WesWorld

1944 Naval Planning Committee

The five Admiral Class battleships have now been completed and no further vessels of this type are planned. Instead studies are underway to see which older capital ships should be retired or transferred to other Commonwealth navies to release manpower.
There was no review of light escort battlecruiser designs and super-heavy cruisers, rather all plans for these types of vessels were rejected finally by the committee.

The two new fleet carriers HMS Leviathan and HMS Magnificent (Carriers O & P) will complete on schedule during 1945. The Swiftsure Class have been refitted and HMS Eagle has also undergone a refit to improve her radio-location fit and new lifts and catapults have been fitted allowing the operation of aircraft up to 25,000lbs on her decks. Plans to decommission HMS Ark Royal and HMS Majestic are on hold, given the refitting of HMS Ocean as a trials ship for the new steam catapult and new RDF sets for fighter control. Oceans new catapult is mounted on the flight deck in a shallow deckhouse to allow the ship to revert to frontline use when the trials are complete. These trials will probably last 18 months but may be further extended if future research work dictates. Detailed design work is underway on the 1945-Pattern light fleet carriers to allow both planned ships (Carriers K & L) to lay down in 1945, but this will probably be later in the year and no final approval has yet been given. It has been decided not to fit any heavy DP armament to save weight and space and another factor was that dedicated anti-aircraft escorts will accompany the carriers. There is some measure of risk from surface ships but any carrier is vulnerable.

The cruiser programme remains paused until the new automatic 6in mount is ready. The DNO reported on progress during the past twelve months which is beginning to sound encouraging but still over year behind schedule. The DGD outlined similar problems with the new 4.5in mounts and it was agreed that the DNO estimate that the 6in automatic would be at least a year behind schedule was accurate. The proposed rebuilding of the I Class light cruisers to match the H Class AACL conversions was abandoned last year but during 1945 all will be rebuilt along similar lines but will keep their twin 6in guns to save money and these ships are likely to be stationed in the Empire where their additional firepower for bombardment or anti-ship gunnery will be welcome.
The imminent retirement of the Kent Class within a couple of years has reignited the debate about whether to build more heavy cruisers to replace them.

Eight Weapon Class destroyers will complete in 1945 and another eight will follow in 1945. The decision the remove the 6pdr AA guns from the Weapon Class reinforced the decision to press ahead with the planned O Class Anti-Aircraft Destroyers, of which eight will be laid down during 1945. The design is based off the Weapon hull but armed with two twin 4.5in mounts and three twin 6pdr mounts and this class will be the first RN destroyers not to carry torpedo armament.
Plans for refitting and rearming the A, B, C and D classes remain on hold. At the meeting a disagreement whether these conversions should be anti-aircraft or anti-submarine was raised and the DGD favoured retaining the 4.7in guns. The Special is confirmed for the 1945 Programme and will be laid down, a few minor changes were made during detailed design. The design of the Battle Class, an improved Daring, for the 1946 programme is still in flux. Following studies of longitudinal stresses and the problems presented by forecastle breaks on hull strength, the DNC has redesigned the Daring hull as a flush-deck design which is stronger and offers more internal space. A final decision was not reached on whether to use this new hull on the Battle Class, but it made a favourable impression on the Third Sea Lord, Admiral Frederic Wake-Walker.

The River Class sloops continue to commission in batches of four, the fourth batch will laid down during 1945. The Leander Class is an improved Orpheus Class design (previously known as the Calliope Class) and five will be built in 1945, further ships may follow as replacing the Defiant Class escorts will take several years and the withdrawal of the V&W Classes has released ample numbers of 4.5in mounts.

Four additional Beach Class Landing Ship Tanks have been deferred until 1946 owing the pressing needs of the destroyer programme.

All Great War-era Fly and Insect Class river gunboats will be decommissioned as they are aging rapidly and condition has deteriorated. Eight ships of the Bee Class have been built as replacements for African Service. Elsewhere additional Denny Steam Gunboats may be built to fulfil future needs.

