• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Argentinian Never-Were Warship Designs and Proposals

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
Yes British designed but Italian built Guns. I'm not sure that the 305mm cannons of the Leondardo, Cavour and Doria classes were of Itlaain manufacture or British ones.
Both.
"I cannoni erano di due tipi: Elswick Pattern "T" e Vickers Mark "G". Le differenze tra i due tipi erano minime e riguardavano il blocco delle culatte mentre entrambi usavano otturatore Welin a comando pneumatico. I cannoni Elswick hanno costituito l'armamento principale della corazzata Dante Alighieri, mentre per quanto riguarda la classe Duilio i cannoni Vickers hanno costituito l'armamento del Doria e i cannoni Elswick-Armstrong quelli del gemello Duilio vennero realizzati a Pozzuoli dalla filiale italiana della Armstrong. Per quanto riguarda le Cavour e cannoni del Conte di Cavour vennero realizzati in Italia dalla Vickers-Terni così come quelli del Leonardo da Vinci mentre quelli del Cesare dalla Armstrong negli stabilimenti di Pozzuoli. La consegna di questi cannoni venne ritardata di circa un anno, in particolare quelli del Conte di Cavour che fini per essere equipaggiato con i cannoni destinati all'Doria, il cui allestimento venne così ritardato."
Wikipedia, sorry
"These were Armstrong (Elswick) Pattern T and Vickers Mk G. The Armstrong gun armed the Dante Alighieri and the Giulio Cesare class in hydraulic mountings. (...) The Vickers gun armed the Leonardo da Vinci class in hydraulic mountings."
Friedman, Norman (2011). Naval Weapons of World War One
Did the 254mm/45 Vickers and Armstrong Guns of the San Giorgo and Pisa classes too were Italian license manufacture or brought from England?
I would not dare to give an accurate answer.
Friedman, Norman (2011). Naval Weapons of World War One. 236–38
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
It is said that if Italy (Ansaldo) had won the bid for the construction of the Rivadavia battleships (1908-9), then the United Kingdom would have blocked the licenses for the construction of the battleships guns, so that they are manufactured in that country
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
Seems like:
Dante Alighieri: Armstrong

Conte di Cavour class:
Conte di Cavour - Vickers-Terni
Leonardo da Vinci - Armstrong
Giluio Cesare - Armstrong-Pozzuoli

Andrea Doria class: Vickers
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
Seems like:
Dante Alighieri: Armstrong

Conte di Cavour class:
Conte di Cavour - Vickers-Terni
Leonardo da Vinci - Armstrong
Giluio Cesare - Armstrong-Pozzuoli

Andrea Doria class: Vickers
Let me retext that.

Armstrong-Elswick:
  • Dante Alighieri class.
Armstrong-Elswick-Pozzuoli:
  • Caio Duilio class, Duilio ship.
  • Conte di Cavour class, Giulio Cesare ship.
Vickers:
  • Caio Duilio class, Andrea Doria ship (planned).
  • Conte di Cavour class, Conte di Cavour ship (from Andrea Doria).
Vickers-Terni:
  • Conte di Cavour class, Leonardo da Vinci ship.
  • Conte di Cavour class, Conte di Cavour ship (planned).
  • Caio Duilio class, Andrea Doria ship (¿later?).
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
Let me ask for some visual help, please. I cant find proper information in quarantine.

Historical info:
In 1920s argentine navy modernized its fleet. One of the projects was to upgun the four old armoured cruisers called "Garibaldis". Belgrano and Pueyrredón ships were modernized, the first one in Italy, the second one in Argentina. San Martin was put on hold and Garibaldi was scraped. It´s very clear that the Belgrano and Pueyrredón ships were modernized. New 152/45 guns and mounts were placed on deck and superestructre and old 152/40 guns on the casemates were discarded.

Belgrano:
e6ff121f-0371-46a6-bf0a-580cf473215a - copia.jpg

Pueyrredón:
ba23dea9-1817-4943-89ca-4942159aefb8 - copia.jpg
ae9206f1-2cad-435a-8713-53b41d6cec2c - copia.jpg

