WesWorld

GReat ship!!!

Perhaps I know to make a nice Flag, If I may?

Sure, go ahead...

My input; the ship is quite cramped when you start adding secondary turrets and light AA. I opted for a more vertical superstructure similar to the new battlecruisers. Hull casemates are removed and the hull side extended to the weather deck. Fitting aircraft was a bit of a problem, finally I went for a single catapult on the port beam with the aircraft stored on the centreline. There isn't really space available for a hangar. As a result, the main boats are spread over the starboard side.

Thanks RA.

Her general layout is pretty close to what could be expected if I had drawn the modernizised ship. An asymetrical cat also is something the RSAN has experience with. Not a bad idea at all.

However, I think her superstructure is too small. It could extend a bit further aft (closer to that funnel) and if going vertical, why not add another two decks? She has enough bean so deck heaviness should not be a ptoblem.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
Something simpler

I think it´s better but somehow I´m still not satisfied. Can´t even say why. That flag just looks too colorful as a pennant, doesn´t it?

Its based on the ZAR ensign, what colors do you want in the flag (pennant or ensign?)

and...?

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
From her top view you can also see that simply extending her bow forward without removing the cut in section where the casemats where will not give a good result. She´ll be quite a wet girl when going at 27kn with such a cut in bow. Hence I really think her forward section needs to be plated to the outer shell of her hull. Your opinion?

The Italian rebuilds are the only instances I can find that had Casemate indentations entirely faired back into the hull, and their situation was much worse. These ships are more similar to the QEs, USN, and IJN rebuilds, which were all satisfied with plating over the openings. The USN had slower ships, but the QEs and IJN ships still aimed for 24-25 knots, and the Kongos were designed for 30. I don't think the indentations for your forward casemates are deep enough to be worth the additional weight and other factors that would be required to completely fair them into the hull; That gets into the range of the Italian rebuilds, which were far more extensive than what you're doing.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
You may also note that on your proposed solution her aft rangefinder cannot turn. it´s a stereoscopic device with a base length of about 12m.

I can fix that; If there's any other small details you'd like adjusted, just let me know. On a related note (Addressing something brought up in another post), I didn't think the aft Rangefinder pedastal was armoured. I just placed it on a pillar for some height, which can also be adjusted.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
I´m not sure if the gap between superstructure and X turret is suffice to handle planes. There might be enough room left and right only a top view could reveal.

The gap is only intended to be large enough to get them out of the hangar and on the catapult.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
What is this aft of her stack? A platform of some sort? For boats?

Yeah, just a platform for the boats. I didn't think having an unbroken superstructure from the forward bridge to the hangar looked right.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
What does the board think about her secondary battery layout? Aren´t those turrets too close to each other? Can a single hit wipe out 50% of the ships secondaries?

I had the Tennessee/West Virginia rebuilds in mind with the layout, but I can space them out a bit more. You could put them all on deck level, but that's not what the Springsharp readout says. I also haven't put on most of the AA battery yet, which will also need some of that deck space.

Well, okay. I accept that it might be a better idea to just plate over the casemates and add the new flared bow forward. I did so with my own Koning and Hertog class rebuilds. So it also might fit RSAN design philosophy.

On her secondaries - I know some on this board don´t think it´s worth it but I prefer superfiring secondaries with arcs that allow improved end on fire. And of course it´s nice to know the ships secondary battery cannot be blown to pieces by just one hit.

The boat deck is a good idea, I like that.

Thanks for working on that drawing...

Quoted

Originally posted by ALVAMA



and...?

The third one rings a bell.

Can you please provide variations with green outside and orange as cross or blue and orange switched?

Thanks.

Slid the hangar further back, and decided to try roof hatches instead; They'll probably have similar leaking problems as the USN cruisers did, but maybe not as much due to them not being in the fantail. On the otherhand, designers at the time probably thought they could keep the hangars dry, or it wouldn't have been tried.

Also fixed the bow, spaced out the secondaries a bit more, and adjusted the AA battery with what I hope are the correct templates; The 2 6x20mm mounts are alongside the stack, with 40mm twins aside the forward structure, on the fantail, and on top of B turret. I'll save the 20mm singles for last, along with the boats.

Version two keeps the casemates and has more superstructure.

My entry, I've gone along the route of plating over the forward casemates flush with the hull, turnable catapult and twin hangars, new superstruture. I've included a seaplane too, a modern monoplane type, and I've done a flag, basically a British ensign with orange and the top corner is based on Brock's brown, green and white pattern which I extended to the aircraft roundels.

Great drawing !

Beautifully, Hood!!!
Way use SA a Arado 196 floating plane?

A VERY nice drawing James!

Great stuff, gentlemen. All versions of a possible rebuild are very interesting.

Some remarks or questions:

All of you have put scuttles below secondary guns. Why? Those mounts have lifts underneath running through armored boxes. Even though normal hull plating might not offer much protection, putting a scuttle in such area looks like asking for desaster. Or am I wrong? I also can´t see that there are crew quarters just below such mounts....