The five T Class ocean-going submarines will be completed in early 1945. Owing to the need to replace the O Class coastal submarines, and the mixed results from the S Class hunters, a new class of coastal submarines will be built next year. Initially it was planned to build five repeat V Class submarines, but Commander in Chief Submarines, Admiral Sir Claude Barrington Barry, was successful in arguing for a more capable design. The W Class is much larger, approaching ocean-going submarines in size for better habitability and powered by double the numbers of diesels and electric motors for improved surface and underwater speeds. A 4in gun is retained and a range of 7,500nm has been aimed for, the torpedo armament will be six bow tubes. Although only five are approved by the Treasury so far, further vessels are likely as the P Class begin retiring around the end of the decade.

After much deliberation a new royal yacht, Britannia, will begin construction next year to replace the current two yachts, now aging. Britannia will be a modern design along modern yacht lines and equipped with the latest in fine luxury and technical features. A Polar expedition ship has been designed but Treasury approval is not forthcoming for work to begin on the ship next year.

The Subsim report for the new W Class as mentioned above.

W Class Long-Range Submarine HMS Walrus, Wolfhound, Whirlwind, Wolverine, Waterwitch
Date: 1945
Coastal
Armament:
- Guns: 1x 102mm (4 in)
- Torpedoes: 6 21in torpedo tubes
- Mines: 18 (also simming reload torpedoes)
Electric HP: 500hp
Diesel HP: 4,500hp
Crew: 66
Weight fuel & batts: 312 tons
Light Displacement: 1,008 tons
Loaded Displacement/Kerb Weight: 1,163 tons
Full Displacement: 1,366 tons
Reserve buoyancy: 15%
Max Surf Speed: 17 knots
Max Sub Speed: 8.3 knots

Length: 64 m
Beam: 7 m
Draft: 6.4 m
Crush depth: 225 m
Tons Oil: 137.2 tons
Tons Battery: 175 tons
Cruise speed: 10 knots
Submerged speed: 7 knots
Surface Range: 7503 nm@10 knots
Submerged Range: 116 nm@7 knots

Notes: 42 tons miscellaneous weight for radar and ASDIC and hydrophones and some extra gear and twin 0.661in HMG AA mount

This sim brings up a question that I'd like to address. Subsim allows for either coastal or oceanic boats. But I'm kinda thinking 1000t light displacement is pretty big for a 'coastal' submarine. Is there a reason you selected 'coastal' for this boat and not oceanic?

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
W Class Long-Range Submarine HMS Walrus,

Long-Range coastal ??????? Did you want to orbit GB at once without refueling ?

Originally it was 950-980 tons but adding more HP for increased speed and allowing for a bigger hull etc. for extra diesels bumped it up, as did adding 2 torpedo tubes. It got to the point where space was too limited. I could drop the range a little I guess.

I'm getting to the point where coastal and oceanic don't really mean very much when both types begin to merge. Really this is a Porpoise Class meets upgraded T Class without the snork or the streamlined conning tower.
At the moment I've got classic small coastal boats, oceanic boats and fast hunter boats. This is meant to be a bigger hunter, but not an oceanic patrol boat.

Here is a smaller, revised subsim report. I've lowered the range etc. and now its much lighter and more coastal-like. Although as I say that term means very little these days.

W Class Long-Range Submarine HMS Walrus, Wolfhound, Whirlwind, Wolverine, Waterwitch
Date: 1945
Coastal
Armament:
- Guns: 1x 102mm (4 in)
- Torpedoes: 6 21in torpedo tubes
- Mines: 14 (also simming reload torpedoes)
Electric HP: 500hp
Diesel HP: 2,500hp
Crew: 46
Weight fuel & batts: 181 tons
Light Displacement: 702 tons
Loaded Displacement/Kerb Weight: 797 tons
Full Displacement: 1,028 tons
Reserve buoyancy: 22%
Max Surf Speed: 15 knots
Max Sub Speed: 8.8 knots

Length: 57.8 m
Beam: 6.7m
Draft: 5.4 m
Crush depth: 225 m
Tons Oil: 81.3 tons
Tons Battery: 10 tons
Cruise speed: 10 knots
Submerged speed: 7 knots
Surface Range: 5505 nm@10 knots
Submerged Range: 73 nm@7 knots

Notes: 42 tons miscellaneous weight for radar and ASDIC and hydrophones and some extra gear and twin 0.661in HMG AA mount

The new O Class AA destroyers. Based on the OTL Gallant Class. Designed to be cheaper and smaller than the Darings and Battles that will form the backbone of the destroyer fleet. These will be surface group escorts and have a good A/S defence too.


