Architecture

[snip]

With that armament (turreted guns and 210mm or greater), this ship would need to conform to the restrictions of the Capital Ship Architecture tech. As such, it will need both full-waterline armor protection and a 90mm upper belt until such a time that the 1910 Capital Ship Architecture tech is completed. Will Japan finish that tech by 1/1/13?

[Desertfox]

Yes, Japan will have the tech by then. That said, Kirk said the capital ship architecture would not need to apply to turrets as long as the guns where under 210mm.

[Jefgte]

Yes, Japan will have the tech by then. That said, Kirk said the capital ship architecture would not need to apply to turrets as long as the guns where under 210mm.

Exact

From Rules "Ship Design Guidelines"

...Block-coefficients

0.38 is the absolute minimum.  Coefficients should be reflective of the size and speed of the vessel.

Architecture

The Capital Ship Architecture tech applies to any ship carrying guns with a bore diameter of 210mm or more carrying its armament in turrets. If the weapons are less than 210mm or not turreted, the Cruiser Architecture tech applies.

Ships built to Destroyer Architecture must have at least 50% of the Distribution of weights at normal displacement section of their Springsharp allocated to Machinery.

Exceptions to architectural classifications may be granted by the Moderators at their discretion. This is to allow for ships of unusual design or concept, and for certain OTL historical outliers that do not fit easily in this system.
...

[Kaiser Kirk]

The Capital Ship Architecture tech applies to any ship carrying guns with a bore diameter of 210mm or more carrying its armament in turrets. If the weapons are less than 210mm or not turreted, the Cruiser Architecture tech applies.

Thank you Jefgte,

Looking at the weapons - 203mm in turrets -
A) is the ship carrying guns 210mm or more in turrets....no
B) are the weapons less than 210mm OR not turreted? - They are less than 210mm.
Therefore, Cruiser Architecture applies.

[snip]

There is a a problem with putting the Thonburi under Cruiser Architecture. Until the 1920 Cruiser tech is researched, ships built to the cruiser rules cannot have turrets.

Ultimently for the legality of the Thonburi, this is a moot question. Since Japan will have the 1910 Capital Architecture in 1913H1, it does not mater if Thonburi is class as a Capital ship because Japanese capital ships will be able to use All-or-Nothing armor schemes. As defined in the Ship Design Guidelines, A-o-N does not have any requirement of ether upper belt or waterline protection. Therefore, if Thonburi (imo rightly) classified as a capital ship, she is legal.

For the Thonburi design, I personally find the limited protected volume (86% of normal length armored) to be a major flaw and would ether improve the protected volume or provide additional total protection for the waterline. While I don't expect the ship would survive a prolonged engagement because of this, its a mean little ship that I'm ok with having a practically nonexistent need to plan for.

Sidenote that might warent splitting into its own discussion: If I'm reading things right, once the 1910 capital ship architecture tech is researched, there are only two items that put a ship in the Cruiser or Captial bucket; turrets and deck armor type. If the ship has turrets, it is therefor a capital ship. All this definition does after the 1910 tech is prohibit capital ships from using the Box over Magazine and/or Engines deck armor option in SS3. Contrarily, ships built to the cruiser rules can use the Box over Magazine and/or Engines option, but cannot use turrets. This whole restriction vanishes after the 1920 Cruiser tech allows for turreted armament on cruisers.

[Kaiser Kirk]

This is probably a good discussion to go ahead and have.

So there are 4 different portions of the rules to consider and a related matter.

First, there is the Cruiser Tech
The word turrets is not mentioned until :

1920:  No restriction (high or low) on caliber of turreted guns. Cruisers under 3000 tons may have cross-sectional hull strength > 0.75

This wording has always been awkward, as it implies there was previous a restriction- exactly what is not clear. The most logical deduction is cruiser can then have guns over 210mm and still be cruisers (USS Alaska?).  Personally I think it should also apply to mounting more than twins on Cruisers prior to 1920.
However a restriction is not the same as a ban on cruiser turrets. I am not aware of a ban on cruiser turrets.

Second, then there is the capital ship tech, which mainly does deal with turrets, but does not place a requirement on it.

Third there is the Ship Design Rules, which Do specifically state what falls under Capital Ship, and What does not.
This is what Jefgte quoted.
By those rules, as written, "If the weapons are less than 210mm or not turreted, the Cruiser Architecture tech applies."
That wording means weapons over 210mm not in a turret, or weapons less than 210mm IN a turret.

Fourth, Looking at the Gun Research, the 210mm number shows up again, as the breakpoint between large and small guns.

Lastly, while not part of N7, these tech rules do predate N7, and I find it interesting that 'treaty cruisers', as <210mm would be outside of the capital ship rules.

So... perhaps the intention was to ban cruiser turrets.... but I do not see that in the actual language.
Instead the Ship Design language rather clearly allows the possibility f turreted guns <210mm and specifies those use cruiser architecture.
What have I missed?

[Desertfox]

Sidenote that might warent splitting into its own discussion: If I'm reading things right, once the 1910 capital ship architecture tech is researched, there are only two items that put a ship in the Cruiser or Captial bucket; turrets and deck armor type. If the ship has turrets, it is therefor a capital ship. All this definition does after the 1910 tech is prohibit capital ships from using the Box over Magazine and/or Engines deck armor option in SS3. Contrarily, ships built to the cruiser rules can use the Box over Magazine and/or Engines option, but cannot use turrets. This whole restriction vanishes after the 1920 Cruiser tech allows for turreted armament on cruisers.

One thing to remember is that the cruiser architecture also allows sub 1.0 strength for ships under certain size limits (0.9/6k in 1900 and 0.75/3k in 1920).

