Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
mr3awsome

British Tier VII Premium Battleship Idea

  

17 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will buy?

    • I!
      6
    • *Awkward Silence*
      11
  2. 2. What should it be called?

    • Something Mythical (e.g. Apollo, Ariadne, Artemis, etc.)
      5
    • Some noun (e.g. Arrogant, Majestic, Magnificent, etc.)
      9
    • Some Historic Captain of note (e.g. Saumarez, Rodney, Drake)
      3

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,921
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,461 posts
1,963 battles

In the late 1920s, with the end of the battleship building holiday looming, the assorted nations prepared designs to be produced should the London Conference not bear any fruit. This was distinctly possible, as the 1927 Geneva Conference had ended without any agreement.

 

Designed in 1929, armed with 16” guns and the first designs to that end, it had the rather mundane, if practical name of “Battleship 1929 16A”.

 

Design Statistics:

 

Dimensions: 692ft x 106ft x 30ft

Tonnage: 35,000t (standard)

Powerplant: 45,000shp

Speed: 23 knots

Main armament: 4 x II 16”/45 Mk I

Secondary armament: 6 x II BL 6”/50 Mk XXII

                                    4 x II 4.7” BD

Anti-aircraft armament: 4 x II 4.7” BD

                                       6 x VIII 2pdr Mk VIII

Armour: 13” belt abreast magazines, 11” belt abreast machinery

               6.25” deck over magazines, 4.25” over machinery

Aviation: 1 catapult, 1 aircraft.

 

Images:

 9lIo0kX.jpg

 pi6Bcow.jpg

 B4JBzQE.jpg

 

It’s a pretty solid tier VII design. However, the stern mounted catapult was tested on HMS Hood, but proved to be unsatisfactory, and is unlikely to be present in the suggested configuration. Furthermore the 4.7” BD twins were never realised. This means there a several options available:

-  4 x I QF 4.7”/40 Mk VIII on mount HA Mk XII-

-  4 x II QF 4”/45 Mk XV on mount Mk XVII

-  4 x II QF 4”/45 Mk XVI on mount Mk XIX

            -  4 x II QF 4.5”/45 Mk I on mount Mk III UD

Whilst the 2nd option is the closest, spiritually, to the proposed mount, it proved to be a failure, and those mounts that were tested at sea were replaced with the 3rd option listed. To that end, I feel like that is the most likely option.

 

Proposed In-Game Stats:

 

General:

Spoiler

 

Main Battery:

4 x II 406mm/45 Mk I

2 rpm, 4°/s traverse speed

Unknown Range & Dispersion

5400 HE dmg with a 33% fire chance, 797 mps MV

12000 AP dmg, 797 mps MV

 

Secondary Battery:

         6 x II BL 152mm/50 Mk XXII

5rpm, out to 5.0km

2100 dmg (HE) with 9% fire chance, 898mps MV    

        4 x II QF 102mm/45 Mk XVI

20rpm, out to 5.0km

1,500 dmg (HE) with 6% fire chance, 811mps MV

 

Anti-Aircraft Battery:

            4 x II QF 102mm/45 Mk XVI on mount Mk XIX

 37.6dps @ 5.0km

            6 x VIII 2pdr Mk VIII on mount Mk VI

118.8dps @ 2.5km

            18 x I 20mm Oerlikon on mount Mk III

64.8 dps @ 2.0km

 

Manoeuvrability:

Speed: 23kts

Turning Circle Radius: ?

Rudder Shift Time: ?

 

Concealment:

Surface Detectability Range: ?

Air Detectability Range: ?

 

Battle Levels:

7, 8 & 9

 

Would you buy it?

What should it be called?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,926
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
16,307 posts
23,632 battles

Errr... you do know the Hood is coming very soon right?

 

So.... yeah Tier 7 Brit premium BB. It will be called the Hood and yes I will buy it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,072
[SVER]
Beta Testers
3,810 posts
10,030 battles

Errr... you do know the Hood is coming very soon right?

 

So.... yeah Tier 7 Brit premium BB. It will be called the Hood and yes I will buy it.

