Shipbucket

Been a while since I posted. Life, Work, Granddaughters, etc, etc ...

Anyhow, got a couple semi-related designs I'm working on I'd like some feedback on if y'all don't mind.

Note: For those who may not know me, all of this is as pertains to my navy, and it does not follow RN, USN, or any other actual and real navy doctrine.

The idea is this: A class of three scout cruisers, laid down in 1923-4. In 1925 a reorganization of the Navy resulted in the elimination of the "Scout Cruiser" classification owing to the advent of aircraft for that purpose. (Early aircraft carriers had been, in fact, classed as "scout cruisers".) As such, all existing scout cruisers were either decommissioned or re-classed as light cruisers. As these were still under construction, with two fairly advanced, it was decided to complete the first two as light cruisers, and the third, which was barely beyond the hull, was redesigned and converted to a light carrier.

This is what I have so far ...

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor

Hi Zephy, welcome back. It has been a while.
I don't have the time to do anything in depth right now, but try doing a rudimentary topview, especially for the carrier.
It helps a lot with the layout.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

Great to see You back.
Unfortunately it seems that most if not all pictures in the thread has been wiped out for some reason (quite likely due to recent changes with Dropbox).

I had an imageshack account, which I let lapse when they wanted to up their rates, and then got busy with myriad other things (twin 7 year old granddaughters mostly LOL) and never got around to opening a new account anyplace. For the time being, I'm using that "tinyurl" thing as a stopgap measure. I'm going to try an gradually get my other ships re-entered someplace so I can put them back up here.

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor

Welcome back zephir, and great to see you're still in top form.
The only quibble I have with your recent designs is the sharp angle of the propellers shafts.

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

I'd like to see a pilotage helm station somewhere, on the carrier, above the flight deck, but it is not necessary. The scout carrier idea is doctrinally quite sound before the advent of torpedo planes.

Great job!

A little bit more done. Added some 4" secondaries


Hexia, being laid down after Cordelia, had her main mast altered from the pole mast to a tripod.

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor

Ok, y'know, the more I look at it the more I look at it the less I like that pole mast idea. I believe I'll stick with the tripod mast instead.
Also, as my scouts are designed for extended independent operations in unfriendly or hostile waters, I've been considering upgrading them from 4 x 2 6" guns to 3 or 4 x 2 8" guns? Any thoughts on that?

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor

To go to 8" (8 guns is better than 6) would probably need at least another 30 foot of length on your ship (would need more beam as well but that does not show of course). The difference in space required to mount 8" weapons over 6" is quite considerable. Size of barbette, magazines, all need more space.

When having problems figuring whether the items you want to fit will work. Do a simple overhead and try to fit what you want in. It does help with placement, especially of large items.

Have a look at the blast effect of the 6" on your aftmost 4". It may have problems.

Novice's comment on your shafts is valid. Extend the line of your shafts to where you want your engines mounted. If the engines are mounted too high you lose their effect on balance within the hull. Topweight.

I do like the tripod version better.

A 1926 scout cruiser would be tied to the fleet. No need for a catapult(s) or hangar. If your cruiser is not to be used solely as a scout cruiser for the fleet, I would reduce your catapults from two to one centrally mounted and again drop the hangar. The extra weight saved could really be used better elsewhere. For a cruiser being used on trade route protection duties a set of twin/triple torpedo tubes on each beam would be of use against raiders that may be larger than your ship.

I do like the shape of the hull, the flare forward looks good and would help with seakeeping.

Hmm. Definitely some things to think about. Thanks.

The only thing I'd explain further, for thinking on, is that in my doctrine scout cruisers were more along the line of intelligence ships, what the army would call LRRP, long range reconnaissance patrol. Fleet scouting was done by standard cruisers while the scouts were farther afield. Thats one reason my early carriers were class d as "scout cruisers", because the aircraft were able to reach nearly as far as the detached specialized cruisers. By the mid twenties it was realized the specialized scout cruisers were obsolete and redundant. This class was the last of them. By the late twenties carriers, as well as submarines, had not only taken over their role as scouts, but added a nee offensive option to fleet operations.
I guess you could call these scout cruisers more of a strategic assest, while light cruisers performed the tactical scouting.

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor