Search found 326 matches

Go to advanced search

by Legend
Sun Dec 26, 2010 8:47 pm
Forum: Naval Propulsion
Topic: Warship Shafts
Replies: 3
Views: 1962

Warship Shafts

Hey everyone, Yeah I know, long time no see. I have been busy with school and been playing around with my old designs. Now that I am older I am seeing problems that I couldn't have imagined before. One of these little quandaries is the fact that my "Armored Citadel" is narrower than the sp...
by Legend
Sun May 30, 2010 4:26 pm
Forum: Naval History Post-1945
Topic: Future of surface units?
Replies: 24
Views: 7014

Re: Future of surface units?

Alright perhaps not five... but the most armor they have these days is posibly a half inch of steel on the outer hull... and perhaps a bit of kevlar in rare areas! At this point the only other thing I see protecting these modern ships are bulkheads... making it necessary for an entire area of the sh...
by Legend
Sat May 29, 2010 4:52 am
Forum: Naval Technology
Topic: Ideal battleship design
Replies: 162
Views: 34426

Re: Ideal battleship design

I have seen the website, and have gotten the gist of what it was made for, but I would like more information before I say "I have to get that program!" Is it free? Is it a drafting program? Who has it?
by Legend
Tue May 25, 2010 10:45 pm
Forum: Naval History Post-1945
Topic: Future of surface units?
Replies: 24
Views: 7014

Re: Future of surface units?

At this point they have just given up on four and five.
by Legend
Tue May 25, 2010 10:40 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: BattleCarriers, a stupid idea?
Replies: 74
Views: 6149

Re: BattleCarriers, a stupid idea?

Hehehe inside an aircraft! :lol:
by Legend
Mon May 24, 2010 3:21 am
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: USN gets their hands on the H-44 study in '39.
Replies: 3
Views: 943

Re: USN gets their hands on the H-44 study in '39.

Why would they bother building an H-44 when they could have just as easily built a Montana?
by Legend
Sat May 22, 2010 2:55 am
Forum: Naval History Post-1945
Topic: Future of surface units?
Replies: 24
Views: 7014

Re: Future of surface units?

As it has been since the first warship, as the artillery gets larger, the armor gets thicker. Now, we have to realize that lately it has been more focused on preventing damage, rather than absorbing it. As missiles become larger, or more accurate, or more maneuverable, expect that the CIWS will beco...
by Legend
Fri May 21, 2010 3:10 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Bismarck Final Moments
Replies: 13
Views: 2307

Re: Bismarck Final Moments

What about wind direction? It appears that the wind is traveling to the starboard of Bismarck... wasn't the wind going northeast that day?
by Legend
Tue May 18, 2010 3:10 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: BattleCarriers, a stupid idea?
Replies: 74
Views: 6149

Re: BattleCarriers, a stupid idea?

No sane commander wants to have his aircraft carrier close to the action... that's what the aircraft are for. I agree that the theory is cool, but the practical uses are slim to none. The closest thing I could say to something like this is not a carrier per say... but perhaps an amphibious assault s...
by Legend
Sat May 15, 2010 2:54 am
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: H class vs Iowa
Replies: 41
Views: 3582

Re: H class vs Iowa

Iowa could withstand shells of her own calibre, until the introduction of the heavyweight shells later introduced in WWII... If my memory serves me correct. I can only assume, in the lightweight nature of Bismarck's shells for her 15in guns, that the 16in version would probably be the same.
by Legend
Thu May 13, 2010 1:06 am
Forum: Naval Technology
Topic: Ideal battleship design
Replies: 162
Views: 34426

Re: Ideal battleship design

Aircraft are sturdy vehicles of war, but not a single one has ever been designed to be able to take a direct hit from a 5in shell. From what I understand the American 5in had a faster rate of fire than either the 5.25in or 6in.
by Legend
Thu May 06, 2010 4:52 pm
Forum: Naval Technology
Topic: Ideal battleship design
Replies: 162
Views: 34426

Re: Ideal battleship design

Note that the actual Montana class design managed to get four turrets on 65,000 tons, but at the expense of speed. I am curious, as I am not a powerplant engineer and do not have much experience with them... what would have been necessary to allow the Montana class to be able to reach the higher sp...
by Legend
Thu May 06, 2010 4:47 pm
Forum: Naval Technology
Topic: Ideal battleship design
Replies: 162
Views: 34426

Re: Ideal battleship design

Where to start... I would begin with upping it to 16in main guns. Having longer sustained fire is kind of irrelevant, considering if you are: A. So deeply surrounded by enemies it's a wonder they didn't torpedo you already. B. Miss so much you have to fire that many more shells to actually score a h...
by Legend
Thu Apr 29, 2010 2:30 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: How would you improve the Royal Navy
Replies: 114
Views: 11137

Re: How would you improve the royal navy

A ship that large would have extreme balance problems. The reason the KGV class did not have the center gun a quad instead of a double, is that during testing and calculations they found that the large center quad would cause stability problems. You would have to increase the hull size to atleast 60...
by Legend
Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:13 pm
Forum: Off Topic
Topic: FIRST Robotics
Replies: 0
Views: 646

FIRST Robotics

Hey Guys, I just got back from a trip to Atlanta, and in light that many of you have some degree in engineering, I should mention it. I am part of an organization called FIRST, which stands for: For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology. Every year they come out with a new game, spor...

Go to advanced search

cron