WesWorld

One of many version of this ship I have at the moment. I've been going for the slightly smaller, slightly less heavily armed for this one, with only 9 main guns instead of the original planned 12.

Capitan Oyama (A)

Chilean Heavy Armoured Cruiser laid down 1931

Displacement:
20,824 t light; 21,681 t standard; 24,000 t normal; 25,760 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
735.00 ft / 720.00 ft x 90.00 ft x 29.00 ft (normal load)
224.03 m / 219.46 m x 27.43 m x 8.84 m

Armament:
9 - 10.00" / 254 mm guns (3x3 guns), 530.00lbs / 240.40kg shells, 1931 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, majority forward, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 4.30" / 109 mm guns (6x2 guns), 39.75lbs / 18.03kg shells, 1931 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
24 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (12x2 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1931 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 6 raised mounts
12 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns (1x12 guns), 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1931 Model
Machine guns in deck mount
on side, all raised guns
Weight of broadside 5,285 lbs / 2,397 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 125

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 8.50" / 216 mm 415.00 ft / 126.49 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 89 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
1.00" / 25 mm 391.50 ft / 119.33 m 20.00 ft / 6.10 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 8.50" / 216 mm 4.13" / 105 mm 8.00" / 203 mm
2nd: 4.13" / 105 mm 4.13" / 105 mm -
3rd: 0.25" / 6 mm - -

- Armour deck: 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower: 8.50" / 216 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 3 shafts, 115,000 shp / 85,790 Kw = 31.97 kts
Range 6,000nm at 20.00 kts (Bunkerage = 4,175 tons)

Complement:
963 - 1,253

Cost:
£7.579 million / $30.316 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 627 tons, 2.6 %
Armour: 6,445 tons, 26.9 %
- Belts: 1,528 tons, 6.4 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 290 tons, 1.2 %
- Armament: 1,305 tons, 5.4 %
- Armour Deck: 3,169 tons, 13.2 %
- Conning Tower: 153 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 3,439 tons, 14.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 10,238 tons, 42.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,176 tons, 13.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
31,508 lbs / 14,292 Kg = 63.0 x 10.0 " / 254 mm shells or 4.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.11
Metacentric height 5.2 ft / 1.6 m
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.44
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.29

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.447
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 31.41 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 55
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 19.98 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.00 ft / 0.91 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 33.00 ft / 10.06 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Mid (50 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Stern: 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Average freeboard: 24.07 ft / 7.34 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 88.2 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 198.8 %
Waterplane Area: 42,829 Square feet or 3,979 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 130 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 162 lbs/sq ft or 789 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.00
- Longitudinal: 1.67
- Overall: 1.05
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Ann with the 12 guns, still on the 24,000 ton standard..less armor.

Capitan Oyama (B)

Chilean Heavy Armoured Cruiser laid down 1931

Displacement:
20,714 t light; 21,681 t standard; 24,000 t normal; 25,760 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
735.00 ft / 720.00 ft x 90.00 ft x 29.00 ft (normal load)
224.03 m / 219.46 m x 27.43 m x 8.84 m

Armament:
12 - 10.00" / 254 mm guns (4x3 guns), 530.00lbs / 240.40kg shells, 1931 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 4.30" / 109 mm guns (6x2 guns), 39.75lbs / 18.03kg shells, 1931 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
24 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (12x2 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1931 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 6 raised mounts
12 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns (1x12 guns), 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1931 Model
Machine guns in deck mount
on side, all raised guns
Weight of broadside 6,875 lbs / 3,118 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 125

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 7.00" / 178 mm 415.00 ft / 126.49 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 89 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
1.00" / 25 mm 391.50 ft / 119.33 m 20.00 ft / 6.10 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 7.00" / 178 mm 4.13" / 105 mm 6.00" / 152 mm
2nd: 4.13" / 105 mm 4.13" / 105 mm -
3rd: 0.25" / 6 mm - -

- Armour deck: 3.50" / 89 mm, Conning tower: 8.00" / 203 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 3 shafts, 115,000 shp / 85,790 Kw = 31.97 kts
Range 6,000nm at 20.00 kts (Bunkerage = 4,175 tons)

Complement:
963 - 1,253

Cost:
£8.249 million / $32.998 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 814 tons, 3.4 %
Armour: 5,799 tons, 24.2 %
- Belts: 1,258 tons, 5.2 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 290 tons, 1.2 %
- Armament: 1,334 tons, 5.6 %
- Armour Deck: 2,773 tons, 11.6 %
- Conning Tower: 144 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 3,439 tons, 14.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 10,587 tons, 44.1 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,286 tons, 13.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
28,907 lbs / 13,112 Kg = 57.8 x 10.0 " / 254 mm shells or 3.7 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.11
Metacentric height 5.2 ft / 1.6 m
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.54
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.27

