WesWorld

What can I say? I got bored.

Neat! Reminds me of the pages Janes used to have at the start of each nation's section where they showed eamples of each class in a small drawing. I'll have to see what I can come up with.

Looks like some of those are "Sneak Previews", too... ;-)

Quoted

Looks like some of those are "Sneak Previews", too... ;-)

You know no-thing.

Which are you interested in?

Quoted

Which are you interested in?

The top-right carrier. :-)

Think larger Illustrious.

Can't remember seeing that one, so guesses are:
844x100x27 feet
Standard displacement: 28,400 ton (so officially less than 27,000 tons)
speed: 30 knots
range: 9000 at 20 knots
Main guns 12 twin 100mm
AA: 6 quad 47mm
70 planes + 20 spares
6 inch main belt, 4 inch deck, 4 inch armored hangar deck.
Name?
Il Duce
(so I guess you have to kill of Musolini before you build it. :-))

There are a lot of 'new' designs in there - or at least designs I can't match up with any of the previous graphics.
Is there a SS for each?
Are they already part of some of the SS designs that have been posted with no picture?

I am so envious of those pictures. When it comes to drawing, I can visual but can't actualize (I must be graphically challenged)

Quoted

844x100x27 feet
Standard displacement: 28,400 ton (so officially less than 27,000 tons)
speed: 30 knots
range: 9000 at 20 knots
Main guns 12 twin 100mm
AA: 6 quad 47mm
70 planes + 20 spares
6 inch main belt, 4 inch deck, 4 inch armored hangar deck.
Name?
Il Duce

Close
Way out
bit too much
yes
no, but still 47mm
more planes
more armour
Garibaldi?

Quoted

There are a lot of 'new' designs in there - or at least designs I can't match up with any of the previous graphics.
Is there a SS for each?
Are they already part of some of the SS designs that have been posted with no picture? .

Most of them are old designs. There are 6 new designs in there. All have SS files, but I won't post them yet as I might not end up building them.

I love drawing them, but I think i spend too much time doing it.

Not sure how to read that...
9 guesses, 8 answers...
I assume that the "bit too much" would be for both speed and range then?
(Funny thing is that I was looking at the Warships1 backup site at Italian carrier names and saw Garibaldi only to forget the name when I was typing the guesses)

Fairly close with the speed.

Garibaldi is a good name. Founder of Italy and a damn good biscuit.

Would those be 90mm guns as the Italians developed historically?

You should see the carrier I have cooking up for 1939...
^_^

Quoted

When it comes to drawing, I can visualise but can't actualise (I must be graphically challenged)

Same here - a while back I did a few drawings (Dagupan aka Panabo, Palawan and Rabihorcado) but I can't bring myself to do any more...

Quoted

I love drawing them, but I think i spend too much time doing it.

If you enjoy doing it, you can never spend too much time on it.
^_^


(BTW, the superstructure on that 'Trade Protection Cruiser' looks like it belongs on a castle.)

Quoted

Would those be 90mm guns as the Italians developed historically?

No. They are 100/65. They are taken off the UP41(well the Italian equivalent, no name) project. There were to be 24x100mm guns. They don't look like 47-cal weapons from the picture so I've gone to 65-cal. Armament is possibly a bit light, but look at Taiho.

Quoted

(BTW, the superstructure on that 'Trade Protection Cruiser' looks like it belongs on a castle.)

Its a fairly historical Italian look. Minimum deckspace, maximum room.

Nice template. Have you ever tried to do show your kind of technology tree? Something like what I had for my BBs and CLs?

I would really love to see something similar.

Thanks for posting,

HoOmAn

Example:



or

If you do have SS for the 'never were' designs could you post them. After all, built or not they were part of the development process and could demonstrate why ships were built or not built or reflect changes in strategic vision.

Trouble is, those are/could be future designs; you don't want to be giving away intelligence to potential enemies too soon...

(not that I have any room to talk on that score ;-) )

I probably went completely the wrong way here, but seeing its size, my guesses and the answers you gave, I doubt that it is a CT carrier... so this is the result.


Garibaldi, Italy Carrier laid down 1933

Displacement:
32,902 t light; 33,817 t standard; 37,879 t normal; 41,128 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
869.63 ft / 844.00 ft x 102.00 ft x 28.00 ft (normal load)
265.06 m / 257.25 m x 31.09 m x 8.53 m

Armament:
80 planes and 20 spares.
24 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns (12x2 guns), 30.51lbs / 13.84kg shells, 1933 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
16 - 1.85" / 47.0 mm guns (8x2 guns), 3.17lbs / 1.44kg shells, 1933 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships
Weight of broadside 783 lbs / 355 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 350

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 10.0" / 254 mm 390.00 ft / 118.87 m 12.12 ft / 3.69 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Upper: 4.00" / 102 mm 700.00 ft / 213.36 m 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
Main Belt covers 71 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
2.00" / 51 mm 390.00 ft / 118.87 m 24.64 ft / 7.51 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm
2nd: 1.00" / 25 mm - -

- Armour deck: 5.00" / 127 mm, Conning tower: 2.76" / 70 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 135,000 shp / 100,710 Kw = 30.89 kts
Range 8,000nm at 20.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 7,311 tons

Complement:
1,356 - 1,764

Cost:
£8.436 million / $33.743 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 98 tons, 0.3 %
Armour: 10,737 tons, 28.3 %
- Belts: 4,083 tons, 10.8 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 711 tons, 1.9 %
- Armament: 90 tons, 0.2 %
- Armour Deck: 5,786 tons, 15.3 %
- Conning Tower: 67 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 3,934 tons, 10.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 11,233 tons, 29.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 4,977 tons, 13.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 6,900 tons, 18.2 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
80,761 lbs / 36,633 Kg = 2,646.9 x 3.9 " / 100 mm shells or 12.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.21
Metacentric height 7.4 ft / 2.2 m
Roll period: 15.8 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.03
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.52

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.550
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.27 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 33.47 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 49 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 46
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 30.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 6.00 ft / 1.83 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 34.00 ft / 10.36 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 25.50 ft / 7.77 m
- Mid (50 %): 25.50 ft / 7.77 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 25.50 ft / 7.77 m
- Stern: 25.50 ft / 7.77 m
- Average freeboard: 26.18 ft / 7.98 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 70.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 224.0 %
Waterplane Area: 62,549 Square feet or 5,811 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 144 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 130 lbs/sq ft or 632 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.00
- Longitudinal: 1.03
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Sadly they are future designs. They'll remain unknown for the moment.

Still a bit wrong Walter.

Quoted

Still a bit wrong Walter.

I guess that bit means I am not too far off... Still it is all pure guesswork with that sim... except length.
Guess we will have to wait until you start building it (if you start building it that is; always the question)