On RAs design study:
I still like the asymetrical installation of boats and catapult. The RSAN used similar arrangements on several units, the first comming to mind are the CL classes of 1921 and 1927 and of course the latest Radiance class super-CAs.

I have doubts that there should not be enough space for a hangar on such a large ship. Looking at historical designs the Germans managed to carry up to 4 planes on their large CAs and Scharnhorst class BBs in hangars where I think their ships superstructures were more crowded with stuff like on a rebuild Mauritius.

We already adressed belt length issues with springstyle so I think her belt needs to be extended aft to protect D barbet although SS data gives a belt length that might not allow full cover of all vitals.

Those 2cm singles on the stern seem a bit exposed. Do you think it would be possible to find possitions for them elsewhere? Probably on the aft or forward superstructure or B turret?

Overall, with that straight bow, forward superstructure and cat arrangement she looks to me like what a rebuild prior to the war might have looked like.

What I am missing is that massive look of modern capital ships, that look that says "power projection". This goes together with my feeling that there should be more room for modern equipment (enlarged radio installations, radar, improved FC etc.) and enlarged crew.

On Shins design study:
She really has that look that I like on a BB: massive, impressive and intimidating. So overall she is pretty much what I had in mind but couldn´t put together.

Maybe it is possible to modify her forward superstructure a bit? Just to avoid she looks too much like a copy&paste from the RSAN Imperator.

On the top view her flared bow looks a bit odd and round. I think some tweaking is necessary here.

As I already said I like the idea of that boat deck behind her funnel. However, I doubt that boom will be long enough to serve the boats beyond her beam.

Having a catapult on C turret is rarely used but nothing new to the RSAN (see CA class of 1923). On a relatively cramped design this probably is a good solution.

On Hoods design study:
Very impressive drawing. It´s a bit difficult to compare to the others as it used a different scale and thus offers more details but it surely is a great piece of art. ;o)

In detail there are a few things that I wondered about and which probably need to be changed.

First, her funnels seems too huge, especially too high. It´s too dominating although I understand your intention to keep the bridge free from smoke. But it blocks the rangefinders view aft...

Rangefinders - the huge rangefinders I usually use on my capital ships are strongly influenced by what the French put on their Richelieu class OTL. It´s a large main gun director below a medium sized DP/secondary device. On your drawing those rangefinders are too small (I doubt somebody could sit and work in them). And in case of her aft RF I doubt it can even train 360° because of that mast. Hence I think modifications are necessary.

What I like is that plated over bow. Now that I have it in front of me it looks like what I had in mind originally. I´d just used a curved instead of a straight bow.

The tube for those sextuble 2cm mounts seems a bit small. I assume up to 8 men handling the mount and ammo supply, reasonable?

Her catapult arrangement is very close to what I had in mind. Given the scale used I cannot say weather that cat is too long or too short. Whatever, there isn´t much room left for an aft superstructure which leads to the problems how to install an aft RF. Any suggestions what could be tried alternatively?


Way forward:
It´s difficult to me to decide how to proceed. RAs design, while interesting in concept, is furthest away from what I had in mind. Hoods and Shins both have feature I´d like to keep.

So here is my proposal in case you gentlemen agree:
For RSAN Mauritius which is rebuild 1937 I´d like to go with Hoods overall layout. That is, with a cat amidships and a straight bow. However, here I´d like to see the forward casemats remain. Patched over and guns removed, sure, but the cutaways still visible. With a cut down funnel and those other points dealt with I think she makes for a perfect 1937er rebuild.

For RSAN Réunion , sistership of RSAN Mauritius, I have planned a rebuild to similar lines in 1939. There will be modifications, internally in general like more range, but it could be a different solution optically. So for this ship I´d like to go with Shins solution but with plating over the forward casemats flush with the outer hull. She will then also need two additional 4cm twins.

What do you think?

Quick rehash of what I was woring on to look similar to what James had.
Note, guns are not exactly as the sim because its a quick redo of Hood's drawing in Hoos scale and template with a drawing I was working on.

B turret and stern AA mounts would be gone and single 20mm's placed on both superfired turrets and sprinkled around the decks.

Ok no problemo

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn

Quoted

Originally posted by ALVAMA



and...?

The third one rings a bell.

Can you please provide variations with green outside and orange as cross or blue and orange switched?

Thanks.

Hoo, all shipbucket ships are to the same scale. 2 pixels = 1 foot

So the rangefinders are 5.5 foot tall (top RF 4.5 foot tall) and 11.5 foot long (top 7.5 foot long).

On the scuttles, it depends on how far inboard the secondaries are, there is quite a bit of beam there and so it might be possible but I'll remove them on the revised version.

On reflection the funnel is too high, the ship looks a little top-heavy.

Hoo,

A revised version with the bits and peices you mentioned all rectified. Is this more what your after?