O Class Destroyers, Great Britain Aerial Defence Destroyer laid down 1945

Displacement:
2,020 t light; 2,120 t standard; 2,378 t normal; 2,585 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
378.59 ft / 366.00 ft x 40.00 ft x 13.70 ft (normal load)
115.39 m / 111.56 m x 12.19 m x 4.18 m

Armament:
4 - 4.50" / 114 mm guns (2x2 guns), 45.00lbs / 20.41kg shells, 1943 Model
Automatic rapid fire guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 1 raised mount
6 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns (3x2 guns), 6.00lbs / 2.72kg shells, 1945 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 0.66" / 16.8 mm guns (2x6 guns), 0.14lbs / 0.06kg shells, 1945 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, all forward, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 218 lbs / 99 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 400

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm
2nd: 0.50" / 13 mm 0.50" / 13 mm -
3rd: 0.50" / 13 mm 0.50" / 13 mm -

- Conning tower: 1.00" / 25 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 2 shafts, 42,000 shp / 31,332 Kw = 33.50 kts
Range 5,000nm at 16.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 464 tons

Complement:
169 - 221

Cost:
£1.643 million / $6.571 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 32 tons, 1.3 %
Armour: 22 tons, 0.9 %
- Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 18 tons, 0.7 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 4 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 1,003 tons, 42.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 714 tons, 30.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 358 tons, 15.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 250 tons, 10.5 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
899 lbs / 408 Kg = 19.7 x 4.5 " / 114 mm shells or 0.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.25
Metacentric height 1.9 ft / 0.6 m
Roll period: 12.2 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.23
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.12

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.415
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.15 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 22.25 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 68 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 45
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 27.00 ft / 8.23 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Mid (45 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m (12.50 ft / 3.81 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 12.50 ft / 3.81 m
- Stern: 12.50 ft / 3.81 m
- Average freeboard: 17.92 ft / 5.46 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 159.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 180.1 %
Waterplane Area: 9,442 Square feet or 877 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 90 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 38 lbs/sq ft or 187 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.50
- Longitudinal: 2.53
- Overall: 0.59
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

Class Names: Orwell, Obdurate, Obedient, Opportune, Offa, Observer, Onslaught, Onslow

Misc weight includes:
ASDIC Type 144Q
ASDIC Type 145
Aerial/Surface Search Set Type 278
Aerial Search Type 971
Height-Finder Type 972
Gunnery Director Set Type 288
Heavy Automatic Gunnery Director Type 289
HF/DF Type 292
Passive Radio Intercept Type 293 series
Passive Radar Intercept Type 297
VHF Direction Finder Type 295
1 Squid A/S mortar

This is the secret 'Special' that will be laid down next year. This ship is a wholly new kind of concept and has been in development since 1940 and armed with a new model of 5.5in automatic gun developed in Canada at the request of the Admiralty. This info is strictly OOC, IC the ship is veiled with even more secrecy than the Admiral Class.

This ship revives the policy of the late 19th and early 20th centuries of building 'Specials', ships that incorporate new ideas and concepts in full size for extensive testing. This new revolutionary design has numerous new features, machinery, weaponry, concept of operations and electronics.
The object is to build a warship that has the speed and agility and economic cost of a destroyer combined with the firepower of a light cruiser. Two of these vessels should be capable of dealing with any large CL.

Canadian Vickers has developed the new 5.5in calibre, 60 calibre barrel gun, the 5.5in Mk VI. It is a single mount weapon, fully enclosed with 1-2 crewmen to oversee the gun/ local control and full access while at sea for maintenance. The desired RoF is 35 rounds per minute against aerial and surface targets and the mount features 80 degree elevation for AA gunnery, automatic loading at all elevations/ traverse and a high traverse speed. Initial static barrel proof firing began during late 1943, automatic loader trials during early 1944 followed by basic mount trials ashore later in the year. Britain is funding the sea-going ship for its firing trials and the fire-control system. HMS Revolution should be thought of as a trials vessel rather than a combat-ready warship.



