They were also intended to replace the mass of hanger-less Adams and Farragut-class DDGs and Leahy-class CGs. So it wasn’t like the USN was losing hanger slots, either.
Still weird that they gave the much smaller perrys hangars but not the burkes.
Well, it's not like there was ever gonna be enough LAMPS III helicopters for one per each or anything...
(like that's one of the reasons according to Conway)
One of the guys in my office is a -60 driver and according to him there are only two -60 squadrons that do service on DDGs. Being attached to the squadrons are considered prime duty cuz you get really good treatment on the DDG.
The 57mm was picked because it has an existing logistics chain through the US Coast Guard and the US Navy alongside the fact that the 5" gun was not seen as ideal for the roles required of the frigate compared to the weight required.
drawn by -
I really like it in an odd way, the refit kinda makes sense!
Alternate design for a the Edgar Quinet class of French armored cruisers. Still food for an early BC, and superfiring turrets probably aren't super realistic for 1905.
Pluton, France Armored Cruiser laid down 1905
Displacement:
10,411 t light; 10,837 t standard; 12,292 t normal; 13,455 t full load
Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(492.13 ft / 492.13 ft) x 62.34 ft x (27.23 / 29.20 ft)
(150.00 m / 150.00 m) x 19.00 m x (8.30 / 8.90 m)
Armament:
8 - 7.64" / 194 mm 50.0 cal guns - 235.84lbs / 106.98kg shells, 150 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1905 Model
4 x Twin mounts on centreline, evenly spread
2 raised mounts
16 - 2.56" / 65.0 mm 50.0 cal guns - 8.87lbs / 4.02kg shells, 300 per gun
Breech loading guns in deck mounts, 1905 Model
16 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 - 0.30" / 7.5 mm 70.0 cal guns - 0.01lbs / 0.01kg shells, 2,000 per gun
Machine guns in deck mounts, 1905 Model
4 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 2,029 lbs / 920 kg
Main Torpedoes
2 - 17.7" / 450 mm, 19.69 ft / 6.00 m torpedoes - 0.827 t each, 1.655 t total
submerged bow tubes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 295.28 ft / 90.00 m 9.71 ft / 2.96 m
Ends: 2.76" / 70 mm 196.85 ft / 60.00 m 9.71 ft / 2.96 m
Upper: 1.57" / 40 mm 295.28 ft / 90.00 m 8.01 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 92 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 7.87" / 200 mm 4.72" / 120 mm 3.54" / 90 mm
2nd: 0.98" / 25 mm - -
- Armoured deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 2.56" / 65 mm
Forecastle: 1.38" / 35 mm Quarter deck: 1.38" / 35 mm
- Conning towers: Forward 2.95" / 75 mm, Aft 2.95" / 75 mm
Machinery:
Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines,
Direct drive, 3 shafts, 28,697 ihp / 21,408 Kw = 23.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,618 tons (100% coal)
Complement:
583 - 758
Cost:
£1.152 million / $4.607 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 502 tons, 4.1 %
- Guns: 499 tons, 4.1 %
- Weapons: 3 tons, 0.0 %
Armour: 2,474 tons, 20.1 %
- Belts: 1,079 tons, 8.8 %
- Armament: 423 tons, 3.4 %
- Armour Deck: 904 tons, 7.4 %
- Conning Towers: 68 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 4,159 tons, 33.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,256 tons, 26.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,881 tons, 15.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 20 tons, 0.2 %
- Hull below water: 20 tons
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
7,760 lbs / 3,520 Kg = 34.8 x 7.6 " / 194 mm shells or 1.8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.35
Metacentric height 4.2 ft / 1.3 m
Roll period: 12.8 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 51 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.31
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.35
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck,
a normal bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.515 / 0.526
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.89 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 22.18 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 38
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 21.33 ft / 6.50 m, 18.04 ft / 5.50 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 18.04 ft / 5.50 m, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Aft deck: 35.00 %, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Average freeboard: 15.75 ft / 4.80 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 125.8 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 101.7 %
Waterplane Area: 20,722 Square feet or 1,925 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 96 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 105 lbs/sq ft or 513 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.53
- Overall: 1.00
Cramped machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Adequate accommodation and workspace room
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily
Displacement:
10,411 t light; 10,837 t standard; 12,292 t normal; 13,455 t full load
Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(492.13 ft / 492.13 ft) x 62.34 ft x (27.23 / 29.20 ft)
(150.00 m / 150.00 m) x 19.00 m x (8.30 / 8.90 m)
Armament:
8 - 7.64" / 194 mm 50.0 cal guns - 235.84lbs / 106.98kg shells, 150 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1905 Model
4 x Twin mounts on centreline, evenly spread
2 raised mounts
16 - 2.56" / 65.0 mm 50.0 cal guns - 8.87lbs / 4.02kg shells, 300 per gun
Breech loading guns in deck mounts, 1905 Model
16 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 - 0.30" / 7.5 mm 70.0 cal guns - 0.01lbs / 0.01kg shells, 2,000 per gun
Machine guns in deck mounts, 1905 Model
4 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 2,029 lbs / 920 kg
Main Torpedoes
2 - 17.7" / 450 mm, 19.69 ft / 6.00 m torpedoes - 0.827 t each, 1.655 t total
submerged bow tubes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 295.28 ft / 90.00 m 9.71 ft / 2.96 m
Ends: 2.76" / 70 mm 196.85 ft / 60.00 m 9.71 ft / 2.96 m
Upper: 1.57" / 40 mm 295.28 ft / 90.00 m 8.01 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 92 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 7.87" / 200 mm 4.72" / 120 mm 3.54" / 90 mm
2nd: 0.98" / 25 mm - -
- Armoured deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 2.56" / 65 mm
Forecastle: 1.38" / 35 mm Quarter deck: 1.38" / 35 mm
- Conning towers: Forward 2.95" / 75 mm, Aft 2.95" / 75 mm
Machinery:
Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines,
Direct drive, 3 shafts, 28,697 ihp / 21,408 Kw = 23.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,618 tons (100% coal)
Complement:
