The First "Dreadnought"

[Tanthalas]

So in the previous version of the Nverse, Dreadnoughts were known as "Arcadias" (since Rohan built the first one and it was named Arcadia) so the question is are we planing to follow that system, and can anyone else lay their first one down H104 (I can but still not sure I will)?

I know the US could, but I have no idea what Snip intends, Looks like Ottomans are on track for a H204 laydown, and IDK for anyone else.   

[The Rock Doctor]

The Ottomans do indeed plan for a H2/04 laydown, but the design is more evolutionary than revolutionary:  Another turret, mixed machinery.

[Tanthalas]

I am going with Mixed propulsion as well (no choice really as I want to hit 21 knots), and while I am only adding 1 turret my choice of layout is quite "Revolutionary" (I went with aBXy so I used SF turrets, a first I think at this point).  I am half tempted to depart from my naming tradition and name them something weird LOL.

[Walter]

I am half tempted to depart from my naming tradition and name them something weird LOL.

Dreaded Nut
Dreaded 0
Dreadlocks
Dreadful
Dreadfulnought
Dreadful Nut
Dreadful 0
Alarmingnought
Frighteningnought
Awe-inspiringnought
Awfulnought
Creepynought
Direnought
Frightfulnought
Shuddersomenought
Pleasantnought
Wonderfulnought

[The Rock Doctor]

I am half tempted to depart from my naming tradition and name them something weird LOL.

Dreaded Nut
Dreaded 0
Dreadlocks
Dreadful
Dreadfulnought
Dreadful Nut
Dreadful 0
Alarmingnought
Frighteningnought
Awe-inspiringnought
Awfulnought
Creepynought
Direnought
Frightfulnought
Shuddersomenought
Pleasantnought
Wonderfulnought

Feargodanddreadnought
WhateverhappensIhavegotadreadnoughtandyouhavenot

[Walter]

Guess I have to outdo those Rocky long names... ;D

HMS_Titaniccraftofmanythousandtonsasmallerbritainfreetocomeandgorelyingonthytenterrificgunstodauntafarthemostpresumptuousfoethickpanopliedwithplatesofhardenedsteelequippedwithalltheengin'ryofdeathunrivalledswiftnessinthymassivekeelannihilationlatentinthybreathdreadnoughtthynameandyetforallthysizeandstrengththeoceanmightengulfthyprowortheswiftredtorpedooftheskiesthelightningblastthyboastemblazonedbrowthouhastthyusebutbritainssonswerewisetoputtheirtrustinbetterthingsthanthou.

[Darman]

Clearly Walter is using the Native American name for the Dreadnought.... I dunno if that counts :p

[Walter]

Not really. William Mackay MacKeracher (whose poem I used for the name) was Canadian so it is the Canadian name for Dreadnought.

[snip]

To provide a bit more of an answer, the United States Navy plans on laying down three all-big-gun battleships in 1903. Preliminary design can be found here. An all big gun design has been chosen over updated Rhode Islands due to the pervasion of AQY battleships in major navies that creates a disparity in the number of 12" guns in the battleline. In addition it is going to be the first USN capital ship equipped with turbines. This was the best way the USN could keep commonality of speed and protection with the Rhode Islands.

[Logi]

Japan will be laying down 2 all-big-gun battlecruisers in 1904/H2 - no steam turbines are used.
Japan might also lay down 2 all-big-gun battleships in 1904/H2 with steam turbines or in 1905/H1 but that's not assured.

-----

I was a little interested in the actual number of AQY ships per navy so I looked up the numbers.

United Kingdom has 14 such BBs. The AQY fraction of capital ships is 41%.
Netherlands has 6 such BBs. All of the capital ships of the Netherlands are AQY (100%).

Germany has 4 such BBs. The AQY fraction of capital ships is 33%.
Ottomans have 3 such BBs. The AQY fraction of capital ships is 23%.

Japan has 2 such CAs (the Asama class, counterpart of the Brandywines). The Asama is only slightly larger than the armored cruisers of other nations and is considered one so the AQY fraction of Japan would be 0%. If I did count it as a capital ship though, the fraction would be 25%.

France has no such ships.
Italy has no such ships.
Russia has no such ships.

I feel as though the nations split neatly into three categories regarding their feelings towards AQY.
1. All-in
2. Cautiously trying it out
3. Regard it as foolish

[Kaiser Kirk]

I feel as though the nations split neatly into three categories regarding their feelings towards AQY.
1. All-in
2. Cautiously trying it out
3. Regard it as foolish

Well, when I presented my next class, I looked at the numbers for a heavy secondary vs a Q turret, and came up with the Q turret not currently being as useful.
Now, I realize an AQY may be more upgradable, but I'm trying not to look to hard to the future..and I'm guessing there will be a heck of an arms race that will leave AQY vessels in the undergunned dust anyhow. :)

[Tanthalas]

I started out aqy to be different (and I admit I always had a soft spot for that layout), I didn't anticipate anyone else going that route... whoops did I ever get that wrong LOL.  My intention is to lay down 2 BBs and one BC/Fast BB (I really cant decide which one to build at this point but the scouting groups need some love).

[Jefgte]

France does not consider the type AQY as progress.
=> in a naval battle, are considered:
The number of battleships.
The total number of 340, 305 & 274 turrets.
The homogeneous speed (18kts) for manoeuvers.

However, France has decided to build two faster battleships (21kts) with 4T2x 305 because many of his neighbors has 20kts AQY battleships.
The speed of 21 kts was chosen because it is the speed of its 10 "croiseurs d'escadre" with 2T2x240.