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.447
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 31.41 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 55
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 19.98 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.00 ft / 0.91 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 33.00 ft / 10.06 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Mid (50 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Stern: 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Average freeboard: 24.07 ft / 7.34 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 96.1 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 198.8 %
Waterplane Area: 42,829 Square feet or 3,979 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 125 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 167 lbs/sq ft or 816 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.00
- Longitudinal: 1.70
- Overall: 1.05
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Larger with speed, armor, and firepower.

Capitan Oyama (C)

Chilean Heavy Armoured Cruiser laid down 1931

Displacement:
23,625 t light; 24,652 t standard; 27,000 t normal; 28,771 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
740.00 ft / 720.00 ft x 92.00 ft x 29.00 ft (normal load)
225.55 m / 219.46 m x 28.04 m x 8.84 m

Armament:
12 - 10.00" / 254 mm guns (4x3 guns), 530.00lbs / 240.40kg shells, 1931 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 4.30" / 109 mm guns (6x2 guns), 39.75lbs / 18.03kg shells, 1931 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
24 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (12x2 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1931 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 6 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 6,874 lbs / 3,118 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 125

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 8.50" / 216 mm 497.00 ft / 151.49 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 106 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
1.00" / 25 mm 497.00 ft / 151.49 m 20.00 ft / 6.10 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 8.50" / 216 mm 4.13" / 105 mm 8.00" / 203 mm
2nd: 4.13" / 105 mm 4.13" / 105 mm -
3rd: 0.25" / 6 mm - -

- Armour deck: 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower: 8.50" / 216 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 3 shafts, 161,000 shp / 120,106 Kw = 34.02 kts
Range 5,600nm at 20.00 kts (Bunkerage = 4,227 tons)

Complement:
1,053 - 1,369

Cost:
£9.534 million / $38.136 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 814 tons, 3.0 %
Armour: 7,332 tons, 27.2 %
- Belts: 1,776 tons, 6.6 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 368 tons, 1.4 %
- Armament: 1,651 tons, 6.1 %
- Armour Deck: 3,371 tons, 12.5 %
- Conning Tower: 165 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 4,815 tons, 17.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 10,589 tons, 39.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,375 tons, 12.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
25,886 lbs / 11,742 Kg = 51.8 x 10.0 " / 254 mm shells or 3.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.02
Metacentric height 4.6 ft / 1.4 m
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.55
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.02

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.492
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.83 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 31.28 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 69
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.90 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.00 ft / 0.91 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 35.00 ft / 10.67 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 25.00 ft / 7.62 m
- Mid (50 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Stern: 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Average freeboard: 24.50 ft / 7.47 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 106.0 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 195.2 %
Waterplane Area: 45,554 Square feet or 4,232 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 115 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 159 lbs/sq ft or 778 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.49
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

Older concept that is probably more balanced for the 29,000 ton normal range. Could use 1.2 for seaboat, but she's get bigger, right?

Capitan Oyama (D)

Chile Heavy Armoured Cruiser laid down 1931

Displacement:
23,669 t light; 24,736 t standard; 29,000 t normal; 32,295 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
720.00 ft / 700.00 ft x 100.00 ft x 29.00 ft (normal load)
219.45 m / 213.36 m x 30.48 m x 8.84 m

Armament:
12 - 10.00" / 254 mm guns (4x3 guns), 530.00lbs / 240.40kg shells, 1931 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 4.30" / 109 mm guns (6x2 guns), 39.75lbs / 18.03kg shells, 1931 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
24 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (12x2 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1931 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 6 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 6,874 lbs / 3,118 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 125

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 8.50" / 216 mm 391.50 ft / 119.33 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 86 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
1.00" / 25 mm 391.50 ft / 119.33 m 20.00 ft / 6.10 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 8.50" / 216 mm 4.13" / 105 mm 8.00" / 203 mm
2nd: 4.13" / 105 mm 4.13" / 105 mm -
3rd: 0.25" / 6 mm - -

- Armour deck: 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower: 8.50" / 216 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 3 shafts, 134,848 shp / 100,596 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 20.00 kts (Bunkerage = 7,675 tons)