My big problem is the size of the secondary armament of the Pueyrredón. They don't look like 152/45 or at least long enough as the Belgrano guns.
¿What do you think? ¿152/45 in Belgrano? ¿152/40 in Pueyrredón? ¿Does anyone recognizes the turrets/mounts?
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
According to Navypedia the new guns were the same type as the ones got replaced:
152mm/40 Armstrong / EOC Mark Z
Just in new shielded mounts, so it is likely the guns were the same, probably refurbished.
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
No, that article is very old. I need to send them more info (as i did with the Rivadavia class). For example, the Pueyrredón ship had 37mm AA guns and radar!
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
When I'm at home I can check Conway's All the World Fighting Ships 1922-46 to see their calibres.
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
When I'm at home I can check Conway's All the World Fighting Ships 1922-46 to see their calibres.
Dont worry, i have "Jane", "Weyer", "Conway" books and they are not very good with details :/
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
I don't know Weyer but I know Conway beats Jane's on most aspects.
But if you check the barrel and mounting's length altogether then it should not go beyond 6meters by much because a 40 calibre 6inch guns barrel lenght is 6 meters. An average argentinian sailor I assume was around 1,75-1,8 meter height so you can make measurements with them
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
Indeed no new info in Conway's and in Jane's 1938 there was even less info.
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
Any chance to identify this as a argentine-italian project?
Rusos - 2004 - Тяжелые крейсера Италии 1927-1945 - P49 2.png

¿Argentine Trento?
  • 8.000 t. - 9.200 t.
  • 170-176-163,6 x 19 x 5,6 m.
  • 100 mm. / 65 mm.
  • 60.000 hp.
  • 30 k.
  • 6 x 203 mm
  • 12 x 120 mm or 6 x 127 mm.
  • 8 x 40 mm + 6 x 20 mm.
  • 6 x 533 mm.
  • 3 a.
ks0R1Ao.png


Fuente: Sección Argentina del libro ruso "Тяжелые крейсера Италии 1927-1945" (¿Trubitsyn S.B. - 2004 - Italian Heavy Cruisers 1927-45?) página 49.


My russian is worse than my english.
Its from an Argentine section in the russian book about the Bolzano cruiser: "Тяжелые крейсера Италии 1927-1945" (¿Trubitsyn S.B. - 2004 - Italian Heavy Cruisers 1927-45?) book page 49.
 
Last edited:

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,283
Reaction score
1,207
If my attempt with OCR and online translator didn't fail, you got the data correct, main armament would have been
in two triple turrets.
But, that design wasn't for Argentina, but for Chile.
Maybe one of our native Russian speakers can have another look on that text.
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
That mention of the UP-90 design the Italian mini Deutschland big gun cruisers with 2 triple 254mm Turrets seems like a redesign for it for Chile with 203mm Guns.

from:

Yep dimensions displacement and armament except main guns are the same
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
Some new drawings, my interpretation of the Design 312 from Vickers:
de2rumr-54f4cbf9-20d6-4aac-97df-2863203ec360.png


The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 160 (pp) 168,75 (wl) x 26,67 x 7,77m
Displacement: 21.600tons (standard)
Armour: unknown probably 38-42mm Deck, 229-254mm Belt
Engines: 27.500shp, steam turbines, 4 shafts
Speed: 39km/h (21knots)
Armaments:
2x3,4x2 12"/50 (305mm/50) Vickers Mk C Cannons,
4x2 16x1 4,7"/50 (120mm/50) Vickers Mk A Guns,
4x1 457mm Underwater Torpedo Tubes (probably)
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
Vickers Export Design 332 for Argentina:
de2tzjy-3a8d3089-5897-47cb-a926-f6e8f27e743e.png


The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: unknown probably 154 (pp) 162,25 (wl) x 26,2 x 7,85m
Displacement: unknown, around 22.500tons (standard)
Armour: unknown probably 38-42mm Deck, 229-254mm Belt
Engines: unknown around 23-27.000shp, steam turbines, 4 shafts
Speed: 39km/h (21knots)
Armaments:
4x2 13,5"/50 (343mm/50) Vickers Mk B Cannons,
16x1 6"/50 (152mm/50) Vickers Mk K Guns,
4x1 457mm Underwater Torpedo Tubes (probably)
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
Next is design 335 a same armed version as 312 but I've chosen /50 calibre ones and winged triple turrets.
de2w9a8-234fcf4d-7d0a-4d21-8980-cabe17fe35e1.png


The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 155,45 (pp) 163,75 (wl) x 26,06 x 7,62m
Displacement: 20.500tons (standard)
Armour: unknown probably 38-42mm Deck, 254mm Belt
Engines: 25.500shp, steam turbines, 4 shafts
Speed: 39km/h (21knots)
Armaments:
2x3,4x2 12"/50 (305mm/50) Vickers Mk B Cannons,
Unknown number of secondary Guns I've chosen: 20x1 4,7"/50 (120mm/50) Vickers Mk A Guns,
4x1 457mm Underwater Torpedo Tubes (probably)
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
I've just found these two designs on a Russian Forum in French language of British designs...
28-3456327-proekty-l.k..jpg

