WesWorld

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
I also see a great deal of misc weight for 'superior' stuff. Not keen on that.

Roo seems to get away with a lot of stuff like that by bypassing the ship design forum and going straight to encyclopedia/industry reports on everything he builds. ¬_¬

I probably could've done the same with these rebuilds and avoided the various debates that've sprung up, come to think of it. :\

Most people are blissfully ignorant of his 36 knot <s>target</s> Large Cruiser, for example.


On a side note, here's another goofy picture I edited together. Basically replaces the pyramid mast of the earlier graphic with the original tripod as a 'cost saving' measure. Probably rediculous in a practical sense.

Pretty sure I noted that cruiser once, I browsed the IJN early on. For my designs, I don't find pushing past 35knts is worth it, but the IJN sure likes lots of high speeds. Makes em a pain to plan for.

I nearly made the Kortenaers ~32-3 knot repeats of Utrecht - and thats announced explanation for the planned size as well, but I decided to keep the speed to that of the Utrechts. I've got various high speed designs, but those are for a little later.

As for the redesign, yes you could have avoided this, but the point was both to firetest the design, and also see if some good suggestions come out of it. The 5.5 thing is another matter beside the refit.

Your basic rationale makes sense to me- for the cost of 1, you can get 2, so rebuilding works. They may not be equal to the newest thing out there, but most ships are not the newest.

The Dutch at least expect future BCs to be 32-33knts and 10-13" guns. True Roo's BC exceeds that for guns, but you can't forecast them all....Depending on the expected foe, you probably want to keep at range.Personally, I might leave the belt alone- if anything make it a bit taller- perhaps a strake of thinner armor to extend down, simmed as upper belt. "spend" spare resources on the deck armor- perhaps concentrate over the citadel. Also, if I was upping the belt, I'd up the barbettes to be close.

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
The Dutch at least expect future BCs to be 32-33knts and 10-13" guns.

I guess that depends on your definition of Battlecruiser. The traditional definition is a fast ship with lighter armour and 1st rate guns, which Walter's ship falls under. You seem to be describing more of a Large Cruiser or 2nd class fast BB (Historical Scharnhorsts come to mind) concept, depending how they're armoured.

As historical, I think we're starting to see the evolution of the fast battleship rather than seperate BC/BB categories, which further muddies things up; The new British ships are straddling that line, for example.

Quoted

Most people are blissfully ignorant of his 36 knot target Large Cruiser, for example.

Though the Dunkirque, Paris and Admiral Makarov classes are slightly older than Roo's over-engined undergunned 36kt toy, they'll do just fine against her, the French ships by shooting large holes in them with big guns, and the Russians by turning their unarmored portions into flaming ruins from a rain of 120 130mm and 36 234mm shells per minute.

Quote;
"I got stuck with lemons, I'm just trying to make some lemonade. :\"

Lemonade? How about fruit punch? Something with a little more kick anyway.

Or, if you prefer a more modern look:

The expectation was that a new crop of ships powerful enough to match or straight outgun the various ACs/BCs already out there would be constructed. Speed/Guns/Armor to suit that. Ships like SAE's newest vessels. The speed range is a pretty obvious one. About 22-30k.

The IJN vessels are very fast, decently armored, with light main guns. However, as the Admiral pointed out, Franco-Russo ships match up decently already.

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
The Dutch at least expect future BCs to be 32-33knts and 10-13" guns.

I guess that depends on your definition of Battlecruiser. The traditional definition is a fast ship with lighter armour and 1st rate guns, which Walter's ship falls under. You seem to be describing more of a Large Cruiser or 2nd class fast BB (Historical Scharnhorsts come to mind) concept, depending how they're armoured.

As historical, I think we're starting to see the evolution of the fast battleship rather than seperate BC/BB categories, which further muddies things up; The new British ships are straddling that line, for example.

Quoted

I could be wrong on this, but the 3 new Japanese BC's can outrun this ship, have an inch better belt armour, and a little better deck protection.

That might be true but in the end they are just cheap modern copies of R&R. In my eyes you just can't beat the real deal: Unknown and Repulsive.
Eventhough I call them Unknown and Repulsive, I do like those ships... which is the reason why I built my own R&R with the Tachibana class.

Quoted

Still would be an interesting fight between the two R BC's, and the new Japanese BC's.

Would definitely be a very interesting fight if all five ships looked the samel.

Quoted

and I've already stated there's nothing I can do short of lengthening the hull and adding a turret to make them at all competative with modern capital ships.

Considering the 75% cost of a reconstruction, I think it would not require too much extra materials if you were to scrap Renown and Repulse and start building Renown II and Repulse II the way you want them with 4x2 165 inch guns. Just a silly idea.

Quoted

The way Roo has his information set up, it's rather clear what the 'public' knows vs. the springsharp.

That is for Cleito Treaty purposes only. Also the stats are kind of like Jane's: not too reliable.