583 - 758
Cost:
£1.152 million / $4.607 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 502 tons, 4.1 %
- Guns: 499 tons, 4.1 %
- Weapons: 3 tons, 0.0 %
Armour: 2,474 tons, 20.1 %
- Belts: 1,079 tons, 8.8 %
- Armament: 423 tons, 3.4 %
- Armour Deck: 904 tons, 7.4 %
- Conning Towers: 68 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 4,159 tons, 33.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,256 tons, 26.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,881 tons, 15.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 20 tons, 0.2 %
- Hull below water: 20 tons
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
7,760 lbs / 3,520 Kg = 34.8 x 7.6 " / 194 mm shells or 1.8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.35
Metacentric height 4.2 ft / 1.3 m
Roll period: 12.8 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 51 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.31
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.35
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck,
a normal bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.515 / 0.526
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.89 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 22.18 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 38
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 21.33 ft / 6.50 m, 18.04 ft / 5.50 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 18.04 ft / 5.50 m, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Aft deck: 35.00 %, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m, 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Average freeboard: 15.75 ft / 4.80 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 125.8 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 101.7 %
Waterplane Area: 20,722 Square feet or 1,925 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 96 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 105 lbs/sq ft or 513 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.53
- Overall: 1.00
Cramped machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Adequate accommodation and workspace room
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily
During the late 1920s it seems like the Greek navy was interested in buying a pair of cruisers, probably heavy cruisers. Does anyone have more information on exactly what they were looking design wise?
I assume this was post them giving up on getting Salamis from the Germans rIght?
It didn't go much beyond the intention. They were supposed to be a pair of heavy cruisers to replace the two pre-dreadnoughts. Given the politics of the era you can likely discount an Italian bid so had this gone forward it would had been most likely either French or British built, the Americans would be likely also an option particularly we had reached the stage Britain was trying to dissuade everyone from building heavy cruisers. So if we are around 1929-30 you are likely talking either a pair of Surrey or a pair of Algerie.
Then the modified 1933 replaced the pair of large flotilla leaders of the 1929 law with a cruiser but no bids were sought for it destroyers had priority and in 1939 the Greeks went to Britain for a large cruiser. For that we actually have quite more details there was even a preliminary design sketched apparently. 18,500t standard displacement (to technically count as a battleship for treaty purposes), 6x10in guns, dual purpose secondaries (IMS 4in), 34 knots max speed with a 9in belt and 5in deck armour. Now THAT if built would be interesting to see in action.
I do wonder if the 10inch guns would have ended up as 9.2 guns due to the increased rate of fire those would have brought plus the reduced R&D costs.
Well that and had the Greeks sought out that ship just a few years earlier would the RN have gotten some close sister ships to it?
Well that and had the Greeks sought out that ship just a few years earlier would the RN have gotten some close sister ships to it?
It was a descendant of the 20,000t battlecruisers Lilicrap was designing around 1930 arguably... and yes the large cruisers designed for Churchill with 9.2in guns likely shared more than a few design features.
The 10in guns were part of the "not a cruiser rilly" part of bypassing London treaty limits. How to find a ready gun design? Why not the Bofors guns used in the Finnish coastal ships?
Surrey, Algerie, and Northampton classes would all have been decent choices. Especially if they could have been modified for Greek requirements such as dropping range for more SHP or more armor.
Another choice would have been the York class. While not the best heavy cruiser they would have provided modern large warships to the Greek navy.
Regarding the 10 inch armed battlecruiser that's an interesting choice I've seen floating around but I think it might have been too expensive. Plus the treaty members might be more willing go sell a heavy cruiser vs a cruiser killer. Was money ever set aside or discussed before cancelation of the project? And since the Greeks are replacing two 13500 ton battleships I wonder if they could have persuaded someone to build them two 13500 heavy cruisers.
Last edited:
Speaking of the super cruiser ideas Churchill wanted did the UK even have a 9.2" gun design that wasn't decades old? Even if on just the drawing board?
Newest is the one for the Norwegian coastal BBs that got seized iirc.
RamscoopRaider
Donor
AFAIK no, that was the Mark XII
The newest was a Mark XV that was primarily intended as a coast defense gun, but was designed for twin mounts. No gun ever entered service though some were apparently proof fired. I don't have any more info on the Mark XV other than that it existed, so it might not be that much newer than the Mark XII
There was a plan to also restart construction of the British Army 9.2"/35 Mark XIII in WWII, but that did not go anywhere and it was a WWI era gun anyways
Now imagine it off the Vietnam coast in 1971 with Harriers on board,
drawn by -
I really like it in an odd way, the refit kinda makes sense!
Too early for the USMC Harrier, tbh. 71 is precisely when they started to arrive. And the A-4 had better payload anyway.
Why not a simmilar conversion of the two A;aska class large cruisers?
en.wikipedia.org
Alaska-class cruiser - Wikipedia
BB69 USS Maine, a Montana class battleship that never sailed in our world but would have done in the Drake's Drum alternate history timeline. Here she is modernised for service in the nineties. (NB This image is Photoshopped)
BB68 USS Ohio, also from the Drake's Drum timeline. (NB This image is Photoshopped)
BB68 USS Ohio, also from the Drake's Drum timeline. (NB This image is Photoshopped)