Iowa class BB in CMANO

[ziolo]

This is an excerpt from an AAR on the Log Bridge scenario:

"With the Wisconsin huge 406mm guns out of action, I pressed on to finish enemy ships(…I suppose including
Wisconsin as it is on NATO Losses list…) with the Sverdlov cruisers and powerful 130 mm guns from Slava
and Sovremenny."

What? Finishing Iowa class BB with 152 and 130mm guns?!? [:D]

Sorry but IMHO if light 152mm Sverdlov's shells and 130mm shells from Slava and co. (130mm = "powerfull" ?!?!?),
if they can inflict damage to the point that small shells can penetrate the triple STS steel deck, triple/quadruple
longitudinal BHDs at sides with heavy armour behind 2 layers of tanks filled with fluid and triple bottom of
Iowa class BB, all designed to withstand 16" AP armour-piercing projectiles, fitted to a battleship designed and built
according to all-or-nothing and immunity zone concept when fighting with similar 16" guns enemy then I have my
doubts whether CMANO is realistically portraying ships with armour.

Does CMANO give only a count of every hit against total points of hull resistance/displacement? This is good
approach when considering damage on modern warships as they are designed and built like merchant vessels,
only cruisers, CVNs having light (composite) armour around vital parts of ship.

Wisconsin could be “mission killed” after several hits by missiles and really heavy guns (not 152/130mm), having
her sensors destroyed (still could be fighting with main guns using secondary control systems) but would never be a complete loss at the bottom of the sea.

Iowa’s, as re-activated in the 80-ties, were intended to be, in theory, the Kirov-killers or Kirov-deterrents.
Thanks to All-Or-Nothing design the Iowas could even take some punch (if escorts could not cope with all incoming
enemy’s missiles) but at the end Iowas would outrun Kirovs, depleted of missiles, and finish them with 16” guns.

How is the All-Or-Nothing design and BB’s armour modelled in CMANO? That is my question.

[Broncepulido]

Only in relation to critical hits in lightly protected ship zones (as rudder, bridge, engine, magazines...).

[ziolo]

ORIGINAL: Broncepulido

Only in relation to critical hits in lightly protected ship zones (as rudder, bridge, engine, magazines...).

Talking about lightly protected zones, I know, the Iowa class BBs are different kind of warships.
Unlike modern warships, which operate on the concept of eliminating an incoming threat (anti-ship
missiles or enemy aircraft) before the given threat strikes a ship and thus carry lighter armour,
the Iowa-class was designed and built in an age when ships were expected to withstand an onslaught
of naval shells from enemy ships, emplaced coastal defences from fortified enemy positions near
the coast, and the increasing threat of gunfire and armour piercing/ incendiary bombs dropped by
enemy fighter and bomber aircraft.
Rudder, bridge, command, engine and boilers room, engine shafts, turrets with ammunition and powder magazines,
main battery plotting and control room, primary control room,all of them were enclosed in a heavy armoured
citadel. You could hit Iowa in external to citadel areas and do very little damage to her fight capability.
Several layers of STS and HTS steel and Class A & B armour plates (several hundreds of mm thick) make the
citadel very difficult to penetrate by modern missiles which are design to hit unarmoured thin skin warships
(remember USS Cole hit by explosives from a small boat? this explosion would do no damage to an Iowa BB)

The blue shaded area on the side view below shows the Iowa's protective scheme of the citadel areas. The fuel and
water tanks give an additional protection between the layers of armour at side. The outside hull skin is relatively thin
only to initiate the igniters of incoming shells.

[Dysta]

Or simple answer: a majority of deck is made of wood, reinforced with steel that only serve as a support. If a penetrating shot/bomb went through it, the Iowa will becomes a floating furnace.

But I am still admire its formidable thickness of protective sides, which is thick enough to survive from few 500KG warhead of torps and/or missiles.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Dysta

Or simple answer: a majority of deck is made of wood, reinforced with steel that only serve as a support. If a penetrating shot/bomb went through it, the Iowa will becomes a floating furnace.

But I am still admire its formidable thickness of protective sides, which is thick enough to survive from few 500KG warhead of torps and/or missiles.

I think you missed all the deck and citadel deck armour in diagram. Majority of ship deck was protected by various levels of armour and not just "serve as support". Those armour values with arrow are "deck armour" on various levels. Almost all deck was protected at least by 38 mm of STS.

[Dysta]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

ORIGINAL: Dysta

Or simple answer: a majority of deck is made of wood, reinforced with steel that only serve as a support. If a penetrating shot/bomb went through it, the Iowa will becomes a floating furnace.

But I am still admire its formidable thickness of protective sides, which is thick enough to survive from few 500KG warhead of torps and/or missiles.

I think you missed all the deck and citadel deck armour in diagram. Majority of ship deck was protected by various levels of armour and not just "serve as support". Those armour values with arrow are "deck armour" on various levels. Almost all deck was protected at least by 38 mm of STS.

