Through the eyes of a hurricane specs thread

Design for the 27 000 tonne illustrious class carriers

25 000 tonnes light load
27000 tonnes deepload
32 knots
2200 crew
64 aircraft in one 16 foot hanger and a second 14 foot hanger
Range 10 000 miles at 18 knots
Two aircraft accelerators capable of launching 11 000 ilb aircraft
 
Gloster gorshawk MK 1 single seat Fighter specs

Crew: 1
Range: 650 miles
Engine: 1 RR Merlin
Speed: 330 mph
Armament: six 50 cal Vickers heavy machine guns
 
Last edited:
Blackburn skua MK 2 twin seat dive bomber specs

Crew:2
Range:1100 miles
Speed: 265 mph
Armament: one 50 cal rear facing Vickers high machine gun and one 1000Ilb armour piercing bomb
 
Swordfish MK i torpedo bomber specs

Crew: 3
Speed: 150 mph
Range: 1250 miles
Armament: one 1250Ilb high explosive torpedo or six 100Ilb bombs or four 150Ilb depth charges
 
King George 5 class battleships

33 000 tonnes lightload
35 000 tonnes deepload
30 knots
1850 crew
3x3 15 inch guns
10 000 miles at 18 knots
 
A couple of points if I may.

The merlin will be in extremely high demand for the RAF, I could imagine the naval fighter having its production cut during the BoB. Radial engines are a better choice, especially when other types in the carrier use the same engine.

If the RN is going to triple turrets it would be best to use the 16" guns and turrets of the Nelsons. Part of the awesomeness of the 15" is its efficient twin turret and that they were available for Vanguard, you lose those advantages if you go triple and have an old gun in a new turret.

The RN never really liked the 8" cruiser, they preferred a lot of smaller cruisers, hence the 6 x 6" gun arethusa class. I doubt they would design a triple turret for a ship type they were not in love with.

Before you go to submarines, the T class was smaller than practical and therefore slower in order to get more built under treaty limits. Loosen limits, maybe invoke the escalatior clauses, and the T class subs can be bigger and faster and more effective.

Keep up the good work.
 
A couple of points if I may.

The merlin will be in extremely high demand for the RAF, I could imagine the naval fighter having its production cut during the BoB. Radial engines are a better choice, especially when other types in the carrier use the same engine.

If the RN is going to triple turrets it would be best to use the 16" guns and turrets of the Nelsons. Part of the awesomeness of the 15" is its efficient twin turret and that they were available for Vanguard, you lose those advantages if you go triple and have an old gun in a new turret.

The RN never really liked the 8" cruiser, they preferred a lot of smaller cruisers, hence the 6 x 6" gun arethusa class. I doubt they would design a triple turret for a ship type they were not in love with.

Before you go to submarines, the T class was smaller than practical and therefore slower in order to get more built under treaty limits. Loosen limits, maybe invoke the escalatior clauses, and the T class subs can be bigger and faster and more effective.

Keep up the good work.

The 15 inch guns is the limit for this AHTL.

The Admiralty believe that triple turrets are the best option for the kgv class battleships.

I will have to change the heavy cruisers

Thanks for the information
 
The 15 inch guns is the limit for this AHTL.

The Admiralty believe that triple turrets are the best option for the kgv class battleships.

I will have to change the heavy cruisers

Thanks for the information

Why is that the limitation? IOTL USA, Japan and Britain had 16" guns in service from the 20s and USA and Japan had 14" battleships is widespread service, thus these were the calibres proposed in the treaties.

Have a quick look at the Nelson class for a bit of background.
 
Top