Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Kingpin61

Premium Ship Proposal - T4 Pan-Asian Cruiser Taksin

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
646 posts
19,884 battles

67563736_2969622856443543_4950875812178952192_o.jpg.a8c9dce12a70ff1249b0d57daf0af8bf.jpg

 

 

The Taksin class was a Siamese light cruiser class that was ordered from Italian shipyards in the late 1930s. The ships were designed to act as the flagships of the Siamese Navy, and featured solid speed compared to other Siamese ships of the time, as well as a light armored belt similar to scout cruiser designs still in service with larger navies at that point.  Both ships were launched, but in late 1942 the Italian Navy seized the ships in order to use them as AA/fast cargo ships for the North African campaign. However, in 1943, after the Italians bowed out of the war, the Germans eventually captured the ships, and they were scuttled in 1944.

 

Survivability

 

HP: 22,000

 

Taksin only displaced around 6500 tons, which puts it at the low end, even for T4 cruisers.

Duguay-Trouin

26,700

Svietlana

24,600

Kuma

24,200

Alberto de Gulliassano

24,000

Phoenix

24,000

Karlsruhe

22,700

Taksin

22,000

Danae

20,900

Yubari

18,700

Iwaki A

18,600

 

 

Armor: TKtMOo31a-qdIM2AMQEkek4C6-BYla3mR31V-X8p6reoa02pLO7JB_jbUbCyc1ndCX6G5PgfCw1bFNiPYmhP6HuSUVchJlKbRmrsxgi1VhkOhHLBs4fKZkaEYEtimanw_N3wALdJ

The turrets for the model 1929 guns were protected by 100mm of face armor and 30mm of armor elsewhere. Internal sections of the barbette were 60mm and external sections carried 70mm of armor.

This is an approximation of the belt and barbette armor scheme. Yes, I colored the director, but as I don't have access to a blueprint at the time of writing, I wasn't sure what parts of the conning tower would have been armored.

Green means 60mm, and yellow is 70mm.

 

TDS: 7%


At least it’s something.

 

 

Artillery

Taksin was designed to carry 3 twin 152mm/53 model 1929 guns in an A-XY layout. The Model 1929 guns were found on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th runs of Conderetti class CLs. They were identical to the 1926 model produced by Ansaldo, except for an improved reloading mechanism that allowed the rate of fire to be doubled from 4 to 8 rounds per minute.


 

152mm/53 OTO 1929

Sigma: 2.0

Rate of fire: 8rpm

HE Alpha: 2,100

Fires Per Minute: 3.36

Muzzle Velocity: 950-1000m/s

HE DPM:100,800

AP Alpha: 3,200

Range: 14.01km

Fire chance: 7%

AP DPM: 153,600

Traverse: 7 d/s

HE Penetration: 24mm

AP weight: 50kg

180 degree turntime:

HE Shell weight: 44kg

Maximum Dispersion: 130m

 

 

These guns are rather lackluster on the tier 6 Duca D'Aosta, but on the T4 Taksin, They're quite nice for their tier. The HE DPM might look lackluster on paper, but you actually come out nearly on top of the pack once you take into account that many cruisers at this tier can't bring all of their guns to bear. You would be second in 'true' HE DPM, but due to Svietlana being able to technically get a 9th turret firing at tiny angles, Taksin is relegated to third. AP DPM is another similar story, with her adjusted values being third in tier. Her range, however, is top tier, defeating the Phoenix and Gulliassano by 100m.

