Looking at Royal Navy Heavy Cruiser designs

[HMSHeavyCruiserEnthusiast]

Hey, I am relatively new here, and decided to make an account generally to join this community as a ship enthusiast. Specifically, I am interested in Royal Navy Heavy Cruisers. I saw Tzoli's Post on British Large Cruisers back in March of 2021, but wanted to know if there is more. I ask this because I am looking at WG British Heavy Cruisers and have been trying to compile a list of their origins if they have one. I understand they have some creative liberty in make the ships, but I feel that providing the Year of Design means it has an origin. Here are some of the ships I am investigating or I believe Tzoli's post on the Large Cruisers has their design on there. Note these are ones that were never produced and only existed as designs.

Potentially Found:
- Albemarle (1940) = 1940 Churchill Design E
- Drake (1940) = 1940 Churchill Design C
- Goliath (1938) = 1938 Design B
- Gibraltar/Monmouth = 1938 Design I

Haven't Found
- Nottingham (1926)
- Hampshire (1944)
- Defence (1940)
- Cheshire (1940)

 

[A Tentative Fleet Plan]

Potentially Found:
- Albemarle (1940) = 1940 Churchill Design E
- Drake (1940) = 1940 Churchill Design C
- Goliath (1938) = 1938 Design B
- Gibraltar/Monmouth = 1938 Design I

Haven't Found
- Nottingham (1926)
- Hampshire (1944)
- Defence (1940)
- Cheshire (1940)

Ships from World of Warships often have a very tenuous connection to reality, and very little relation to any real design (see Goliath for example, the 12-gun 9.2-inch gun cruisers actually drawn up in 1938 had quadruple turrets, not triple turrets).

In as much as I can find anything for the latter four ships, Defence and Cheshire seem to be outright works of fiction, and Nottingham and Hampshire seem to be based upon Sir George Thurston's Type C and the suggested alternative 1927 10-gun Type A Cruiser design with three mountings on the forecastle (the baseline design, and the only one with a line drawing had one mounting amidships) respectively.

 

[Tzoli]

Excluding the Export designs and built ones, the British heavy cruiser designs as follows: (To my Knowledge)

Atlantic Cruiser Design B1	1912
Atlantic Cruiser Design B2	1912
Atlantic Cruiser Design B3	1913
Atlantic Cruiser Design B4	1913
Atlantic Cruiser Design B4A	1913
Atlantic Cruiser Design B4B	1913
Design A	1915
Design B	1915
Design C	1915
Design D	1915
Design E	1915
Design F	1915
Hawkins (Proposed Refit)	1925
"Super" E Design A	1918
"Super" E Design B	1918
Thurston Design E	1920
Big Crusier Design A	1921
Big Crusier Design B	1921
Big Crusier Design C	1921
Big Crusier Design D	1921
Big Crusier Design E	1921
Trade Protection Cruiser	1921
Vickers Design 1074	1923
Vickers Design 1074C	1923
Vickers Standard Cruiser Design	1924
Vickers Design 1143	1924
Vickers Design 1143A	1924
Thurston Design	1925
Surrey Variant A	1927
Surrey Variant B	1928
Ackworth 1934 Design	1934
1935 Proposal	1935
DNC Armoured Cruiser Design I	1938
DNC Armoured Cruiser Design II	1938
DNC Armoured Cruiser Design A	1938
DNC Armoured Cruiser Design B	1938
DNC Design 1939	1939
Design A	1939
Design B	1939
Design C	1939
Design D	1939
Design E	1939
Design F	1939
Design G	1939
Churchill's Design A	1939
Churchill's Design B	1940
Churchill's Design C	1940
Churchill's Design D	1940
Churchill's Design E	1940
Design C	1941
Admiral Design I	1941
Admiral Design II	1941
Admiral Design III	1941
Admiral Design IV	1941
Admiral Design XY	1941
Final Admiral Design	1942

 

[Dilandu]

I understand they have some creative liberty in make the ships,

Well, let's just say that the times when they "have some creative liberty" are long gone... nowadays they just invent ships mainly based on "which already-rendered components we could quickly re-use".