HMS Revolution, Great Britain Cruiser-Destroyer laid down 1945

Displacement:
3,419 t light; 3,589 t standard; 4,087 t normal; 4,485 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
463.00 ft / 448.00 ft x 48.60 ft x 14.60 ft (normal load)
141.12 m / 136.55 m x 14.81 m x 4.45 m

Armament:
4 - 5.50" / 140 mm guns in single mounts, 80.00lbs / 36.29kg shells, 1945 Model
Automatic rapid fire guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline, evenly spread, 1 raised mount
Aft Main mounts separated by engine room
4 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns (2x2 guns), 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1943 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
4 - 0.66" / 16.8 mm guns (2x2 guns), 0.14lbs / 0.06kg shells, 1940 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, all forward, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 343 lbs / 156 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 450
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 2.00" / 51 mm 120.00 ft / 36.58 m 7.00 ft / 2.13 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 41 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 1.50" / 38 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm
2nd: 0.50" / 13 mm 0.50" / 13 mm -

- Conning tower: 0.50" / 13 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 58,487 shp / 43,632 Kw = 34.00 kts
Range 7,000nm at 16.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 896 tons

Complement:
255 - 332

Cost:
£2.562 million / $10.248 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 53 tons, 1.3 %
Armour: 113 tons, 2.8 %
- Belts: 86 tons, 2.1 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 24 tons, 0.6 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 3 tons, 0.1 %
Machinery: 1,477 tons, 36.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 1,507 tons, 36.9 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 668 tons, 16.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 270 tons, 6.6 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
2,800 lbs / 1,270 Kg = 33.7 x 5.5 " / 140 mm shells or 0.7 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.19
Metacentric height 2.3 ft / 0.7 m
Roll period: 13.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.25
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.30

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.450
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.22 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 24.47 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 65 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 54
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 24.36 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.00 ft / 0.91 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 26.50 ft / 8.08 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 21.50 ft / 6.55 m
- Mid (50 %): 20.50 ft / 6.25 m
- Quarterdeck (14 %): 20.50 ft / 6.25 m
- Stern: 20.50 ft / 6.25 m
- Average freeboard: 21.25 ft / 6.48 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 135.6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 166.8 %
Waterplane Area: 14,427 Square feet or 1,340 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 109 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 56 lbs/sq ft or 273 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.65
- Longitudinal: 2.67
- Overall: 0.75
Caution: Hull subject to strain in open-sea
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Belt armour is box protection for magazines (40 tons misc weight to sim box roofs)
Torpedo tubes are fixed at an angle of 55 degrees with one reload for each tube
Twin Squid A/S Mortars are fitted

Electronic Systems;
Surface Search Type 970 X-Band
Height-Finder Radio-Location Type 277
Aerial Search Type 978
Two Gunnery Director Type 288 with 'Tallboy' console
Four Heavy Automatic Gunnery Director Type 289 mounted on four CRBF (Close-Range Blind Firing)
HF/DF Type 292
VHF Direction Finder Type 295Q
Type 293 Passive Radio Intercept series Type 297 Passive Radio-Location Intercept
ASDIC Type 147
Passive ASDIC Type 148 (linked with Type 147 and 178 RDF)
Passive ASDIC Type 941 (torpedo warning)

Speaking OOC...

I am concerned with the description of the main armament - a 130mm weapon with a desired ROF of 35 rounds per minute? I think that with the technology of the mid 1940s that would not be possible to attain.

Now, the Soviet 130/70 AK130 is noted on the Naval Weapons Page as having a ROF of up to 40 rpm - but it was designed in 1980. The Italian 127/54 Compact is credited with 40 rpm, but it was first introduced in 1968. I therefore have to wonder what sort of technological breakthrough was made with the Canadian weapon. Of course, I do note the word desired - it may not be attained in practice.

I am also concerned with the extensiveness of the electronics suite. I've not researched the subject but with 1940s technology, is "passive sonar" for torpedo warning even possible beyond a hydrophone picking up "high speed screws"? I cannot imagine that in the mid 1940s any sort of direction information would be possible. Can you point me in the proper direction to find more information on the subject?

