Tzoli said:... Also the less "holes" in the armour hull he less vulnerable the ship will be.
Jemiba said:Tzoli said:... Also the less "holes" in the armour hull he less vulnerable the ship will be.
Thats's a good argument, I think, but the triple probably needs a larger turret ring, than a twin.
Nils_D said:Can you make some modernized Yamatos along the lines of the 80's Iowa refits?
Tzoli said:Nils_D said:Can you make some modernized Yamatos along the lines of the 80's Iowa refits?
Something like with Phalanxes, Harpoons and Tomahawks?
I don't know, but I found something similar though with Russian/Soviet weaponry:
Jemiba said:My first thought wa "very far fetched !", but as the survival of a Yamato class ship is that either,
why not ? IF the war had ended earlier, tere COULD have be still a IJN Yamato or Mushi and then MAYBE
Japan would have been a neutral state, buying equipment from whatever source available...
Either way,looking great !
Jemiba said:I know, that there was an article about proposals to convert HMS Vanguard into a missile carrying
ship (maybe on http://www.phpbbplanet.com/forum/index.php?mforum=warshipprojects ), but I couldn't
find it still yet, so I've only wiki as source ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Vanguard_%2823%29 ).
But there actually were such ideas. And, as you probably would be disappointed, if I won't moan :
Perhaps you should include a deck house in front of the upper Sea Slug launcher, as this missile system was built
with horizontal storage ?
Jemiba said:The latter probably would have been the more worthwhile ship for the IJN, I think.
Jemiba said:Yes, you're right, but to my opinion, the possibilty to carry aircraft had become more and
more neglegible during the later stages of the war. Radar had become more efficient and
reliable and neither on the convoy routes in the artic sea, nor in the pacific other aircraft,
than those launched from carriers played a large role anymore.
Jemiba said:Indeed, and as is mentioned in some sources, aircraft with their related fuel
were often regarded as more a liability, than an asset for a fighting ship.
HMS King George V, for example, carried no aircraft since 1944.
Jemiba said:AFAIK the quadruple turrets proved to be problematic, so maybe a version with four triples would
be reasonable ? Stil two more heavy guns, than the original version, but greatly improved reliabilty
and better handling inside the turrets.
Tzoli said:Which could not mean the issues would not be fixed by then
Jemiba said:Tzoli said:Which could not mean the issues would not be fixed by then
Why not, but one of the complaints was, that the turrets was cramped, something, that probably
couldn't be solved easily.