Jump to content

Marine_Diesel

Members
  • Content Сount

    252
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1781

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Marine_Diesel

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

827 profile views
  1. Marine_Diesel

    Crossing the Equator with Karlsruhe and Yorck

    My main problem with the Karlsruhe is the lack of gun range. *WG please buff Karl's range to 13.1km or something. And the modules are somewhat fragile. Onto the pros: The turning radius is actually smaller than Phoenix and Kuma though the rudder shift time is longer. Karlsruhe also does in fact have solid armor for a tier 4 cruiser. (60mm plus turtleback) The 15cm AP on Karlsruhe has very slightly better drag than Danae and better Alpha dmg. Though Danae has better velocity and better Krupp value. Both shell weights are similar.
  2. Marine_Diesel

    Ersatz Elsass (Estraz Elsaß)

    Panzerschiff D, Ersatz Elsass (Estraz Elsaß) The Project At a conference in Berlin on March 9, 1933, it was decided that the new capital ships should be built to counter "Dunkerque". The first calculations showed the need for a 320mm armored belt that could withstand 330 mm of armor-piercing shells from a distance of more than 18,000m and a thick armored deck that was supposed to stop these projectiles at distances over 25,000m. The limits of displacement did not fit and the requirements were reduced. The ship's design was altered to withstand the hits of 330mm high-explosive and 203mm armor-piercing shells. To do this, a 220mm belt and 80mm deck was implemented. In response to the growing danger of aircraft, the armored deck was to be at least 50mm. Discussions on the main caliber basically came down to a search for a compromise between better armor penetration and destructive impact. Destructive impact on one hand and rate of fire on the other. Then it was considered that nine 283mm guns are better than six 330mm guns, and the transition to a larger caliber is justified if at least eight barrels can be placed. Only 283mm turrets were available, and all the others had to be designed, tested, and put into production. Admiral Raeder did not intend, like Admiral von Tirpitz, to build his naval policy on a direct call to British naval power but considered it more important to counter French shipbuilding programs. He permitted the construction of 4th and 5th of the Deutschland type, designated "D" and "E" but only with enhanced protection while maintaining a displacement limit of 19,000 tons and armament from six 283mm guns in two turrets. In December 1933, they returned to the issue of the main armament caliber. The budget allowed for the development of a new 330mm gun but in an attempt to win the favor of the British, Raeder again decided to return to the 305mm caliber. A month later, such a long wait for the development of these armaments was considered unreasonable, and on January 25, 1934, the military shipyard in Wilhelmshaven and Deutsche Werke in Kiel received orders for the construction. History and Construction The ships were designed under the contract names D and E, and designed under the provisional names Ersatz Elsass and Ersatz Hessen. The contract for the first ship, D, was awarded on 25 January 1934 to the Kriegsmarinewerft in Wilhelmshaven. The ship's keel was laid on 14th of February, 1934. Early that year, France announced the second ship of the Dunkerque class, Strasbourg. And retaliatory measures were taken. Hitler gave the go-ahead for adding the third turret and increasing the displacement to 26,000 tons. However, construction was stopped on July 5, and further redesigning began, which could not be completed before October 1935. Construction on D was therefore halted on 5 July, and E was never laid down. Soon, it preferred a more familiar scheme with two turrets in the nose, one at the stern. (The final design submitted to Admiral Raeder as 'Neuentwurf II') Some suggested that the project should be able to complete the replacement of the triple 283mm turrets with twin 330mm or 380mm turrets. As for the machinery, the sympathies tended to favor turbines and high-temperature boilers to provide a speed of 30 knots. The construction contracts were soon canceled and resources reallocated for the more powerful Scharnhorst class (Neuentwurf I). The last requirements of Estraz Elsaß before construction was halted included a 28-knot continuous speed & 30-knot full speed, protection from 330-mm guns in the range of 15,000 to 20,000 meters, anti-fragmentation protection of the extremities, three turrets of 283mm caliber (one in the nose and two in the stern), four-twin 15cm guns due to the absence of torpedo tubes. (Eventually two turrets in the nose, one at the stern) The ship's upper deck armor was 35mm thick. The main armored deck was 70mm forward, 80mm amidships, and decreased to 70mm towards the stern. The conning tower side armor was 300mm thick. The main armored belt was 220mm thick and the citadel armor was 50mm thick. Important Note: The 30.5cm gun that Admiral Erich Raeder wanted was actually completely designed as 30.5 cm/56 (12") SK C/39. However, not put into production. It was to use the modernized 30.5cm APC L/4.9 shell but at 865mps instead of 850mps with 30.5 cm SK L/50. Actual barrel length was 55.74 calibers. Final Specifications Displacement: 26,000 tons (Initially about 20,000 tons) Length: 230 m (750 ft) Beam: 25.5 m (84 ft) Speed: 29 knots (Initially 30 knots) Armament: 9 x 28cm SK C/28 (Same guns as Graf Spee) (Initially 6 x 28cm SK C/28) 8 × 15cm/55 SK C/28 guns (4 × 2) 8 x 10.5cm/65 SK C/33 (4 x 2) (Some sources including the design layout state that the ship was initially planned to mount 10 x 8.8 cm SK C/31 (4 x 2) but that this was changed to 10.5cm guns after the redesign.)
  3. Marine_Diesel