 

[Yellow Palace]

Ships from World of Warships often have a very tenuous connection to reality, and very little relation to any real design

Well, let's just say that the times when they "have some creative liberty" are long gone... nowadays they just invent ships mainly based on "which already-rendered components we could quickly re-use".

It's my understanding of video games that they largely determine the 'need' for a ship (or tank, or aircraft) based on the presence or absence of a gap in a table of equivalents across the various sides one can play as, and that their performance characteristics are dictated by some notion of 'fairness' and 'balance'.

Any resultant similarity to real military equipment is then a happy coincidence.

 

[Dilandu]

It's my understanding of video games that they largely determine the 'need' for a ship (or tank, or aircraft) based on the presence or absence of a gap in a table of equivalents across the various sides one can play as, and that their performance characteristics are dictated by some notion of 'fairness' and 'balance'.

Well, initially they at least tried to find something suitable amongst the available projects and designs. But apparently historical accuracy even at this level costs too much, so they started increasingly invent their own "what if" projects, even if historical analogue was available. At some point they basically just stopped to care and mostly turned into "hey, we have 1940s American battleship project we planned for American line but decided not to - Put it into Chinese line and wrote something about it being completed and sold to China"

 

[00-PureEvil-00]

Hey, I am relatively new here, and decided to make an account generally to join this community as a ship enthusiast. Specifically, I am interested in Royal Navy Heavy Cruisers. I saw Tzoli's Post on British Large Cruisers back in March of 2021, but wanted to know if there is more. I ask this because I am looking at WG British Heavy Cruisers and have been trying to compile a list of their origins if they have one. I understand they have some creative liberty in make the ships, but I feel that providing the Year of Design means it has an origin. Here are some of the ships I am investigating or I believe Tzoli's post on the Large Cruisers has their design on there. Note these are ones that were never produced and only existed as designs.

Potentially Found:
- Albemarle (1940) = 1940 Churchill Design E
- Drake (1940) = 1940 Churchill Design C
- Goliath (1938) = 1938 Design B
- Gibraltar/Monmouth = 1938 Design I

Haven't Found
- Nottingham (1926)
- Hampshire (1944)
- Defence (1940)
- Cheshire (1940)

Drake and Goliath/Gibraltar/Monmouth are indeed based on 1938 designs (although warped to hell and back, especially Goliath).
Albemarle is actually based on Admiral-class cruiser from 1940... very loosely based.
Nottingham is George Thurston's design from... 1926, I think? Somewhere around there.
Hampshire is a predecessor of Surrey-class cruiser, from when Admiralty considered fitting a fifth turret to rival Takaos, before they decided to improve protection instead.
Cheshire IIRC reuses Albemarle's hull (which is itself based on Neptune's hull, for some reason), but with different guns. Which makes her even less historical than Albemarle.
And Defence is outright made-up, without any historical connection whatsoever. I can't even comprehend any sensible reason to build it.

Also, DON'T BELIEVE THEIR STATED DESIGN YEARS. In way too many cases they're completely bogus, to the point of contradicting their own historical notes. The most egregious case, IMO, is Edgar, whose historical note calls it a 1948 "wish" design, while it's stated design year is 1976. Just think about it: an enlarged Minotaur, designed deep into the missile era.

But apparently historical accuracy even at this level costs too much, so they started increasingly invent their own "what if" projects, even if historical analogue was available.

Slightly off-topic, but Lesta recently made a really ridiculous case of this with their Pan-American destroyer line. In this line, they have a made-up Peruvian Fletcher... while Peru had two Fletchers in the exact same configuration IRL. Their explanation? "We didn't have enough references to call the destroyer its historical name and be sure we didn't make any mistakes".
That's the same guys who gave Zara torpedo tubes it never had IRL, btw.

 

[Dilandu]

Slightly off-topic, but Lesta recently made a really ridiculous case of this with their Pan-American destroyer line. In this line, they have a made-up Peruvian Fletcher... while Peru had two Fletchers in the exact same configuration IRL. Their explanation? "We didn't have enough references to call the destroyer its historical name and be sure we didn't make any mistakes".