Quoted

I also see a great deal of misc weight for 'superior' stuff. Not keen on that.

Actually I deliberately use the word 'superior' to make it sound more impressive than it actually is.

Quoted

Roo seems to get away with a lot of stuff like that by bypassing the ship design forum and going straight to encyclopedia/industry reports on everything he builds.

Actually, the BCs were posted on the design board *(here) with the whole Miscellaneous weights breakdown so I definitely did not bypass the ship design forum.

Quoted

Most people are blissfully ignorant of his 36 knot <s>target</s> Large Cruiser, for example.

Aye and a fine target she is.
Able to tag along with Japan's fast carriers.

Quoted

Pretty sure I noted that cruiser once, I browsed the IJN early on. For my designs, I don't find pushing past 35knts is worth it, but the IJN sure likes lots of high speeds. Makes em a pain to plan for.

Pain?! You're obviously doing something wrong then. You should keep those plans simple: plainzzzzzz and lotzzzzzz of them.

Quoted

I guess that depends on your definition of Battlecruiser. The traditional definition is a fast ship with lighter armour and 1st rate guns, which Walter's ship falls under. You seem to be describing more of a Large Cruiser or 2nd class fast BB (Historical Scharnhorsts come to mind) concept, depending how they're armoured.

I myself stick to the traditional definition of the Battlecruiser. So the Tachibana class is in my eyes a 'true' battlecruiser while the Dairen class is not a 'true' battlecruiser even if they are classified as such.

Quoted

Though the Dunkirque, Paris and Admiral Makarov classes are slightly older than Roo's over-engined undergunned 36kt toy, they'll do just fine against her, the French ships by shooting large holes in them with big guns, and the Russians by turning their unarmored portions into flaming ruins from a rain of 120 130mm and 36 234mm shells per minute.

... so you are willing to lose two Dunkirque BCs, two Paris BCs, four Makarov ACs and all their escorts to the many submarines Japan has in order to sink one Special Test Platform.

Not sure if I should call that bravery or... *puts on helmet* ... stupidity. *quickly runs away*

Quoted

Zitat:
Though the Dunkirque, Paris and Admiral Makarov classes are slightly older than Roo's over-engined undergunned 36kt toy, they'll do just fine against her, the French ships by shooting large holes in them with big guns, and the Russians by turning their unarmored portions into flaming ruins from a rain of 120 130mm and 36 234mm shells per minute.


... so you are willing to lose two Dunkirque BCs, two Paris BCs, four Makarov ACs and all their escorts to the many submarines Japan has in order to sink one Special Test Platform.

Not sure if I should call that bravery or... *puts on helmet* ... stupidity. *quickly runs away*

Utility of submarines vs ships able to sustain 30+kts for long periods is pretty low.

Plainzzzzzz and lotzzzzzz of them, on the other hand, are a definite concern...

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10
Considering the 75% cost of a reconstruction, I think it would not require too much extra materials if you were to scrap Renown and Repulse and start building Renown II and Repulse II the way you want them with 4x2 165 inch guns. Just a silly idea.

If I was running the RN, I'd go with that. But Canada can't afford to wait another 4 years for new ships to complete. I have no further plans for capital ships after the Canadas complete and R&R are done modernizing due to the prohibitively long build times, the need for other ships, and weak industrial power. The RCN has Two Ocean requirements on a Gulf budget. :\

Why not give them minor refits and build replacements on a one for one basis. Aquire an additional 2 twin 15' turrets from Britain and build the BB's you want.

Better yet, aquire 4 turrets and build a new BB without having to take either R out of service. when your first BB completes, remove an R from service and remove her guns. That way at best you have 3 BB's in service and a BC for a short time before the 4th BB completes.

To do that would either mean

1) Giving R&R such a minor and ineffective refit that their utility against modern threats is dubious at best anyway

2) Giving R&R a more costly and extensive refit...only to scrap them a few years later.

Either way, that would also mean tying up my industry & infrastructure for at least 4 years (Reusing guns only shaves a whopping month off build times, as I read the rules...) while the ships build, which would entail a continued lack of destroyer, sub, escort, and fleet train capabilities. And at the end of that, I'd still have second-class ships compared to the 50k giants being laid down at the same time. At that point, in for a penny...might as well build a follow-on to the Canadas.

I'd say that refitted R&R still have some use to the Canadians as a Fast Division. Their aren't a lot of ships that can catch and potentially sink these two. Besides the French BC's, and the Russian AC's, SAER doesn't really have any other heavy ships capable of 32 knots. Fast BC (32 knots) numbers for SATSUMA and SAER are the 3 Japanese + 1 Filipino ships (both capable of 33 knots), vs the 2 Cdn R's and the 4 French BC's. Of course should the Americans get involved, that changes everything.

They're only good for 32 knots if I go for the current, preferred modernization. updating the engines is a 50% rebuild no matter what, otherwise they're limited to 30 knots. Less, if any weight is added and the machinery is worn our.