Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Major_Damage225

Uber OP russian BB study from 1914

  • You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.

33 posts in this topic

1 minute ago, mariouus said:

If specification is wildly off from realistlicly achievable it is fantasy.

 

I do not think they would mind. Firstly, I am rather sure, that they did not had anything to do with this stated design. Secondly "Vene-Balti Laevaehituse ja Mehaanika Aktsiaseltsi Tallinna Laevaehitustehas" was only one year old in June 1914, what further reinforces my opinion that it is not 1914 design. 

 

But one (or two, dependes how you look at it) Wows ship -Svetlana or Krasnõi Krõm (Krasny Krym) was built in Russo-Baltic,

 

Actually Russo-Baltic Shipbuilding and Mechanical Society of Reval was not only Estonian shipbuilder during WW.1. Another Tallinn shipbuilder Bekker ja Ko (Bocker and Co) built Izyaslav class destroyers.

 

I am Estonian, actually.

 

Edit: well there's no denying that the Svietlana was a very..ambitious design for her day as well.

 

A 29,5 knot cruiser was unheard of in 1914 (when she was designed)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20-11-2017 at 0:34 AM, RamirezKurita said:

It does make me wonder what parts of the design they sacrificed to fit all that onto a hull of that size, or whether the designers were simply hopelessly optimistic with how things could be made. Compared to the Admiral Class, it has not much less engine power, similar armour, a massively increased armament and that is all on a similar displacement using older technology - even with 1930s technology those specs would be impossible on a ship of that size.

 

AA guns for one. The entire ship is covered in magazines and boilers as well, 2 things that don't react well to being hit. I think it would be safe to assume crew comfort is out the window as well, as is operational range probably.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Verdius said:

 

AA guns for one. The entire ship is covered in magazines and boilers as well, 2 things that don't react well to being hit. I think it would be safe to assume crew comfort is out the window as well, as is operational range probably.

Detonation flag farming ship :Smile_trollface:

Tbh this ship is soo oddball, i would actually want it :Smile_teethhappy:


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any data on gun perfomance of a 1914 Russian 16"/45? Quad mounts from that timeperiod probably would have some major issues as well, both in traverse, armour, and accuracy.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Verdius said:

Is there any data on gun perfomance of a 1914 Russian 16"/45? Quad mounts from that timeperiod probably would have some major issues as well, both in traverse, armour, and accuracy.

Nothing I'd hang my hat on as far as I know.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Verdius said:

Is there any data on gun perfomance of a 1914 Russian 16"/45? Quad mounts from that timeperiod probably would have some major issues as well, both in traverse, armour, and accuracy.

One 16/45 gun was built by Vickers, Not much is known, probably similar to performance of the Colorodo MKI guns, but inferiour do MKV - propelling 1116kg do about 766m/s. Russian made and designed variant were do be mutch "hotter" 1116kg propelled do about 840m/s, making it more powerfull than US 16"/50 MK7, what is obviously BS in 1914 (source "Последние исполины Российского Императорского флота" 1999). And unsupprisingly, this magical gun was never built. While it is clamed, that Vickers built 16" gun for "proposed Black Sea Battleship" it is not the case

 

16" four gun turret was thought do have rotating mass of 2210.t. What again is rather unrealistic -Richelieu had 15" guns and weaker armor, but more weight.Guns were do be idividualy sleeved. Loading system were do allow 3.rpm. While there are sketches in Russian archives for that turret, it was actually not finalased or even advanced design. Rather than sketched proposals.

 

Now, if we talk about that "Russo-Baltic SY study". Just like I sayed, it is a fantasy ship, not design or proposal. They actually started from the book "Последние исполины Российского Императорского флота" 1999. And is from the drawing board of the book author Sergei Vinagradov. It is author rendition of different notes, sketches and god knows what artistic moments of somebody. For example picture of the sidearmor is authors representation of Gavrilov sketch to the assiastant off somebody and so on. In that book ship had 16 universal and 11 oil fired boilers.

 

Actually, most of the ships info does not come from historical data, but is book authors opinion.


2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mariouus I think we may have uncovered the problem with McLaughlin's work right there.

 

You see, he heavily references Vinagradov's work to the point of coming off as considering it gospel.

 

I guess it should have raised a bigger red flag for me than it did when the WoWS model for the Imperator Nicky does not agree with the one he referred to as the final design. According to that book I've mentioned before, and presumably mr Vinagradov, the raised forecastle we see in game was a earlier, and ultimately rejected, design route to fix the Imperitza Maria class' known (and well documented) nose heavyness issue.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/11/2017 at 7:38 PM, mariouus said:

1.Armor is weird. [...] Also 250mm flat turret roofs are unnecessary, not only, pre-Pearl Harbor no-body would have seen any threat do justify it. Who ever designed this ship, saw aircraft as credible threat for BB, whenever this happened, probably not in 1914.

Forgive me, but to me, slapping 200+ mm of armor on the turret roofs, and then leaving the decks at a meager 37+63 mm (although such a value isn't half bad for a supposed WWI-era battlewagon, overall) does not make this ship that well-protected against aircraft. Basically, to my eyes you have a ship that has very little chance of anything getting through to the magazines from above, but that is likely to get the machinery punctured somewhere...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.