Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

Has anyone considered the Katori class training CL's for CLAA/CVL/CVE conversion? Katori, Kashima, Kashii and the uncompleted Kashihara are about 1000 tons lighter and 100 feet shorter than Omaha, but nearly the same width and draught.

They'd need upgraded power plants, and could use blistering, and another 100 feet of hull, but they could make serviceable CVL's of maybe 24 planes. If they were taken in hand at the start of the war, they could be turned around in 9 months, or assume Katori, Kashima to be in conversion process at war start due in March, with Kashii due in June and Kashihara in September.

Thoughts?

We eliminated the 'Training-Class' cruisers in all the Mods. The older WWI CLs are converted to training to open tonnage for other cruisers under the Washington/London Treaties.

New art for CLAA Omaha:

Omaha hull art as:

CLAA (5in/38 mounts)
CVL/CVE w/mast only
CVL/CVE w/small island
CVL rebuild w/full island/stack

Looks good admiral dadman.

Do I count 8 5/38 mounts?

Not to high jack the thread. I did turn the Katori's into CLAA.

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

New art for CLAA Omaha:

That may be a little bit overgunned. The Omahas were a relatively flimsy design that suffered from stability problems all their lives. 16 5-inchers firing at the same time, with the ship traveling at flank... May not literally shake it to pieces, but it wouldn't make for a stable and accurate gun platform. There's a good reason why the Oakland class downgunned from the Atlanta class. That, and the fact that the wing guns were an afterthought meant to fire starshell only.

If it were me, I'd dismount at least the #3 turret, right behind the bridge superstructure. It has a very limited field of fire anyway.

Also, #4 and #5 turrets are sitting on top of the engineering spaces, and the hull is too narrow for the two not to conflict, so that equates to a slower ship.

I've come up with this:




based on this:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Looks good admiral dadman.

Do I count 8 5/38 mounts?

Not to hijack the thread. I did turn the Katori's into CLAA.

Yes. 16x2 5/38's.

4x2 fwd
6x2 center
2x2 all
4x2 rear

All are centerline mounted.

Term, I agree that they might be a bit overgunned. I originally had this design with 3 more turrets winged amidships, and decided that was definitely overkill.

I was iffy on turret #2 and turret #3. I may move turret #3 and the fwd stack aft a bit then remove turret #4.

So here she is as a 12x2 5in/38 CLAA



4x2 fwd
4x2 center
4x2 rear

If that CLV could handle 36 planes in 1940. How many more could it take if the 6 in guns where removed and flight deck was increased?

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

If that CLV could handle 36 planes in 1940. How many more could it take if the 6 in guns where removed and flight deck was increased?

I think 36 was optimistic. It would need a full length deck/hanger to handle that number.

That's still a little bit better than the Independence class.

On the Omaha CLAA did you leave the 3in guns and the 50s?

I set her up as follows:
5/38
4x2 F
4x2 C
4x2 RR

1.1"
4x4 F
4x4 RS
4x4 LS
4x4 R

.50cal Browning
2x1 RS
2x1 LS

9000 Endurance
1200 Fuel
8250 Tons Displacement

32kts Max

No radar

Upgrades as desired

(First refit was radar)

Quick thing about the 1.1in AA: it only existed in a quad mount. Also, it was meant to replace, not complement, the .50cal AAMG.

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Quick thing about the 1.1in AA: it only existed in a quad mount.

Nice catch. Copied my numbers down wrong. Thanks.

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Also, it was meant to replace, not complement, the .50cal AAMG.

Seriously? I thought the progression was .50cal to 20mm in tandem with 1.1in to 40mm?

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Quick thing about the 1.1in AA: it only existed in a quad mount.

Nice catch. Copied my numbers down wrong. Thanks.

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Also, it was meant to replace, not complement, the .50cal AAMG.

Seriously? I thought the progression was .50cal to 20mm in tandem with 1.1in to 40mm?

Nope. The .50cals were realized to be too feeble well before the war, and well before the Oerlikon was a thing (much less the Bofors). The 1.1in was designed and produced to replace the .50cal, but took so long to get into mass production that the .50cal was still there in large numbers when the war began. Once used operationally, the Navy quickly realized that the 1.1in was bad as well, and that spurred deployment of 20mm and 40mm.

Remember that the pre-war navy had 3in and 5in AA guns to fill the medium and heavy flak roles.

Hmm. I knew the basic history of the .50 and the 1.1. I had it in my brain that the .50 still existed on ships that had not been gotten around to yet.

Correct. Also remember that production was permanently outpaced by demand in the early years of the war. That's why the Atlantas and the South Dakotas were commissioned with 1.1in guns, even though the Navy knew they were shit.

About Allied ground units replacement rates.

I don't know if alt time line includes Russo-German war of 1941, but if Germans attack Moscow in December, then how Russians would send 400 (!) squads of infantry monthly to Far East. It's even more than Chinese troops or American in 45.
In 1943 Russians have even more infantry monthly, which is also doubtful. It could be possible in 45, when they shifted all their power to Far East.

Another idea. Allied pools are set as 1200 or 600 monthly replacements of different support troops from the very 07.12.1941. I can't believe it was possible. I suggest making copy of Aviation, Naval, Engineers, Support troops for every year. Then use increasing numbers gradually for different years.

Example:
Naval Support 41 - 300 squads
Naval Support 43 - 600 squads
Naval Support 45 - 1200 squads

I am going to zip all four scenarios to Michael where he is going to somewhat dial back the garrison requirements we bumped up for CBI.

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

I've come up with this:




based on this:

Admiral: I was looking at the purposed flight deck cruisers. This one has a 390 ft deck. One of the other ones had a 420ft deck. Wouldn't that one be able to carry more air craft?