Register here

Author Topic: TZoli's Warship Designs  (Read 146773 times)

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2013, 10:16:58 am »
On another forum I've been noted of the bad idea for a single large funnel but no explanation added.

At first glance, due to its single funnel, it looked to me, what I would expect the HMS Agammenon/Lord Nelson
to look like after a refit ŕ la HMS Barham during the 1920s.

I don't think so, Lord nelson had 6 secondary heavy gun turrets and much bulky superstructure!


Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2013, 10:28:11 am »
And now my most beautiful BB drawing :
A Hypothetical Battleship design to follow up the Alsace class
This ship featuring 4x3 420mm (16.5 inch) and 2x3 152mm (6 inch) as main Anti shipping guns. AA Armaments consist of 10x2 100mm (4inch) Heavy AA and 18x2 37mm Light AA Guns
I call her:
Le Grand navire Cuirasse Napoléon Bonaparte
The Great Battleship Napoleon Bonaparte




« Last Edit: June 23, 2013, 10:29:57 am by Tzoli »

Offline CliffyB

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #17 on: June 23, 2013, 03:36:21 pm »
Single funnels were generally used to clear the sky arcs for the various anti-aircraft guns resulting in less topside hamper and a in my opinion, a sleeker appearance in some cases.  The downsides of this is more internal space is required to trunk all of the exhaust vents together.  This leads to a greater chance that a hit could fill large areas of the interior with flue gases since none of the uptakes were armored in any way save for a few older ships (BBs).

I really like your designs and I hope you continue make more.  My only criticism would be to reduce your line weight.  It looks like your making these in Illustrator, am I correct?  If so I'd reduce your lines by about %50.  This would allow for more detail if you chose, as well "clean up" some of the busier areas where all of the thick lines simply merge together.

Just my two cents, keep up the designs man  B)

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2013, 12:51:12 am »
Single funnels were generally used to clear the sky arcs for the various anti-aircraft guns resulting in less topside hamper and a in my opinion, a sleeker appearance in some cases.  The downsides of this is more internal space is required to trunk all of the exhaust vents together.  This leads to a greater chance that a hit could fill large areas of the interior with flue gases since none of the uptakes were armored in any way save for a few older ships (BBs).

I really like your designs and I hope you continue make more.  My only criticism would be to reduce your line weight.  It looks like your making these in Illustrator, am I correct?  If so I'd reduce your lines by about %50.  This would allow for more detail if you chose, as well "clean up" some of the busier areas where all of the thick lines simply merge together.

Just my two cents, keep up the designs man  B)

I choose single funnel to further differenate from the Radetzky class.
No I used Paint Tool SAI for drawing and colouring these

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2013, 03:40:07 am »
New set.

These two new drawings idea came from of a what-if alternative construction plan for ww1 Era Japan
Instead of building 2-2-2 Fuso, Ise and Nagato class BB's
They would built:
2 Normal 6 turreted Fuso, 3 smaller 4 turreted Ise and 2 Nagato or,
2 Smaller 4 turreted Fuso, 4 smaller 4 turreted Ise and 2 Nagato or either
2 Smaller 4 turreted Fuso, 2 smaller 4 turreted Ise and 4 Nagato class battleships

So instead of few many turreted battleship they would have more less turreted ones.

Small Fuso:


Because of the removal of the 4th and 5th turrets the hull is shortened quite a bit. I did not delete the aft conning tower, but removed 1 pair of casemate guns and added 1 pair of AA guns.
The cause that the now 3rd turret isn't superfiring over the 4th one because I meant this to a last minute change in construction plans so no time to redesign the entire ship from scratch.

Small Ise:


Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #20 on: June 28, 2013, 03:49:46 am »
Let's see what if we mix an Italian Admiral's idea, one of the Preliminary design of the Richelieu and the Biggest Battleship of the World!

IJN Yamato De Feo Style!




Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7924
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #21 on: June 28, 2013, 03:54:13 am »
Severly limited for and aft fire, especially taking into account the blast problems
with regards to this caliber.   ;)
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #22 on: June 28, 2013, 04:16:55 am »
Severly limited for and aft fire, especially taking into account the blast problems
with regards to this caliber.   ;)

And when does the last time a battleship fired it's guns forward and aft and not broadside???
This was the idea behind Admiral De Feo's proposal!

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7924
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #23 on: June 28, 2013, 11:14:20 am »
And when does the last time a battleship fired it's guns forward and aft and not broadside???

Nitpicking, I know, but ...

- Hood/POW vs Bismarck/Prinz Eugen, when the british task force, closing on to
the German ships, could just use their forward turrets

- KGV/Nelson vs Bismarck at the beginning of the final battle

- "Battle of the Surigao Strait", when Adm. Oldendorffs task force achieved a classical "crossing the T"
against the Japanese "Southern Force", led by Adm Nishimura, with the battleships Fuso and Yamashiro

In all cases ships without forward firing armament would have been "out of action" for at least a considerable
and maybe crucial time of the engagements.