Complement:
1,110 - 1,444

Cost:
£9.063 million / $36.252 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 814 tons, 2.8 %
Armour: 7,184 tons, 24.8 %
- Belts: 1,480 tons, 5.1 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 290 tons, 1.0 %
- Armament: 1,651 tons, 5.7 %
- Armour Deck: 3,589 tons, 12.4 %
- Conning Tower: 173 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 4,033 tons, 13.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 11,539 tons, 39.8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,331 tons, 18.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 100 tons, 0.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
38,200 lbs / 17,327 Kg = 76.4 x 10.0 " / 254 mm shells or 5.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.13
Metacentric height 6.3 ft / 1.9 m
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.37
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.10

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.500
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 31.12 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 63
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.90 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.00 ft / 0.91 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 35.00 ft / 10.67 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 25.00 ft / 7.62 m
- Mid (50 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Stern: 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Average freeboard: 24.50 ft / 7.47 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 86.0 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 197.2 %
Waterplane Area: 48,501 Square feet or 4,506 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 133 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 170 lbs/sq ft or 829 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.00
- Longitudinal: 1.68
- Overall: 1.05
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

The other three concepts are smaller in some ways and less stable or slower....save one wich was to place 16x10 inch guns in twins...it would work at 31.5 knots, but just.

Aren't all these ships a bit too big for cruisers? They stand no chance against BBs or BCs which will be more likely to meet.

Given the rest of the South American country's assets I'd say they are not nessassarily useless. Design "B"s armor doesn't fully cover the vitals.

I'd rather have design "C" with 9x12" guns and a thicker belt.

Your C design looks a lot like a possible future design of mine... only its a bit heavier than mine.

I must have been going through "B" too quickly and missed the armor length change, it shouldn't be off by too much at present, probably a few feet when I changed the length by 20 feet.

As for these not being cruisers, how big were the Alaska's? These are armed with a cruiser gun as oppose to a battleship gun. And they are intended to take on cruisers of about any navy. They could be considered what an Armored Cruiser would evolve into without Treaties restricting cruisers but forcing an end to capital ship construction.

Since there should be propotionally more cruisers in the world then battleships and battlecruisers, would it not make sense for them to encounter cruisers then? And at 31.9 - 34+ knots, they should be able to outrun almost any battleship and only be caught by a few battlecruisers.

Oh sure I could build a battlecruiser or small battleship instead, but the mission intended for this vessel in cruiser-killer, not capital ship. She's armored enough to stand against 8.2 inch gun heavy cruisers, her primary target. She and her potental sisters will be quick enough to take on any native South American Power's cruisers, leaving the dreadnoughts and newer battleships to take care of the heavier vessels.

"C" with only 9 guns? I'll have to check it out later.

Alaska is one of the largest pieces of crap ever built. She cost twice as much to build as KGV, more than SoDak and very nearly as much as Iowa. All that extra cost for something that can be sunk by 2-3 torpedoes?

Having 254mm guns limits them to just cruisers. 6x381mm or even 9x381mm can go on the same hull giving a lot more punch. Then you actually have some chance of winning against a battleship.

If you want to build overgrown cruisers fine, but for a navy hugely constrained by production i can't see it being wise.

Leaving cost out of the discussion (the only downside to expensive ships is Congress's unwillingnes to give their thumbs up to them), the Alaska's despite being rated as heavy cruisers or cruiser killers, are in the same league as Sharnhorst and Renown.

In the armor department Sharnhorst fairs better while Renown has the hitting power. Alaska is a fairly balanced design with her only flaws being lack of TB and her cost. Given their late entry in the war they never got a fair shot to prove their worth.

When the U.S. was scrapping the hordes of Cruisers in the 60's the Alaskas were a proper choice, they were practically as expensive to maintain as a battleship and offered no additional capability's that either the Iowa's or smaller cheaper cruisers like the updated Clevelands or Des Moines's could fullfill.

A and B have the benefit of being smaller, but I don't like the low BC of the hull. Something in the 0.5 to 0.55 range seems more appropriate for this size of ship.

C and D are more balanced, but bigger: fully loaded, they displace more than an Akbar or Tyr class battleship. As Gavin notes, if one runs into another, the BB is going to clean the HAC's clock.

Quoted

If you want to build overgrown cruisers fine, but for a navy hugely constrained by production i can't see it being wise.

I'll echo this sentiment. With half again the industrial output you have, I'm going to be hard-pressed to operate the three BB and three CV I'm allowed. How you intend to operate two BB, one or more HAC, and one or more CV is beyond me.

Quoted

She and her potental sisters will be quick enough to take on any native South American Power's cruisers, leaving the dreadnoughts and newer battleships to take care of the heavier vessels.

