Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

And what about deck armor?

Maybe the designer is hoping for 100% pass-throughs! [:D]

Some other interesting things about the design - The 1 x 9 main guns means all 9 eighteen inch guns are in a single turret, which would be some pretty impressive marine engineering all by itself. Though I suppose it is a way of saving weight..... [:)]

I really like Springsharp. It gives a better than first approximation look at the design tradeoffs warship designers have to make. Springsharp

Michael

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Mike,

I presume Upper = Deck. As to the Ends vs Main thing - probably got over-enthusiastic. As to torp bulkheads. Well,what I know about ship design can be written in really large letters on a really small page so this was just me fiddling around.

What I was surprised with was just how much armour I could actually get on the ship without cramping it. I managed to get about 48% of the ship's total displacement as armour which I think is pretty impressive.

I had wondered about "upper", as it is commonly used to describe the upper portion of the belt (above water), as opposed to the "lower belt" which often thins out towards the bottem because the water provides some penetration protection of it's own. The program sounds like fun..., but the results given towards the "skewed ends" of the possibilities seem to be coming out a bit wierd. You have almost 32,000 tons of armor on a not quite 60,000 ton vessel..., and virtually all of it too thick to be worked into the structural strength of the design. It's interesting, but I wouldn't want to go sailing on it.

Mike,
 
Aye well, as I said, I know next to nothing about warship design and was just messing around. it sounds like the way to go is to modify from a currently incorporated design rather than creating a new one as the documentation doesn't adequately explain the ramifications of all of the choices.
 
So, does anyone know of any propeller-driven plane design programmes?

Maybe we need SpringSharp competition now ! [:D]

Just found this proggie..very very neat !!

SpringSharp

muhahaha i am the bringer of gifts.

An upper belt is the strake of protection above the main belt. Few battleships built after WWI had an upper belt.

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

An upper belt is the strake of protection above the main belt. Few battleships built after WWI had an upper belt.

Technically correct. But as he had made no reference to the "lower belt" it was unclear just what was meant by "upper".

I believe the creator of the program is present on some internet forums, so it may be easy to clarify how he is using his terms.

I think Pacific War SpringSharp competition might be fun...BB, CA, CL etc. classes.. Now just need the bunch of judges...[8D][:D]

And parameters for the designs. 'Twould be interesting though.

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

I think Pacific War SpringSharp competition might be fun...BB, CA, CL etc. classes.. Now just need the bunch of judges...[8D][:D]

Wow, wouldn't that be an incitement to riot??? Given all the different opinions about what was the best actual ship design, what would the discussion be like for ships that are never more than specs.

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

And parameters for the designs. 'Twould be interesting though.

Certainly trying to come up with a balanced design within some historic or possible traty limits would be a good challenge.

But IMHO, the most appropriate and realistic limiting parameter would be $.

Michael

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

And parameters for the designs. 'Twould be interesting though.

To be really challenging, they ought to be Treaty-limited. Anybody can build a good CA displacing 15,000 tons..., but doing it with 10,000 is a real juggling act. Asme for other ships. And unlike the Axis powers, no "cheating" allowed.

It should be noted that the system was designed intially calling it spring style for use on making cruisers in the time between ww1 and 2 crusiers and BBs it does very well on but is less effective for destroyers or light cruisers.