You are not logged in.

Kaiser Kirk

Lightbringer and former European Imperialist

  • Send private message

21

Thursday, January 17th 2008, 5:23pm

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
Is there a minimum beam for mounting triple 8" turrets ?


It can be hard to decide what the "Minimum" needed is. Historical examples can provide some guidance, but could also indicate a pushed design.

The IJN Aoba and Furataka mount 8" twins on 52ft, which seems about the least, while the HMS Exeter used a 58ft beam for twins.
The USS Pensacola class with a 65ft beam mounted twin 8" in "A" and triple in "B" and I have seen the reason given as that the beam at "A" was insufficient for triples... yet there are triple 8" cruisers with smaller beams, so hull form also matters.

In this case, you have a very narrow hull with a moderate BC, twins are likely what fit.

22

Thursday, January 17th 2008, 6:09pm

China's ears and eyes are open for every ideas ;)

Maybe someone like to redesign my drafts ?!?!

HoOmAn

Keeper of the Sacred Block Coefficient

  • Send private message

23

Thursday, January 17th 2008, 7:18pm

Well, you may want to take a look on the RSANs CA design of 1926: the Cape Infante class.

While 9 years older she´s heavier armed, armoured and faster than you M-class and also offers more bunkerage. On the other hand she has less deck armour, misc weight and seakeeping.

24

Thursday, January 17th 2008, 7:31pm

The original M class design was OK except (in Germany's opinion) for the 88mm secondary battery. Looking at the miscellaneous weight on that design, there appears to be plenty to simply remove the 88mm mountings and replace them 1-for-1 with 105mm mounts.

If I were making a more drastic change to the original design, I might slow it down to (say) 33 knots and use the tonnage gained for additional belt armor. A few more 37 and 20mms would also not be out of place.

Kaiser Kirk

Lightbringer and former European Imperialist

  • Send private message

25

Friday, January 18th 2008, 2:29am

OOC : For a Satasuma member China's ok, but why oh why do countries the Netherlands calls friends insist on helping them with the naval arms?

Please don't mention Italian arms sales :)

26

Friday, January 18th 2008, 3:12am

Because we're also China's friend? We Germans are a friendly people (we ignore sounds from clams in that section of the English Channel that is between France and the Netherlands.....), so we try to help our friends.

27

Friday, January 18th 2008, 6:37am

This is true, the Germans have also helped freinds of freinds of freinds. Lost yet? thought so, what I mean is the Germans helped the Peruvians as well, who are freinds of the Iberians, who in turn are freinds of the Netherlands.

Kaiser Kirk

Lightbringer and former European Imperialist

  • Send private message

28

Friday, January 18th 2008, 7:30am

Hey!

Don't confuse me while I'm whining... now where was I?

29

Friday, January 18th 2008, 7:50am

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
Hey!

Don't confuse me while I'm whining... now where was I?


I believe you were about to sign over Newfoundland and Greenland over to Canada...

-hands kirk a pen- :D

(yes, I know denmark doesn't own newfoundland...but it's more fun that way!)

Kaiser Kirk

Lightbringer and former European Imperialist

  • Send private message

30

Friday, January 18th 2008, 8:50am

dutifully signs over the title to Hokkaido and Sri Lanka