Don't remind me... their sloppy workmanship reached new heights by now.

 

[HMSHeavyCruiserEnthusiast]

Drake and Goliath/Gibraltar/Monmouth are indeed based on 1938 designs (although warped to hell and back, especially Goliath).
Albemarle is actually based on Admiral-class cruiser from 1940... very loosely based.
Nottingham is George Thurston's design from... 1926, I think? Somewhere around there.
Hampshire is a predecessor of Surrey-class cruiser, from when Admiralty considered fitting a fifth turret to rival Takaos, before they decided to improve protection instead.
Cheshire IIRC reuses Albemarle's hull (which is itself based on Neptune's hull, for some reason), but with different guns. Which makes her even less historical than Albemarle.
And Defence is outright made-up, without any historical connection whatsoever. I can't even comprehend any sensible reason to build it.

Also, DON'T BELIEVE THEIR STATED DESIGN YEARS. In way too many cases they're completely bogus, to the point of contradicting their own historical notes. The most egregious case, IMO, is Edgar, whose historical note calls it a 1948 "wish" design, while it's stated design year is 1976. Just think about it: an enlarged Minotaur, designed deep into the missile era.

Slightly off-topic, but Lesta recently made a really ridiculous case of this with their Pan-American destroyer line. In this line, they have a made-up Peruvian Fletcher... while Peru had two Fletchers in the exact same configuration IRL. Their explanation? "We didn't have enough references to call the destroyer its historical name and be sure we didn't make any mistakes".
That's the same guys who gave Zara torpedo tubes it never had IRL, btw.

Thank you this helped me a lot, I guess I will sort of Cross Reference with what I see on Tzoli's post to see what matches for at least Goliath and Cheshire.

 

[HMSHeavyCruiserEnthusiast]

Excluding the Export designs and built ones, the British heavy cruiser designs as follows: (To my Knowledge)

Atlantic Cruiser Design B1	1912
Atlantic Cruiser Design B2	1912
Atlantic Cruiser Design B3	1913
Atlantic Cruiser Design B4	1913
Atlantic Cruiser Design B4A	1913
Atlantic Cruiser Design B4B	1913
Design A	1915
Design B	1915
Design C	1915
Design D	1915
Design E	1915
Design F	1915
Hawkins (Proposed Refit)	1925
"Super" E Design A	1918
"Super" E Design B	1918
Thurston Design E	1920
Big Crusier Design A	1921
Big Crusier Design B	1921
Big Crusier Design C	1921
Big Crusier Design D	1921
Big Crusier Design E	1921
Trade Protection Cruiser	1921
Vickers Design 1074	1923
Vickers Design 1074C	1923
Vickers Standard Cruiser Design	1924
Vickers Design 1143	1924
Vickers Design 1143A	1924
Thurston Design	1925
Surrey Variant A	1927
Surrey Variant B	1928
Ackworth 1934 Design	1934
1935 Proposal	1935
DNC Armoured Cruiser Design I	1938
DNC Armoured Cruiser Design II	1938
DNC Armoured Cruiser Design A	1938
DNC Armoured Cruiser Design B	1938
DNC Design 1939	1939
Design A	1939
Design B	1939
Design C	1939
Design D	1939
Design E	1939
Design F	1939
Design G	1939
Churchill's Design A	1939
Churchill's Design B	1940
Churchill's Design C	1940
Churchill's Design D	1940
Churchill's Design E	1940
Design C	1941
Admiral Design I	1941
Admiral Design II	1941
Admiral Design III	1941
Admiral Design IV	1941
Admiral Design XY	1941
Final Admiral Design	1942

Could you send the 1939 Designs so I could compare them to WG models of Goliath and Cheshire to find any similarities?

 

[YourChair]

It's my understanding of video games that they largely determine the 'need' for a ship (or tank, or aircraft) based on the presence or absence of a gap in a table of equivalents across the various sides one can play as, and that their performance characteristics are dictated by some notion of 'fairness' and 'balance'.

Any resultant similarity to real military equipment is then a happy coincidence.

that used to be an accurate description of World of Warships, true. The developers invented a few fake (but at least realistic) ships to round out the tech trees, and these helped smooth out the gameplay.