 

 

Ship

HE DPM

Adjusted HE DPM

AP DPM

Adjusted AP DPM

Range

Taksin

100,800

100,800

153,600

153,600

14km

Alberto de Gulliassano

123,200*

123,200*

96,000

96,000

13.9km

Phoenix (max effective is 1/2)

188,571

94285.5

265,174

132587

13.9km

Kuma (max effective is 6/7)

168,000

144000

189,000

162000

12.8km

Yubari (Can slot ASM0)

88,615

88,615

99,692

99,692

12.8km

Danae

-

-

139,200

139,200

12.5km

Duguay-Trouin

88,000

88,000

132,000

132,000

12.1km

Karlsruhe (max effective is 3/4)

132,923

99692.25

273,321

204990.75

11.7km

Svietlana (max is 9/15)

171,225

102735

225,000

135000

11.3km

Iwaki A (max is 4/5. Can slot ASM0 and ASM1)

120,000

96000

135,000

108000

10.8km

 

 

AA

6 x 1 76mm/40 Ansaldo 1917 37 dps @ 3km

4x2 13.2/76 Breda 1931 47 dps @ 1.5km

 

Taksin's AA  is........ rather piss poor. But it's a T4 cruiser, so nobody expects anything from it.

 

Torpedoes: Same as Duca D'Aosta. Arcs would be similar to Venezia, due to the placement, in the upper deck of the hull on each side of the A turret.

2x3 533mm

533mm Si 270

51knots

12 km

13,367 alpha

Detect: 1.0km

Flood Chance: 220%

71s Reload

2SdIxO6OvKiM9q9S1E2VknkPyI3DQT7Udvd0rm1xuTgXIV0l8MftiHQ8SSKJAhwDhr43SIfob8Gh6qY8TVJjJjBmxTYTl8bRqjdRSZA906QB10rTBbkHRvsUSAUXhVNObjIWn0VV

 

 

Maneuverability

Maximum Speed: 45000 shp for 30 knots.

 

*Concealment

10.0km by sea

4.5km by air

 

This would drop her concealment to 8.7km max, with her air concealment being 3.9km. She's a very small cruiser, so she gets to be very stealthy.

 

Consumables:

 

Slot 1 Damage Control Party I & II

Slot 2 Fuel Smoke Generator I & II Crawler Smoke Generator I & II

Slot 3 Spotter Plane I & II Fighter I & II

 

Taksin gets the spotter and Fuel Smoke generator like the good Italian built ship she is. Howver, she gets the option to swap her full speed fuel smoke for a much longer, but much more limiting Crawler. Fighters will support your 14 total AA guns.

 

Well, hopefully this or Ping Hai will be next year's "One Annual Pan Asian Ship for the LNY event". Sadly, I expect another copy pasted high tier ship. Oh well.

 

 

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
19,045 posts
7,015 battles

Very well-balanced from what I can see. At first sight, HE-Smoke of any sort would be thought of as gamebreaking (considering the recent...atrocities put out by WG), but taking everything into account she comes off perfectly mediocre - but with that spice that should make premiums worth buying more so than just being better or stronger than their in-line counterparts. Well done. 

Edited by _Sarcasticat_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38
[TXT]
Members
105 posts
6,564 battles

I'm all for giving the game more wholey unique ships, especially PA.

 

You can probably make 2 versions of this, a "Zara/Gorizia" split, sell one as a premium and leave one for a spot in the main PA cruiser line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
646 posts
19,884 battles
4 minutes ago, Arri_Shi said:

main PA cruiser line.

I don't see that happening for the simple reasons that 1) we've already got Irian as a T8 CL, and she was pretty much the only viable candidate, and 2) a complete lack of T9/10 designs

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38
[TXT]
Members
105 posts
6,564 battles
Just now, Kingpin61 said:

I don't see that happening for the simple reasons that 1) we've already got Irian as a T8 CL, and she was pretty much the only viable candidate, and 2) a complete lack of T9/10 designs

Well, the T9 isn't an issue, there is only one T9 cruiser built in steel (Alaska). The T10 might take some bending, but that hasn't stopped WG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
646 posts
19,884 battles
2 minutes ago, Arri_Shi said:

Well, the T9 isn't an issue, there is only one T9 cruiser built in steel (Alaska). The T10 might take some bending, but that hasn't stopped WG.