Surely export designs but from whom (Vickers or Armstrong) and to who I do not know
The left one is probably for Russia the right one for anybody
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
The first looks like the "Russian type" for which German companies also competed.
The second looks like a limited version of the New York class, right? For the year, circa 1914, this does not seem to conform to the Argentine requirements that suppose a standardization with the Rivadavia class and surpass the characteristics of a Rio de Janeiro with 356 or, later, 305 millimeters.
However, it is still an interesting design, perhaps it was offered to Argentina as a complement to existing ships. I wish the quarantine did not prevent access to documentation from those years.
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
By the way, a friend shared to me a blog post "BATTLESHIPS & KNIGHTS". It is called "1909 Ansaldo / Armstrong dreadnought proposal" and Argentina is mentioned as a possible recipient of this design.
Here are some pictures of the model and details:
0_j7yl_L.jpeg
kv8LoZ5L.jpeg
"Specs:
  • Length 136m.
  • Length bpp 130m.
  • Max width 24.20m.
  • Draught normal load 8.2 m.
  • Displacement 16100 tons.
  • Speed at trials 19 nm
  • Four shafts
  • Range 5000 nm
  • Guns 8 305/50, 20 100/50
  • Main belt 230 mm
  • Upper belt 180-150-100
  • Barbetts 250 mm
  • Turrets 250mm front 150 rear
  • Horizontal center 22/19 Bow 25/20 Stern 38 Main deck 38/19(?)"
About this model I left a comment on the blog, which has not yet been moderated, whose ideas I also wanted to share here.
The amount of Ansaldo designs that have been offered to Argentina has been immense. Probably the general design of the battleship Rivadavia is based on the initial ideas presented by this company. It is also well known that Ansaldo and the Argentine Navy towards the beginning of the 20th century already had two decades of great acquisitions (for those who do not know: 4 armored cruisers, “Generals” Garibaldi, Belgrano, San Martín and Pueyrredón, as well as others canceled, 6 destroyers of 350t and 2 battleships of 14,500t).
However, the characteristics of the ship, the year of the title and the Argentine label do not seem adequate, but rather anachronistic. Probably this design was offered to Argentina (or Spain), but I would say between 1906 and 1907. Let us remember that Brazil, Argentina’s rival, in September 1906 began to manufacture 3 battleships with 12×254/50 guns and in January 1907 changed to making 3 battleships with 12×305/45 guns. It would be technically unhelpful for Argentina to buy 3 (4 or 5) vessels of these limited characteristics.
In addition, the Argentine requirements in the bids for the construction of battleships since the end of 1908 established that as a basis that the designs had to be like those of the english Dreadnought but enlarged, having these greater details in the following months.
I hope I have clearly explained that in my opinion it is either not a design offered to Argentina or it is not correctly labeled.
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
Your comment will not be moderated I suppose as Stefano passed away years ago. I've saved the images from both of his sites as a precaution so if you find interesintg articles there I suggest doing the same.

That battleship is most likely a generic offer for South America or indeed for Spain or Portugal (Portugal too was searching for battleships )
Not forget South America includes Venezuela, Uruguay, Peru, Columbia and Ecuador. Ecuador and Paraguay are unlikely but not impossible to buy these, so that still leaves the three other larger counties on that continent to be offered.

Vickers offered Destroyers and Cruisers (Light and Heavy) for Venezuela though only after WW2 till mid 1950's

I've not yet found mentions of designs for Columbia

But Armstrong offered a BB for Peru in 1914 and Vickers in 1911

For Uruguay offers were made for Frigates, Destroyers, Cruisers (light and scout) and even a Battleship

and as a sidenote offers were made for Cuba in scout and light cruiser category

And a single design for Mexico which might be a monitor, a very small heavy cruiser or light coastal battleship with 1x2 8", 2x2 6", 4x1 4,7"
 
Last edited:

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
1,804
Surely export designs but from whom (Vickers or Armstrong) and to who I do not know
The left one is probably for Russia the right one for anybody

Well the title in French says they are the plans of an "M. Owens", which translates as (Monsieur) Mr Owens.
Mr Owens is of course Thomas George Owens - who on 12 April 1915 changed his name to Thomas George Owens Thurston. So these might be official Vickers designs or might be Owens (Thurston's) own work, they might be connected with his 1914 paper 'Some Questions Relating to Battleship Design' for example.
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
Your comment will not be moderated I suppose as Stefano past away years ago. I've saved the images from both of his sites as a precaution so if you find interesintg articles there I suggest doing the same.
Ohh, that's sad. He did a good work in that website :(

That battleship is most likely a generic offer for South America or indeed for Spain or Portugal (Portugal too was searching for battleships )
The Plate is in Spanish, so Spain, Chile or Argentina. I discard Portugal or even Brazil.