However, those days are long gone: the game has gone downhill in every aspect (gameplay, balancing, monetization/gambling, historical accuracy, etc), and the newest designs in the game are all ridiculous fantasy ships. For example: the strongest ships in the game right now are physics-defying fictional Chilean battleships

Slightly off-topic, but Lesta recently made a really ridiculous case of this with their Pan-American destroyer line. In this line, they have a made-up Peruvian Fletcher... while Peru had two Fletchers in the exact same configuration IRL. Their explanation? "We didn't have enough references to call the destroyer its historical name and be sure we didn't make any mistakes".
That's the same guys who gave Zara torpedo tubes it never had IRL, btw.

Lesta developers definitely smoke something strong while they work, and then they round it out with some liquor. I remember they had a crazy gamemode where you played extremely buffed tier 4 ships (that went 50 knots) against tier 9 bots

 

[YourChair]

Hey, I am relatively new here, and decided to make an account generally to join this community as a ship enthusiast. Specifically, I am interested in Royal Navy Heavy Cruisers. I saw Tzoli's Post on British Large Cruisers back in March of 2021, but wanted to know if there is more. I ask this because I am looking at WG British Heavy Cruisers and have been trying to compile a list of their origins if they have one. I understand they have some creative liberty in make the ships, but I feel that providing the Year of Design means it has an origin. Here are some of the ships I am investigating or I believe Tzoli's post on the Large Cruisers has their design on there. Note these are ones that were never produced and only existed as designs.

Potentially Found:
- Albemarle (1940) = 1940 Churchill Design E
- Drake (1940) = 1940 Churchill Design C
- Goliath (1938) = 1938 Design B
- Gibraltar/Monmouth = 1938 Design I

Haven't Found
- Nottingham (1926)
- Hampshire (1944)
- Defence (1940)
- Cheshire (1940)

Cheshire is fictional, the official description even mentions it's a hypothetical design based on the 1940 cruiser designs (specifically, it's based on the 15,500 ton cruiser, which Tzoli has a drawing of as Design E)

Defence is even more fictional. I don't think it has any historical basis

I never knew what Nottingham was before you asked, so I looked it up, and apparently this cruiser (along with 2 others) was proposed by Admirality naval architect Sir George Thurston, in a 1923 essay, "The Influence of the Washington Conference on Naval Design".
Sappino's blog has a post on these cruisers; I'm not sure if Friedman or any other author has info on them though.
https://stefsap.wordpress.com/2015/10/15/sir-george-thurston-cruiser-designs-type-abc/
Hampshire ostensibly depicts the Surrey design in the as-conceived 5 turret layout, but its armor has been drastically increased (for example the belt over machinery is 152mm), so most likely it's a hypothetical modification that goes over the treaty limits to resolve problems (much like tier 10's Plymouth)

Also, DON'T BELIEVE THEIR STATED DESIGN YEARS

yes, the "design date" seems to be inconsistent. Sometimes it refers to design date (which is often an estimate, for example Nottingham being 1926), sometimes it refers to configuration date (or perhaps the date of a major modernization). For example, Hampshire is supposedly in a 1944 modernized state

 

[Tzoli]

Could you send the 1939 Designs so I could compare them to WG models of Goliath and Cheshire to find any similarities?

Here you can find them all:
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/royal-navy-big-cruiser-designs.36861/

 

[Dilandu]

Lesta developers definitely smoke something strong while they work, and then they round it out with some liquor. I remember they had a crazy gamemode where you played extremely buffed tier 4 ships (that went 50 knots) against tier 9 bots

That's just a fun modes; not important. But in a times long gone they prided themselves on "being historically accurate" and even listened to the public criticism...

 

[cattalonX]

About Defence ·····Perhaps they remade some small battleships, or just Nelson······

 

[Tzoli]

"The Influence of the Washington Conference on Naval Design".

I wonder if anybody has that article, or the designs might be written in Thurston's workbook?

