Page 73 of 90
BC Alvensleben disarmed
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 9:10 am
by Ashley
The Alvensleben disarmed in a deserted condition 1925. Until now the future of the hulk was unclear.
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 9:50 am
by acelanceloet
with the removal of those turrets, you would certainly decrease the draft.
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 10:19 am
by heuhen
acelanceloet wrote:with the removal of those turrets, you would certainly decrease the draft.
no navy will repaint there ship because it has a reduced draft and are no longer in use!
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 10:21 am
by heuhen
Now what do we do with big good looking ship with that problems and only 10 years old? You can't sell her you can't use her without heartattack. Rebuilding would cost nearly as much as a new ship.
barracks/hospital ship
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 10:26 am
by acelanceloet
heuhen wrote:acelanceloet wrote:with the removal of those turrets, you would certainly decrease the draft.
no navy will repaint there ship because it has a reduced draft and are no longer in use!
that depends on it's use. use as barracks ship? repainted. mothballed? repainted when it get's back in use. museum ship? not repainted
also, ships of those times tend to be scrapped early when no longer needed OR for the washington treaty. even if only for the threaty's between the wars, I doubt they would just disarm an ship and do nothing with it.
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 1:21 pm
by bezobrazov
What's funny here is the mentioning of the Washington treaty, as if Germany would've been allowed to partake with a navy seemingly intact. I cannot, under any circumstances, after such a Great War, that Britain should have allowed that. And if Germany would've emerged victorious, then that treaty would in itself have been a moot point.
These are, of course, only my personal opinion...
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 1:24 pm
by nigevids
This is an AU, you can do what you like. What sort of treaty obligations is Germany under from 1919 onwards, when does the next German Govt throw away the treaty. Use some imagination - what would the ship look like with 9x13.8 in 3x3 layout? Unless you have really good (and I mean REALLY good) fire control, then 6 guns ships tend to have problems hitting their targets. Park it in harbour and fill it full of AA guns. Convert it to a carrier - 28 knots is a good speed for that. Sell it to an undisclosed South American country. The possibilities are endless.
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 3:38 pm
by klagldsf
acelanceloet wrote:
also, ships of those times tend to be scrapped early when no longer needed OR for the washington treaty.
Despite nostalgia for how "they don't build 'em like they used to" ships of those times also simply didn't last that long (remember, the Tillman Super-Battleship was designed with a hull life of only about 20 years or so). Sure the hull may be still seaworthy but the things that actually make the ship go and fight are likely due for replacement, and it's just easier to scrap the thing anyway.
That said, clearly you've put some work into it and don't want it to go to waste so something like a hospital ship or bararacks ship seems to make the most sense. You can also refit it into some fashion of trials ship, which probably provides the most 'creative' opportunity.
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 4th, 2012, 4:34 pm
by Carthaginian
Ashley wrote:Carthaginian wrote:She'd have made a frightening opponent for Refit and Repair.
What problems with machinery? Was she one of their odd steam/diesel propulsion experiments?
To early for diesel. She was fitted wis high pressure steam turbines. They were a pure pain in the ass for any engineer. Further the new 15" gun (two years before Bayern-class) was a big step forward. It made a very large turret neccessary and it was believed the barbette had to be as oversized. The turning mechanism failed sometimes.
Now what do we do with big good looking ship with that problems and only 10 years old? You can't sell her you can't use her without heartattack. Rebuilding would cost nearly as much as a new ship.
In this time period, reconstruction would be an option- especially into a carrier, which was a very popular option at this time.
Also, the diesel/steam powerplant is NOT too early- the
Konig class had two units with two shafts powered by steam and one shaft powered by diesel in 1914!
Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approach
Posted: April 5th, 2012, 6:46 am
by Ashley
Carthaginian wrote: the Konig class had two units with two shafts powered by steam and one shaft powered by diesel in 1914!
that is very interesting, can you give me the source for this information?
Btw. I'm just doing a rebuild, it will be something unexpected.