WesWorld

Below you'll find first stabs at:

-The new Z-203 class torpedo-boat, laid down in 1924

-The Emden class light cruiser, laid down in 1921, and based fairly tightly on the historical Emden;

-The Karlsruhe class light cruiser, laid down in 1923, and more of a stretched Emden than the historical K-class - though I have tried to incorporate a few design elements

-And the as-yet un-named 1925 CL, which is obviously adjusted from the Karlsruhe above it, while trying to add in a few elements from the historical Leipzeg class.

Plan views will eventually follow; but not today.

Whatcha think? Do they kinda look German?

The ships share some characteristics of most of the 1920's era German ships.
The gunshields and turrets seem a little out of proportion. (I believe you are using single & twin 5.9" guns)
The superstructure seems a lot higher than on the actual "K" class & the Leipzig class CL's

You're correct about the guns, and I should note that my Karlsruhe carries both twins and singles. Do you mean that the turrets and gunshields are too small, or too big? I assume the former; it's a gut feeling I have. Any idea where I might find some dimensions of the historical mounts?

Hi there...

Nice drawings. You´ve changed your style as it seems.

Some short comments as I´m running out of time. Sorry for being blunt:

- The DD is good looking but not typically german. The gap between B mount and bridge - why is it? At least it is not german. The bridge being connected to the forward funnel looks odd the way you´ve drawn it. Better cut the bridge before touching that funnel. The horizontal lines on the funnels look. They should form a right angle with the funnel, not the deck below. TTs look a little bit small.

- EMDEN looks quite good and similar to her historical counterpart. Maybe little bit more stretched but that´s not a problem, though. However, on her brdige structure you should work again. That huge block looks odd. Add more details, platforms etc. if possible.

- KARLSRUHE looks odd, sorry. She´s way too long. No german vessel ever had such a long bow section. Her bridge also looks too much like a big block without details. It should also show some modifications and improvements to earlier designs. I don´t understand why the aft AA gun should be behind D mount thus having a limited arc instead of "sitting" on another deck. Extend the aft superstructure aft. Those 15cm twins are too small. The Germans were known to build relatively large turrets. Take a linedrawing of the K-class and a scalebar, meassure (waterline) length (whatever specs you have available) and calculate turret size from that. Those turrets (including above deck barbets) should be nearly two decks high and somewhat longer.

- Yet-to-be-named.... Same applies as above. Too long a bow, lacking details on bridge (at least her mast should change), AA gun aft etc. In general she looks better than KARLSRUHE but she´s still too long. Are you sure deck high, guns etc. are correct in scale compared to her hull? With EMDENs hull length she´d look quite good, I think.

My thoughts,

HoOmAn

I like them, but maybe its just me, but the last one looks as if she belongs in the 50's!
She just seems to have that spacious look that latter-day ships have!

Is it just me, or what?

But I still like them!!!

Hooman - thanks for the comments.

No real reason for the gap between the destroyer bridge and B gun. I'll check the torps and implement the other suggestions.

The bridge on all three cruisers does need some work.

I agree with you regarding the Konigsberg flak mount, but that's where it sits historically, for better or worse.

Scale of hulls should be good - one pixel per foot, eight feet per deck. Freeboard is consistent with my springstyles. The turrets I'll measure out now that I've found a decent line-drawing of Konigsberg. I'll also check out a Hipper drawing to get a sense of how the four twin look was handled.

Commodore - the last one does kinda remind me of the post-war British CLs - Tiger, Blake, etc. But that's certainly not what I intended...

I´ve just seen your KARLSRUHE is 179m long - that´s exactly 10m more than historically (169m waterline, 174m OA). But even if I cut those 10m of your drawings bow I can´t help but think her superstructure and especially her turrets are too small. Historically the Ks didn´t even had superfiring guns forward which eat up some length on your design....

I particulary like the last one.

I like it very much indeed... *rubs hands together*

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
Commodore - the last one does kinda remind me of the post-war British CLs - Tiger, Blake, etc. But that's certainly not what I intended...

EXACTLY the ships I was thinking of!!!!!!

But even if that's not what you intended, they still look good!!

Quoted

I particulary like the last one.

I like it very much indeed... *rubs hands together*

Aha!! You plan to acquire those plans, right? :-)

The internal affairs of FINK are never revealed, even to friends.

I might be planning to get the plans, or merly planning to plan to get the plans. Then again I might not be planning regarding the plans, or I might be planning not to plan about the plans...

...ad infinitium, ad nauseum... :-p

Perhaps you're planning to make us think that you are panning to plan to get the plans while in reality you're not planning to plan to get the plans at all.
Perhaps you already have the plans, meaning it is not necessary for you to plan to get the plans.

Someone hand me the Aspirin!!

Did you ask for a golden Aspirin or a regular Aspirin?

Regular, ordinary, normal, run-of-the-mill, plain, simple, hum-drum, bog-standard, average, common, everyday, garden-variety, pedestrian, routine, fair, familiar ASPIRIN!!!

Thanks to the other half for half of this!!

Will this do?
:-)

...Still need some work on the superstructure, but other changes have been made...

Doc --

those drawings look much better now, I think. The DD and EMDEN have a handsome appearance while both others also gaines something.

Will there be a catapult aft of the forth design single funnel?

I wonder if the AA guns aft on the yet-to-be-named won´t be too wet and low on the ship to be useful? Why not place them one deck higher on the ship?

Forward superstructure on EMDEN and K-class could still be improved, though. The Germans had balconies and "wings" on all of their designs.

Maybe a tripod - even though not typically german - would imporce yet-to-be-named? That tulip-shaped mast EMDEN carried historically and which you´ve used on your design prooved to be too cramped and prone to vibrations. Thus the Germans later put a different mast on EMDEN and none of the later cruisers got a similar mast.

Will those ships have mine rails?

A funnel cap might be a good idea if you´re aiming for a germanic appearance. Most if not all german units carried various types.

Maybe a line here and there could give an idea of the angled plates used for the main turrets?

Maybe on the K-class and yet-to-be-named-class the funnels could be slightly larger in general?

Just some thoughts...

HoOmAn

Unnamed - we'll call her Ersatz Arcona, since Arcona will be replaced by her - has deck space set aside for a catapult, you're right.

Good to know of the mast issues - I'll consider a change for Ersatz Arcona I'll assume that the K-class follows too quickly on Emden's heels to make immediate use of that knowledge.

Funnel, main gun and AA suggestions noted for later mods.

No mine rails at this time - you may recall that Germany is prohibited from employing them at this time. Though I'm sure retro-fitting them would be a simple matter.

I'm certainly after a Germanic look - and just as importantly, want to avoid the Indian look.

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10
Will this do?
:-)

Thanks........I think!!