Mexican cruiser from 1920s

[Hardrada55]

Okay, where does the twin 8-inch gun go on this Vickers monstrosity for Mexico? Fore or aft? Or, God forbid, does it land somewhere else? "Design 819 (for Mexico) was more a fast gunboat (one twin 8in/45, two twin 6in, four 4.7in/45, two 4.134in HA, twelve 3 pdr QF, two triple 21in torpedo tubes, 23kts (power no given). 410ft x 47ft x 26ft x 15ft 6in, 4850 tons, 3in side armor over machinery)."

 

[Tzoli]

Not a monstrosity at all, more comparable or even better to the Japanese built Thai Sri Ayuthia.
Most logical was arrangement to be:
8" forward,
superfiring 6" aft
4,7" at the sides
the 105mm DP-AA either aft on a platfrom behind and above the 6" or evenly spread on the centreline superfiring the 8" and 6" turrets
The 40mm pom-poms were arranged where there could be enough space.
And of course torpedoes.... well those could go under the 4,7" singles.
a bit over armed (number of gun wise) for a 125m long (pp) ship

 

[Dilandu]

I'd say it's some... unortodox design for cruiser, and actually seems to be more in line with coastal defense ships, than cruisers.

Most logical was arrangement to be:
8" forward,
superfiring 6" aft

Agreed with such reconstruction.

 

[Hardrada55]

Okay, I certainly agree that arrangement sees most logical. To what 8 inch 45 caliber gun could they be referring? I'm not aware of a British gun with those parameters. Seems most of the contemporaneous modern 8 inch guns were 50 calibers and above. 45 caliber seems to imply an obsolete weapon, which could be an attempt at making this design more economically palatable. USA had several classes of pre-dreadnoughts which were scrapped under the Washington Treaty in 1923 which had turreted 8 inch 45 caliber secondary guns. Seems strange to build a vessel in Britain and arm it with old American guns. Makes you wonder about the twin 6 inch turrets. I believe the 3 pdr would be the Hotchkiss or Vickers semi-automatic "Quick Firing" guns.

 

[Tzoli]

Yes, the last British 8"/45 gun was an Armstrong one from around 1898 the Pattern or Mark W.
Vickers seems not created such calibre gun.

But yes most likely the gun would be an older American made one the Mark 6 from 1900
Or if Japan would sell their Type 35 guns

 

[Dilandu]

But yes most likely the gun would be an older American made one the Mark 6 from 1900
Or if Japan would sell their Type 35 guns

Or it may just be a mistake made on some point, and the gun was actually supposed to be 8-inch/50.

 

[Hood]

The 4.134in (105mm) HA guns are odd normally these would be 4in (102mm) if standard British mounts were being used.
Vickers did however market a 4.134in (105mm) mountain howitzer which they sold to Bolivia (Vickers also sold 105mm field howitzers to Bolivia too).
So I wonder if these HA guns are actually mountain howitzers - which would have a high degree of elevation? Unless Mexico already had stocks of 105mm ammunition and the standard 102mm AA guns were rebored?

 

[Tzoli]

Not seen the original Vickers papers or any accompanying Official text or even Mexican papers we cannot be sure about it but not an impossibility.
But choosing a non British standard calibre for a British export design while rare, isn't unheard of among the large number of export designs!
Sometimes it is the exact requirement of the nation or navy requesting the design.
For example Armstrong offered 9,45"/50 (240mm) guns for Brazil in 1910 and which were also used on the Norwegiean Björgvin class taken over as HMS Glatton and Gorgon.
105mm guns featured on light cruiser proposals from Vickers to Spain and Chile in the early-mid 1920 (presumably Bofors guns) as well as heavy cruisers for Brazil and Turkey
in 1930 the same calibre was envisioned for designs for the Netherlands and Portugal with the former's main battery featured 149mm Guns likely the Dutch Wilton-Fijenoord made guns.
Similar the case with the 75mm guns mostly produced by France and Sweden and before WW1, Germany

 

[Dilandu]

The 4.134in (105mm) HA guns are odd normally these would be 4in (102mm) if standard British mounts were being used.

This add to my suspicions, that there are some mistakes in numbers. Maybe original document was in poor shape and hard to read, or it was lost and data was read from inaccurate copy.

 

[DWG]

The 40mm pom-poms were arranged where there could be enough space.

3 Pdrs would be 47mm QF, not the 2 Pdr / 40mm pom-pom.

 

[DWG]

The 4.134in (105mm) HA guns are odd normally these would be 4in (102mm) if standard British mounts were being used.

This add to my suspicions, that there are some mistakes in numbers.

It reads to me exactly like someone converting metric on the drawings or ledgers to Imperial in their notes, probably for a US audience as Brits would be more inclined to leave it (105/25.4 = 4.1338 = 4.134). There's plenty of precedent for metric guns being mixed with Imperial, usually from multiple suppliers, but even Vickers designated some of their guns in one system and some in the other, cf the 25.4mm AA on ARA La Argentina. The German 10.5cm/45 SK C/32 would be an obvious candidate.

 

[Tzoli]

I've just noticed that your title is wrong. The design was actually from around 1933 not from the 1920's though indeed the Vickers design numbers often inconsistent. and a larger number not always represent a later design.

The 1930 London Naval Treaty banned further construction ín the United Kíngdom of heavy cruisers, but Vickers could keep building such ships as long as it retained its Spanish yards. lt was therefore able to offer a heavy cruiser to Brazil in 1933 (it is illustrated separately). One other interwar Vickers design qualifies as a more or less heavy cruiser. Although described as a protected cruiser, Design 819 (for Mexico) was more a fast gunboat (one twin 8in/45, two twin 6in, four 4.7in/45, two 4.134in HA, twelve 3pdr QF, two triple 21in torpedo tubes, 23kts [power is not given]. 410ft x 47ft x 26ft x 15ft 6in, 4,850tons, 3in side over machinery).