I am likewise not convinced that this is a realistic weapon that is capable of entering service in the 1940s... assuming that the design specs are actually achieved. I can perhaps stomach an achieved ROF of 20-22 RPM maximum, but I don't believe anything more can, or should, be accepted. The comparable systems on which this is clearly based - by the drawing and description - are failed 1950s projects. On what basis is a failed 1950s project (which it doesn't appear even made it off the drawing board before it was shut down) suitable justification for a successfully fielded 1940s system?

The gun is an real-world weapon developed in 1950-53. Here is its real-world potted history (more can be found in; 'Post War Cruiser Designs for the Royal Navy 1946-1956', George Moore, Warship 2006; and British Destroyers and Frigates: The Second World War and After, Norman Friedman).
The origins of the gun go back to 1943 with the 5.25in Mk III ordered for the N2 class cruisers. Work on the gun did not cease until 1948 due to possible need aboard new battleships or cruisers. Then it was decided to standardise with the US 5in/54 with either single or twin mounts as the 5in M.C.D.P. (Medium Calibre Dual Purpose). In late 1947 studies were made into 4.5in, 5in and 5.5in mountings based on the 5.25in Mk III which was designed to fire 48 rpm (rounds per minute) at HA and 24 rpm against surface targets. By October 1948 the 5in M.C.D.P. had become a 5in/62 weapon with a RoF of 60 rpm. Work continued on a single-mount weapon only and it was no longer a US-ammunition compatible gun. Vickers, Elswick received a development contract in autumn 1950 but by 1952 the weapon was obviously too heavy and complicated (it was meant to weight 90 tons). A less ambitious Mark 2 with a RoF of 40rpg was then developed but now the Admiralty wanted a twin-gun mounting. In May 1953 all work stopped in favour of the 6in and 3in automatic mountings for cruisers and the gun and because the Korean War remarment left no spare funds for its development. Cruisers designs with the 5in continued into 1956.

Therefore you can see my wesworld version is much less ambitious having nearly halved the design RoF and actually slightly inferior in some respects to the 5.25in Mark III. I don't expect to get near 35 rpm.

The Type 941 is based on the real-world Type 175 and Type 176 torpedo passive sonars during the very early 1950s. 175 was linked to the Ruler rocket anti-torpedo system and both were cancelled. The 176 lived on and was fitted to some Type 12 frigates. 176 operates at two frequencies 12-15 and 39 kHz. 175 and 176 gave an approximate range based on the ratio of received signals at its two frequencies because the sound attenuates at different speeds. It scanned its 40 degree beam at 7 RPM and could also sweep back and forth in a 90 degree sector.

Again, this is a trials ship and proof of concept. Don't expect to see a flotilla of these being laid down in 1946. It is full of new stuff to test these items at sea in a new-build purpose-built ship without the need to refit older ships and accept limitations because of hull design, insufficient space or electricity supply.

You are describing a weapons system that, while conceived in the late 1940s, was never fielded; you are also describing electronic systems that were not fielded until the early 1950s. That is far in excess of the +5 "rule" we are commonly guided by.

I realize this is a test ship; but I think this one tears the technology envelope, rather than pushing it.

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan
You are describing a weapons system that, while conceived in the late 1940s, was never fielded; you are also describing electronic systems that were not fielded until the early 1950s. That is far in excess of the +5 "rule" we are commonly guided by.

I realize this is a test ship; but I think this one tears the technology envelope, rather than pushing it.

Also this technology is strongly influenced by the WW2. I meant, the big war showed the need of high frequency firing weapons and also the electronic components are influenced by the world war 2. Even if you only build one ship and only for testing and training purpose - i have some "problems" with it.

We are going faster and faster on the technology tree and not slower !!! Quck firing guns with 40 rpm, jet aircrafts, rockets ..... and all developed without the experience of the ww2. No war that showed that jet aircrafts are better than propelled aircrafts.

War pushes developments .... peace slowed it .... a well known rule and a fact So may be it's time to start a big war to make some things reality.

Well, I only have to send my bombers into the air to flatten Shanghai in order to make your war a bit bigger.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
The gun is an real-world weapon developed in 1950-53.