If the year is correct, it adjusts to the Spanish requirements, but in no way to the Argentine or Chilean ones. Due to the general characteristics and the designs presented by Ansaldo, I think it is Spanish.

I rule out that it is Argentine because:
- In October 1908 the tender was formalized for two dreadnoughts (+20.000t) with an option for a third four scouts (650t) and 6 torpedo boats (350t). The Ansaldo-Armstrong house presented the "Progetto 1908" (15x305 mm and 22 knots).
- Towards August 1909 the best technical designs were from the Ansaldo house. These were taken as the basis for the other companies to present improvements to theirs. By then it was already known in detail what the characteristics of the "Minas Gerais" class were (far superior to this "Ansaldo 1909" design that I discard here).
- In October 1909 an even more demanding comprehensive program was established (battleships with 12x305, 12x152, 12x100 +254 belt and +22 knots and 12 torpedo scouts of 4x100, 4x530, 32 k and 1000 t) the Ansaldo house improved the armor of its previous design (supposedly 229 to 254 mm). But by that time the other companies were already making the same "Plano Argentino" or "Argentine Type" and improving the characteristics, manufacturing times and costs of these ships.
- Towards the end of October 1909 Ansaldo shows a notable improvement in armor (supposedly from 254 to 279 mm) and in speed (of 24 knots). But before formalizing the winner in Argentina, it was known that the manufacturer would be Bethlehem Steel (the one that would buy Fore River).
- In January 1910 the American company wins. The above irregularities generated protests from Italian Ambassador Cellere and Marquis Guicciardini. Economic and political sanctions were applied to Argentina and the manufacture of destroyers in this country was made impossible (later only carried out in the United Kingdom, Germany and France) as compensation for the irregularities.
Sources: B.C.N. T.26 P.804 - B.C.N. T.27 P.714 - Etchepareborda, R. The Naval Armaments of 1908.

Regarding Chile, I have no record in spanish or english of this nation having contacted Ansaldo for the construction of a battleship (american Bethlehem a couple of mentions). There are previous registrations for the purchase of one or two Garibaldi class armored cruisers and later for the purchase of light or heavy cruisers of the Condoretti or Trento class.
Not forget South America includes Venezuela, Uruguay, Peru, Columbia and Ecuador. Ecuador and Paraguay are unlikely but not impossible to buy these, so that still leaves the three other larger counties on that continent to be offered.

Vickers offered Destroyers and Cruisers (Light and Heavy) for Venezuela though only after WW2 till mid 1950's

I've not yet found mentions of designs fro Columbia

But Armstrong offered a BB for Peru in 1914 and Vickers in 1911

For Uruguay offers were made for Frigates, Destroyers, Cruisers (light and scout) and even a Battleship

and as a sidenote offers were made for Cuba in scout and light cruiser category

And a single design for Mexico which might be a monitor, a very small heavy cruiser or light coastal battleship with 1x2 8", 2x2 6", 4x1 4,7"
And about other Latin American nations, from Peru i have this list:
1905.7 - Vickers similar to N°188 - Predreadnough 254-50x12 (?)
1907.6 - Peruvian navy design traditional guns - Dreadnought 305x12 (WIP)
1907.6 - Peruvian navy design vertical guns - Dreadnought 305x12 (WIP)
1911.2 - Vickers N°512 - Dreadnought 356-45x4
1911.3 - Vickers N°513 - Dreadnought 356-45x6
1914.2 - Armstrong N°783P - 203-50x4
1920 - Gorgon - 234x2

Other countrys of LA had no monetary, financial, crew or infrastructure to get and support dreadnoughts or big ships (armoured or protected cruisers). Not even Cuba or Mexico. The annual maintenance cost of a dreadnought is estimated to be between 10 and 20 percent of its purchase value (forget the source). To exemplify this Argentina, Brazil and Chile had to build their own big dykes (the latter still having received her dreadnought 10 years after the first had to rent for years in Panama for maintenance) at costs and efforts unattainable for the rest of Latin America.
 
Last edited:

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
After quarantine i will research about this:
30285ed8-38ff-44b4-be86-5be554749771.jpg
In 1924 a preliminary price request was issued to various private builders of United States, Spain, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Sweden and Japan.
Between 1924 and 1925 were received budgets: 27 of cruisers, 27 of destroyers and 24 of submarines.

The winners were Italy (Brown class heavy cruisers) and France (Santa Fe class submarines). Later Italy replaced France as builder.

