Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Brood]

Also, i would like to vote against choppers.

I would only want helicopters for casualty evac or transport of light goods and/or small numbers of troops.

Trying to use choppers for air superiority is ridiculous.

True but we don't have the weaponry to really arm planes yet, so we can use the chopper as a light support vehicle and for casualty evac and begin on planes next year along with aerial weaponry and naval weaponry.

So, all agreed we do the navan engineer this year and the aerial next year?

[tryrar]

....when was it EVER said we'd be using choppers for air superiority? That's not what they're for, they're mainly utility craft(at least, this early in the 20th century). We'd be designing a fighter next year if all goes well

Brood, yeah, sounds like a plan

[Brood]

(( Is one of our current HMG high enough caliber for a ships side rail mounted weapon? Or should we design a higher caliber one for ship use?
I'd also suggest we design a seriously big main cannon for the battleship, I was thinking two 3 cannon batteries on the front of the ship and one on the rear with 4 AA guns 2 front 2 back and mounted HMG all along both sides for the battleship, it'd need a good engine and heavy armor but the basic idea is for it to be the vanguard of the fleet, the ship that smashes into the enemy head on and rips there formation in half for the lighter ships to explot.

The heavy cruiser I was thinking a single dual cannon battery front and back with 4 aa guns and HMG along the sides, still has the battleships cannons, engines and armor but with less cannons it's much lighter and still tough enough to provide flank cover or to follow a battleship through the breach.

Something that can sink a cruiser or a destroyer with a solid hit, it's gonna slow it down but it would make a great defensive ship as well as an infantry support battery. ))

[kahn1234]

For a period torpedo bomber, we could always base our designs on the Blackburn Ripon Torpedo Bomber.

and for a fighter we could use the Bristol Bulldog as a base.

both used 7.7mm vickers MG's as their main weapons, which goes to show we already have the weapons to arm a period-correct aircraft.

[mesor]

Something for you all to mull over, I'd suggest once those designs are complete you create a unique ship.
Dreadnaught class.

Something with the heaviest armor, 15 battleship cannons plus 12-16 of the main cannons currently used on the destroyer, it'd require 2 AA gunships in close support for air cover but the basic idea is for it to be the heart of the fleet, a ship that can withstand enormous punishment and deal so much damage back that it can break entire fleets on it's own.

But you'd only want one because it'd be hard to build at best but build that and you have a massive fire support ship for aiding in landing operations and a floating fortress to transport men all rolled up into one.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

That helo project is for future, first helo is bound to have a limited use (scouting, light transport, liason, light fire support), we need experience to build more advanched things later
In alternative history helicopters may challenge earlier fighters for air superiority, we aren't taking about jets here, but turboprop wooden biplane fighters with their own limitations
Of cause, we should have fighters later, as helicopters can't be the only airforce and will be overperformed.

I see helicopter thing as a little gamble, that, if successful can give us unique advantage, maybe we'll even sell them abroad and get cash!

Most importantly, helicopters are very effective for naval use, better than aircrafts like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish.

______________________
And yes, Brood, TP-1 is a very heavy HMG, perfectly suitable for side rail role, 14.5mm isn't something to laugh at. I designed it to be used against light AFVs after all

And I am against mega-expensive battleships, let's not repeat real word  mistakes, go heliccopter\aircraft carriers and submarines route. At the very least Submarines should be designed before battleships.

[Brood]

Don't worry I don't intend to make that mistake.
They will be costly yes, but I only intend to create 3 of them think of them as the armored core of the fleet, if we have to fight an enemy fleet they are the ships that lead the attack, put 1 in the center and 1 on each flank and bring the rest of the fleet in slightly behind them, the battleships main guns will sink smaller ships in a single barrage and do serious damage to bigger ships.

Our lighter ships come in slightly behind and focus fire on the damaged ships to finish them up as well as providing close support to the battleships when the enemy counters.

It is a little costly but every military force has a unit at it's heart that the rest rally around, the battleships will be the navys heart for the destroyers, cruisers, frigates and gunships to rally around.




What do you want carrier wise? 1 heavy carrier with massive AA and heavy armor to sit at the fleets core? Or a series of smaller carriers to spread out? Personally I'd take the heavy carrier, a single carrier is easier to defend and with it's size you could put dozens of AA guns on it to give it security from air assault and with it at the core enemy ships will never reach it with the battleships in the way.

[tryrar]

Why not have aircraft carriers to rally around? Remember, carriers replaced battleships as the main fleet component, and it didn't happen before world war 2 only because all the battleship admirals scoffed at the idea of carriers(and look what happened!)

[GrizzlyAdamz]

(Sigh)
What size do we want our shore batteries/battleship-size cannons to be?
This is important!

With radar, (btw, something we MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER GETTING), naval battles were often fought beyond the horizon, lobbing shells in a mobile artillery duel.

420 FOR THE WIN.

[Brood]

Actually I intend to go for a balanced mix of battleship and carrier.
Both have strengths and weaknesses so combine the two and you get the best of both air and sea superiority with the rest of the fleet just proving support.

Battleship size cannons I was looking at 800 inches give or take, like the Iowas main guns.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

 
800 inches?!
IOWA class was 402mm, (16inches!)
I'm pitching for 420mms.

Spoiler: 800 inches (click to show/hide)

[tryrar]

Actually I intend to go for a balanced mix of battleship and carrier.
Both have strengths and weaknesses so combine the two and you get the best of both air and sea superiority with the rest of the fleet just proving support.

Battleship size cannons I was looking at 800 inches give or take, like the Iowas main guns.

....Dude, 800 inches is 20,000 millimeters, give or take!

[Brood]

Uhm yea I know.

The Iowas main guns stats are this.


Gun Length oa
 
816 in (20.73 m) (breech face to muzzle)

Bore Length
 
800 in (20.32 m)
 
Rifling Length
 
682.9 in (17.35 m)


It fired a 16 inch shell.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

No one measures guns according to length! YOU'RE BEING CONFUSING!

WHAT SIZE DO WE WANT?

[Brood]

16 inch 2700 pound shells for the main guns.