Turret Configurations

[Delta Force]

Weren't AQY turret configurations rather rare prior to the dreadnought era? It seems that Russia is the only power going with heavy secondaries and occasionally experimenting with Kearsarge style stacked turrets. Obviously the all big gun ships are the way to go once modern fire control is developed, but it seems that AQY ships will be a major disadvantage against ships with heavy secondary armament at typical engagement ranges. I know there was actually a major debate between naval experts even up until the 1910s over the semi-dreadnought and dreadnought schools of design, did that actually start earlier and we are simply seeing it pay out with everyone's designs?

[KWorld]

Historically, the USN had lots of different ideas for how the battleships after the second USS Maine should be armed.  There were proposals to use triple 12" turrets fore and aft with 6" secondaries, to replace the 8" twins with 10" twins, etc.  One of the main drivers here was that, with Krupp armor, ships were able to protect more of themselves than they had been with compound or Harvey armor, with the result that the 8" guns were less useful.  Another driver was that the difference in the rate of fire between the 12" and the 8" was getting smaller and smaller.  Under the Navalism rules, I can't build triple turrets yet, so to get the 6 12" guns that some in the USN wanted, I have to go to AXY layouts.

[Jefgte]

Historically, in France, the debate centered primarily on the arms, three solutions were well planned.
- The first planned like the Dreadnought 5T2x12" but it was not used. Since ninety, it is fashionable to ramble on about the rejection of this solution.
- The second project involved 2T2x12" and 6T2x240mm
- The third project involved 3T2x12" and 6T2x194mm.

----
I choose an other disposition  :)
3T2x12" - AQY + 4T2x240 side distribued

Jef

[snip]

Im sticking with the mixed main battery practice, but adding some twists. The next class of battleships after the Formidables (layed down in 1901 because I really shot myself in the foot with the Illustrious class only being 16knt ships :o) will have the intermediary guns mounted en-enchlon in twin turrets most likely.

[KWorld]

Heh, I can't criticize about 16 knot ships, it's only the latest 2 classes (out of 5) of USN BBs that are faster than 16 knots.  An en echelon secondary battery, though?  That will be..... different.

[snip]

it increases the theoretical broadside by 18% in terms of weight of shell on the same tonnage. Seems like a good deal to me. Also a means to a end of not having the waistful thets have main gun turrets that can only fire limited arcs abeam of Dreadnaught and her near sisters.

[Tanthalas]

I'm known to be a huge fan of the Brandenburg class ships, I actualy wanted to build them warts lumps, short gun Q turret and all for my startup ships... since that wasnt allowed (not gona get into the whys and all that) I will likley end up building AQY ships as my 1900 ships (although I do have other proposals percolating still and since they all weigh exactly the same ammount light I have time to decide).

the idea that im curently playing with has a 11/45 twin on each beam, one foreward and one aft.  Granted its hugely wasteful on tonage (realy a Q turret would be vastly superior) but it gives me an excuse to play with wing turrets (and belive me Kworld your not the only one lusting after tripples)

[Delta Force]

I wonder what the Russian battleships would look like if I drew them. Tumblehome hulls with Kearsarge stacked turret and semi-dreadnought designs would have to be some of the strangest looking battleships since the French Navy in the 1880s and 1890s. Russia was a major innovator in warship design in real life, so I might have it be the world's experimental navy for the 1900s.