 

I'm sure he knows that hood is comming. 

 

I'm also sure he knows that hood is a battlecruiser and not a battleship haha. 

 

I'd like to see the HMS Rodney (built) myself, to pair up like Mutsu and Nagato are in game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,343 posts
3,378 battles

 

I'm sure he knows that hood is comming. 

 

I'm also sure he knows that hood is a battlecruiser and not a battleship haha. 

 

I'd like to see the HMS Rodney (built) myself, to pair up like Mutsu and Nagato are in game. 

 

Yeah, Rodney is a pretty easy premium ship. Give her those two torpedo tubes and some very heavy hitting torps in exchange for staying in her Bismarck engagement refit and you have a nice ship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,926
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
16,307 posts
23,632 battles

 

I'm sure he knows that hood is comming. 

 

I'm also sure he knows that hood is a battlecruiser and not a battleship haha. 

 

I'd like to see the HMS Rodney (built) myself, to pair up like Mutsu and Nagato are in game. 

 

​hehe yeah probably right. Well we will shortly have two prem RN BB. I think we may have a bit of a wait before we see another one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,072
[SVER]
Beta Testers
3,810 posts
10,030 battles

 

Yeah, Rodney is a pretty easy premium ship. Give her those two torpedo tubes and some very heavy hitting torps in exchange for staying in her Bismarck engagement refit and you have a nice ship. 

 

Unfortunately WG has said before that they will not do fixed torpedo tubes, otherwise more BBs would have torps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,693
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,885 posts
21,750 battles

the blue prints look like HMS Vanguard to an extent.......:sceptic:

 

either way, RN ships are garbage, we don't need anymore of that trash in game........:read_fish:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

 

Unfortunately WG has said before that they will not do fixed torpedo tubes, otherwise more BBs would have torps. 

 

I thought the whole point of Mutsu (aside from shameless cash grab reusing preexisting assets) was to try out "fixed" torp tubes on a BB?

 

Or were Mutsu's torps truly some sort of "casemated single tube swivel launcher" system unique to the ship that I hadn't yet learned of.

 

I will readily confess my knowledge is a yard wide but only an inch deep on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,168
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,902 battles

British Colorado competing in a tier with Hood, Rodney and whatever else? I'd love for the game to get to that point, but I think it's a ways off.

 

Her similarity to existing ships doesn't greatly help her cause. I don't think she'd be bad. 

 

 

For names - it's tricky, depending on which ships are used the mythical names are possible premium cruisers, the Admirals are slightly thin on the ground for name recognition + not used elsewhere + moderately impressive sounding (ooh scary, a 'Duncan' is approaching...). Noun names might be best, kind of depends what else was being used. 

 

My vote for good names, not much in demand for other ships would be something like Albion or Bulwark. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
Beta Testers
2,580 posts
4,750 battles

Interesting design, its like 'what happens if Nelson & Warspite had a baby'.

 

Would I buy it? Nope.

Never heard of it before today

45º X turret traverse = shooting 3 turret salvoes most of the time. (Colorado has 30º for 3, 37º for all 4, Nagato 34º for all 4)

Edited by hoom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,728
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,538 posts
12,810 battles

In the late 1920s, with the end of the battleship building holiday looming, the assorted nations prepared designs to be produced should the London Conference not bear any fruit. This was distinctly possible, as the 1927 Geneva Conference had ended without any agreement.

 

Designed in 1929, armed with 16” guns and the first designs to that end, it had the rather mundane, if practical name of “Battleship 1929 16A”.

 

Design Statistics:

 

Dimensions: 692ft x 106ft x 30ft

Tonnage: 35,000t (standard)

Powerplant: 45,000shp

Speed: 23 knots

Main armament: 4 x II 16”/45 Mk I

Secondary armament: 6 x II BL 6”/50 Mk XXII

                                    4 x II 4.7” BD

Anti-aircraft armament: 4 x II 4.7” BD

                                       6 x VIII 2pdr Mk VIII

Armour: 13” belt abreast magazines, 11” belt abreast machinery

               6.25” deck over magazines, 4.25” over machinery

Aviation: 1 catapult, 1 aircraft.

