unbuild ww2 japanese ship projects
- Thread starter T-50
- Start date
Hoo-2b-2day
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 27 February 2008
- Messages
- 65
- Reaction score
- 11
In regard to the site http://www.phpbbplanet.com/warshipprojects/index.php?mforum=warshipprojects, view most items in this site with caution as the majority are fiction or even fantasy creations by the contributors. Unlike Secretprojects there in no attempt to keep within the realms of actual projects.
Example: this site includes many "super-duper" or "hyper Yamato" designs with up to 15 20 inch guns in triple mounts. Due to the need to keep hull beam and depth within the constraints required of Japans coastal waters and harbours the Japanese navy never genuinely contemplated using triple 21 inch turrets. The biggest designs contemplated, (as opposed to dreamed about) by the Japanese Navy were designed to carry 4 twin 20 turrets, (all forward as per the Tone class cruisers), and these raised major issues relating to building, harbouring, refit/repair etc
It appears that many contributors to the above website are gun obsessed, some of the designs included are so overgunned for the hull size that if they would float at all it would be keel up.
As light entertainment for naval enthusiast http://www.phpbbplanet.com/warshipprojects/index.php? has some merit but it does not in any way approach Secretprojects in regard to authenticity and verification of the "designs" portrayed.
Despite the above comments there is some useful information on this site but it primarily concerns US Navy designs (due to the availability of "Springstyle" design studies and the works of Norman Friedman) and to a lesser extent Royal Navy designs.
T-50 - If you want to access genuine information relating to Japanese Naval project you need to do the hard work of located and purchasing (or borrowing if able) reputable and properly researched books on naval design and technology. I recommend Conway Maritimes "Warship" series which began as a quarterly publication in 1977 and continues as a yearly publication to this day.
Unfortunately due to the secrecy obsession of the Japanese Navy up to and including WW2 and the destructive effects of US firebombing raids on Japan 1944-1945 there is very little contemporary information left. Much of what is known of the war time Japanese designs come from the memories of the surviving staff involved and conjecture based on earlier designs and Japanese design/construction traits.
Example: this site includes many "super-duper" or "hyper Yamato" designs with up to 15 20 inch guns in triple mounts. Due to the need to keep hull beam and depth within the constraints required of Japans coastal waters and harbours the Japanese navy never genuinely contemplated using triple 21 inch turrets. The biggest designs contemplated, (as opposed to dreamed about) by the Japanese Navy were designed to carry 4 twin 20 turrets, (all forward as per the Tone class cruisers), and these raised major issues relating to building, harbouring, refit/repair etc
It appears that many contributors to the above website are gun obsessed, some of the designs included are so overgunned for the hull size that if they would float at all it would be keel up.
As light entertainment for naval enthusiast http://www.phpbbplanet.com/warshipprojects/index.php? has some merit but it does not in any way approach Secretprojects in regard to authenticity and verification of the "designs" portrayed.
Despite the above comments there is some useful information on this site but it primarily concerns US Navy designs (due to the availability of "Springstyle" design studies and the works of Norman Friedman) and to a lesser extent Royal Navy designs.
T-50 - If you want to access genuine information relating to Japanese Naval project you need to do the hard work of located and purchasing (or borrowing if able) reputable and properly researched books on naval design and technology. I recommend Conway Maritimes "Warship" series which began as a quarterly publication in 1977 and continues as a yearly publication to this day.
Unfortunately due to the secrecy obsession of the Japanese Navy up to and including WW2 and the destructive effects of US firebombing raids on Japan 1944-1945 there is very little contemporary information left. Much of what is known of the war time Japanese designs come from the memories of the surviving staff involved and conjecture based on earlier designs and Japanese design/construction traits.
H22day said
There are guidelines for posters, and guidelines for the uninitiated who want to use the site as a small number of its regular contributors do: to find information on designs which were never built, but originated with real design teams at specific dates in the past. Give it a try, and if you don't find it possible to deal with, and find what you are looking for, send me a pm from that site.
There is good material out there, and Warship is a good start.
There is an index to Warship articles at
http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/periodicals/warship/
Imperial Japanese Navy items are in red, as it happens. Look in particular for articles by Lengerer.
Try also Japanese cruisers of the Pacific war by Lacroix and Wells, a large, expensive but superb book.
Good luck!
Unfortunately this is largely true, though not the original intention of the site. Efforts are made (I am a moderator), with Forum rules to distinguish between Own Designs and real history, but they are not generally very successful.
There are guidelines for posters, and guidelines for the uninitiated who want to use the site as a small number of its regular contributors do: to find information on designs which were never built, but originated with real design teams at specific dates in the past. Give it a try, and if you don't find it possible to deal with, and find what you are looking for, send me a pm from that site.
