Guns, and More Guns, and All the Guns

[TacCovert4]

I've also done the requisite math.  Despite what I wanted to do, the tonnage doesn't lie.

My 100mm/50 Deck guns can be replaced in their single and twin mountings 1 for 1 with a 90mm/55 DP Gun, with the 10% heavier shell (12kg).  While it's a slightly smaller round and even with the heavy shell slightly lighter (by 2.6kg), I think the improved shell design and the higher velocity will help it perform roughly the same surface role as the 100mm gun, IE a main gun for lighter ships and auxiliaries and a secondary gun for cruisers, carriers, and the like.

My plans for a 115mm gun have also been sidetracked, as the 130mm/50 is nearly exactly replaced with a 120mm/55 DP Gun.  Same caveats as before, but it's a good match up to be the main gun for DDs going forward, as well as a heavy secondary gun on my capital units....And potentially the main battery for a DD-Leader.

[Kaiser Kirk]

I frequently ensure new guns can fit in old mountings.
I happen to like the 90mm, good mix of ROF and shell size, I've been featuring an 11kg shell in the 90/50 version and I forget if I'm bumping up in the 90/54 version.
To a certain extent the different caliber from 45-50-54 marks the difference.

I'm actually musing about re-introducing 90mm casements, with the idea they would be in the first deck below the weather deck, splinter armored, and intended to
provide cheap AA fire vs. incoming torpedo bombers.

As for larger,
I have both a 130 and a 120mm guns, and I'm thinking I'll unify them at some point. Probably at 120.

For the 120, I'm not looking to go up to 55.  I'm thinking the rotation / elevation /firing rates of the 130L50 and 120L45 and 120L43 will give me some comparison points.
One of the features of the 5"/38 DP was that the shorter barrel helped rotation/elevation speeds in comparison to the 5"/50 SP in service.
While I'd have to step down to 120L40 to match the bore*cabliber, I'm guessing the 120L43 will be deemed 'close enough' and I'll just go with a DP version of that.

Next question : WHAT do folks think these are ...are they "on deck"  or "below deck"... I do not think they are casement, but I am thinking they are 'mount & hoist' 'below deck'. Which I believe gives and error message.

But I want them. Would allow me to have up to 5 layers of guns on a side.....muhahhahahahaa
...bah doesn't seem to show.. http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_45-45_mk1_Anson_pic.jpg

[TacCovert4]

I frequently ensure new guns can fit in old mountings.
I happen to like the 90mm, good mix of ROF and shell size, I've been featuring an 11kg shell in the 90/50 version and I forget if I'm bumping up in the 90/54 version.
To a certain extent the different caliber from 45-50-54 marks the difference.

I'm actually musing about re-introducing 90mm casements, with the idea they would be in the first deck below the weather deck, splinter armored, and intended to
provide cheap AA fire vs. incoming torpedo bombers.

As for larger,
I have both a 130 and a 120mm guns, and I'm thinking I'll unify them at some point. Probably at 120.

For the 120, I'm not looking to go up to 55.  I'm thinking the rotation / elevation /firing rates of the 130L50 and 120L45 and 120L43 will give me some comparison points.
One of the features of the 5"/38 DP was that the shorter barrel helped rotation/elevation speeds in comparison to the 5"/50 SP in service.
While I'd have to step down to 120L40 to match the bore*cabliber, I'm guessing the 120L43 will be deemed 'close enough' and I'll just go with a DP version of that.

Next question : WHAT do folks think these are ...are they "on deck"  or "below deck"... I do not think they are casement, but I am thinking they are 'mount & hoist' 'below deck'. Which I believe gives and error message.

But I want them. Would allow me to have up to 5 layers of guns on a side.....muhahhahahahaa
...bah doesn't seem to show.. http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_45-45_mk1_Anson_pic.jpg

I'm going with the L55 on both guns primarily to maintain their effectiveness as an anti-surface gun.  The higher velocity also means that in an AA Barrage their shells will get to altitude quicker, meaning less errors in calculating lead.  I've determined that for now it's worth the weight that'll make their slew slower than a shorter gun.  At least in the way the Sultanate works....and especially with a first-gen DP gun that's first and foremost a surface action gun that can replace the 70mm AA, not an AA Gun that can work surface....which I'd argue is the 5/25 and even 5/38. 

Overall, I'm not going to be doing a whole lot of replacing guns on existing mounts.  Mostly I'll be replacing the mounts themselves.  The exception will probably be the 130mm Twin M&H, which I can slot the 120 DP into with tonnage to spare.  The slight drop in tonnage of the 90 and 120 can allow for an increase in protection, or potentially a bit of leftover tonnage/comp for adding more equipment.

[Kaiser Kirk]

The 130L50 is my cruiser +  AS gun, and I'll make an early DP version of it.
The 120L43 is meant to be easier to handle on lively (DD) platforms, and that will get the early DP version.

Each comes from a different lineage , the 130 from the 165 getting smaller/faster/better tracking, the 120 from the 90 getting harder hitting.

The full DP version is what I expect will be the unified 120L43. Which may have a +20% shell.

Only when a gun is a repeat bore+caliber do I not redo the "mount" portion.
However, for planning purposes I try to ensure the future gun can go where the current ones are, and that may mean single 165 -> 2G130 as an option.
I also keep researching more mounts for existing guns, as I want Parthia's systems
to reflect the most current generation, and then incremental improvements on that.

[TacCovert4]

Incidentally the 90/55 DP is actually going to wind up replacing some 130 singles.  Mostly because the 90 Twin is going to be a deck mount, so it'll match with the 130 single deck mount.  I've already done the math on the Constellations which are planned to be laid down in 1929....and will be at the 'free refit' point when the DP guns enter service....their planned 8 x 130 deck mounts will be swapped for 16 x 90mm in twin deck mounts....and then some single 40mm mounts will get tacked on because there will be some free tonnage even after that swap.

[Kaiser Kirk]

I will probably feather DP mounts into service with several varieties of the 'Limited', as well as the various AA I'm currently developing.
and then research a follow on mounting for the 'chosen', which will be paired with fleetwide refits with the next FC tech.
...and then when I get true DP....even more mounts and refits...

[TacCovert4]

I will probably feather DP mounts into service with several varieties of the 'Limited', as well as the various AA I'm currently developing.
and then research a follow on mounting for the 'chosen', which will be paired with fleetwide refits with the next FC tech.
...and then when I get true DP....even more mounts and refits...

The Early DP will start getting put onto new construction pretty universally as soon as it's ready.  And some of the oldest ships will get them, like the Implacables and Sultan Alis.  But ships with a substantial AA Battery and the 130s as their surface guns.....will probably skip a dedicated DP-AA refit until I'm ready to do another refit to them, by then I will have probably refurbished the DP guns into their improved variations.