, Searcher and Seawolf.

I remembered a twin turret has been developed for the General Class gunboats so have run up this four twin Iron Duke gaining some armour and speed.

Opinions wanted on which is better, triples or twins?

Iron Duke Class, Great Britain Heavy Cruiser laid down 1939

Displacement:
15,902 t light; 16,665 t standard; 17,893 t normal; 18,876 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
675.29 ft / 670.00 ft x 80.00 ft x 23.00 ft (normal load)
205.83 m / 204.22 m x 24.38 m x 7.01 m

Armament:
8 - 9.20" / 234 mm guns (4x2 guns), 510.00lbs / 231.33kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 4.50" / 114 mm guns (6x2 guns), 45.00lbs / 20.41kg shells, 1935 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side ends, evenly spread
12 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns (6x2 guns), 6.00lbs / 2.72kg shells, 1935 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side ends, evenly spread, 4 raised mounts - superfiring
48 - 0.66" / 16.8 mm guns (8x6 guns), 0.14lbs / 0.06kg shells, 1935 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 4,699 lbs / 2,131 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 24.5" / 622.3 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 8.00" / 203 mm 400.00 ft / 121.92 m 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 92 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 9.00" / 229 mm 7.00" / 178 mm 9.00" / 229 mm
2nd: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 2.00" / 51 mm
3rd: 0.50" / 13 mm - -
4th: 0.50" / 13 mm - -

- Armour deck: 3.00" / 76 mm, Conning tower: 3.00" / 76 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 85,000 shp / 63,410 Kw = 30.52 kts
Range 12,000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,212 tons

Complement:
773 - 1,005

Cost:
£7.394 million / $29.576 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 467 tons, 2.6 %
Armour: 5,097 tons, 28.5 %
- Belts: 1,650 tons, 9.2 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 1,326 tons, 7.4 %
- Armour Deck: 2,077 tons, 11.6 %
- Conning Tower: 44 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 2,300 tons, 12.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 7,838 tons, 43.8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,992 tons, 11.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 200 tons, 1.1 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
37,346 lbs / 16,940 Kg = 95.9 x 9.2 " / 234 mm shells or 3.7 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.18
Metacentric height 4.9 ft / 1.5 m
Roll period: 15.2 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.53
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.31

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.508
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.38 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 29.94 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 38
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 10.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 30.00 ft / 9.14 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 26.00 ft / 7.92 m
- Mid (70 %): 26.00 ft / 7.92 m (19.00 ft / 5.79 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Stern: 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Average freeboard: 24.22 ft / 7.38 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 64.5 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 196.9 %
Waterplane Area: 37,417 Square feet or 3,476 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 131 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 142 lbs/sq ft or 695 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.59
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Class Names: Iron Duke, Edgar

Radar Equipment

The thicker armour is nice, but that's a sizable reduction in firepower at only 500 tons savings in cost. While I'm not a fan of mixing up turrets, what would a twin-over-triple arrangement look like?

Or a 3x3 arrangement, even?

For another 1,700 tons, you can have the best of both worlds: firepower and armour!

Quoted

Iron Duck, Great Britain Heavy Cruiser laid down 1939

Displacement:
17,747 t light; 18,723 t standard; 20,056 t normal; 21,123 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
726.01 ft / 700.00 ft x 80.00 ft x 23.00 ft (normal load)
221.29 m / 213.36 m x 24.38 m x 7.01 m

Armament:
12 - 9.20" / 234 mm guns (4x3 guns), 510.00lbs / 231.33kg shells, 1939 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 4.50" / 114 mm guns (6x2 guns), 45.56lbs / 20.67kg shells, 1939 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns (6x2 guns), 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1939 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 4 raised mounts
48 - 0.55" / 14.0 mm guns (8x6 guns), 0.08lbs / 0.04kg shells, 1939 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 6,739 lbs / 3,057 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 8.00" / 203 mm 455.00 ft / 138.68 m 10.73 ft / 3.27 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 9.00" / 229 mm 7.00" / 178 mm 9.00" / 229 mm
2nd: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 2.00" / 51 mm
3rd: 0.50" / 13 mm - -
4th: 0.50" / 13 mm - -

- Armour deck: 3.00" / 76 mm, Conning tower: 3.00" / 76 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 91,339 shp / 68,139 Kw = 30.50 kts
Range 12,000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,400 tons