    HE Pen Chart

    Yeah you really don't need IFHE on Yorck, DE if anything. On Scharnhorst, IFHE is a waste of a skill. However, long ago I tested IFHE on Scharnhorst and got citadels on Omaha and other light cruisers. (or anything with an exposed citadel) Excellent damage for HE, it wasn't nearly as strong as AP cits but was funny nonetheless because....."Oh he's just firing HE, I don't need to turn" Also of note, the Karlsruhe HE shell has .01 ' Projectile detonator' vs .001 for other HE shells. Idk if this means anything. Karl also has slightly higher HE alpha than Konigsberg. Poor Karlsruhe needs range buff though to be any fun for me.
  4. Marine_Diesel

    armored secondary guns & AA In cruiser and Battleship

    I disagree. In the sense that some (armored) secondaries should be stronger (tougher to destroy) than others, I'm all for it. (To some degree this is already reflected but perhaps not enough??) On certain BBs this would bring more strengths and variety. This can easily be put ingame without any additional issue. To the extent that secondaries are armored as much as they were placed on cruisers. No, it's not needed. Most BBs did not armor their secondary turrets quite as well. Also, some of you just don't like casemate secondaries. I really like casemate secondaries, they're quite tough. @rafael_azuaje Well until there's more options, you should play BBs with Casemate secondaries, more of them will be coming as well. As far as the rangefinders/telemeters rotating, this would also bring 'greater experience'. OTOH this should be 'an option' when 'graphics quality high or custom' is selected. Auto-disabled otherwise. (I thought the secondaries rotate when certain options are selected?? They don't already??) In other words, I'm all in favor of options.
  5. IMO, Nerf the Prinz Eitel Friedrich's concealment a small bit. But buff (reduce) the ship's AP Psgr. L/3.6 shell drag slightly from .4075 to .4015. (Note: Nurnberg's 15cm AP shell is L/3.7 and Graf Spee's 28.3cm AP shell is L/3.7 and both have a much lower shell drag ingame)
  6. Also decent accuracy. Including decent vertical dispersion. Doesn't have to be great, just not bad. The concealment should get nerfed but should remain good.
  7. Marine_Diesel

    new german bb tier vi

    I mostly agree. Konig wasn't OP. Konig lacks alpha strike on 305mm shells and has a bit higher ROF this mean Konig excels at destroying cruisers..so what? Konig is still vulnerable to fires. The higher ROF won't help much in that scenario against a barrage of fire from multiple cruisers. Nerf to from 2.0 to 1.8 was unnecessary. Apparently 1.9 sigma would've allowed Konig to remain 'OP'.... **Anyways I'm more concerned about P.E. Friedrich getting an AP shell drag of .4075 when Bayern has .4092 shell drag. Bayern's 38cm guns. fires an L/3.5 shell while the 35cm fires a L/3.6 shell. So shouldn't the AP drag for P..E. Friedrich be between .3975 and .4025??? The result of Jutland was due to a combination of armor, accuracy, and (lack of) fire prevention on British ships. Leaving hatches open, storing powder in turrets, etc. Germans also did alot more test fires with their naval guns whereas RN was hesitant to scratch the paint. And had higher quality optics. Germans used all-steel gun barrels versus wire-wound barrels, possibly slightly better accuracy/less 'droop'. As well as less sensitive powder. So while the accuracy is insignificant when discussing a few shells, even a minor advantage in accuracy when discussing thousands of shells makes a huge difference.
  8. Marine_Diesel

    new german bb tier vi

    I'm more concerned with the aerodynamics of the AP shell than modernized versions of Mackensen. 35cm gun didn't get modernized AP. The 35cm (13.78in) gun fired a slightly more aerodynamic shell compared to the Bayern's 38cm gun. L/3.6 vs L/3.5. So hopefully the shells don't lose quite as much pen at distance for the caliber like Bayern does... (maybe WG make the AP great, regardless)
  9. Marine_Diesel

    Mackensen-Class Battlecruiser

    Apparently we're possibly getting a Mackensen-class battleship but the guns are 350-мм L/42 SK C/14 instead of 35cm SK L/45?? (Prinz Eitel Friedrich)
×