Page 58 of 137
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 20th, 2012, 6:45 pm
by eltf177
Clonecommander6454 wrote:Looks like a nice design, but that is seriously a heck load of TTs
It is, but Japan did it with quad 24-inch. Pity they never saw action, especially at Guadalcanal or Surigao Strait.
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 20th, 2012, 6:49 pm
by klagldsf
eltf177 wrote: Pity they never saw action, especially at Guadalcanal or Surigao Strait.
Why, because too few dead Americans?
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 20th, 2012, 7:03 pm
by Carthaginian
klagldsf wrote:eltf177 wrote: Pity they never saw action, especially at Guadalcanal or Surigao Strait.
Why, because too few dead Americans?
Well, it was a good concept and in all fairness, I would like to know how effective it would have been.
This from a guy with a uniform in his closet and ribbons 4 rows deep.
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 21st, 2012, 1:13 am
by nigevids
An interesting design, unfortunately its biggest problem is the torpedos themselves and the speed of the ship. The natural target of this ship is other cruisers and above. This means the smallest guns it is likely to be facing are 6", most of which fired around 23-28,000 yards. With the standard 21" torpedo having settings of 13,500 yards at 25 knots through to 5,000 yards at 40 knots, it would seem that your torpedo cruiser is going to have to travel a minimum of 9000 yards to 18000 yards under fire at a speed that gives you a closing speed of 1000 yards a minute (which will be even worse if you zig zag, and worse again if your target angles away from your ship). Getting within range of the target will require your ship to have as many distractions as possible.
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 21st, 2012, 2:20 am
by Zephyr
You seem to be assuming Bonaventure will be operating solo during combat. I'm not sure how your navy runs things, but our navy prefers to have a goodly number of ships working together for a common purpose, which is to give the other guys a splendid view of the underside of the surface of the ocean.
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 21st, 2012, 7:43 am
by Clonecommander6454
eltf177 wrote:Clonecommander6454 wrote:Looks like a nice design, but that is seriously a heck load of TTs
It is, but Japan did it with quad 24-inch. Pity they never saw action, especially at Guadalcanal or Surigao Strait.
Talking to Kitakami and Oii? They are designs from Japanese after they have apotheosis Long Lance as the ultimate weapon in naval warfare.
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 21st, 2012, 7:49 am
by Carthaginian
One thing she might work well at is defending a coastline with numerous islets and channels... a small, shallow draft cruiser could quickly dart back and forth behind cover, or could rush out from behind the cover of an island to launch torps at close range before ducking back again.
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 21st, 2012, 10:21 am
by Zephyr
More rebuilds of the War Emergency Cruisers.
1934-35 rebuild of the Avenger of the Bonaventure Class and all 5 ships of the Tempest Class.
Displacement: 3,237 t standard; 3,435 t normal; 3,594 t full load
Armament:
12 x 4" (6 x 2)
20 x 2 Pdr/40mm (1 x 8; 6 x 2)
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 21st, 2012, 11:20 am
by Thiel
Out of curiosity, how fast did they need these ships? If it's in the Oh Shit NOW!!! category you might consider direct drive steam engines since gear boxes were the long lead item of the day.
Re: Grays Harbor Designs
Posted: April 21st, 2012, 2:41 pm
by Zephyr
Direct drive? I had thought geared was coming into fairly common use during the late teens. Hnh. Thats what I get for working of memory and making assumptions, instead of researching, I guess.
I was figuring on a fairly quick construction time, along the lines of the C and D classes. Switching from geared to direct in the description isn't a problem, especially if it enhances accuracy.
Let me ask a question then, is that something they would change during the 30's when these are rebuilt? Or would that fall under the heading of "It would be simpler to just build new ships from the keel up instead of changing out the drive mechanism on these antiques"?