Source: Montenegro, G. - 2002 - El Armamentismo Naval Argentino - Page 121.
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
Argentine Type* Germania 650t 1908
Eds3Qpz.png

German design based in G169-G173
660-750 t (900 t potential)
76x8 m
2 (2x1) 105/45
4 (4x1) 75/50
2 (2x1) Mg
3 (3x1) 450/5000
8-9 mm
30,5-34 k

*"Tipo Argentino"
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
1,181
Reaction score
672
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
And about other Latin American nations, from Peru i have this list:
1905.7 - Vickers similar to N°188 - Predreadnough 254-50x12 (?)
1907.6 - Peruvian navy design traditional guns - Dreadnought 305x12 (WIP)
1907.6 - Peruvian navy design vertical guns - Dreadnought 305x12 (WIP)
1911.2 - Vickers N°512 - Dreadnought 356-45x4
1911.3 - Vickers N°513 - Dreadnought 356-45x6
1914.2 - Armstrong N°783P - 203-50x4
1920 - Gorgon - 234x2

Very interesting! But what is "vertical guns"?
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
And about other Latin American nations, from Peru i have this list:
1905.7 - Vickers similar to N°188 - Predreadnough 254-50x12 (?)
1907.6 - Peruvian navy design traditional guns - Dreadnought 305x12 (WIP)
1907.6 - Peruvian navy design vertical guns - Dreadnought 305x12 (WIP)
1911.2 - Vickers N°512 - Dreadnought 356-45x4
1911.3 - Vickers N°513 - Dreadnought 356-45x6
1914.2 - Armstrong N°783P - 203-50x4
1920 - Gorgon - 234x2
Very interesting! But what is "vertical guns"?
Well Vertical Guns are mix of:

This peruvian battleship design
111eljW.png


And this vickers turret design
R8mYxg9.png


Last image provided by Tzoli.

I´m working in this Peruvian Dreadnought article right now.

I think we must create a Peruvian Ships topic.
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
BTW, can someone help me to understand this scheme:
Udhl6hn.jpg

Does that "38mm" correspond to the roof of the rear superstructure?
And where does that 78mm correspond?
Could it be that both correspond to the funnel shields?
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
It is called an elevated turret.
But the IJN too during the 1920's were thinking on these line for 41cm cannons in quad turrets:

one barrel on one cradle each, (KGV arrangemenr)
two barrels on one cradle arranged horizontally (Donkerque arrangement)
two barrels on one cradle arranged vertically (like on that Vickers pattern elevated turret above)
one-two-one aka triple arrangement where the middle two barrels are on a common cradle and the outermost ones one their own cradle.

Yet to re-find the photo about the models and the data table in Hiraga
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
Yep that one! Thanks!
Elevated quad,
Double twin quad and
triple quad
 

JohnR

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
790
Reaction score
231
What was the loading arrangements for the superimposed gun turrets?!?!?!
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
What was the loading arrangements for the superimposed gun turrets?!?!?!

If the American experience with two-story battleship turrets is any guide they were poor.

That is a different design. It is basically a barbette less turret put on a larger turret and have two different ammo hoists. The elevated quad turret is a one unit.
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
847
Here is a data table between the 41cm/45 Type 3 Cannons twin, triple and two kinds of quadruple turret designs. as you can see the elevated quad roller path diamater was minimally larger then the triple one, and weights only a bit more then the double twin arranged quad turret:
And this table shows the same comparison between /45 and /50 calibre Cannons as well as the non-coupled variant: (Twin, triple, coupled quad, elevated quad, un-coupled quad)
 

M. A. Rozon

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Messages
81
Reaction score
11
BTW, can someone help me to understand this scheme:
Udhl6hn.jpg

Does that "38mm" correspond to the roof of the rear superstructure?
And where does that 78mm correspond?
Could it be that both correspond to the funnel shields?
They number "38" and the number "78" appear to refer to the thickness of armour surrounding the base of each funnel.
 

COLDOWN

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
116
Reaction score
88
Hi. So long.

I'll start with bad news. No, I don't mean the Italian tier X battleship to be implemented in WoWs :p
Rather, the dreadnoughts that are mentioned in an article from Peru do not correspond to their own designs. I found an article in the Argentine naval bulletins that is very similar to the Peruvian one. In other words, both have the same source of origin but different translation and presentation of the contents, which led to a misinterpretation on my part.
In case someone is interested in these I can provide access to them to see the diagrams or read the text. Right now I don't remember the original source.

If they have not done so, it is still interesting to propose to create a topic about the smaller fleets of Latin America (outside the ABC). While there are no large battleships there are mentions of cruisers and destroyers that could be compiled into this one.
 

Similar threads

Top