The other T9 cruisers (except Roon, and i guess Aegir now too) weer at least thoroughly blueprinted or ordered. I strongly dislike using completely fabricated ships, so a line in which the T8, 9 and 10 would be complete WG creations would be pretty pointless to me.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,070
[FURIA]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,984 posts
6,150 battles
1 minute ago, Kingpin61 said:

The other T9 cruisers (except Roon, and i guess Aegir now too) weer at least thoroughly blueprinted or ordered. I strongly dislike using completely fabricated ships, so a line in which the T8, 9 and 10 would be complete WG creations would be pretty pointless to me.

Yet, with Wukong and Bajie now, I think fantasy ships are everytime more possible. I don't like the idea of a line with his more important ships  been all WG concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,115
Alpha Tester
2,552 posts

There hasn't been a new low tier premium ship since 2018. Wargrinding only introduces T5 and above premium ships nowadays. If this ship cannot be bumped to T5 then I'm afraid you will never see it in WoWS.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,070
[FURIA]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,984 posts
6,150 battles
7 hours ago, Wolcott said:

There hasn't been a new low tier premium ship since 2018. Wargrinding only introduces T5 and above premium ships nowadays. If this ship cannot be bumped to T5 then I'm afraid you will never see it in WoWS.

Thats a very strong point. The company has his aim set to top tier premiun.  Low tier premiuns are not intresting for the mass of the players. They are not usable for ranked or cw, not big money producer and not very useful for captain training. 

Yet I wanna see this ship in game. Is very unique. I hope wg find the way to put it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
646 posts
19,884 battles
7 hours ago, Wolcott said:

There hasn't been a new low tier premium ship since 2018. Wargrinding only introduces T5 and above premium ships nowadays. If this ship cannot be bumped to T5 then I'm afraid you will never see it in WoWS.

I originally wanted to put this at T5, but if I did, it would have made Yahagi look OP. It simply isn't able to stack up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
646 posts
19,884 battles

More historical background, from Gli Incrociatori Italiani, translated by @Phoenix_jz

 

Etna-class Anti-Aircraft Cruisers
(Etna - Vesuvio)

Etna (ex-Taksin) – CRDA, Trieste
Laid Down: 23 September 1939; 
Launched: 28 May 1942; 
Lost: 10 September 1943; 
Stricken: 27 March 1947


Vesuvio (ex-Naresuan) – CRDA, Trieste
Laid Down: 26 August 1939; 
Launched: 6 August 19421; 
Lost: 10 September 1943; 
Stricken: 27 March 1947


Displacement: 6,000 metric tons Standard


Dimensions:
•    Total Length: 153.8 meters
•    Beam: 14.47 meters
•    Draught: 5.95 meters
Propulsion:


-    4 Water-tube Boilers
-    2 Parsons reduction geared steam turbine groups


Power: 40,000 shp


Top Speed: 28 knots


Armament: 6-135/45; 10-65/64; 12-20/65


Protection:
•    Horizontal: 35mm
•    Vertical: 60mm
Notes: Ordered in 1938 by the Siamese Navy from CRDA of Trieste and requisitioned in 1942 by Italy, which passed the order for completion on 6 August 1942. The project was radically modified. It was abandoned in September 1943 when it was about 60% complete.


General:
    In 1938 the Siamese navy ordered two light cruisers from CRDA of Trieste. The order, which followed shortly the delivery of nine torpedo boats built by the same yard for Siam, was a proof of confidence towards our naval-mechanical industry, which with previous constructions had fully satisfied Bangkok. The setting [laying down] of the two units, which had been given the names Taksin and Naresuan, was in 1939, after the Siamese Navy had approved the construction plans with the following features;

Displacement: 4,300 metric tons standard
Dimensions: 
•    Total Length: 153.8 meters
•    Beam: 14.47 meters
•    Draught: 5.25 meters
Propulsion:
-    3 Boilers
-    2 Parsons reduction geared steam turbine groups
Power: 45,000 shp
Top Speed: 30 knots
Armament: 6-152; 6-76; 8-13.2 or 20; 6 533mm TT
           2 aircraft, one catapult
Protection:
•    Horizontal: 35mm
•    Vertical: 60mm


These cruisers should have looked very similar to the Italian Monteccuoli-class, but without the aft funnel and with one less turret forward. The torpedo tubes were placed on the main deck, in the forward sector, abreast 152mm turret no.1, and they could have fired through two bulwark openings in the forecastle. 