Complement:
842 - 1,095

Cost:
£8.859 million / $35.436 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 661 tons, 3.3 %
Armour: 5,588 tons, 27.9 %
- Belts: 1,649 tons, 8.2 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 1,644 tons, 8.2 %
- Armour Deck: 2,247 tons, 11.2 %
- Conning Tower: 48 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 2,471 tons, 12.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 8,827 tons, 44.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,309 tons, 11.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 200 tons, 1.0 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
36,037 lbs / 16,346 Kg = 92.6 x 9.2 " / 234 mm shells or 3.5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.15
Metacentric height 4.6 ft / 1.4 m
Roll period: 15.6 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 49 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.67
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.19

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.545
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.75 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 30.36 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 52 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 41
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 40.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 31.00 ft / 9.45 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 26.00 ft / 7.92 m
- Mid (50 %): 26.00 ft / 7.92 m (19.00 ft / 5.79 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Stern: 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Average freeboard: 22.90 ft / 6.98 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 68.0 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 203.6 %
Waterplane Area: 40,493 Square feet or 3,762 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 125 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 152 lbs/sq ft or 740 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.34
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

With a 9.2" gun, there's no technical reason a twin will be any better than a triple or a quad (they're all going to be power operated, the shells are too heavy to manually handle). Given that many of the post-WWI RN heavy mountings have been triples, I'd stay with the triples for this design.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Or a 3x3 arrangement, even?

To be quite honest, If you're willing to settle for 9 guns and willing to pay in the 17000s, then I'd have to reccomend the Ontarios.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
For another 1,700 tons, you can have the best of both worlds: firepower and armour!

Quoted

Iron Duck, Great Britain Heavy Cruiser laid down 1939

I'm getting a Naval Ops vibe now, plus...

Does it quack for justice? Is it the terror that flaps in the night? will the second unit be...DARKWING DUCK!?!?!!?

I did this one some time ago for a thread on "The Warships Projects Board". Ship is shown in 1944 with aircraft removed and extra AAA added.

Monty, nice to see that cruiser, I think I must have missed that one.

Now you see why I went for 12 guns, twins don't save enough weight to be worth it. Nine guns doesn't give enough bang for my liking. I want something thats going to mash a CL into scrap and seriously pound some of the smaller CAs around. Compared to my existing heavy cruisers you'll see vast improvements.

Brock, 17,747 tons is more than I'm willing to pay. Might as well build a retro-style QE for that kind of tonage and build time.There has to be some limit to the crazy escalation of warships before no-one can afford to build a decent cruiser.

One thing I noticed on your latest Iron Duke design is that the cruise speed dropped from 16 knots to 12. Is this intentional?

Yes, to save weight their lordships cut the requirement to cruise at 16kts saying there are enough tankers and ports dotted around the globe to facilitate fueling if higher cruise speeds are used (really only in wartime) and range drops as a result.

It's something that I might change before metal is cut.

I kinda have mixed feelings about these ships. They've definitely got good firepower, and I can appreciate that; but their armour is inferior to most current ACRs and they're 2-3 knots slower than everything but the German ships (which are MUCH larger and more heavily armed and armoured).

The main thing, IMHO, which makes these ships useful is that Britain can afford to build a lot of them and send them out in pairs or trios...

Quoted

The main thing, IMHO, which makes these ships useful is that Britain can afford to build a lot of them and send them out in pairs or trios...

But the RN can do the same with battleships/battlecruisers and a much larger margin of superiority. Such large cruisers aren't needed given the large number of big ships.

There aren't that many places where the RN is only going to deploy cruisers, most of her greatly reduced overseas possessions have large fleet bases with a squadron of battleships or more. There just aren't the bases like Freetown and Simonstown where cruisers would be based which reduces their usefulness somewhat. With more capable and more reliable aircraft and radar their utility for scouting is also reduced.

Nice ships, but not very useful.

On that note, me and Brock were discussing the concept, and thought an interesting idea would be something along the lines of 10-12k ton cruisers; moderately thick armour, 6 9.2" guns. Mass produce the class and operate them as pairs or trios. The individual ships might be a bit underwhelming, but the UK is pretty much the only WW power that could afford to mass produce them, and basically ensure that you'd never run into just one of 'em.

Perhaps GB would be interested in the Australian Bismarks. Better armor, better speed, better range, and better secondaries. Does have 3 less main guns but is 2,500 tons cheaper.