brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 9, 2013 2:22:34 GMT -5
Here's some information to get started. Class & type: Gangut-class battleship Displacement: 24,800 tonnes (24,400 long tons; 27,300 short tons) Length: 181.2 m (594 ft) Beam: 26.9 m (88 ft) Draft: 8.99 m (29.5 ft) Propulsion: 4-shaft Parsons steam turbines 25 Yarrow Admiralty-type watertube boilers 52,000 shp (38,776 kW) (on trials) Speed: 24.1 knots (27.7 mph; 44.6 km/h) (on trials) Range: 3,200 nautical miles (5,900 km) at 10 knots (12 mph; 19 km/h) Complement: 1,149 Armament: 4 × 3 - 12-inch (305 mm)/52 guns 16 × 1 - 4.7-inch (119 mm) guns 1 × 1 - 3-inch (76 mm) Lender AA gun 4 × 1 - 17.7-inch (450 mm) submerged torpedo tubes Armor: Waterline belt: 125–225 mm (4.9–8.9 in) Deck: 12–50 mm (0.47–2.0 in) Turrets: 76–203 mm (3.0–8.0 in) Barbettes: 75–150 mm (3.0–5.9 in) Conning tower: 100–254 mm (3.9–10.0 in)
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 20, 2013 20:09:28 GMT -5
Feedback welcome! Let's keep it constructive. Proposed stats: Gangut-class Battleship (6+) Hull: 99 (24800 t) Speed: 6 Armour: 14 SAV: 2 AA / ASW: 4 / 0 Move Step: Battleship Shoot Step: Battleship Fire Control: STD Primary Weapon: 12 x 12”/.52 Secondary Weapons: 16 x 4.7" Primary Data: Short: 11 Med: 22 Long: 33 Ext: 44 Arcs: 3 x [1] F / P / S 3 x [2] P / S 3 x [1] A / P / S Pen: 9 Dmg: 8 Secondary Data: Short: 7 Med: 14 Long: 21 Ext: 28 Arcs: 4 x [1] P 4 x [1] F 4 x [1] S 4 x [1] A Pen: 1 Dmg: 2 Aircraft: 0 (Recon) Flight Ops: 0 TT: 4 x 18” (Submerged) F Updated based on feedback!
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 20, 2013 20:24:46 GMT -5
Gun and armor stats were a total swag based on War at Sea stats and Wikipedia. I used IJN 4.7" gun stats, and a "mid-range" between Alaska and Shleswig Holstein for the main 12" .52's.
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 21, 2013 21:45:42 GMT -5
If anyone has alternate suggestions, please don't be shy. I am new at this.
|
|
|
Post by regiamarina on Feb 21, 2013 22:34:58 GMT -5
Hey Brigman, constructive advice for you: 1. The hull, speed and armour all look pretty good, I wouldn't change these. 2. SAV too high. The Gangut was noted for having poor waterline armour, poor bulkhead design and no torpedo bulge so would fair very poorly against torpedoes and mines. a 1-2 would probably suit this better. 3. AA probably too high. If talking about the specific Oktyaba Revolyutsia it did receive extra AA guns in '40-'41 but Russian fire control was not good and the AA guns were not numerous. I would drop this model to a 4. 4. The 12"/52 had a max range of about 26000 yds which is 52". This is new so after 30 years of wear and use your ranges aren't bad. Maybe a little short but I wouldn't increase it much past extreme of 44-48"" 5. Main gun pentration is probably a point too high. The old wornout 13.5" guns on the Bretagne are penetration 10 damage 8 and I would see the Gangut guns as slightly weaker than these. Pretty good first try and not too far off the mark on any areas. Try this website for specs if you don't have books. navalhistory.flixco.info/H/93745x263540/259869/c0.htm Little annoying to navigate but the info is excellent. Just use the menu headings down the left side. Martin
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 22, 2013 0:24:52 GMT -5
Martin, Awesome, thanks! I'll take a look and revise my stats. EDIT: Stats updated and revised. Anyone got a swag on point value?
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 24, 2013 22:56:45 GMT -5
Just noticed that Wyoming's 12"/.50's have a range of 10/20/30/40 and a Pen of 10 and Dmg of 8. Any particular reason Gangut's 12"/.52s would be less damage/pen, or more range?
|
|
|
Post by regiamarina on Feb 25, 2013 5:31:15 GMT -5
The Russian guns had a slightly better range and the US guns had better muzzle velocity. Then throw in 30 years of firing up and down the baltic and being abandoned to rust without a crew in dry dock after the Russian Civil War. I'd stat them at 11/22/33/44 Pen:9 Dam:8. I never said lower damage. However if you're happy with your stats then keep them, I only made suggestions based on comparisons to other ships I know. If you think the 12" guns of the Wyoming are equivalent then so be it. Try here for actual historical gun data. www.navweaps.com/ It has all the weapons you want, and you can compare muzzle velocites, ranges, rifling, barrel lengths, and more and see what you think fits best. If you want rock hard stats and points then talk to Dred, he's the man who has the calculations for his game. Martin
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 25, 2013 11:23:05 GMT -5
No worries, I was just wondering if there was a reason for the lower penetration, higher range.
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 26, 2013 11:41:59 GMT -5
I've adjusted the range bands down to 11/22/33/44 and the damage back up to 8. Anybody have any further feedback? Shall I take a swag at the points or would someone more experienced care to?
|
|
|
Post by regiamarina on Feb 26, 2013 19:44:03 GMT -5
Only Dred knows his formula for points, I've never bothered to point the ships I've made.
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Feb 26, 2013 21:13:56 GMT -5
Understood. Baring Harry taking a post at it, I'll put up a SWAG if nobody else will, just for interim play purposes...
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 2, 2013 23:58:40 GMT -5
I'm thinking somewhere between 320-350 points... any thoughts?
|
|