After the outbreak of the war, work continued under Siamese control [meaning the ships still belong to Siam] until December 1941; after this date the Italian Navy decided to requisition and continue the construction based on the order given to the yard on 6 August 1942. The two units then became registered in the framework of the Naval Registry with the names of Etna for the ex-Taksin and that of Vesuvio for the ex-Naresuan. 
The Italian Navy, before beginning construction of the two cruisers, altered the plans to adapt the units to their own wartime needs. The new project forecasted the conversion of the two ships unto anti-aircraft units with the possibility to transportation for materials and small contingents of troops. Naturally all the characteristics were changed with the exception of size. Armament, propulsion and consequentially speed, will be adapted to the new tasks. Protection, especially the horizontal one, was increased; the standard displacement became around 6,000 tons, which is due both to an actual increase in the original values, but also by more accurate and realistic weight calculation. It was decided to change the armament, replacing it with six 135mm, ten 65mm, and twelve 20mm.


The launch of Etna took place on 28 may 1942 and that of Vesuvio on 6 August of the previous year. The two cruisers, which already for employment would have represented something new in the Italian Navy, also presented themselves as novelties in their unique appearance. 


The hull had very refined form with a forecastle that was almost half-ship; the bow, straight up to the waterline, had a strong sheer [not what’s actually said, but the term doesn’t really translate literally] in the above water part, the stern, like all ‘Condottieri’, has in form a very ‘sucked in’ and rounded profile. The rudder was semi-compensated, the two propellers were triple-bladed and of high-resistance steel.
  The appearance of these units was characterized by the wide free spaces in the extreme areas, with the superstructure and armament collected in the center of the ship. The size of the tower is remarkable, surmounted by the director, with the highly inclined funnel attached. Abreast this, one per side, were the two anti-aircraft directors. The forecastle continued with a deckhouse to the No.2 135mm/45 turret [superfiring turret aft]; there was also immediately aft of the smokestack an upper deckhouse which contained the space reserved for the transported troops. Other rooms for transported personnel could be found ahead of the no.1 turret under the armor deck. Towards the extreme sections there were large hatches with cranes for loading materials. The rooms for storage of transported materials had a volume of about 450 cubic meters.


The propulsion system was made up of three sub-vertical water-tube boilers arranged in three separate rooms, the first two in contiguous rooms under the superstructure, the other aft of the smokestack. The three boilers fed two groups of reduction geared steam turbines with a maximum potential power of 40,000 shp, each formed by a high-pressure turbine, a medium pressure, and a low-pressure double flow with the reverse gear incorporated. The turbines were Parsons type built by CRDA. Each of the two groups was connected to the propeller through a simple reduction gear. The bow [forward] groups was placed on the starboard side immediately after the forward boiler rooms, the aft one on the port side after the aft boiler. In the same room as the turbines, laterally there wee two turbogenerators for each room, which would have been fed during service in port by two auxiliary boilers [‘donkey’ boilers, positioned above the forward engine room, on the main deck]. The maximum speed in service would have been about 28 knots.


The armament would have included six 135/45 naval guns in twin mounts and placed one at the bow and two at the stern; ten pieces of 65.64 antiaircraft guns in single mounts and installed five per side; twelve 20/65 cannons in twin mounts placed on the superstructure. They would not embark torpedo tubes or aircraft. Instead they would have been fit with a German-type radar, which would have been placed above the main fire control director.
The vertical protection consisted of a partial belt 60mm thick and an internal [longitudinal] bulkhead 20mm thick. The horizontal protection was secured by an armored deck 35mm thick amidships and 20mm laterally [outboard]. This deck was topped with the main one armored with a decreasing thickness from the external side to the center of the ship, from 13mm to 5mm.


