Hi everyone, I have roughly translated and typeset this chart from the phenomenal book "Линейные корабли типа Советский Союз-Галея Принт (2006)" (Battleships of the Soviet Union).
This book is a phenomenal resource for any of the Soviet Battleship designs, starting with Project 21, with information on Project 23 (Sovetsky Soyuz) and Project 24, as well as the less well known "Type B" project 25 and project 64.
Hi everyone, I have roughly translated and typeset this chart from the phenomenal book "Линейные корабли типа Советский Союз-Галея Принт (2006)" (Battleships of the Soviet Union).
This book is a phenomenal resource for any of the Soviet Battleship designs, starting with Project 21, with information on Project 23 (Sovetsky Soyuz) and Project 24, as well as the less well known "Type B" project 25 and project 64.
From what I know, this scan was fully OCRed, and though getting a copy in Latin characters still is desirable, it would be quite a lot of work. But you can easily copy and paste paragraphs to an online translator with a good chance of getting a suitable result.
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:14 pm Post subject: Soviet small BB projects
As the Soviet Navy considered Iowas to have far stronger armour than in reality the Project 24 BB with only 406mm guns was not considered to be decisively superior. As the displacement of Project 24 was stretching the limitations of the Soviet shipbuilding industry, during 1951-1952 CNII-45 prepared around 20 versions of smaller BBs, which while still retaining 16" guns, had the displacement, armour and speed of Pr. 82 cruiser. These are considered to be the last Soviet "classic gunship" BB design. Instead they switched to cruise missile armed capital ship projects.
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:12 pm Post subject: Re: Soviet small BB projects
snake65 wrote:
As the Soviet Navy considered Iowas to have far stronger armour than in reality the Project 24 BB with only 406mm guns was not considered to be decisively superior. As the displacement of Project 24 was stretching the limitations of the Soviet shipbuilding industry, during 1951-1952 CNII-45 prepared around 20 versions of smaller BBs, which while still retaining 16" guns, had the displacement, armour and speed of Pr. 82 cruiser. These are considered to be the last Soviet "classic gunship" BB design. Instead they switched to cruise missile armed capital ship projects.
Do you have any dimensions or specifications for the two depicted designs?
Quite right, just some small corrections:
The belt is 180mm over the magazines and less everywhere else;
Full displacement for Design IIu-2p is 33870. 42300 is for Pr.82
The text for the first lists it as having 406mm (16") guns as well... but this does not fit with the size of the turret in the drawing when compared to the 220mm (8.7") triple turret aft.
Both drawings show 14 - twin 57mm mounts, not the 12 listed in the specifications.
The first drawing shows only 10 - quad 25mm mounts, not the 12 listed in the specifications.
I do think the 5 x 406mm + 3 x 7.1" version is much better balanced, but would have preferred a heavy AA/DP suite.
Replace the first pair of twin 57mm mounts on each side and the aft pair of twin 57mm mounts with the twin 130mm (5.1") 46cal mount as intended for the Stalingrad class BCs.
Replace the triple 7.1" turret with 2 twin 130mm (5.1") 46cal mounts as well.
Move the aft twin 57mm mount on each side to a superfiring position on the side (replacing the 3rd & 4th quad 25mm mounts on each side). Install a twin 130mm (5.1") 46cal mount where these twin 57mm mounts used to be.
This gives an armament of 5 - 406 [16"] (1 x 3 & 1 x 2); 14 - 130mm [5.1"] (7 x 2) DP; 16 - 57mm (8 x 2) AA; & 32 - 25mm (8 x 4) AA.
I liked small BB ships!(But these are not really small or light ones-compared to pre-WW2 ships.Compared to an Iowa, Montana, H-..., Yamato are more visible. Not mentioned an H-44 or a similar soviet topheavy ship!)
If you have similar great pictures about Pr.22 or Pr.66 heavy cruiser, please post!(H-44 also velcome!
)
So, as seen the russian text above, ships are turbo-electric driven?
Or not? But the 4 diesel-generators outside the main armour stucture are interesting. So, translation are welcome!
Mopat
I doubt it very much that the ships are turbo-electric. As for the diesel generators, they are auxiliary anyway, I guess they just didn't have enough space inside the citadel.
Font colour: Default Dark Red Red Orange Brown Yellow Green Olive Cyan Blue Dark Blue Indigo Violet White Black Font size: Tiny Small Normal Large Huge
Jump to: Select a forum General Board----------------News, announcements Never-were warships----------------United States NavyRoyal NavyNihon KaigunMarine NationaleRegia MarinaDeutsche KriegsmarineDeutsche HochseeflotteRussian/Soviet NaviesOther, smaller navies Other never-were related forums----------------Never-were modelsNever-were sources,books,websitesNever-were fleet tactics, concepts etc. Non-never were but ship related forums----------------Real ships Own Designs----------------Own designs
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You can edit your posts in this forum
You can delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
You have no new messages![Log out [ garayterrazas ]](https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/Warship%20Projects%20Discussion%20Boards%203_0%20%20View%20topic%20-%20Soviet%20small%20BB%20projects_archivos/icon_mini_login.gif "Log out [ garayterrazas ]"){kind=icon}
Log out [ garayterrazas ]