To make this clear, I didn't want to critise you and not even Admiral De Feo. Actually, the idea with the main battery
concentrated amidship was old, just look at HMS Inflexible from 1892, or, even better the battleship Italia from 1885,
designed by Benedetto Brin. But you probably know about the criticism to HMS Nelson and Rodney, as they actually
had no rearward angle of fire. The Admiralty shrugged it off then, with mentioning, that "British ships won't retreat
and so need no rearward angle of fire"....    ::) But reading several examinations of the Battle of Jutland, it was mentioned,
that ships on both sides with turrets amidship (e.g. HMS Iron Duke class, or German König Klasse ) experienced reduced
broadsides due to limited arcs of fire with their mid mounted turrets. AFAIK the protection for the light AA guns of Yamato
and Musashi wasn't actually against enemy fire, but against the blast of the own heavy guns.
Nevertheless, Russian warship design owed a lot to Italian designers, so, why not Japanese ships, too ?
It's an interesting thought experiment, although I think, that experienced in combat would have proved those ideas
as not to be working as advertised.  ;)
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #24 on: June 29, 2013, 01:33:46 am »
Well Admiral De Feo was lived in ww1 and he concluded this was the future.

Yeah your list of battles probably true but look at them:
Battle between a very small number of vessels! One is a battle between straights and islands the other is an escape battle.
Yeah sure battles would start when each ship must face front first toward the enemy and having no forward firing turrets could lead a bit of disadvantage, but during this time the ships are the least vulnerable as their profile was the smallest/thinniest!

Nelson's all forward arrangement was choosen not because UK battleships never retreat but because this was the most economical distribution of armour weight VS lenght for the limited displacement. But look at the studies which led to the O3 (Nelson):
2 forward 2 centre: M2
2 forward 1 centre: G3, I3, N3, M3
1 forward 1 centre: H3b
All Forward: E3, F3/F2 H3a
The Only traditional versions with forward and aft are: J3, K3/K2 L3/L2

In a traditional battleship battle like the battle of Jutland the all centre arrangement would be good as the thickest armour would be the shortest one too!

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #25 on: June 29, 2013, 07:14:18 am »
And now a bit different.
Someone on the Warships Projects forum asked how would the ww2 carriers would look like with angled flight decks, so I modified a few Japanese ones which could be built or rebuilt that way. The idea to increase the effectivitness of of the Recovery and launch of planes from these type of ships!
So here they are:

The Hiyo Class:

The Soryu Class:

The Taiho Class:

And the Shinano Class (Though maybe I overdone it a bit)


Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #26 on: July 02, 2013, 10:16:53 am »
This Battleship design for my friend who likes many turreted battleships so I merged the Ise and Yamato classes :)
It's more of a fun design then a possible build but still...

So this is what you get when your Father is the IJN Yamato and your Mother is the IJN Ise :D height=15
A battleship with 12 38cm (15inch) Cannons in 6 double Yamato turrets and 10 155mm Guns in 2 triple and 2 twin turrets. On a Yamato hull but with smaller hanger space and thinner armour.



Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7924
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #27 on: July 02, 2013, 11:23:51 am »
the IJN "Yamise" (or better "Isato" ?) could be a good What-If, maybe thinking around the 18 inch
gun design to be a complete failure. or their factory destroyed by an earth quake. To get the ship
into service quickly, older and smaller gun designs were used, although I would think of 16 inch,
like in Mutsu/Nagato, rather than 15 inch, which weren't used by the IJN, I think.

About the IJN carriers with angled decks, I'm somewhat sceptical, if these ships wouldn't have needed
a little bit more mass on the portside for balancing the overhang of the flight deck ?
I would rather expect a flight deck similar to the first conversion of HMS Eagle, 1955
(drawing from http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.ImageFileViewer/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles.orion/7823.layout.jpg_2D00_700x0.jpg)

- I know about the reason for the gun arrangement of Nelson/Rodney, I just thought the way the admiralty was
cloaking the criticism quite funny (if it is more, than just a legend) !

- .. and I think, ships were more vulnerable to gunfire when pointing their length to the enemy, instead of their
broadside, as finding the correct distance was more difficult, than correct azimuth ?
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #28 on: July 03, 2013, 12:56:08 am »
In a case of reconstruction or build from skratch the builders surely would put some extra ton steel or concrete on the other side to balance the flight deck.

Offline royabulgaf

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 388
Re: TZoli's Warship Designs
« Reply #29 on: July 03, 2013, 05:10:47 pm »
Jemiba, look at it this way:  Just assume that a dozen 15" guns and mounts were available.