Your Nation's Warships, Batch 3

[North Arkana]

That's not a good excuse. It's hard to overstate how much of a piece of junk the Kuznetsov is. It's a barely sea worthy rust bucket that needs a tug to escort it at all times because it's breakdowns are so frequent. In any serious shooting war it would be nothing but a liability to your forces. The only way to make it worth anything would be to literally gut the ship from the inside out and replace every single power generation, propulsion, and HVAC system, and at that point it would be probably less of a hassle just build a new carrier from scratch. The only value you'd get from a Kuznetsov is if you tow it out to sea and use it as a target for torpedoes and/or anti-ship missiles. It's essentially a perfect example of everything not to do when you design and build an aircraft carrier.

What's so inherently wrong with the Kuznetsov's design?

Last gasp Soviet carrier. What could possibly go wrong?

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

What's so inherently wrong with the Kuznetsov's design?

Defective boilers, defective steam turbines, defective HVAC (ship has no AC or heating, half the toilets and sink don't work) all compounded by shoddy maintenance and poorly trained crews. And STOBAR is basically the weakness of CATOBAR and STOVL combined without the strengths of either.

[Laritaia]

it makes the CdG look good by comparison, which is a feat unto itself.

[Urran]

So I've decided that having a littoral patrol submarine in addition to nuclear attack submarines with littoral capability would be a good idea. I chose the Type 212 because of its small size but do any of you more learned souls have better suggestions

[Lamoni]

You could also try the Type 209/1400 Mod.

It doesn't have non-magnetic steel, but the class has been technologically improved with each contract, and it also has fuel-cell AIP. It can also launch every torpedo on the international market, with the appropriate additions to the fire control system, and the torpedo tubes are sub-harpoon capable.

https://www.thyssenkrupp-marinesystems.com/en/hdw-class-209-1400mod.html

The Type 209/1400 Mod. is also on offer to the RL Philippine Navy, today.

[Rustyal]

http://i.imgur.com/nPAGkd9.jpg

My battleship, the Imperator Alkaev.
Before anyone complains, Rustyal is a 2650 nation. I know there are flaws in my design, but its just for pure firepower.

Basic stats
Speed: 28 knots
Displacement: 82,000 tons
Rudder shift time: 19.9 sec
Turning radius: 920m (approximately)

Armament
4 x 3 22 inch rifled cannons
8 x 2 7 inch cannons
2 x 4 37mm AA cannons
4 x 1 6 barreled 57mm Anti-Air cannon
2 x 6 HDAFC-12 AA missiles
2 x 8 HDAFC-12 AA missiles
2 x 1 SKRD Anti-ship missiles
2 scout jets

Armor
Belt 200-550mm
Turrets 200-623
Deck 27-300
Citadel 130-520

There is some basic information. Let the ranting of how unrealistic it is commence!
I'll also try to answer questions of things that aren't on the list, if required.

[Connori Pilgrims]

http://i.imgur.com/nPAGkd9.jpg

My battleship, the Imperator Alkaev.
Before anyone complains, Rustyal is a 2650 nation. I know there are flaws in my design, but its just for pure firepower.

Basic stats
Speed: 28 knots
Displacement: 82,000 tons
Rudder shift time: 19.9 sec
Turning radius: 920m (approximately)

Armament
4 x 3 22 inch rifled cannons
8 x 2 7 inch cannons
2 x 4 37mm AA cannons
4 x 1 6 barreled 57mm Anti-Air cannon
2 x 6 HDAFC-12 AA missiles
2 x 8 HDAFC-12 AA missiles
2 x 1 SKRD Anti-ship missiles
2 scout jets

Armor
Belt 200-550mm
Turrets 200-623
Deck 27-300
Citadel 130-520

There is some basic information. Let the ranting of how unrealistic it is commence!
I'll also try to answer questions of things that aren't on the list, if required.

A 2650-era warship that's still apparently using fossil fuels?

[Pharthan]

http://i.imgur.com/nPAGkd9.jpg

My battleship, the Imperator Alkaev.
Before anyone complains, Rustyal is a 2650 nation. I know there are flaws in my design, but its just for pure firepower.

Basic stats
Speed: 28 knots
Displacement: 82,000 tons
Rudder shift time: 19.9 sec
Turning radius: 920m (approximately)

Armament
4 x 3 22 inch rifled cannons
8 x 2 7 inch cannons
2 x 4 37mm AA cannons
4 x 1 6 barreled 57mm Anti-Air cannon
2 x 6 HDAFC-12 AA missiles
2 x 8 HDAFC-12 AA missiles
2 x 1 SKRD Anti-ship missiles
2 scout jets

Armor
Belt 200-550mm
Turrets 200-623
Deck 27-300
Citadel 130-520

There is some basic information. Let the ranting of how unrealistic it is commence!
I'll also try to answer questions of things that aren't on the list, if required.

