ORIGINAL: Nemo121
GBL,
Designer class CLAAs. I actually used a ship modelling programme to test them out. Now I may be wrong about gun mount weights etc and I couldn't get the programme to account for all the side AAA as anything other than barbette mounts so I'll be the first to admit that the modelling mightn't be perfect but my findings were as follows:
1. Assuming that the side-mounted guns were actually arrayed in 2 major banks along the length of the ship, first bank being barbettes revetted into the side of the ship a la Fuso etc ( but with good clearance for elevation ) and that the second bank were "on the deck" ( aka, a traditional gun mounting ) and assuming that you could replace two forward 8 inch turrets with 3 quadruple 3.9inch each ( which when you look at the footprints of the 8 inch turret vs a double 3.9inch ( since I assumed that the 3.9 inch arrangement would be 2 x 2 in terms of horizontal and vertical spacing and not 4 x 1 ) ) and that the pagoda-like bridge was replace by a sort of barbican arrangement allowing gun revetments then the spacing of guns etc is taken care of.
2. Would it have been the size of a CA? NO!!! You have to look at their durability and realise that at 75 durability these ships are NOT CAs they are, essentially, pocket battleships with nothing but AAA armament. Each costs 2/3rds as much as a front-line IJN BB and they have to be viewed through that prism.
3. So, assuming a 21,000 ton displacement are these ships possible and would they be able to stay afloat and fight? Yes.
4. Would I like to take them into heavy seas ? No but I don't think it would have been too much worse than some of the other ships the Japanese built. I seem to recall one of their DDs actually just breaking apart in heavy seas in the 30s and a lot of their DDs being rebuilt as a result.
5. Are they as top-heavy as you might think? No. Building a 2/3rds BB without main gun armament and all that sort of stuff actually frees up a LOT of weight for other stuff and no matter how many 3.9 inch guns you put on board you find it very difficult to use up all that free weight. Think of them as a 2/3rd scale Mutsu or Nagato without main guns but with AAA festooned into every nook and cranny.
I'm no expert on ship design. I'd know a lot more about tank design. But I took a Nagato class BB, scaled it down, stripped out the main and secondary armament, reduced the armour in some areas and kept it in others and then festooned it with AAA. The programme calculates speed etc etc and also seakeeping and while it wasn't as good as the Nagato the seakeeping wasn't all that bad either. It certainly made me think that the Designer Class COULD have kept afloat and fought if someone had been single-minded and crazy enough to build one.
I think the 15 Durability "Forum" Class CLAAs ( based on an enlarged DD design ) are much more in keeping with what the USN and RN did to build AAA ships. The Forum class CLAAs are basically the Japanese copying the West while the Designer class are really more along the lines of BCLAAs ( Light Battlecruiser Anti-Aircraft ) and were designed after reading Kaigun again and being impressed by the Japanese desire to always build "the biggest and best". This led me to think that if someone proposed building true CLAAs someone else would come along and say "What we need are BCLAAs as these will be bigger, more survivable and more lethal than any 2 or 3 CLAAs."
When push came to shove though the Designer class were a fun "what if". The Japanese cannot build everything I put in their build queue and I just assumed that if players didn't like them they'd stop building them and concentrate on more of the fairly conventional DDs and CLAAs and proper CLs I put in. Each to their own and all that. That's the guiding light behind my mod.... I wanted to put together something which would:
a) be different and fun.
b) be competitive in 1944 and 45
c) could be played a whole lot of different ways
d) REALLY put the focus on the economy and had lots of little traps for Japanese players who looked at all the goodies and thought "Gees, I can do anything." I think a good example of what can happen when the Japanese player over-stretches is currently being demonstrated in the game I took over against Damian. He over-extended and now he's about 1 week away from losing almost all of Burma and a fair bit of Vietnam in July 42.
Question: If you could give me the figures for armour rating for the Hurri I vs Spit version in the game I will look at it and consider changing. It is always possible that I had poor data when making the decision and your data might be different.
Hi Nemo
The quadruple mounts are pure fantasy. Designers were struggling to get a twin DP or AA mount to work efficiently. The quad mounts just could not have been served with ammunition fast enough to be useful. Barbette mounts for AA are also not really feasible. They were out of favour even for secondary armament well before WW2. That much top weight and the ammunition requirements would have made them very dangerous ships. Terminus has done some work and turned out some very feasible enhanced AA designs. El Cid has installed a more balanced uber AA fit on smaller hulls too.
My reference books were all packed away to make room for baby stuff so I can't lay my hands on much. I am however convinced that your figures relate to an early Hurricane I. They had a two bladed wooden propellor, no armour and ran on poorer fuel. By summer 1940 they had three bladed metal constant speed propellors, seat armour and 100 octane petrol. Speed, agility and ceiling were increased as a result. This came as a rude shock to the Luftwaffe during the Battle of Britain. The MkI was no longer in production in early 42 and most were in the hands of training units.
The Hurricanes that first arrived in the Far East were Mk IIBs. They had the same engine as the IIC and performance was very similar. The more I ponder it, the more I am convinced that you have short-changed the Allies. They only get 26 a month after all...
Throwing the early Spit V into the discussion is a red herring. It was available and should have been sent, but the Air Staff were still labouring under the misconception that Jap planes were inferior. IRL they sent Paul Ritchie to address the constant requests for Spit Vs from commanders in theatre. When he agreed with the pilots and commanders they had to eat their words and send them. All you have done is present the best case scenario, ie what would have happened if somebody sensible had been in charge. I am grateful, but I still think the Allied players deserve the proper Hurricanes...