And it's not 1950-1953 yet.

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan
You are describing a weapons system that, while conceived in the late 1940s, was never fielded; you are also describing electronic systems that were not fielded until the early 1950s. That is far in excess of the +5 "rule" we are commonly guided by.

I realize this is a test ship; but I think this one tears the technology envelope, rather than pushing it.

And more to the point, none of our +X Year rules, whether +3 or +5, applies to anything other than propeller-driven aircraft. We do not apply it to naval equipment.

A 5.25in Mk IV Mk III mount was actually built for testing. The claim is that it was designed for 70 rpm with the autoloader and fixed case ammunition, but the Moore article quoted earlier says 48 rpm (AA).Just for comparison, the non-auto 5.25in Mark I could achieve four rounds in 3.5 seconds (un-sustained rapid fire) and a sustained 8 sec cyclic rate.

5.25in rate of fire
Vickers Archive

For more on the 5in MCDP see this page; Navweaps
Barrel life was the main constraint, no more than 10 rpm after the first minute or 5 minute pauses between 100 round salvos.
As to Bruce's information that such rates of fire were impossible until the 1960s onwards or even the 1980s, as Navweaps points out the same technology was used by Vickers for the Army and for 4in naval guns for Chile which could sustain 40 rpm. See; 4in/ 45

I'm not even claiming to attain 35rpm, I can quite buy Brock's 20 rpm assessment for sustained fire. I'll admit its slightly earlier than the cutting edge but the existence of the 5.25in Mk IV from 1943 (the National Archives file for the 5inch MCDP actually starts in 1944) shows this kind of technology was being thought about before the 1950s. By 1953 these ideas were dead, missiles and the lack of cruisers or battleships needing such weapons had halted any real serious development and the weight and reliability concerns were serious too. I admit this 5.5in gun is bigger than the 5in weapon and that is why I also dropped the RoF. I'm happy with all sorts of caveats like initial high-rate fire for a limited period and then reduced rates. This ship might be the only one to carry such weapons until 1950 before any improved mount comes along.

As for the passive sonar, I'll snip it. No problem to me. Saves me 20 tons misc weight for the officer's Jacuzzi.

I could still build the ship with Shin's current 5.5in autos in single mounts or four twin 4.5in Mk VI mounts. There is no real difference other than 10-15 rpm difference. I also cut the VT fuzes I had originally planned before posting this ship. I honestly think there is a place for automatic guns. Much as we eased forward piston-engine development to ease more life out of the later high-power engines that were historically junked by the arrival of jet engines, I feel auto guns could give us a breathing space before we get into the world of naval SSMs and SAMs. We all know Peredor had such weapons planned for 1947 at one time. I'd prefer to be simming gun-armed ships for as long as we can and realistically, IMHO, automatic guns are the only way to expand the life of gun systems as we reach into the 1950s. Also, we must factor in that automatic small calibre autos like the 57mm guns have been around a few years now and designers have cut their teeth on these smaller guns and helped work out feed issues etc.

EDIT:
Adding the 4.5in Mk VI rates of fire. This are real-world and can be considered to be the same here, especially the hand loading rates.
Designed: 24 rounds per minute (power)
Service: 12 - 14 rounds per minute (hand)
Burst mode: 18 rounds per minute (hand)

Quoted

Saves me 20 tons misc weight for the officer's Jacuzzi

No doubt with more fance stuff like marble and gold and statues of Roman and Greek gods.

A big war Parador with multiple Great and smaller powers isn't really possible in Wesworld, such a war would take longer than the 1 year maximum.

War does speed development, in some cases yes. In others it slows it due to wartime generals and politicians being more interested in building a lot of what already works than something experimental.

I would actually say war speeds improvements of already existing technology and generally hinders new tech from being widely used.

I don't really have a problem with a 5.5in capable of 20rpm sustained fire. The 6in to be used on the Worcester class laid down in 1945 will be capable of 12rpm.

Well with a number of people not expressing interest in continuing WW beyond the 1950 SS2 deadline, why not end WW with a nice big bang by having a nice big world war? We built all these nice ships, lets go sink them!

We're not like you Southern Hemisphere barbarians...