 

Images:

 9lIo0kX.jpg

 pi6Bcow.jpg

 B4JBzQE.jpg

 

It’s a pretty solid tier VII design. However, the stern mounted catapult was tested on HMS Hood, but proved to be unsatisfactory, and is unlikely to be present in the suggested configuration. Furthermore the 4.7” BD twins were never realised. This means there a several options available:

-  4 x I QF 4.7”/40 Mk VIII on mount HA Mk XII-

-  4 x II QF 4”/45 Mk XV on mount Mk XVII

-  4 x II QF 4”/45 Mk XVI on mount Mk XIX

            -  4 x II QF 4.5”/45 Mk I on mount Mk III UD

Whilst the 2nd option is the closest, spiritually, to the proposed mount, it proved to be a failure, and those mounts that were tested at sea were replaced with the 3rd option listed. To that end, I feel like that is the most likely option.

 

Proposed In-Game Stats:

 

General:

Spoiler

 

Main Battery:

4 x II 406mm/45 Mk I

2 rpm, 4°/s traverse speed

Unknown Range & Dispersion

5400 HE dmg with a 33% fire chance, 797 mps MV

12000 AP dmg, 797 mps MV

 

Secondary Battery:

         6 x II BL 152mm/50 Mk XXII

5rpm, out to 5.0km

2100 dmg (HE) with 9% fire chance, 898mps MV    

        4 x II QF 102mm/45 Mk XVI

20rpm, out to 5.0km

1,500 dmg (HE) with 6% fire chance, 811mps MV

 

Anti-Aircraft Battery:

            4 x II QF 102mm/45 Mk XVI on mount Mk XIX

 37.6dps @ 5.0km

            6 x VIII 2pdr Mk VIII on mount Mk VI

118.8dps @ 2.5km

            18 x I 20mm Oerlikon on mount Mk III

64.8 dps @ 2.0km

 

Manoeuvrability:

Speed: 23kts

Turning Circle Radius: ?

Rudder Shift Time: ?

 

Concealment:

Surface Detectability Range: ?

Air Detectability Range: ?

 

Battle Levels:

7, 8 & 9

 

Would you buy it?

What should it be called?

 

 

You had me until I saw 23 knots.  I noped right out.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,229
[HINON]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
2,632 posts
6,436 battles

Buy it.. of course, its Royal navy :)  

 

As to name.. I thik the Artemis group of names is more cruisers,    how about a British Battleship name that never made it to current history but was well used previously.  HMS Nonsuch??  (yeah I know about the sloop and the captured german DD post war, but it was a capital ship name really)

 

In addition, the RN used HMS Nonsuch when talking about a hypothetical design so it couldn't be more appropriate.

 

M

 

PS whilst were talking British premium BB's  I still want HMS Agincourt :)

Edited by MaliceA4Thought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7,086 posts

Buy it.. of course, its Royal navy :)  

 

As to name.. I thik the Artemis group of names is more cruisers,    how about a British Battleship name that never made it to current history but was well used previously.  HMS Nonsuch??  (yeah I know about the sloop and the captured german DD post war, but it was a capital ship name really)

 

In addition, the RN used HMS Nonsuch when talking about a hypothetical design so it couldn't be more appropriate.

 

M

 

PS whilst were talking British premium BB's  I still want HMS Agincourt :)

 

The next RN premium capital ship I hope to see is Repulse, since Renown is destined for the tree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,728
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,538 posts
12,810 battles

I want Repulse and Queen Mary something fierce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,921
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,461 posts
1,963 battles

Why would I pay for a fictional, poor-man's Nelson with fewer guns?

Its not fictional, and its hardly a poor man's Nelson. 

 

the blue prints look like HMS Vanguard to an extent.......:sceptic:

Well its hard to make 4 x 2 ABXY designs look different after a while......

 

In addition, the RN used HMS Nonsuch when talking about a hypothetical design so it couldn't be more appropriate.

PS whilst were talking British premium BB's  I still want HMS Agincourt :)

I'd prefer to have the German DD, honestly. 

Agincourt is a solid choice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×