RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad

RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding

Message

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/7/2011 2:19:48 PM)
Game files:

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/7/2011 2:35:24 PM)
Dutch lineup so far. [image]local://upfiles/17421/6B643C1095024DB892B5BC8F7A9BCDEA.jpg[/image]

Terminus -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/7/2011 2:53:12 PM)
That Rotterdam thing is not a good design. Poor siting of the guns.

TOMLABEL -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/8/2011 2:08:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gary Childress Another Dutch "never-was". CA Rotterdam. Presumably an 8" cruiser. [image]local://upfiles/17421/7F2D53E110064AD0A651AE0F1A5F7C5F.jpg[/image] OOOOOOHHHH! Now that's nice (again)!!!! Heck, some of our stuff may need a makeover! Thanks Gary! TOMLABEL

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/8/2011 2:56:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus That Rotterdam thing is not a good design. Poor siting of the guns. How is it all that different from some of the treaty cruisers? It's also possible they could be smaller caliber than 8".

Terminus -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/8/2011 2:43:29 PM)
Not talking about the main battery, but the positioning of the AA suite. Also, there's very little reason for the Dutch to build both Project 1047 AND heavy cruisers. Both are for fighting IJN CA's, and the Dutch can't afford both.

traskott -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/8/2011 3:40:20 PM)
Would they have the shipbuilding hability to launch all those ships ?? Battlecruisers, heavy cruisers...That's A LOT of steel..

Pascal_slith -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/8/2011 5:05:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Not talking about the main battery, but the positioning of the AA suite. Also, there's very little reason for the Dutch to build both Project 1047 AND heavy cruisers. Both are for fighting IJN CA's, and the Dutch can't afford both. Not much of an original AA suite to speak of in any case. As with everyone else, early war experience pushed AA suite upgrades in almost every ship. And as you point out, these would not have been built to 'deter' the Germans. Given the economic situation of the 1930's, there was little to no money for any of these. But again, we're in the 'what-if' realm.

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/8/2011 11:18:22 PM)
Well if I could get hold of some stats on the Dutch ship building industry we could maybe find out how much they could have built, optimal. The BC project was on hold for a long time due to lack of understanding of underwater torpedo protection.

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/8/2011 11:24:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Not talking about the main battery, but the positioning of the AA suite. Also, there's very little reason for the Dutch to build both Project 1047 AND heavy cruisers. Both are for fighting IJN CA's, and the Dutch can't afford both. What's wrong with the positioning of the AA suite? I'm not saying anyone has to include all the ships. If someone wants to just include the BCs or just the CAs, that's fine by me.

Terminus -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/9/2011 12:07:06 AM)
Well, the two Bofors mounts behind X-turret won't have much of a firing arc, blocked by that mast and the floatplanes. That wing turret below the bridge is the same. And how, by the way, is that gun director behind the forward Bofors mount supposed to work, when it's looking at nothing?

oldman45 -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/9/2011 1:06:16 AM)
The wiki article stated that the purpose of the BC's was to defeat the IJN CA's. It makes me wonder would they bother building the CA's.

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/9/2011 1:34:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Well, the two Bofors mounts behind X-turret won't have much of a firing arc, blocked by that mast and the floatplanes. That wing turret below the bridge is the same. And how, by the way, is that gun director behind the forward Bofors mount supposed to work, when it's looking at nothing? I see what you're saying with the gun director (assuming that's what it is). The Bofors mounts presumably would be firing off to the side and not in line with the ship under most circumstances, but yeah, they could be placed in more strategic positions.

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/9/2011 1:41:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 The wiki article stated that the purpose of the BC's was to defeat the IJN CA's. It makes me wonder would they bother building the CA's. Well, I guess it would depend upon what happens in one's alternative universe. If they don't build the BCs then that would create a need for some CAs. If they do build the BCs then maybe they don't need the CAs or maybe they could still use one or two. I'm no expert but I suppose it would be like any other decision by any other navy. Generally more is better and if they can afford to build more they will.

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/9/2011 3:14:05 AM)
How does this look, then? Took out the gun director and placed the two bofors in the rear side by side instead of in line. [image]local://upfiles/17421/548B5BF0FFA84860991383C18851B857.jpg[/image]

Terminus -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/9/2011 9:06:07 AM)
Better.[:)]

oldman45 -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/9/2011 5:17:39 PM)
Are those DC racks on the stern? Nice work by the way.

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/10/2011 1:53:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 Are those DC racks on the stern? Nice work by the way. Not sure. They look like it in close up, either that or mines. Unfortunately the author(s) of the drawings I've been using for the Dutch navy doesn't give stats for his ships. As far as stats go, I'll see if I can come up with some for some of the never-were dutch ships. I'll post them here for due scrutiny by the AE community.

