|
Post by regiamarina on Apr 3, 2011 3:10:38 GMT -5
BattleshipOverkill
In the previous message you asked about the Hull Rating and the AV. The displacement of the Ise after it was Hybridised was 35350t so a value of 141. I think the nature of the concrete and the effect on structure of the ship with the removal of turrets and barbettes you could easily drop this to 130. The ship may have still had a higher displacement I just think the evidence suggests it wasn't a very effective displacement. You could represent this in it's AV rather than Hull Points but I think perhaps both.
As for AV the Ise was not considered to be a very structurally sound ship anyway so the removal of so much of it's structure to accommodate the deck I think you could easily drop the AV from 16 to perhaps a 12-14. From what I've read a 12 wouldn't be out of order as the structure was fairly poor after the removal of the turrets and represents a loss of 25% armour. This brings it down to below most battle cruisers but above most heavy cruisers which is about where the evidence suggests it should be I think.
Martin
|
|
|
Post by BattleshipOverkill on Apr 4, 2011 15:51:05 GMT -5
Thank you for doing the research and compiling the numbers. I will work to put the data on a card some time this week.
|
|
shigure
Commander
IJN Shigure
Posts: 356
|
Post by shigure on Apr 11, 2011 20:20:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BattleshipOverkill on Apr 12, 2011 18:57:36 GMT -5
Good read, Shigure.
With this and Martin's info, what stats do you guys think should be on the card? I can try to have the card done and e-mailed to Harry by the end of the week if I don't get too busy.
|
|
|
Post by shellback on Feb 22, 2012 0:03:52 GMT -5
My only comment on the matter is. The ISE hybrid removed the after turrets for a 'flight deck', but it's not like they removed armour plate, or protection.
Granted I'm still new, but as I see the rules the displacement of the ship vs hull to sink, countered with the armour to penetrate..
|
|
runsilent
Ensign
BTN Smith USS Ranger CV-61 BT2 Smith USS Mount Vernon LSD-39
Posts: 5
|
Post by runsilent on Oct 11, 2012 13:22:56 GMT -5
Is there anyhing further on the Ship ??
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 5, 2013 0:38:17 GMT -5
I've got a very good book on Japanese Hybrid Warships, including Ise/Hyuga, Mogami and the I-400s. Let me see what I can dig up!
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 5, 2013 0:51:49 GMT -5
Displacement: 38, 676 tons after conversion Speed: 25.31 kt Thickness of belt armor was not subject to change, but remained 305mm everywhere.
Total armament post-conversion: *45cal Type 41 36cm twin mounts x 4 = 8 guns, 130 rounds/gun, 1,040 rounds total *40cal Type 89 12.7cm twin HAG x 8 = 16 guns, 250 rounds/gun, 4,000 rounds total *Type 96 25mm triple MG x 19 = 57 guns, 2,400 rounds/gun, 136,800 rounds total
Planned Air Complement (divided between both ships): 18x Judy, 6x Reserve 18x Paul, 6x Reserve
|
|
|
Post by Martin Lefebvre on Mar 5, 2013 3:31:40 GMT -5
Interesting... only 24 ships apiece and only good for launching the planes, not recovering them. Considering that the Jean Bart was supposed to be completed along the same lines had the carrier faction won the internal tug of war, I wonder how they managed to think that they could hold 54 planes, launch them and recover them.
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 5, 2013 13:59:30 GMT -5
Well, I've got 1/1800 minis of both designs and frankly, the deck on Jean Bart is much bigger...
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 5, 2013 15:27:30 GMT -5
The plan on how to operate Ise's air group was to either launch the Judys from Ise, have them perform a strike, and then land on another carrier (or land base); or to use the Pauls which could land in the water and return to the carrier via crane recovery.
|
|
|
Post by regiamarina on Mar 5, 2013 22:14:32 GMT -5
I think deck length is less important than the fact that the Ise hybrid was an entirely different designed ship. The Ise simply removed the rear two turrets and stuck a flattop deck on the rear. The pagoda tower and super structure were still in place in front of the deck so planes couldn't take off into a head wind as they could potentially on the Alsace hybrid, and they certainly couldn't land properly flying at a steel wall. With the Alsace having the super structure off centre it looks more like a carrier with 15" guns. I think it had the potential to act more like a conventional carrier in launching and landing aircraft than the Ise ever could. brigman- The belt stayed at between 200-300mm in thickness but AV represents a lot more than that. The Japanese engineers added concrete and armour plating to sections to help with rebalancing the displacement of the ship and to help cover areas no longer protected by the massive turrets and barbettes. Martin
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 6, 2013 14:53:35 GMT -5
True, that. I'm just not sure that Ise's conversion lowered her armor values by that much. Most wargames I've read tend to keep her armor values roughly the same pre- and post-conversion. I guess I'd better do some more reading. Thanks Martin!
|
|
|
Post by regiamarina on Mar 6, 2013 20:40:46 GMT -5
I think a lot of wargmes scratch their head when it comes to the Ise hybrid. Keeping the armour ratings the same is usually an easy cop out after much conflicting research. The ship was generally considered a little structurally weak and removing the turrets and barbettes would have weakend the structure further. However this is just in the rear section of the ship so how do you represent that? The front wasn't weaker. I think it's generally a tough ship to do stats for post refit which is why I tend to stick to ABDA and Guadalcanal era games. It's a better ship when sailing at you firing with 12 14" guns. Martin
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 8, 2013 19:13:12 GMT -5
Any thoughts as to what the BBCV Ise/Hyuga's AA rating would be?
Her pre-conversion stats give her a 4, but part of the conversion added a LOT of AA guns. By my sources, in her final configuration, she had:
40cal Type 89 12.7cm twin HAG x8 = 16 guns, 250 rounds/gun; 4000 rounds total. Type 96 25mm triple MG x19 = 57 guns, 2,400 rounds/gun; 136,800 rounds total.
|
|
|
Post by regiamarina on Mar 8, 2013 23:40:01 GMT -5
Brigman,
AA is a weird variable that you can really only guess at.
After the rebuild the 5inch dual purpose guns were doubled and the 25mm rapid fire AA guns were almost tripled so you could reasonably argue a case for at least 8 maybe 10. Air search radar was also added so this should probably bring it up again to about an 11 maybe as high as a 12.
Find a ship with similar specs to the Ise that has already been done and use it as a guide for an AA number. The Nagato class might fit the bill?
Hope this helps.
Martin
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 9, 2013 0:33:14 GMT -5
Thanks Martin! I admit the AA formula is a code I have not cracked at all. Comparison shopping is the best I've come up with. Anyway, I'll check the IJN roster for something similar. Appreciate the advice!
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 9, 2013 0:39:08 GMT -5
So far, the closest match I'm finding is Shokaku... 16x 5" DP mounts, although Shokaku had a bit more than half as many 25mm guns...
|
|
brigman
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by brigman on Mar 9, 2013 20:56:43 GMT -5
It's also worth noting that Ise lost her secondary battery of 5.5"/50s to add more 5"/40s, in the conversion.
|
|