If it's a 2650 ship, why does it have stats that make it look more like a 1960's conversion of a WWII battleship?
There are a lot of things fundamentally wrong with this design, but this is how we learn.

Unless your guns are firing something exotic, they are probably not going to be so much better than the missiles of the time that you'd go against the convention of guns since missiles have been around - that is, really only having one caliber of gun, with exception of CIWS - because, odds are in 2650 your standard cruise missile will have some ridiculous range, while your guns will still be limited.
Similarly, unless you intend on the 57mm 6-barreled AA cannon to be a CIWS, don't anticipate being able to use it against aircraft. Your anti-air missiles should be plentiful enough and long-ranged enough to make this thing deadly to come anywhere near for aircraft - that is to say that aircraft will be using missiles against you, not divebombing like in WWII.

I also see zero ASW. Even just a single helicopter would help, but we can also assume this thing isn't going it alone and probably has an ASW escort.

It would probably have an internalized bridge, rather than external like you have drawn, though an external bridge could still be used for docking (but I think they'd just forgo that as well and still use an internal bridge.)

But, like CP mentioned, I don't imagine it would be using fossil fuels, and I imagine it would probably be faster than 28 knots.

[Crookfur]

http://i.imgur.com/nPAGkd9.jpg

My battleship, the Imperator Alkaev.
Before anyone complains, Rustyal is a 2650 nation. I know there are flaws in my design, but its just for pure firepower.

Basic stats
Speed: 28 knots
Displacement: 82,000 tons
Rudder shift time: 19.9 sec
Turning radius: 920m (approximately)

Armament
4 x 3 22 inch rifled cannons
8 x 2 7 inch cannons
2 x 4 37mm AA cannons
4 x 1 6 barreled 57mm Anti-Air cannon
2 x 6 HDAFC-12 AA missiles
2 x 8 HDAFC-12 AA missiles
2 x 1 SKRD Anti-ship missiles
2 scout jets

Armor
Belt 200-550mm
Turrets 200-623
Deck 27-300
Citadel 130-520

There is some basic information. Let the ranting of how unrealistic it is commence!
I'll also try to answer questions of things that aren't on the list, if required.

The thing about it is not really any lack of realism but the almost total lack of any sci-fi stuff that would suggest the year 2650.

Given that time line most people would be expecting something closer to a floating Bolo with hellbores and other super shooty space guns.

As it is its just the typical yamatoish dimensioned ship with bigger and moar guns plus missiles that we see all too frequently.

[Wesontia]

'Ello all.

So, I am not incredibly knowledgeable in naval matters, but I have been trying to put together a rough carrier design, and I wanted to know how tenable it is.

Basically, a nuclear-powered fleet carrier, with the following rough statistics.

Displacement: c. 51,000t
Speed: 28+ knots
Armament: 4x 30mm CIWS
Complement: 30x Multirole fighters (F-35/Rafale-type), 4-6 AEW craft (Hawkeye-type)
3x Catapults (EMALS). Rotary wing complement.

Essentially a minimally armed carrier, decent displacement, nothing too fancy. Just wanted to know how feasible it was, what its rough dimensions could be, etc.

Thanks in advance.

[Laritaia]

'Ello all.

So, I am not incredibly knowledgeable in naval matters, but I have been trying to put together a rough carrier design, and I wanted to know how tenable it is.

Basically, a nuclear-powered fleet carrier, with the following rough statistics.

Displacement: c. 51,000t
Speed: 28+ knots
Armament: 4x 30mm CIWS
Complement: 30x Multirole fighters (F-35/Rafale-type), 4-6 AEW craft (Hawkeye-type)
3x Catapults (EMALS)

Essentially a minimally armed carrier, decent displacement, nothing too fancy. Just wanted to know how feasible it was, what its rough dimensions could be, etc.

Thanks in advance.

probably a little small for 3 catapults but other then that it's entirely feasible.

[The Selkie]

'Ello all.

So, I am not incredibly knowledgeable in naval matters, but I have been trying to put together a rough carrier design, and I wanted to know how tenable it is.

Basically, a nuclear-powered fleet carrier, with the following rough statistics.

Displacement: c. 51,000t
Speed: 28+ knots
Armament: 4x 30mm CIWS
Complement: 30x Multirole fighters (F-35/Rafale-type), 4-6 AEW craft (Hawkeye-type)
3x Catapults (EMALS)

Essentially a minimally armed carrier, decent displacement, nothing too fancy. Just wanted to know how feasible it was, what its rough dimensions could be, etc.

Thanks in advance.

