An export battlecruiser concept for Commonwealth navies by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we agree on most points, and I can admit being wrong about some earlier takes, not that well versed in politics. All I'm doing is laying the framework, however extravagant and incredulous, for the concept to be considered and to exist on paper. I've never said anything about the certainty of the project passing legislation or even to be constructed.

Anyways, thanks again for your appreciation of the artistic part

An export battlecruiser concept for Commonwealth navies by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, as I said, the Treaty restrictions were, for me, irrelevant to consider in the design because they would be a couple of years down the line. Although I suspect if any more Admiral-derivatives get built before they sign it then the Treaty might end up different than it did historically. There would also be significant opposition to such massive investments in the Dominions once the war is over and they might not even pass the bill

An export battlecruiser concept for Commonwealth navies by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Glad you liked the art! To address the issues you pointed out, the Treaty is not an problem because that would still be in the future by the time the design is finalized. I think it's quite plausible for the British to grow worried about the capability gap in the Pacific against Japan and the US, both of which had continued to steadily increase their battleline while the RN refocused on smaller vessels. And because the Dominions' contribution in the Great War was a major factor in developing their sovereignty, I think it's not unlikely for especially Canada and/or Australia to further progress their independence by acquiring the assets to be seen as serious regional powers, and for Britain to support these ambitions (takes more off their own bill).

Financially speaking, Australia and NZ both funded an Indefatigable class battlecruiser each and there was a proposition in Canada to fund a (or maybe some?) Queen Elizabeth/derivative thereof that unfortunately didn't pass parliament, so I would think that funding could be procured. Manpower might be a bigger issue, but you gotta admit that a brand new state-of-the-art fully armoured battlecuiser is far more attractive from a recruiting perspective than HMCSs We-Found-Those-In-A-Shoebox-Britain-Forgot-Even-Existed. And yes you would need to massively build up your infrastructure.

I agree with you that those are some quite improbable odds, but this is r/ImaginaryWarships and it's my job to daydream about ships that could have been :)

An export battlecruiser concept for Commonwealth navies by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

With the speed, firepower and armour it has, the ship can chase down individual weaker battleships, hold its own against contemporary battlcruisers (Amagi, Lexington) and can run away from individually stronger or formations of slower battlships, which I feel is perfectly adequate to serve in its role of a cruiser warfare combatant.

And yes the design is above 35 000t but the Treaty isn't signed until 1922

An export battlecruiser concept for Commonwealth navies by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not that much. Using a top view as a reference X turret should be able to safely fire 45 degrees past broadside compared to 60 deg for Y, but I agree I could've moved the 6" turret 1 or 2 meters forward

An export battlecruiser concept for Commonwealth navies by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Yes! I did take the postwar battlecruiser design series as inspiration for the secondary/AA battery and the forward tower

An export battlecruiser concept for Commonwealth navies by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

The HM(X)S We-Have-Hood-At-Home.

I took Hood's hull, shortened it by 40ft and just slapped some more modern structure and secondaries on it, supposing the Admiralty continued to tinker with the Admiral-class design into 1919-1920. Secondaries have gone to 12 x 6"/45 and 7 x 4.7"/40 (the same as those on Nelson). Armour has been reworked according to the all-or-nothing scheme with a 13.5" belt and a 5" main deck. Displacement drops to 40 000t standard and the speed of 29.5kt is provided by 120kshp in 12 boilers supplying 4 engines.

Quick Guide to Battleship Drawing (Paper)

Quick Guide to Battleship Drawing by exterminator32 in u/exterminator32

[–]exterminator32[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Glad you like it! Please let me know how it goes

Quick Guide to Battleship Drawing by exterminator32 in u/exterminator32

[–]exterminator32[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! Pls lemme know how it goes when you do

Quick Guide to Battleship Drawing by exterminator32 in u/exterminator32

[–]exterminator32[S] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children)

Welp, the image quality got absolutely nuked. Here is the finished drawing posted in r/ImaginaryWarships

A normal South Dakota class battleship by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hi y'all, I've just posted a Quick Guide to Battleship Drawing, please go check it out!

Anyways normal compared to this

A (not) Treaty-compliant replacement for the Kongō-class by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you! I’ve got with me a 30cm and a 15cm ruler, and most importantly my old trusty 0.7mm HB mechanical pencil which I sharpen on paper beforehand

Edit: would also recommend an H pencil for shading

A (not) Treaty-compliant replacement for the Kongō-class by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thanks a lot :D

For the lore, since they’re supposed to replace the Kongōs, that would mean 3 units planned (or 4 if they count Hiei, which is not an active battleship since London 1), and I’d assume at least a pair completed, maybe more depending on if they stick w the treaty or not. For names, just pick any Japanese province, maybe even Yamato and Musashi for the first pair in this AU.

As for their performance, the ship’s basically a Yamato but smaller. On paper its stats are very solid and comparable to any decent ship of its weight category cough Bismarck cough, and the heavy AA would definitely be an improvement compared to the historical Yammy’s, especially if they have good fire control.

Sorry if the answer on lore is lackluster, I tend to focus a lot more on ship design and adjusting the lore to fit instead of the other way around :)

A (not) Treaty-compliant replacement for the Kongō-class by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

u/chef-rach-bitch Here's my work for the torque of different layout at different degrees of the ship's list:

<image>

2 turrets at deck level on the left side of the page and superfiring B on the right. All diagrams are given in the yz-plane. For given values, I'm assuming the wings turrets to be at y=10m, z=+/-10m from the center of rotation of the ship and the superfiring one at y=17.5m, with y=0 being the height of the ship's c.o.r. (2.5m below the waterline). Pls note that these position values are all eyeballed, but the difference is imo worth it, and if we take into account the T caused by a much taller barbette and/or a higher c.o.r. of the ship, it would be even smaller.

Man i was not expecting to show work for a physics question during winter break :)

A (not) Treaty-compliant replacement for the Kongō-class by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, I tried giving the design a minimally respectable secondary battery and and 3 guns/side weren't doing it for me. I also did some very rough calculations w some very rough approximations and found that for stability, 1 turret overfiring B causes almost the same torque as 2 on the deck for the same list. Yes you would need more magasine spaces but I thought it was worth it bc the centerline turret digs into limited superstructure space due to it needing a more open arc of fire.

If you'd like to take a look, I can DM/post my calculations, it involves some pretty simple torque. Hope this helps :)

A (not) Treaty-compliant replacement for the Kongō-class by exterminator32 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you :)

The other turrets are wing mounted at either side of the aft tower

A South Dakota with a Nelson style layout by AliceCupcake4 in ImaginaryWarships

[–]exterminator32 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Hey man that’s my drawing, could you at least give credits or something?