There is good material out there, and Warship is a good start.
There is an index to Warship articles at
http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/periodicals/warship/
Imperial Japanese Navy items are in red, as it happens. Look in particular for articles by Lengerer.
Try also Japanese cruisers of the Pacific war by Lacroix and Wells, a large, expensive but superb book.
Good luck!
Artist impressions of Design A-150 or "Super Yamato" class battleship. Generally similar to the Yamato-class battleship, but with a main battery of six 510-mm/45-caliber guns and a dual purpose anti-aircraft battery with high-performance 100-mm/65-caliber guns.
Design work was completed in 1941. At least one 510-mm gun was manufactured at Kure Naval Yard in early 1941. The armor-piercing shell would have weighed 1,900 kilograms. The powder bags--eight for each round--would have been too heavy for loading, and automatic transfer and loading devices were under development.
Warship Number 798 would have been built at Yokosuka in the Shinano dock. Warship Number 799 at Kure in the Yamato dock, after the fourth Yamato-class battleship cleared the dock. The ships were scheduled to be laid down in late 1941 or early 1942 and launched three years later, with a total building period of five years.
Source: Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II by William H. Garzke and Robert O. Dulin, Jr., United States Naval Institute, 1990.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_A-150_battleship
http://www.watakan.com/works/yamato/a150.html
Design work was completed in 1941. At least one 510-mm gun was manufactured at Kure Naval Yard in early 1941. The armor-piercing shell would have weighed 1,900 kilograms. The powder bags--eight for each round--would have been too heavy for loading, and automatic transfer and loading devices were under development.
Warship Number 798 would have been built at Yokosuka in the Shinano dock. Warship Number 799 at Kure in the Yamato dock, after the fourth Yamato-class battleship cleared the dock. The ships were scheduled to be laid down in late 1941 or early 1942 and launched three years later, with a total building period of five years.
Source: Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II by William H. Garzke and Robert O. Dulin, Jr., United States Naval Institute, 1990.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_A-150_battleship
http://www.watakan.com/works/yamato/a150.html
Attachments
Design B-65 was the Imperial Japanese Navy response to the US Navy's Alaska-class battlecruiser. Preliminary design work was completed by September 1940 and two ships of the class were planned. Main battery of nine 310-mm guns and a displacement of 35,000 metric tons, the general characteristics of this design were very similar to the Alaska-class.
Source: Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II by William H. Garzke and Robert O. Dulin, Jr., United States Naval Institute, 1990.
General Characteristics
Type: Super Type A cruiser
Displacement: Standard: 31,905 t (31,401 long tons)
Full-load: 35,000 t (34,000 long tons)
Length: 240 m (790 ft) length at the waterline
246.2 m (808 ft) length overall
Beam: 27.2 m (89 ft)[1]
Draft: 8.8 m (29 ft) (trial)[1]
Propulsion: Four sets of geared turbines and eight Kampon boilers would yield 170,000 metric horsepower (167,674 shaft horsepower); this would have been able to drive the ship at 34 kn (39 mph; 63 km/h)
Endurance: 8,000 mi (13,000 km) at 18 kn (21 mph; 33 km/h)
Armament: 9 × 310 mm (12.2 in)/50 caliber guns (3×3)
16 × 100 mm (3.9 in)/65 caliber dual-purpose guns (8×2)
12 × 25 mm (1 in) anti-aircraft guns (6×2)
4 × 13 mm (0.51 in) machine guns (2×2)
8 × 610 mm (24 in) torpedo tubes (4×2)
Armor: Sources do not give any specifics outside of a 190 mm (7.5 in) side belt sloped at 20° and 125 mm (4.9 in) deck
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_B-65_cruiser
Source: Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II by William H. Garzke and Robert O. Dulin, Jr., United States Naval Institute, 1990.
General Characteristics
Type: Super Type A cruiser
Displacement: Standard: 31,905 t (31,401 long tons)
Full-load: 35,000 t (34,000 long tons)
Length: 240 m (790 ft) length at the waterline
246.2 m (808 ft) length overall
Beam: 27.2 m (89 ft)[1]
Draft: 8.8 m (29 ft) (trial)[1]
Propulsion: Four sets of geared turbines and eight Kampon boilers would yield 170,000 metric horsepower (167,674 shaft horsepower); this would have been able to drive the ship at 34 kn (39 mph; 63 km/h)
Endurance: 8,000 mi (13,000 km) at 18 kn (21 mph; 33 km/h)
Armament: 9 × 310 mm (12.2 in)/50 caliber guns (3×3)
16 × 100 mm (3.9 in)/65 caliber dual-purpose guns (8×2)
12 × 25 mm (1 in) anti-aircraft guns (6×2)
4 × 13 mm (0.51 in) machine guns (2×2)
8 × 610 mm (24 in) torpedo tubes (4×2)
Armor: Sources do not give any specifics outside of a 190 mm (7.5 in) side belt sloped at 20° and 125 mm (4.9 in) deck
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_B-65_cruiser
Attachments
Artist impression of two 1930 design studies of Washington Naval Treaty-compliant battleship replacements for the Kongo-class battlecruisers/fast battleships.