If the other South American fleets are kind enough to oblige you, then yes, this may work. But knowing that this vessel exists, why would they do so? More likely they'd set up the kind of trap Swampy and RAM were yakking about in the Dutch BB thread. I'd expect that any of your neighbours would be delighted to trade a CA for one of these guys.

If you really want a cruiser killer, maybe you ought to either talk to RAM about his design, or investigate the possibility of obtaining and modernizing those Atlantean ACs that have been sitting idle for a while.

Well the question becomes, are you trying to talk me into bigger ships, bigger guns for this vessel, or smaller cruisers?

Aside from the value of this ship type verses battleships, and cost....how is this ship for what it was designed to do?

I'm certainly not trying to talk you into larger cruisers; the smaller Oyamas are more than sufficient in size for their intended task.

You've given yourself a lot of things to do with what will always be a fairly small navy. A decent number of multi-purpose ships is the best compromise here - they may not be the best at any single mission, but they can do them all competently.

An Oyama is only really good at picking off enemy cruisers. She's overkill for sealane patrols and anti-piracy ops (Deathshadow notwithstanding, and any Wesworld BB should be able to deal with her easily enough). She's roadkill against enemy battleships in anything except a night action, and even there, three CL or two CA can be just as effective without risking a capital ship.

A couple of proper BB, backing up a handful of CDS and a good group of CA/CL, would probably serve your needs nicely.

But it's your fleet, so do what you will...

It's the age-old problem: for one 22,000 (rough average of A/B and C/D)-ton übercruiser, you could build...

-two 11,000t heavy cruisers
-three 7,300t light cruisers
-four 5,500t "coastal cruisers"
-five 4,400t überdestroyers
-six 3,500t frigates

etc...


So it's all a matter of priorities.

The concept is for a heavy cruiser designed to be armored against 8.27 inch guns fire at most ranges, and should therefore be (relatively) immune to lighter vessels while being able to outrun larger vessels (the German WWII 11 inch gun armed Scharnhorst come to mind here as an example, or the Graf Spee if armored better and faster.) The gun size is mainly because it is possible and will be able to take on something the size of El Cid or the older Argentinian and/or Brazilian armored cruisers that are armored well, unlike several of the more modern heavy cruisers (thought with 13,000 tons, some are probably better armored then historical ships).

The hope is to be able to operate the Oyama's in pairs, or with one of the Atlantis build cruisers (heavy or light), and perhaps with either an aircraft carrier or floatplane carrier for additional scouting and some long range strike capability. A long range destroyer or two would also help.

Personally I wouldn't build any cruisers above 15,000 tons and to me thats quite heavy. Thanks to the Chilean request for a CA design around 10,000 tons I've come up with a decent design that will eat up less tonnage.

Chile dosn't have the pesky CT to worry about but if she does decide to join up these cruisers will eat up capital ship tonnage. It would likely be in Chile's best interests to stick with more 10,000 ton cruisers to get the numbers rather than 1 on 1 supremacy. IIRC just accounting for the Atlantian CA/CL designs alone Chile has a numbers advantage over Argentina.

As an aside - is Oyama being named for somebody other than the naval architect of the same name?

The vessel is named after his grandfather who fought in the War of the Pacific. Not the one that looks like him but the guy that married the sister of that generation's Tochiro (last name not given).

The present day Tochiro Oyama is named after his great-uncle.

As for the cruiser killer. I'd still rather have something larger then the treaty limit in terms of tonnage and gun size if possible (or gun number as in the Tylor's case) to be able to handle the potental problem of treaty built cruisers (I suspect trouble from across the ocean in the future. The rattle of sabers and swords gets loud from Manila and Kyoto ever so often). Something this size could also be considered a symbol ship, national pride sort of thing while being "smaller" then a battleship. Something you'd send to other nation's naval reviews, coronations, or other international social events. The Oyama's with larger guns won't be any more potent then the new Coastal Defense Battleship from the United States, but potentially faster, but not in better then 29 knots with the same armor as this cruiser and with only 6 x 14 inch guns and still roughly 24,000 tons. I've not tried it with 8 inch guns as while that would fit with the Tylor and the Atlantian heavy cruiser, it wouldn't be all that much better then a treaty cruiser, and won't be able to punch though the armor of Iberian El Cid (the ship they Chileans are trying to beat).

Quoted

(I suspect trouble from across the ocean in the future. The rattle of sabers and swords gets loud from Manila and Kyoto ever so often).

Manila and Edo occasionally think they hear rattling noises from Santiago, too... ;-)