[Post Reply] [*]  Page 5 of 7  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page « 13 4 5 6 7 »
Author Message
Clonecommander6454
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 4:42 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 756
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 2:35 pm
You know Torpedo Tubes takes quite a lot of space, right? The only destroyer that I recall having TTs mounted on the port & starboard instead of the centerline are the French ones. Your funnel & superstructure still does not make sense.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Rhade
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 4:48 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2681
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 12:45 pm
Location: Poland
APDAF wrote:
And Rhade the closest role you would have for her IRL is a Rapid-cruiser or as a very fast light cruiser.
You talk about class ... I ask about role of that ship ... you know what role mean ?
Clonecommander6454 wrote:
The only destroyer that I recall having TTs mounted on the port & starboard instead of the centerline are the French ones.
And whole line of Yanks flush-decks. ;)

_________________
[ img ]
Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
KHT
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 4:51 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1376
Joined: November 19th, 2011, 12:49 pm
APDAF, you claim your ship to be a "rapid cruiser" or "Very fast" light cruiser. For it to be counted as such, one would expect a contracted speed of AT LEAST 35-36 knots. You won't be able to do that with said hull proportions.

Rhade, I would like to point out that all kinds of ships are named after their mission.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
APDAF
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 5:01 pm
Offline
Posts: 1482
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am
Well in IRL terms yes but in Britannain terms more like 25-30 knot as a "light cruiser" to them is a Protected cruiser as the Imperial Britannain Navy is rather slow to adopt Ideas it does not come up with itself as most of the admirals don't like change.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
KHT
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 5:06 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1376
Joined: November 19th, 2011, 12:49 pm
Oh, a wide variety of curses in Swedish, English, Polish, German and Japanese. Punt in some Spanish for good measure as well.

I guess we better make it official that the following fifty-eleven pages will discuss the flaws of this AU and the absurd conservatism of it yet again.

APDAF, that means that we'de come of with 18-knots average WW1-style battleships.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Rhade
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 5:07 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2681
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 12:45 pm
Location: Poland
Yes, but destroyer is a multi task ship ... also cruisers tasks change with time. APDAF say that:
APDAF wrote:
She is designed for a role that does not exist in the real world.
in that case I was wonder what is that mistery role ... what this ship will do, for what task is created that not exist in IRL. Hunt a gigantic robotic whales of Amazon ?

_________________
[ img ]
Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 5:09 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7210
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
uhm...... could you do us an favor and use the real life names for your ships? I don't care what the brittanian navy calls them, an light cruiser is not an protected cruiser.
you also know, that 25 knots would make your ships being overtaken by the battleships and especially the battlecruisers in all but the easiest weather?
your ship has just lost the battle. which one? every one, as long as you keep using ships like these.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
SrGopher
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 5:25 pm
Offline
Posts: 371
Joined: April 13th, 2011, 9:21 pm
APDAF wrote:
Imperial Britannain Navy is rather slow to adopt Ideas it does not come up with itself as most of the admirals don't like change.
That sounds more like a desperate answer just to keep your decision. Human decision like what you have stated is completely circumstantial. Everything that everyone here says is countered by the same answer about some emperor or admiral not wanting something. I honestly think that this AU is gonna go down.

_________________
Worklist:
Puerto Oeste - AU - WWI-WWII


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 5:31 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7210
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
also, keep in mind that the RN was kind of conservative as well (look for example at the fact that steam turbines were used on battleships only after jackie fisher took the initiative)

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
KHT
Post subject: Re: Britannian Destroyers.Posted: August 13th, 2012, 5:43 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1376
Joined: November 19th, 2011, 12:49 pm
I suggest saving ammunition by stopping firing broadside upon broadside into this AU; it's already a burning hulk that's struggling to float.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 5 of 7  [ 66 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page « 13 4 5 6 7 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]