 

[Tzoli]

Might just found it:
https://archive.org/details/brasseysnavala1923brasuoft

 

[YourChair]

Might just found it:
https://archive.org/details/brasseysnavala1923brasuoft

Nice find. For anyone who wants to read the article, it's on page 85 of the document, and page 148 in the viewer.

The cruiser actually isn't in there, so I guess the late 20s date Stefsap gives or the 1926 design date of Wargaming might be correct.

But, the particulars of a post-Washington battleship are being considered instead. (I took the liberty of attaching the relevant pages, for anybody who can't load the document)


Sir Thurston also conceived a hybrid carrier:




It would be a ship of 35,000 tons or less, and would have 1 triple turret of 406mm forward, with a secondary battery of 3x2 heavy cruiser guns (similar to the Lexingtons), and retractable heavy AA guns that could be lowered during flight operations, to avoid creating hazards for pilots.
Aircraft would assumedly be stored within a hangar, and would be used "purely for the purpose of her own defense and action", which meant spotting, and, interestingly, bombing and torpedo bombing.

Thurston acknowledged the hazard that funnel smoke and air currents could pose to landing aircraft, but didn't manage to come up with a particularly good way of ejecting engine exhaust, hoping that experiments would be carried out to find the best solution.

The ship would be expected to defeat enemy cruisers (much like the battlecruisers had done in WW1), as well as fleet action (torpedo and bomb attacks on the enemy fleet, and artillery engagements)

 

[Tzoli]

Well the other naval annuals are here:
Free to read till 1929 and limited from 1930, though download is difficult as the webpage seems to allow download one page at a time:
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/006201567
Need to search for full downloadable online content.

 

[Dilandu]

It would be a ship of 35,000 tons or less, and would have 1 triple turret of 406mm forward, with a secondary battery of 3x2 heavy cruiser guns (similar to the Lexingtons), and retractable heavy AA guns that could be lowered during flight operations, to avoid creating hazards for pilots.
Aircraft would assumedly be stored within a hangar, and would be used "purely for the purpose of her own defense and action", which meant spotting, and, interestingly, bombing and torpedo bombing.

He clearly did not understood, that three 16-inch guns aren't enough for efficient long-range fire.

 

[00-PureEvil-00]

Found Thurston's cruisers. They were in the 1925 issue, so WG's "1926" design year for Nottingham is just a bit off))
Besides those three designs, Thurston also describes "Type D", which is basically the same as C but with three twin turrets instead of three triples, and a bit shorter hull (565 feet versus 570 in "Type C").

Also...

Albemarle is actually based on Admiral-class cruiser from 1940... very loosely based.

Forget this part. A few days ago I dived a bit into British heavy cruiser design history and... well, the actual Admiral-class cruisers (BTW, they were never officially called as such) were designed in 1941, and had 114mm armored belt like in Town-class cruisers. WG's Albemarle has 152mm belt and it's stated design year is 1940.
So, Albemarle is not Admiral-class. It's inspired by an older design, from 1940 (in Tzoli's table and Deviantart gallery, this design is listed as "Churchill's cruiser").

(Which still doesn't excuse WG's usage of Neptune's hull as a basis for Albemarle.)

 

[Dilandu]

(Which still doesn't excuse WG's usage of Neptune's hull as a basis for Albemarle.)

As if they worried about any excuses... they stopped to long ago.

 

[YourChair]

Forget this part. A few days ago I dived a bit into British heavy cruiser design history and... well, the actual Admiral-class cruisers (BTW, they were never officially called as such) were designed in 1941, and had 114mm armored belt like in Town-class cruisers. WG's Albemarle has 152mm belt and it's stated design year is 1940.
So, Albemarle is not Admiral-class. It's inspired by an older design, from 1940 (in Tzoli's table and Deviantart gallery, this design is listed as "Churchill's cruiser").

(Which still doesn't excuse WG's usage of Neptune's hull as a basis for Albemarle.)

yeah, the official description from Wargaming describes Albemarle as being based on a 15,500 ton design from 1940, and there is a perfect match: the 15,500 ton heavy cruiser from 1940.