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/10/2011 9:41:15 PM)
Wow! After looking at the stats for fuel consumption, range and endurance of US warships to try to get a handle on WITP stats, I've gone cross eyed. I think I'll leave the stats to the experts. I'm more comfortable with art work. [X(]

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 1:35:54 AM)
OK. I broke down and did some stats for the Dutch BC 1047 project. First off the name I have for the class is from a famous Dutch ship of the line and means "Golden Lion". Some of the stats for the ship class are really just "eye balled" based upon similar ships in the database and not based upon any concrete facts, but then there aren't a lot of concrete facts for the ship as it never existed IRL. Feel free to respond with any critiques. I'm interested in how realistic the projection might be. [image]local://upfiles/17421/24FBD86EF84E4892B09ACF7AF245E23B.jpg[/image]

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 1:42:33 AM)
For the main armament I invented a gun based generally upon the 28cm SK C/34 used by the Scharnhorst. [image]local://upfiles/17421/44E00C55F578473AB893F3C46262A472.jpg[/image]

oldman45 -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 3:26:00 AM)
I used this site for those guns; http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNNeth_11-545.htm Because of his comments I came up with these numbers Range 36 Accuracy 40 Pen 604 effect 727 Just my guesses

GaryChildress -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 11:01:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 I used this site for those guns; http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNNeth_11-545.htm Because of his comments I came up with these numbers Range 36 Accuracy 40 Pen 604 effect 727 Just my guesses The stats off the site are the same I got out of a Wiki article on the guns. For range it has 46,590 yds so I put 46k for range. Accuracy - I didn't know what to put so I just left it at the same accuracy as the 12" gun I used for copy and paste. Penetration - wasn't sure what to put here either so I used the penetration given for 8,640 yds. For efffect it says use weight of the shell which is 694lbs so that's what I used.

Terminus -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 1:54:09 PM)
The proposed Dutch mounts had considerably longer range than the German equivalents, because they could elevate the tubes much higher.

oldman45 -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 5:03:23 PM)
Thats a good point Terminus, but they were using a smaller powder charge and I am not sure how that would effect range.

oldman45 -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 5:04:30 PM)
Gary- I went with a higher accuracy because I assumed the guns would be German built and they tended to be more accurate then many of the other European navies.

Terminus -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 6:36:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oldman45 Gary- I went with a higher accuracy because I assumed the guns would be German built and they tended to be more accurate then many of the other European navies. Actually, in historical terms, they weren't very different. An Acc of 40 is twice the accuracy of the Iowa's 16in rifles; I think you'll agree that's too much.

JWE -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/11/2011 7:51:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Actually, in historical terms, they weren't very different. An Acc of 40 is twice the accuracy of the Iowa's 16in rifles; I think you'll agree that's too much. T's on the money. In historical terms german guns were not more accurate. Most were in the ballpark, many sucked, nothing much to speak of. This nazi-uber-ober owl dung is just that. Same as everybody else, good, bad, average, mostly just average. Accuracy is a parameter used in the game. Acc is calculated using mathematics. Acc has nothing whatever to do with rof or any of those things people love to talk about. Acc is calculated using mathematics. Don't get sucked into thinking Acc is rof. It isn't.

dwg -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/12/2011 12:04:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gary Childress This is a neat ship, a VERY large DD at 426 ft. Somewhere between a DD and a DD leader. I took the original design on shipbucket and took off the seaplane (a seaplane seems kind of useless for a DD) But seaplanes were historically correct for the Admiralen class in the NEI. The shipbucket design looks reasonably like the real Gerard Callenburgh class as designed to follow on from the Admiralen, but none were completed to that design, with the Germans finishing Gerard Callenburgh, and the British Isaac Sweers, while Tjerk Hiddes and Philips Van Almoride were scuttled. The big discrepancy is the length, which was only 351ft, but at 1600t they were still reasonably big for contemporary destroyers. A and Y were twins, X a single, while B mount should be a 40mm, presumably a Hazemeyer, rather than the anomalous turret.

oldman45 -> RE: Gary's Never Was Workshop and Doodle Pad (4/12/2011 1:25:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JWE quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Actually, in historical terms, they weren't very different. An Acc of 40 is twice the accuracy of the Iowa's 16in rifles; I think you'll agree that's too much. T's on the money. In historical terms german guns were not more accurate. Most were in the ballpark, many sucked, nothing much to speak of. This nazi-uber-ober owl dung is just that. Same as everybody else, good, bad, average, mostly just average. Accuracy is a parameter used in the game. Acc is calculated using mathematics. Acc has nothing whatever to do with rof or any of those things people love to talk about. Acc is calculated using mathematics. Don't get sucked into thinking Acc is rof. It isn't. 30 is a better number?

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.796875