Unfortunately, the construction of these units went too slowly; first of all, the reworking of the plans and the adaptation of the hull took longer than expected. So the difficulties of supply materials together with those deriving from the construction of the new weapons, irreparably delayed the fitting-out. One 1 July 19453 Etna was 53% complete for the hull, propulsion, superstructure, accommodation, and 65% for the weapons, instruments, and related equipment. Vesuvio was respectively at 55% and 65%.


On 8 September 1943, the date of the armistice, the two cruisers were sabotaged and then fell into the hands of the Germans. At the end of the war they were found half-sunk in Trieste. They were recovered and then scrapped. They were stricken from the naval register by decree of the Provisional Head of State on 27 March 1947.


As already mentioned, Etna and Vesuvio represented for the Italian Navy a new type of ship, never built before, and intended to perform anti-aircraft escort and rapid transport tasks. Difficult communications with Libya had suggested its construction which would certainly have benefited the navy, even if two units alone could not have greatly alleviated the critical conditions of the traffic with North Africa.

Activity:
Etna
The cruiser, while it was being fitted out in the Trieste shipyards, was captured by German forces on 10 September 1943, after the proclamation of the armistice.
At the liberation of Trieste, in April 1945, it was found half-sunk. It was stricken from the naval register by decree of the Provisional Head of State on 27 March 1946.
Vesuvio
Followed the same fate as Etna. It was also stricken with the decree of 27 March 1943.

Bold is my emphasis. [Brackets] are Phoenix's translation notes.

20200202_180037.jpg

20200202_180048.jpg

20200202_180025.jpg

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,070
[FURIA]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,984 posts
6,150 battles

What about using SAP in this ship? May be with SAP she could work in tier 5. She will also be more attractive for the player base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
646 posts
19,884 battles
2 hours ago, Talleyrand said:

What about using SAP in this ship? May be with SAP she could work in tier 5. She will also be more attractive for the player base.

I thought about SAP,  but none of the other PA cruisers at the tier have it, and I feel it would be too similar to the T4 Italian CL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
253 posts
On 2/1/2020 at 3:01 AM, Kingpin61 said:

Taksin was designed to carry 3 twin 152mm/53 model 1929 guns in an A-XY layout

From what I've read they seem more likely to have been intended to carry Bofors guns, likely the same kind as found on the Swedish Gotland. Bofors was constructing six 152 mm twin-gun turrets for Siam during this time period but due to the onset of war they were never delivered, ultimately ending up as fixed coastal artillery.

Edit: I suppose I could add the stats for the ammunition used on Gotland while I'm at it:

SAP: 46 kg, 900 m/s muzzle velocity, 2,58 kg explosive charge

HE: 46 kg, 900 m/s muzzle velocity, 5,45 kg explosive charge

 

It strikes me that the 76 mm/40 Ansaldo AA guns might actually be 75 mm Bofors guns as well. It'd make sense to get a more modern AA gun from the same source that you're buying the main guns from after all. Unlike with the main guns however I don't have any sources backing me up on this, it's simply a guess.

Edited by Snowyskies
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
19,045 posts
7,015 battles
On 2/6/2020 at 8:56 AM, Talleyrand said:

What about using SAP in this ship? May be with SAP she could work in tier 5. She will also be more attractive for the player base.

Very late to the party here but
Having her at tier 5 is an impossibility at 6,000 tons yeah naw not with 4,300 tons (belay my last) and 28 knots speed. That can be made to work at tier 4, but tier 5? Slap on all the gimmicks and go nuts with the stats. That can be done with any ship but it's brainless. 
Yahagi for comparison displaces 8,000 tons with a 35 knot speed. 
This besides that fact that at tier 5 she has 6 guns that fire at 4 RPM versus Yahagi's 6.7 RPM.

WG will simply have to swallow their greed and place her as a tier 4. 

Edited by _Sarcasticat_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×