Oh god, that is surely not an ordinary WWII myth about wooden deck on warships.

[hellfish6]

I seem to recall that the devs have said that really detailed ship gunnery and armor simulation will come with a WWII game. I'm happy to be corrected on this, however.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

I seem to recall that the devs have said that really detailed ship gunnery and armor simulation will come with a WWII game. I'm happy to be corrected on this, however.

It is true, they have said that gunnery and armour is not detailed yet and it can sometimes give funny results. E.g. Soviet ship sinking Iowa with 130mm etc.

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

I seem to recall that the devs have said that really detailed ship gunnery and armor simulation will come with a WWII game. I'm happy to be corrected on this, however.

Yeah that's pretty much it.

Mike

[ryszardsh]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

I seem to recall that the devs have said that really detailed ship gunnery and armor simulation will come with a WWII game. I'm happy to be corrected on this, however.

Yeah that's pretty much it.

Mike

So would tweaking the unit proficiency (Iowa BB = ace, etc) balance these issue somewhat? Or does that only impact offensive proficiency, i.e. chance of hit when shooting?

[mikmykWS]

No wouldn't help. We need to actually implement armor etc.

Mike

[ziolo]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

No wouldn't help. We need to actually implement armor etc.

Mike

Mike, thanks for clarification. Is it any chance in near future that we have the armor vs projectiles & missiles implemented for CMANO? I mean for BB's but also cruisers, like Des Moines class or even Sverdlovs.
It would really enhance the CMANO realism for the hypothetical scenarios from the cold war era especially from the 50-ties, Korean War and 60-ties, Vietnam War, etc. However I see that it would not be any big priority for your team at the moment considering the Modern warfare as in the CMANO name, but who knows? We can always dream...

I am delighted with the progress of CMANO, overall play-ability, and your team continuous work on improvement in realism. And waiting for more stuff in years to come. I hope this project will not stop like others previous platforms.
If one day we get the armor implemented I will be very happy.[&o]

[mikmykWS]

It's not likely to happen soon. Sorry! We all wish we could nail some of this stuff quicker but we've got to stick to a plan that keeps us in business and somewhat sane. It's definitely on the list.

Mike

[Dimitris]

Something I've been curious about every time someone praises the "armored citadel" concept (not exclusively on the Iowa class): What happens to the super-armored block(s) when the rest of the ship is blown/burned away? Can it/they even remain afloat?

[Randomizer]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Something I've been curious about every time someone sings the praises of the "armored citadel" concept (not exclusively on the Iowa class): What happens to the super-armored block(s) when the rest of the ship is blown/burned away? Can it/they even remain afloat?

Typically, there was supposed to be sufficient reserve buoyancy and enough reserve stability to keep the ship afloat with the unarmoured ends flooded. British naval architects had gone through a "citadel" phase during the ironclad period and decided that it was an impractical scheme overall and an expensive one since it required a larger hull which cost more and necessitated greater propulsive power, which also increased cost. The Admiral Class of ironclad battleships were built using armoured citadels and but HMS Camperdown was very nearly lost when she had her stem wrecked in the collision with HMS Victoria in 1893. Only beaching her on the nearby Levant coast and a flat calm likely saved the ship. The Victoria disaster pretty much soured the Royal Navy on this armour arrangement. You can find some discussion on this in Parkes, British Battleships and no doubt lots of related noise on the Internet.

-C

[Primarchx]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Something I've been curious about every time someone praises the "armored citadel" concept (not exclusively on the Iowa class): What happens to the super-armored block(s) when the rest of the ship is blown/burned away? Can it/they even remain afloat?

FWIW, I helped test a Dreadnought->WWII naval combat system by some very talented ameteurs a few years back and while armor was very nice, you did not want your shiny BB getting hammered by fast-firing low caliber rounds for long as they wiped out your upper works and started nasty fires. Not to mention the danger of torpedoes. Armor worked well, but only covered certain areas of the ship. I saw the Yamato pummeled into scrap a few times by big guns, too. Those 18" are nice but their rate of fire wasn't all that great and their magazine allowance was not all that generous.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

ORIGINAL: hellfish6
I seem to recall that the devs have said that really detailed ship gunnery and armor simulation will come with a WWII game. I'm happy to be corrected on this, however.

Yeah that's pretty much it.

Are there actually any plans for a WWII game in the foreseeable future? If so, would it be integrated into this game (as a paid "module", etc.), or be a stand-alone game?

[mikmykWS]

Likely pay unless we're stupid and decide to not get a return for the effort.

Mike

[renders]

ehehehehe LOL

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk
Likely pay unless we're stupid and decide to not get a return for the effort.

uh, OK, but you're answering a question I didn't ask; I assumed any WWII content would not be free. I guess my question wasn't clear, let me try again:
1) Are there specific plans for a WWII game, or is it more in the category of "maybe someday..."?; and
2) if there are such plans, will the WWII content be able to be used within this game or will it be a stand-alone game?