Cruisers for South America

[JSB]

Hi JSB,
I hope that explains the reasoning enough - the TE bit is probably the weakest (it's basically "TE is cool!") but I think the reasoning on the 203mm is fairly sound.

Hope you didn't mind and thanks, I was just wondering why you used a heavy system like TE when you are still in a treaty or you would just go for the 8' from the start ?

[eswube]

Earlier I wrote I got a bit twisted idea. It's a design of heavy cruiser from Soviet Union. Of course it doesn't quite fit the demands - instead of 203mm artillery it's armed with 180mm ones to begin with.
Unfortunately, I have to admit I'm not happy with the design (to be honest, designer deserves to be shot on the spot by NKVD ). Leaving aside that Springsharp says it would be lacking seaworthiness and will be wet forward (but then again, I don't have experience with Springsharp so maybe I just wrote something wrong), it might be top heavy, lacks enough boats (and likely cranes for them), chronology for some elements of armament and equipment is somewhat stretched so to speak, it's 130mm guns aren't quite universal (though design works were going on, only were cancelled after war started), has number of other flaws and style-wise it's not really a particularly great achievment as drawing.



Osvoboditel (or Libertador) class heavy cruiser

Displacement: 11 025 t light; 11 544 t standard; 14 221 t normal; 16 363 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught: 199,6 m / 196,15 m x 19,5 m x 6,7 m
Machinery: Oil fired boilers, steam turbines, Geared drive, 2 shafts, 102 432 shp / 76 414 Kw = 33,00 kts, Range 7 000nm at 18,00 kts
Complement: 650 - 846
Armament: 4 x III x 180mm, 4 x II x 130mm, 6 x II x 37mm, 4 x MG, 2 x III x TT 533mm

Ok, now You can start laughing.

[Krakatoa]

Actually Eswube, the bones of a good ship are there. Its a good drawing.

The choice of the 180mm/7.1" is a good one. That gun could fire a very long way for its time. It just wasn't that accurate at the longer ranges, too much shell spread. The only thing I would change is to swap out the 130's for twin 100mm/3.9" (maybe even 3 mountings a side). Use the single 3.9" off the Kirov and call them twins. Very rarely is there a lot of difference in twin and single mountings in profile.

An armament of 12x7.1" would be enough to start another round of a "cruiser race" in South America.

[eswube]

Thanks for kind words Krakatoa.
As for the "bones" being there, well, I guess they should be, after all I wasn't designing it completely out of nowhere (like my head):

(resized)
Still, while the inspiration was there, in-depth thinking of some issues not so much.
(after all, my speciality are rather small vessels)

As for the replacing 130mm's - with 100mm's - I was thinking of it, but to be honest I just didn't liked their "outdated" looks. (Yeah, rather shallow argument.)
I guess that it could be assumed that these are B-2-U:
Prior to the start of World War II a development of the DP version of the B-2 turret was started. This turret was designated as B-2-U (U meaning Universal'naya - Universal). It was to use a barrel extended to 55 calibers. These turrets were intended to be used on the next generation of destroyers and destroyer leaders, but the war stopped the project and none were built.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNRussi ... _m1936.htm

[Krakatoa]

That would have been the main reason I would have had for not using the 130mm B-2-U is the timescale for its entry into existence. Development start 1938-39, first turrets would not have come off the line prior to 1942/43 if not later. That's just a few years outside the timespan of the challenge. Like a lot of countries the Soviets left the design of DP weapons rather late. In fact looking at all the 'DP' guns built in the 4.5" to 5.3" range, it was really only the US 5"/38 and the later UK 4.5" that were any good. The French abandoned the 5.1", the UK 5.25 was just too big to be a successful DP gun. It is hard to get across to some desk-bound Admirals that bigger is not always better.

BC Renown made a comment on my Hawkins AA thread about the 5.25" compared to the twin 4" which had some rather interesting facts attached.

I could see the 'family' resemblance to the various Soviet 'light' cruiser designs in your ship. They all share that Italian influence that made them such good looking ships.

[Hood]

I think it looks pretty nice and seems very plausible.
It's not likely the Soviet shipbuilding industry was capable of exports in the 1930s but its a nice comparison piece.

[doorman]

My first foray into this idea of public sharing on shipbucket my drawings. This is a major WIP and I wanted to submit at least my idea while its still fresh and also to get help for improvement. I know this is a bad kit-bash and I apologize if I have broken any rules.



I know I want to add torpedoes and I need to change out the early Mk37 for the mk28(cant remember the early one). Also need to add the 20mm though the 50cal would be more appropriate imho for the time.

[Blackbuck]

Something else WIP wise from me.
This time a more conventional design (again for Chile) but unlike last time something French with some Italian design cues...



Preliminaries include Twelve 152mm DP a la Richelieu with six 100mm well aft and eight 37mm distributed between the ends. 13.2mm pop guns are still being placed. Armouring is currently provisional but will be a full external belt.

[eltf177]

Osvoboditel-class heavy cruiser - I'm thinking she's got the same armor scheme as Kirov more or less?

[Krakatoa]

Nice start Doorman. You seem to have got the right parts in the right places and the overall effect of the design is pleasing. Should be a good looking contemporary US cruiser. Keep it up.
Crediting: Guns, directors, boats are considered parts and do not need to be credited. Hull and superstructure: if more than 10% of your drawing is copied from someone elses drawing then you need to give them credit.

BlackBuck: That is a nice blend of French and Italian styles. Twelve 6" is never an armament to sneeze at. The term 'Heavy' and 'Light' when referring to cruisers is purely arbitrary on the gun size, not how big or capable the ships are.