Maori Fleet

[P3D]

I feared that someone will start putting belt on destroyers.

And with the 1912 engines I won't consider 27kts a fast combatant.

[Valles]

I feared that someone will start putting belt on destroyers.

Why not, then?

And with the 1912 engines I won't consider 27kts a fast combatant.

With an 18knot fleet speed, I certainly would.

[Desertfox]

Well you guys could go with generic destroyers, generic cruisers, generic battleships, generic subma...oh you already have those. Catch my drift? If everyone builds the perfect ship, you might as well start playing Risk.

[Carthaginian]

I feared that someone will start putting belt on destroyers.

And with the 1912 engines I won't consider 27kts a fast combatant.

27 knots is a fast combatant by SS and the rules.
Good enough for me.

Also, the belted destroyer is simply an idea who's time is coming. You have a ship that's 1-2 knots slower than a standard DD, but armored to kill them, and still fast enough to outrun many enemy craft. It's a good, cheap way to defend the battleline.

Makes perfect sense to someone thinking outside the box.

[Ithekro]

The problem with armored destroyers is not so much thinking outside the box, its more a case of shells exploding inside the box.  An unarmored destroyer has a fairly good chance of having a shell pass through the hull and explode on the other side of the ship (much like RPGs going through PBR Mk. II hulls during Vietnam and exploding (mostly harmlessly) on the other side of the boat).  Adding armor means that shells that would have passed through now will explode inside the ship, doing far greater damage.  At least in the realm of realism.

[Carthaginian]

How far away are the two ships?
2" of armor can deflect/stop a 3" round in tank combat a sufficient ranges, and can force some to explode before penetrating. The ship seems fairly well armored against it's equals.

[Valles]

I'm less than optimistic about the surety of a hit to an unarmored area of a ship not detonating. There's a chance, certainly, but anything aimed low enough to hit the belt likely would've pasted some important bit of machinery anyway, and if that happens with a decent sized shell then any destroyer is toast, armor or not. So, being able to shrug off the light hits from rapid-fire guns would definitely be worthwhile.

And! Pictures! Two potential designs.

[Korpen]

The problem with armored destroyers is not so much thinking outside the box, its more a case of shells exploding inside the box.  An unarmored destroyer has a fairly good chance of having a shell pass through the hull and explode on the other side of the ship (much like RPGs going through PBR Mk. II hulls during Vietnam and exploding (mostly harmlessly) on the other side of the boat).  Adding armor means that shells that would have passed through now will explode inside the ship, doing far greater damage.  At least in the realm of realism.

Punchtrough is really only an issue if someone is firing large calibre AP shells on the destroyer, something one does not normally use on destroyers. The most common shell against DDs is either HE or common, and the risk for punchtrough with either of those is minimal.

How far away are the two ships?
2" of armor can deflect/stop a 3" round in tank combat a sufficient ranges, and can force some to explode before penetrating. The ship seems fairly well armored against it's equals.

Just for comparison, a common/SAP (base&nose fuze) shell from my DDs can penetrate 50mm armour out to about 60hm.

But the belt is usefull if under shrapnel fire.

[Carthaginian]

So, if they are not more distant than 3 n. mi., a 50mm belt wouldn't stop an AP shell.
Still, being as you say most attacks against DD's were with HE or Common, wouldn't 50mm be sufficient to detonate the round on the outside at least most of the time? If so, it would seem wise to add a thin belt to a destroyer if you were planning on it engaging and killing light ships with gunfire.

[Korpen]

So, if they are not more distant than 3 n. mi., a 50mm belt wouldn't stop an AP shell.
Still, being as you say most attacks against DD's were with HE or Common, wouldn't 50mm be sufficient to detonate the round on the outside at least most of the time? If so, it would seem wise to add a thin belt to a destroyer if you were planning on it engaging and killing light ships with gunfire.

Well I was talking about common shells; an AP shell would penetrate 50mm out to almost 100hm...
Sure the belt could keep nose fused HE out most of the time, delay fused SAP(common) I doubt it would hold out anytime. Even so a direct hit from a 12cm HE is likely to breech the armour by virtue of chemical energy.
As far as I am concerned, the greatest advantage of a belt is to keep out splinter from near misses, and possible shrapnel shells used against the ship.

[Valles]

Better than nothing, that is, certainly, but...

Hm. How much would be needed to protect against 100mm-ish at torpedo-launch range?

[P3D]

Torpedo launch range is like 500-3000yards depending on speed difference and torpedo technology. To have an armor to stop 4" shells at that range you need a cruiser.

And DD machinery space occupies the whole depth of the ship (until you got to late WWII designs), from hull bottom to weather deck. If you want to armor that, 2m deep belt is not enough.

[Korpen]

Better than nothing, that is, certainly, but...

Hm. How much would be needed to protect against 100mm-ish at torpedo-launch range?

Like P3D said, loads at laest up around 75mm if 1you want protection against 10cm guns, closer to 10-11cm if you want protection against 12 and 15cm guns.

Torpedo-launch range really depends on what the torpedo attack tries to accomplish, if it is to prevent the enemy from closing the range is much further then if trying to press an attack against an enemy avoiding. (In the later case then you really need to overtake the enemy before launch)

[Tanthalas]

Well you guys could go with generic destroyers, generic cruisers, generic battleships, generic subma...oh you already have those. Catch my drift? If everyone builds the perfect ship, you might as well start playing Risk.

I think the idea is for everyone to build the perfect ship acording to them.  If its actualy perfect or not well thats a mater of perspective, the rules are such that everyone will in the end build similar ships, however there will be and are fundemental diferances.

[Sachmle]

Um...interesting pics. Yeah, interesting...that's waht I meant.  LOL  No really, the bottom one looks like a converted, although much smaller Oil Tanker, while the top one seems very superstructure heavy for a DD.  Is, of course, IMO but I don't see any purpose to a belt on a DD.  Korpen/P3D are probably right, anything heavy enough to stop what's gonna be shot at you will kill the performance of your DD. Lose the armor and go faster. OMG I sound like DF....ow..ow.oh the pain. ;D