Look at that fucking sexiness! too bad this remodel never saw the light of day ;_;

jester4837 said:

Look at that fucking sexiness! too bad this remodel never saw the light of day ;_;

And probably can't cause of weight and stability issues. The 2-3-3-2 gun arrangement was used on only one ship class for a reason.

Unless you increase her beam by a lot, like Yamato size beam. Then that will kill you speed.

armory18 said:

And probably can't cause of weight and stability issues. The 2-3-3-2 gun arrangement was used on only one ship class for a reason.

Unless you increase her beam by a lot, like Yamato size beam. Then that will kill you speed.

Only one? I came up with two already: Conte di Cavour class and Andrea Doria Class.

Shouldn't the triple gun turrets be below the dual gun turrets? That would not cause too much problems in term of stability, right?

Medalofdead said:

Only one? I came up with two already: Conte di Cavour class and Andrea Doria Class.

You forgot the Battlecruiser Lexington class and the Nevada class battleships

armory18 said:

And probably can't cause of weight and stability issues. The 2-3-3-2 gun arrangement was used on only one ship class for a reason.

Unless you increase her beam by a lot, like Yamato size beam. Then that will kill you speed.

The IJN and USN weren't averse to bulging, even if it did kill speed. That's how Savannah got facelifted to a quasi-St. Louis

oberstleutnant said:

Shouldn't the triple gun turrets be below the dual gun turrets? That would not cause too much problems in term of stability, right?

You forgot the Battlecruiser Lexington class and the Nevada class battleships

Well, you potentially turn a stability problem into a hogging problem. Weight distribution on a ship is so tricky

garpun said:

The IJN and USN weren't averse to bulging, even if it did kill speed. That's how Savannah got facelifted to a quasi-St. Louis

Well, you potentially turn a stability problem into a hogging problem. Weight distribution on a ship is so tricky

I'd say it's much more serious with a plane than with a ship. It's mostly a willingness to spend the cash when it comes to rebuilding the vessel vs. building a whole new ship, and I feel bad for the IJN in how it's forced to go on those costly rebuilds due to the political factors at the time.

Don't forget the Pensacola class cruisers, though they aren't battleships nor battlecruisers so I'm not sure they count.

panzerfan said:

I'd say it's much more serious with a plane than with a ship.

I can't disagree with you on that. In one case you give EDOs headaches, in the other case you fall out of the sky

panzerfan said:

It's mostly a willingness to spend the cash when it comes to rebuilding the vessel vs. building a whole new ship, and I feel bad for the IJN in how it's forced to go on those costly rebuilds due to the political factors at the time.

Yep. The USN went far in rearming its ships, such as the standards that got rebuilt into South Dakota-lookalikes, but it never stretched hulls or reboilered them like the IJN did, which was "why not just build a new ship?" territory under normal (non-naval treaty) circumstances

Most ships that had twins and triples had the twins in the superimposed position. The KGV-class also has its one twin mount superimposed over the forward quad turret.

Triple over twin is basically asking for problems to fix. But with a massive set of blisters, it could work...if you can make a turret that will fit in the existing ring, otherwise you are going to spend a lot of time cutting through the armored deck to make a new ring mount for the triple turret's barbette.

Medalofdead said:

Only one? I came up with two already: Conte di Cavour class and Andrea Doria Class.

oberstleutnant said:
the Nevada class battleships

All of those were 3-2 2-3 (twin superfiring over triple), as far as I know the 2-3 3-2 (triple superfiring over twin) arrangement was only used in Pensacola-class.

It occurs to me that we have come full circle. This is the drawing of a ship of a drawing of a girl who is a drawing of a ship.

[deleted]

BelchingSpitfire said:

You forgot the Battlecruiser Lexington class and the Nevada class battleships

Several years later, but the Lex’s were 2-2-2-2, Twins (or Two-Gun, there’s a difference) over Twins, not triples (or three-gun) over twins

Besides, there’s a difference between being built with that arrangement, and being remodeled into it. Nagato and Mutsu could have never had 2-3-3-2 for the fact that you can’t increase number of guns without going down in caliber.

…And those are all 16” my dude.