New Experimental Light Cruiser

[maddox]

A net is rather cheap. And better a hole in the net, than in the hull.

[TexanCowboy]

In that case..... do any of your ships have torpedo nets? And I have a 14 ton reserve, I can use that for a net.

[Walter]

With 2*5950 ft² you're counting on 6 tons.  Sounds not even remotely enough.

Not for the whole package. The netting might be 6 tons, but you still have all the stuff that is needed to keep those nets up and in position and looking at those models, I think that you are looking at at least double that weight for the whole system.

[TexanCowboy]

I have 14 tons of reserve. By the way, does anyone mount torpedo nets?

[maddox]

France just uses them in anchorages.

And a ship with deployed torpedo nets has a very limited speed. So, the speed challenged French ships won't have mobile deployed nets.

[TexanCowboy]

Exactly. I don't have fast ships. I'm like Maoria.So, my best chance is to run, and if its too close, fire rockets.

[The Rock Doctor]

It will take us Mods a couple of days to discuss the new systems and conclude what is possible.  In the meantime, feel free to assign what you think is a reasonable amount of miscellaneous weight, and we'll get back to you.

[Desertfox]

I don't think the system is a problem. The technology to do so is available. I do however do not think it will be very useful. Aiming will be near impossible and the fuses extremely unreliable. However it does have potential if you intend to board an enemy ship, but that's a completely different beast.

[TexanCowboy]

The Fire-Dragon rockets have a 6-7,000 meter range. I'm shoving a 100 kg warhead in there. Do tell me a 230 lb explosion of high explosive, or a armour peircing 230 lb explosive, isn't going to hurt. Besides, better against a small torpedo boat then a 8'' gun.

[Logi]

I think DF is talking about the anti-torpedo system, not the anti-ship rockets.

[Walter]

I think that the main problem with the anti torpedo system is that your ship is moving, the torpedo is moving, the rockets have no guidance and are thus very inaccurate so the chances of hitting the torpedo is smaller than the chance of hitting a tank with a Soviet RS-132 rocket in the late 1930s (134 launches and no hits) and a static tank on the groud is a bigger, much easier to hit target than a fast moving, submerged torpedo.

The Fire-Dragon rockets have a 6-7,000 meter range. I'm shoving a 100 kg warhead in there. Do tell me a 230 lb explosion of high explosive, or a armour peircing 230 lb explosive, isn't going to hurt.Besides, better against a small torpedo boat then a 8'' gun.

Considering that the chance of hitting a static tank at 500 meters with a late 1930s RS-82 rocket is about 1.1%, how big do you think your accuracy is going to be with a 1910s rocket against moving MTBs at twice that distance? So no it is not going to hurt since you're not going to hit anything with it. I think it is better to have a bunch of 8" guns whose shells travel a lot faster and thanks to the rifling in the barrel would be a lot more accurate.

Don't get me wrong. I like the idea but I really don't think that such rockets will work until the 1940s. The Le Prieur rocket had a range of 115m "due to great inaccuracy of the rocket", and perhaps that is the best RL example to look at regarding rocket accuracy at this point in Navalism time as their targets were static observer ballons (which the rockets brought down) and large moving Zeppelins (which the rockets did not bring down).

Just all my opinion though...

[Korpen]

Totally different concpet, but as walter brougth up using 20cm guns..

Fits into a type 0 dock/slip.

Dracul, Rumänien kustförsvarsskepp laid down 1916

Displacement:
   3 000 t light; 3 218 t standard; 3 560 t normal; 3 834 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   229,66 ft / 229,66 ft x 57,41 ft x 18,04 ft (normal load)
   70,00 m / 70,00 m x 17,50 m  x 5,50 m

Armament:
     2 - 7,99" / 203 mm guns in single mounts, 255,24lbs / 115,78kg shells, 1916 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, evenly spread
     10 - 5,98" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 107,15lbs / 48,60kg shells, 1916 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, all amidships
   Weight of broadside 1 582 lbs / 718 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
  - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   3,15" / 80 mm   147,64 ft / 45,00 m   16,40 ft / 5,00 m
   Ends:   Unarmoured
     Main Belt covers 99 % of normal length

  - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   3,94" / 100 mm   2,95" / 75 mm      3,94" / 100 mm
   2nd:   2,95" / 75 mm   0,79" / 20 mm      2,95" / 75 mm

  - Armour deck: 1,20" / 31 mm, Conning tower: 5,91" / 150 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Geared drive, 2 shafts, 11 747 shp / 8 763 Kw = 20,00 kts
   Range 6 000nm at 12,00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 616 tons

Complement:
   229 - 299

Cost:
   £0,544 million / $2,176 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 198 tons, 5,6 %
   Armour: 766 tons, 21,5 %
      - Belts: 349 tons, 9,8 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0 %
      - Armament: 187 tons, 5,3 %
      - Armour Deck: 200 tons, 5,6 %
      - Conning Tower: 30 tons, 0,8 %
   Machinery: 438 tons, 12,3 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 1 334 tons, 37,5 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 560 tons, 15,7 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 264 tons, 7,4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     4 622 lbs / 2 097 Kg = 18,1 x 8,0 " / 203 mm shells or 1,2 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,07
   Metacentric height 2,5 ft / 0,8 m
   Roll period: 15,3 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,58
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1,02

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck
   Block coefficient: 0,524
   Length to Beam Ratio: 4,00 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 15,15 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 69 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 48
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0,00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0,00 ft / 0,00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      22,97 ft / 7,00 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   19,69 ft / 6,00 m
      - Mid (50 %):      18,04 ft / 5,50 m
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   16,40 ft / 5,00 m
      - Stern:      18,04 ft / 5,50 m
      - Average freeboard:   18,47 ft / 5,63 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 91,5 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 134,3 %
   Waterplane Area: 8 979 Square feet or 834 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 102 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 95 lbs/sq ft or 464 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0,81
      - Longitudinal: 6,72
      - Overall: 1,00
   Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
   Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

EDIT: Added picture.

[maddox]

Wow, an MGB on steroïds.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Wow, an MGB on steroïds.

My thought was more an old armored cruiser or new coastal battleship. She's not that far off from the Danish Herluf Trolle  CBBs.

[TexanCowboy]

Threadjacker!  :)