Jump to content

mr3awsome

Supertester
  • Content Сount

    11,237
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1959

Community Reputation

1,848 Superb

About mr3awsome

  • Rank
    Admiral
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

WG

  • Position
    ---

Recent Profile Visitors

5,785 profile views
  1. mr3awsome

    How Effective was Battlecruiser idea?

    How effective were battle-cruisers? More than most give them credit for, I think. Battle-cruisers have a number of roles, the foremost of which are the hunting down and destruction of large armoured cruisers operating as commerce raiders and acting as part of the fleet's scouting force. That tactical advantages are undeniable, or else battle-cruiser design and construction would not have continued after Jutland. Its only once the 1930s come about that battle-cruisers really start to get long in the tooth. There are two reasons for this. The first and earliest is that the improvements in propulsion technology meant that the trade off between speed and armour (or firepower) no longer needed to be so radical as it had been. You could get fast, well protected, well armed, battleships. And because of the Naval Limitation treaties, these were a better investment than separate groups of slow, heavily armoured battleships and faster battle-cruisers. The second is the growth in the capabilities of aircraft, although that would only truly come to maturity in the late 1930s and early 40s. That the idea was sound can be seen in the revival of large cruisers to counter the more common Heavy Cruisers, even as their role as fleet scouts fell by the wayside. They are definitely a sort of latter day battle-cruiser (for the first battle-cruisers were themselves large cruisers), although that is another quagmire best left for today.
  2. mr3awsome

    Naval and Defense News (cont.)

    Its a Frigate, I think PPA is just the project name. In part is was probably chosen to reflect the lower capabilities compared to the Horizon and FREMM class frigates (In much the same way the Royal Navy will have Type 31es and the French will have the FTIs)
  3. mr3awsome

    Yamato 20 inch guns

    I don't know the details, I just happened to be reading an article about what was planned at the time, and it specified that Fujimoto wanted 4 x II for the last four ships, with the middle three (No.797 and two others) being able to fit either 18.1" or 20.1" weapons depending on the escalation of other powers.
  4. mr3awsome

    Yamato 20 inch guns

    Its worth noting that this would only apply to the middle three battleships of the intended 11, as the first four were Yamatos, and the last four were 4 x II 20.1" gunned (at least planned to be).
  5. Correct, but the USN had already starting replacing its older ships with the ordering of two North Carolina class ships in 1937. This was followed by four ships in 1939, so a rate of two per year is not out of the question. Of course, that depends on the design process, and the extent of changes made between them. Equally, what with the escalation in global tensions, and the growth of potentially dangerous rivals such as the IJN, it is likely that older ships would have been retained to increase the figure above 15. At the very least this would be the Colorados and Tennessees, but possibly older ships as well. They would certainly be the last to go.
  6. The first one, that of 1930, was seen to full term, or near enough, so I assume you mean the 2nd London Treaty, which is certainly more dubious in its value. As for the Colorados, I'd say late 40s rather than early 50s, as there was a move towards generally higher speeds, and the Standards would likely go to the breakers sooner for it.
  7. However, what with the London Naval Treaty (1930) extending the battleship holiday, this became out of date. Consequently, the older ships would likely have been replaced when the new battleships were commissioned. Of course, that is assuming that the Treaty remains in force through that period. In the event of a 1944 outbreak (a la Z Plan), then odds are a number of the US' 15 would have been scrapped by that point.
  8. mr3awsome

    [WIP] RN Battlecruiser Arc

    N3 is only 23 knot speed; its a battleship through and through. There are other designs of the time of G3 that work at VIII and X, G3 herself can probably work at tier IX. As for tier V, I'd recommend Tiger rather than Queen Mary, as she's a bigger improvement over the Princess Royal, and is the peer of both Iron Duke and Kongou.
  9. mr3awsome

    8” Omaha variant?

    Why not have the best of both? 2 x II 6"/53, 7 x I 5"/38 & 6 x IV 1.1"/75
  10. mr3awsome

    8” Omaha variant?

    Odds are the 8" twin is physically too large for the ship too.
  11. mr3awsome

    Worst design flaw you can think of?

    The World's Worst Warships by the late Anthony Preston gives a pretty good list of examples.
  12. mr3awsome

    Naval and Defense News (cont.)

    Can't say I'm surprised that the Type 31e programme restarted, as they said that they would. At this point the big question is will any of the ships be ready in time to prevent a dip in the total number of frigates. Somehow I doubt it.
  13. mr3awsome

    The Derpiest Warships of the Battleship Era

    Whilst Courageous and Glorious were modified several times during their service lives, neither were radically rebuilt. Only Furious comes close to this, and that was after her period as a test ship in the late 1910s and early 1920s, at which point she was converted into what had become the standard form for aircraft carriers.
  14. mr3awsome

    I created my first Wikipedia article

    Whilst the names of the Neptune class were carried across, that does not include Minotaur, as only five Neptune class ships were planned (Friedman's British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After pg.420). Whilst you are probably aware of this, it could be phrased more clearly in the article itself. Excellent work.
  15. 11,111 posts. 

     

    Spooooooky. 

    :cap_haloween:

×