@3" armor on mounts: Destroyers are literally tin cans (no armor outside of things like turrets to speak of). If it's not a turret, then it's likely only splinter armor at best. My only question was why bother ? if you can be killed by hits to Mags/BRs/ERs why does losing a turret matter ? might as...
I was using the Bofors 57mm L/70 design as a basis of the 57mm guns. Can stuff a lot more 57mm ammo than 76mm ammo. My question is who its for ? if Scandinavian or USSR that makes sense but post war NATO/USN/RN will have accesses to VT shells (min size 3") and that makes the 3" gun (especially /70)...
OK my take on a Heavy Escort Destroyer Design, Very heavy this is designed to stand v WWII CLs if needed but mainly to escort fast CV forces. Heavy Escort Destroyer, NATO DDHE laid down 1950 Displacement: 4,646 t light; 4,889 t standard; 5,670 t normal; 6,295 t full load Dimensions: Length (overall...
Re post war design, - Have a look at RL DL1 Norfolk, Mitscher-class and Daring class - I think your to big to be affordable post war (by anybody let alone none USN) - Too many weapons IMO remember that in 50s all of them will each have to have heavy single purpose electronic directors to be effecti...
While I work on making 'war-time upgrades' for the WW1 destroyers, here is a post-war design: Heavy Escort Destroyer Design #1, United Nations Alliance Heavy Escort Destroyer laid down 1950 Displacement: 3,394 t light; 4,125 t standard; 5,000 t normal; 5,700 t full load Dimensions: Length (overall /...
Why the love of such large DDs ? (so early on) Its part of the problem with building destroyers via Springsharp... and the need to put more AA onto ships. Why the 2x 85mm AA guns on a ship ? bit of a waste without there own director just for 1 gun on each side ? (same for USN 3") Well put it this w...
Moscow, Imperial Russia Destroyer laid down 1938 Displacement: 3,176 t light; 3,413 t standard; 4,000 t normal; 4,470 t full load Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep) (558.43 ft / 524.93 ft) x 65.62 ft x (13.12 / 13.94 ft) (170.21 m / 160.00 m) x 20.00 m x (4.00 /...
Jormungand is much better, although I would try and fit in a torpedo bulkhead on a ship this large. Moscow is interesting, 30-inch torpedoes? Somebody's gonna get hurt! You have excess hull strength which you can get rid of (get hull strength down to 0.51), and if possible try and get seakeeping ab...
Here you go... Jormungand, Imperial Germany Heavy Cruiser laid down 1942 Displacement: 14,924 t light; 16,139 t standard; 18,900 t normal; 21,109 t full load Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep) (704.15 ft / 672.57 ft) x 78.74 ft x (26.25 / 28.43 ft) (214.63 m / 20...
Quick links
FAQ
Register
Login