There are several differences: Albemarle has torpedo tubes, Albemarle has a different secondary gun layout and uses 114mm guns (vice 102mm) in both configurations, Albemarle has different armor (ex: magazine deck armor: 102mm instead of 76mm, machinery deck armor: 70mm instead of 63.5mm), Albemarle has greater beam, Albemarle has raked funnels, etc. But the basis of the design is there

 

[Tzoli]

Yes, that is Design E:
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Royal-Navy-Churchill-Type-Heavy-Cruiser-Design-E-873107935

 

[Tzoli]

Slightly relevant:
All of W.G. John's workbooks (1-16) are available for the time being:
https://file.kiwi/160cea3a#382-0NsLvImX75DRyFH0fQThey will be deleted automatically after 96 hours

 

[00-PureEvil-00]

Slightly relevant:
All of W.G. John's workbooks (1-16) are available for the time being:
https://file.kiwi/160cea3a#382-0NsLvImX75DRyFH0fQThey will be deleted automatically after 96 hours

I try to download the files, but every time it reaches about 35-40% it just stops and complains about "not enough disk space" (which can't be, I still have over 900 GB of free space, dammit)
I hope at least somebody else was able to download them...

BTW y'all only have about 19 hours to download these for free, just FYI.

 

[Tzoli]

If you are interested I can re-upload somewhere. Altogether 70+Gb

 

[McTodd]

I try to download the files, but every time it reaches about 35-40% it just stops and complains about "not enough disk space" (which can't be, I still have over 900 GB of free space, dammit)
I hope at least somebody else was able to download them...

BTW y'all only have about 19 hours to download these for free, just FYI.

Are you trying to do it as a batch download i.e. all 16 zip files together? If so, is it somehow overloading your computer? I've just downloaded the first book and it went fine, so I'm going to download each book one at a time.

 

[DWG]

apparently this cruiser (along with 2 others) was proposed by Admirality naval architect Sir George Thurston,

Thurston wasn't part of the Admiralty or RCNC, he was a senior civilian designer working for Vickers.

ETA: So his article was really proposing designs for export, not the RN - whenever Vickers or the other commercial yards tried to proposed their own designs to the RN they were told it wasn't quite what the RN was looking for. Which was usually true, as the RN needed ships capable of months at sea anywhere from the Arctic to the Tropics, while export designs often focussed more on short endurance ships optimised for one particular theatre of operations.

 

[SARG12]

If you are interested I can re-upload somewhere. Altogether 70+Gb

Hello. Thanks for the interesting information. But I didn't have time to upload everything. Can you repost parts
WG John Book 08.zip to WG John Book 14B.zip?

 

[Tzoli]

Hello. Thanks for the interesting information. But I didn't have time to upload everything. Can you repost parts
WG John Book 08.zip to WG John Book 14B.zip?

Try this, not sure how much uptime it left:
https://file.kiwi/160cea3a#382-0NsLvImX75DRyFH0fQ

 

[SARG12]

Try this, not sure how much uptime it left:
https://file.kiwi/160cea3a#382-0NsLvImX75DRyFH0fQ

Unfortunately, there is no longer a free download. The free time has expired((

 

[Tzoli]

Guys... It is 70+Gb! Cannot upload it every few days! Do you know a data sharing site which allows that much storage, free and stores it for like 2 weeks for you to download it?

 

[pinochet_in_helikopter]

yeah, the official description from Wargaming describes Albemarle as being based on a 15,500 ton design from 1940, and there is a perfect match: the 15,500 ton heavy cruiser from 1940.
View attachment 796731
There are several differences: Albemarle has torpedo tubes, Albemarle has a different secondary gun layout and uses 114mm guns (vice 102mm) in both configurations, Albemarle has different armor (ex: magazine deck armor: 102mm instead of 76mm, machinery deck armor: 70mm instead of 63.5mm), Albemarle has greater beam, Albemarle has raked funnels, etc. But the basis of the design is there
View attachment 796733

I'm not sure why wargaming make British cruisers boiler belt a deck higher.Boiler superheater and boiler room turbo fans made light cruisers need higher belt.Here is Birmingham‘s.But for heavier cruisers,deeper drought provides sufficient depth.