[snip]

So... perhaps the intention was to ban cruiser turrets.... but I do not see that in the actual language.
Instead the Ship Design language rather clearly allows the possibility f turreted guns <210mm and specifies those use cruiser architecture.
What have I missed?

Cruiser Architecture:
Baseline: guns in single mounts or casemates, on side/centerline
1900: ammunition hoists, deck torpedo armament, superfiring mounts. Cruisers under 6000 tons may have cross-sectional hull strength > 0.9
1910: twin gun mounts (require hoists); powered gun mounts; unrestricted weapon armor
1920:  No restriction (high or low) on caliber of turreted guns. Cruisers under 3000 tons may have cross-sectional hull strength > 0.75

To me, its not that the Ship Design Guidelines explicitly say no turrets on cruisers, but that the tech explicitly says mounts. This has been the case since N3.

I've always read the cruiser tech like this with respect to gun mountings. Single deck mounts without hoists are always allowed, its part of the baseline tech. Single Mount & Hoist is allowed after the 1900 tech. Twin Mount & Hoist is allowed after the 1910 tech. After the 1920 tech there is no limit on the use of M&H or T&B on cruisers.

I think the ambiguity here comes from the way this definition is written.

The Capital Ship Architecture tech applies to any ship carrying guns with a bore diameter of 210mm or more carrying its armament in turrets. If the weapons are less than 210mm or not turreted, the Cruiser Architecture tech applies.

It has the AND and OR checks for whether or not a ship is a capital ship reversed. To fit my interpretation of the cruiser tech above, the definition really should read like this.

The Capital Ship Architecture tech applies to any ship carrying its main armament in turrets or has a bore diameter of 210mm or greater. If the weapons are less than 210mm and not turreted, the Cruiser Architecture tech applies.

This clearly establishes what counts as a capital ship and what does not, which is more important here than it was in N3 since we have defined requirements for capital ship armor layouts. I dont think this change in wording would alter any interpretations of the rule as applied to any existing or proposed designs.

[Desertfox]

The Capital Ship Architecture tech applies to any ship carrying its main armament in turrets or has a bore diameter of 210mm or greater. If the weapons are less than 210mm and not turreted, the Cruiser Architecture tech applies.

This clearly establishes what counts as a capital ship and what does not, which is more important here than it was in N3 since we have defined requirements for capital ship armor layouts. I dont think this change in wording would alter any interpretations of the rule as applied to any existing or proposed designs.

Well it would definitely affect me, all of my current and projected protected cruisers, except for the two oldest ones, have 8" guns in turrets.

[snip]

Well, I stand corrected then. Its up to Kirk, ignore my rambleings.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Well, I stand corrected then. Its up to Kirk, ignore my rambleings.

No no no.

I want to make a point - I specifically asked Snip to stay involved and call me on it if I'm wandering off course.
That's what he's trying to do here, and I appreciate it.

That said, I think he and I will chat about the cruiser architecture a bit more via PM.

As Foxy pointed out, he would be effected, and I do not know who else.
Generally it is not advantageous weight wise to use a turret, and so most folks seem to have gone with the 7-7.5' that don't require one.
I do not expect that any existing designs done in good faith will find them invalidated.
At the worst, the nations designs may realize that future designs should be different.
But we will chat and sort things out.

in the meantime, it's Weds, my 'day off'.

[Desertfox]

For the record, I can confirm that turrets weight more than "mount and hoist".

How about this compromise? Cruisers can use turrets but restricted to: no more than 210mm, no superfiring (perhaps single turrets allowed?), and no triple turrets, until 1920 tech. So current and projected cruiser designs are not impacted, but there is still a demarcation line between the two architectures.

Edit: To use historical examples if the above implemented, the Furutakas would fall under 1910 Cruiser Architecture (single, superfiring, 8" turrets), while the follow on Aobas (twin superfiring 8" turrets) would fall under the 1920 Cruiser Architecture. Note, this would only matter if they are under 6,000t light and taking advantage of the 0.9 Hull Strength rule. The Aobas can also be built under the 1910 Capital Ship Architecture if they don't take advantage of the 6,000t rule.

Question, what is the point of the 1920 Capital Ship Architecture? Is it to allow turreted 6" guns?

[Kaiser Kirk]

Snip and I are chatting.

The rule goal is to avoid a cruiser race influenced by our foreknowledge that cool things like the USS Cleveland with 12x6" are somehow the goal.
The treaty cruisers were an odd outgrowth of the treaty, and likely would not have come to be without it.

I think viewing the Cruiser Rules as allowing a lower Comp hull, in return for some weaponry restrictions, is a good model for reality that meets the goal. 

Fox, regardless of the exact result, my inclination is to grandfather existing designs. I'll probably give them a once over, but I don't want to invalidate good faith designs.

[Desertfox]

I feel like if the goal is to avoid "optimal" solutions, then adding restrictions will only lead to that kind of ships. Case in point the German "Pocket Battleships", Germany did not have the 8" gun limit so they stuffed 11" guns in them. Going back to the Cruiser Architecture, remove the 210mm restriction and I bet someone (most likely me) will try to stuff 12" guns into a sub-6,000t cruiser. Select random limits like the 10,000t for treaty cruisers can make things interesting, but keep adding limits and it narrows the design space and you get convergence. Just look around at how many dreadnoughts here already have 9 main guns in triple turrets.

As for me, I just want to build this beauty: http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/kamina_f.htm

[Jefgte]

Let's not forget that Navalism can allow us to "wander" in ship designs.

Foxy is right with "Combinedfleet" source.