The Hiraga design, left, featured an unusually compact superstructure with a main battery of ten 410-mm guns, with triple turrets superfiring over twins.
The Fujimoto design, right, provided for a similar armament, but the second battery of twelve 152-mm guns in twin turrets was unusually positioned, nearer the bow and the stern than the main battery turrets, with special shields to protect them against the main armament's blast.
Both these design studies provided for maximum speeds of about 26 knots.
Source: Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II by William H. Garzke and Robert O. Dulin, Jr., United States Naval Institute, 1990.
The Hiraga design, left, featured an unusually compact superstructure with a main battery of ten 410-mm guns, with triple turrets superfiring over twins.
The Fujimoto design, right, provided for a similar armament, but the second battery of twelve 152-mm guns in twin turrets was unusually positioned, nearer the bow and the stern than the main battery turrets, with special shields to protect them against the main armament's blast.
Both these design studies provided for maximum speeds of about 26 knots.
Source: Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II by William H. Garzke and Robert O. Dulin, Jr., United States Naval Institute, 1990.
Attachments
Fujimoto does seem to like putting his secondaries ahead of the main guns, I have wondered what effect this location would have on the secondaries, would they suffer from blast effect from the main guns. Also I would imagine that protection of the magazines from underwater attack would not have been as great due to the reduced beam of the area of the ship.
From Warship Projects Discussion Boards 3.0:
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2063&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&mforum=warshipprojects
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2063&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&mforum=warshipprojects
Attachments
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,249
With regards to the A-150, it's designers seem not to have been blind to the increasing danger of air attack, unlike certain other design teams and naval authorities of the period leading up to WWII.
Also, it is ironic that serious work on the threat that the Alaskas were built to deal with (Super Heavy Cruisers/ Battlecruisers, such as the B-65) actually only started in response to their construction!
Also, it is ironic that serious work on the threat that the Alaskas were built to deal with (Super Heavy Cruisers/ Battlecruisers, such as the B-65) actually only started in response to their construction!
Triton said:
According to Jentschura & Jung, the design was still Project 64 when it still had the 31cm guns and torpedoes. The Project 65 was an iteration of that with the torpedo tubes deleted and the main battery increased in caliber to 14", in response to reports of the Alaska-class.
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,249
Madurai said:
And so the wheel turns! One thing, though. Given that torpedoes were such an important weapon for Japanese warships in general, what was the rationale behind the deletion of Project 65's torpedo armament do you know? Was it because of weight/displacement issues, as in other cases where built or projected warship designs lost part or all of their torpedo tubes?
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,249
Triton said:
Via MilitaryPhotos.net:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po0mht6LcwA&feature=player_embedded
- Joined
- 1 February 2011
- Messages
- 2,802
- Reaction score
- 3,166
Madurai said:
Wrong!
Design B-64 is the Amagi class battlecruiser and B-65 is this large cruiser / Mini Yamato
Also there was an alternative armament for this ship of 3 twin 36cm Gun Turrets
And not 4 twin 61cm Torpedo Tubes but Two Quad ones!
- Joined
- 1 February 2011
- Messages
- 2,802
- Reaction score
- 3,166
And here are my interpretation of the Yamato Variants:
Yamato Class (3 ships):
Improved Yamato (or as I call Them Yamato-Kai Class) (Last two ships of the Yamato class to a different design) 3x2 51cm 2x3 15.5cm
Version A: (My Suggestion with still the 127mm Type 89 AA guns)
Version B: (real proposal with 10cm Type 98 AA Guns)
A-150 aka Super Yamato with 4x2 51cm and "Many" 10cm Type 98 AA Guns:
Yamato Class (3 ships):
Improved Yamato (or as I call Them Yamato-Kai Class) (Last two ships of the Yamato class to a different design) 3x2 51cm 2x3 15.5cm
Version A: (My Suggestion with still the 127mm Type 89 AA guns)
Version B: (real proposal with 10cm Type 98 AA Guns)
A-150 aka Super Yamato with 4x2 51cm and "Many" 10cm Type 98 AA Guns:
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,249
Similar threads
-
never realized projects of Japanese destroyers ww2
- Started by T-50
- Replies: 18
-
-
Japanese 'dream project' battleships and never built battleships
- Started by ceccherini
- Replies: 113
-
-
experimental ww2 Japanese aircraft radars
- Started by T-50
- Replies: 0