Tinkering with Treaties...Again

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The problem, as you know, is making the air groups appear properly. That won't be possible in AE either. So no.

I might make it possible to convert to CVE's...

True with airgroups. I may need to do a few extra carrier capable, land based Navy groups in order to outfit carriers, but basically the idea would be that a single CVL could opperate 1 Daitai of either fighters or attack planes. What I may do is trade off some float plane daitai for carrier a/c.

I also plan on making at least one series of merchies (over 5000 capacity) convertible into CVEs as well. That would also be the case for Allies as well. Something I've been toying with is eliminating CVEs for the US and simply making several classes of merchies convertible to them.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I don't agree...

With what? The two classes had different missions. The Clevelands were designed to break up IJN massed torpedo attacks against the battleline. They needed a lot of 6" firepower to do that. The Atlantas were designed to support the DDs in fighting the IJN DDs. They had to be fast and light.

The only reason to build a ship with bigger guns was penetration. It was always cheaper and more effective to use more ships with lighter guns. In raw firepower and structural resistance to damage, two heavy cruisers were the equivalent of a battleship. The BB just had more penetration and more armour.

[el cid again]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

It looks to me that, although the Clevelands may rate higher in AA firepower, the Atlantas basically would give more AA "bang for the buck." I think the whole point of the Yoshinos on Alt_Naval is to do just that. Concentrate a lot of AA power on a relatviely inexpensive hull.


The later US light cruisers had a better director layout - and twice the directors - of an Atlanta (if memory serves). Essentially these broad hulled ships permitted side mountings and directors - and so the way it ended up you could track and engage 3 targets on any bearing.
An Atlanta was limited to 1 ahead or astern, or 2 on the beam (using both directors). With 4 directors in "lossenge" arrangement you only lost 1 from any aspect. These ships had come a long way from the days of the early Brooklyns - with undirected single AA guns along the sides -
and they also had two surface directors. This does not count that the 40 mm had a completely separate set of fire control - at least eventually.

A Japanese AA cruiser intended to be more powerful than the 100 mm armed AA destroyers would undoubtedly use the Type 1 5 inch guns - in the original dual mountings. The layout would be similar to the modified Mogami - which also is very like later US practice - twins fore and aft on each side - a twin super superfiring amidships fore and aft - a total of three twins on the centerline forward and the same aft. This is exactly the same armament as the Atlanta - but on a hull nearly twice the size - with proper armor - great speed - and no need for primary directors for the surface guns not present (saving a lot of weight and top hamper). The normal fire control for AA - on the sides amidships - would remain - and a similar director would replace the fore and aft surface directors. See Cruisers of the Imperial Japanese Navy for some of the details of these vessels. The Type 1 five inch is very similar to the US five inch 51 (it is a 5 inch 50) - but it is far more reliable - and it has a fine performance. These shells are much heavier than US 5 inch 38 shells are - and there is a SAP round - so they would be hard even on lightly protected armored ships.

[DuckofTindalos]

Here are my takes on IJN CLAA designs. I maintain two distinct types: the pre-war modifications (here typified by the Kuma, the other classes are more or less the same), and the war mods (the Aganos). I've been sparing with the 10cm DP guns, in an effort to be somewhat realistic; the main AA ships to get them are the Aganos and a heavily expanded Akitsuki class):

[DuckofTindalos]

The Agano class:

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The Agano class:

With DP guns as its main armament, how is the Agano any more effective than a Yoshino or for that matter an Atlanta? [&:]

[DuckofTindalos]

It isn't, really, but the point (to me, at least) is that it's based on a real class, rather than a made-up one. I've tried to move away from Alt_Naval's specific classes, into modifying existing ones. I dropped his Kiyokaze class destroyers, for example, and instead expanded the number of Akitsuki's (which are basically identical to the Kiyokazes).

[DuckofTindalos]

Also, it gave me a chance to break out my cut-n-paste graphics kit... I can't draw at all, but I can cut and paste with the best of them...[:D]

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Also, it gave me a chance to break out my cut-n-paste graphics kit... I can't draw at all, but I can cut and paste with the best of them...[:D]

You can at that! The DP guns look good on your CLs. [8D]