Print

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

[tryrar]

I'm still looking for feedback on that new frigate idea I had. What do you guys think? Would I be able to fit all that shit in the tonnage goal I set, or should I bump it up to 1750 tons?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Tryrar
Slight modification of Alexi is a fine thing as we produce them anyway, but problem is that ship is still can't hurt Capian surface fleet with it's guns, has too few torpedos and looks too ASW centered

If we go on defensive navalwise, our best bet is coastal ships, coastal batteries and submarines for hit and run attack... Few more frigates will not scary Capian  fleet away

[tryrar]

point. Ok then, sohlud I remove the hedgehongs or the depth charges for more torpedo tubes?(note that the HVG-80s have MUCH better pen than our old 80mms, so they're much better at destroying ships now)

[RAM]

Doublepost. I just got an idea for a good project; modernizing the Alexi! Due to the changes, it'll be treated as a separate class that will eventually replace all alexis and alexi 1337s:

Jaguar Escort Frigate. A larger, more modern frigate than the Alexi variants, this ~1500 ton frigate is designed top-down for ASW, ship-to-ship combat, and AA duties. It sports a double-hull and other anti-torpedo measures, a sonar and radar suite, 4 GVS-14s, 4 Hydra turrets, 4 double-mount twin HVG-40s in an open turret configuration, and 4(slightly modified) HVG-80s in a twin-turret configuration, as well as two front torpedo tubes+two hedghog mounts, and room for minelaying/depth-charge racks. It will, of course, use the new maritime deisel to power all this to keep the speed about the same as the Alexi's

Hrmmm, it seems as though it is trying to do everything all at once. I would want some more speed on something that carries depth-charges, you might want those 80s to have A.A. flak potential, you probably don't need a R.A.D.A.R. on every ship of this class either. I would probably try to turn it into a light generalist with more speed to act without a formal fleet or focus its armament a little more.

[tryrar]

Also a point. Ok, I'll go ahead and bump up the tonnage target to ~1750, put the 80mms in 4 open mounts(to allow for anti-ship AND AA), and put 2 single 160mm turrets as the main armaments, as well as adding 2 more tubes and more tonnage for engines. This should make for a nice generalist that goes fast, and can attack subs, ships, AND planes

[3_14159]

I'll add one thing I really, really, really, really want to get through next turn and already proposed this turn: Proximity fuzes.
Design a proximity detonation system, for use in bombs and (if possible) artillery / AA shells.
Design it with a Maximum distance of up to 3m and an accuracy of about the same, and concentrate on weight savings. Try something under a half kg. Further improvements go into weight.

To cite wikipedia, the proximity fuze increased the effectiveness of AA fire for 15cm guns by ca the factor seven, and when mounted in artillery shells significantly increased their effectiveness, too. The above (<500g) should mounting them in artillery shells and heavy AA shells practicable.

As for the 240mm artillery gun, I'm divided... while having heavy artillery with a range advantage is pretty nice, it also very much relies on the range advantage. Otherwise, the other side should be able to mount an effective counter-battery fire. Also, as has been said, they are pretty bad when you actually have to move. Hm... I guess I'd be neutral to the proposal (barring changing facts), though that may be influenced because I believe manoeuvrability to be very, very important.

[tryrar]

Agreed. That 800mm gun referenced earlier? It was railway mounted. So, if the railways were overrun or destroyed, it was stuck. It also was mainly used to seige cities, since it relied on hurling ridiculously-sized shells(about the same general size of a T-34) extreme distances(up to 28 miles). You aren't gonna be hitting anything but a stationary target at that range(and even then....), and you're only firing a shell every 30 minutes. Not very scary to troops, vehicles, just about anything else that moves...

Edit: On a further note, any WoT players here know there WAS a 240mm mounted on a SPG, but that 240mm was strictly for attacking hardened targets like bunkers and heavy fortifications. Mounting it on a chassis only really provided a slight mobility boost versus towing something so goddamn heavy

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Heh, real world have seen 600mm self-propelled artillery piece (Karl-Gerat) . But that was a mortar with a short barrel

[tryrar]

I'm not saying we can't use a 240mm howitzer(especially if we encounter something along the lines of the Maginot Line), it's just that artillery pieces above 160mm would be pretty specialized guns, not general purpose like you imagine RAM

[Funk]

we should skip massive artillery guns for ground use, there not as good as a few dive bombers.

[Brood]

Air support can not do everything all the time mate, you always need multiple options. A good artillery piece frees up air units for other roles.

[tryrar]

Well, unless we invent Grand Slams, there ARE fortifications that could resist air attacks, which is where a large artillery piece would come in handy. However, until we encounter such hardened targets, I'd say we focus on improving the guns we already have rather than make new super-heavy guns

[3_14159]

Well, the advantages of artillery over air support are twofold:
1) Better costs per ordnance. For a 500t bomb you need to fuel the plane, get it into position, run an attack, bomb, and fly back. For 500t in shells, you need... well, a few dozen shells. Cheaper.
2) No defence. Defending a target against air strikes (or at least making them costly enough) is comparatively easy. Defending against an artillery attack, you need higher range or air strikes of your own.

The 240mm howitzer is a pretty specialized piece of equipment, though.

By the way, any comments on proximity fuzes?

[tryrar]

prox fuses would get a vote from me this time(I would have voted on it last time, but ran out of votes). As a bonus, we can put them on torps too!

Edit: Plus, it IS a logical progression from VT fuses to prox fuses....

[Funk]

Air support can not do everything all the time mate, you always need multiple options. A good artillery piece frees up air units for other roles.

true but a massive howitzer is a big target.
im not against having some big artillery pieces, but we need a way to move them easily.
we should build as big as our Cargo truck can move.
if we have a clever system that brakes the gun down in to truck sized pieces then that is fine.
if our tanks have to tow the gun then that is fine as well.

if a new railway line has to be build to move the weapon then it is unsuitable for offensive use.   

our small mortar and tanks should be able to provided fast moving fire support.

maybe we should build a super heavy 150 ton self propelled gun to move a singe 320mm gun.
it would have to be just the gun, its ammo can be moved by truck a long with its crew.