Not bad for a first try, if you ask me, but I'm no expert. My five cents:
I wouldn't call it a fleet carrier, more a light carrier. I would throw out two of the CIWS and add two RAMs. Two catapults would make a bit more sense, Laritaia is right about that one. You might want to cut back a few fighters and instead go with a few ASW-helicopters.

[Wesontia]

'Ello all.

So, I am not incredibly knowledgeable in naval matters, but I have been trying to put together a rough carrier design, and I wanted to know how tenable it is.

Basically, a nuclear-powered fleet carrier, with the following rough statistics.

Displacement: c. 51,000t
Speed: 28+ knots
Armament: 4x 30mm CIWS
Complement: 30x Multirole fighters (F-35/Rafale-type), 4-6 AEW craft (Hawkeye-type)
3x Catapults (EMALS)

Essentially a minimally armed carrier, decent displacement, nothing too fancy. Just wanted to know how feasible it was, what its rough dimensions could be, etc.

Thanks in advance.

Not bad for a first try, if you ask me, but I'm no expert. My five cents:
I wouldn't call it a fleet carrier, more a light carrier. I would throw out two of the CIWS and add two RAMs. Two catapults would make a bit more sense, Laritaia is right about that one. You might want to cut back a few fighters and instead go with a few ASW-helicopters.

I had actually forgotten to put the rotary wing in there-I was still guessing at some numbers for it.

"Fleet Carrier" is more of a show title, as it would be the only active carrier in the fleet.

I may be mistaken-don't RAMs generally require more internal volume/resources than CIWS? My primary reason for the minimal point-defense was to squeeze in a third catapult (with the EMALs being a little smaller than CATOBAR), and leaving that up to the escorts. If volume/space is not an issue with them, though, that sounds like a good idea.

Thank you both for the feedback.

[Laritaia]

Not bad for a first try, if you ask me, but I'm no expert. My five cents:
I wouldn't call it a fleet carrier, more a light carrier. I would throw out two of the CIWS and add two RAMs. Two catapults would make a bit more sense, Laritaia is right about that one. You might want to cut back a few fighters and instead go with a few ASW-helicopters.

I had actually forgotten to put the rotary wing in there-I was still guessing at some numbers for it.

"Fleet Carrier" is more of a show title, as it would be the only active carrier in the fleet.

I may be mistaken-don't RAMs generally require more internal volume/resources than CIWS? My primary reason for the minimal point-defense was to squeeze in a third catapult (with the EMALs being a little smaller than CATOBAR), and leaving that up to the escorts. If volume/space is not an issue with them, though, that sounds like a good idea.

Thank you both for the feedback.

you aren't going to be fitting 3 90m catapults on a 50k ton hull, EMALS or steam

[Wesontia]

I had actually forgotten to put the rotary wing in there-I was still guessing at some numbers for it.

"Fleet Carrier" is more of a show title, as it would be the only active carrier in the fleet.

I may be mistaken-don't RAMs generally require more internal volume/resources than CIWS? My primary reason for the minimal point-defense was to squeeze in a third catapult (with the EMALs being a little smaller than CATOBAR), and leaving that up to the escorts. If volume/space is not an issue with them, though, that sounds like a good idea.

Thank you both for the feedback.

you aren't going to be fitting 3 90m catapults on a 50k ton hull, EMALS or steam

What would the minimum displacement for that be, more or less?

[Laritaia]

you aren't going to be fitting 3 90m catapults on a 50k ton hull, EMALS or steam

What would the minimum displacement for that be, more or less?

probably around 75-80ktons depending on deck configuration

[Wesontia]

What would the minimum displacement for that be, more or less?

probably around 75-80ktons depending on deck configuration

Hmm. Looks like I may end up slimming this girl down some if it is that high for three. Thanks.

[Laritaia]

probably around 75-80ktons depending on deck configuration

Hmm. Looks like I may end up slimming this girl down some if it is that high for three. Thanks.

steel is cheap, and you don't want to end up with a CdG.

[Wesontia]

Hmm. Looks like I may end up slimming this girl down some if it is that high for three. Thanks.

steel is cheap, and you don't want to end up with a CdG.

I was not planning on dropping down that low, but what are the main issues with the de Gaulle?

[The Corparation]

Not bad for a first try, if you ask me, but I'm no expert. My five cents:
I wouldn't call it a fleet carrier, more a light carrier. I would throw out two of the CIWS and add two RAMs. Two catapults would make a bit more sense, Laritaia is right about that one. You might want to cut back a few fighters and instead go with a few ASW-helicopters.

I had actually forgotten to put the rotary wing in there-I was still guessing at some numbers for it.

"Fleet Carrier" is more of a show title, as it would be the only active carrier in the fleet.

I may be mistaken-don't RAMs generally require more internal volume/resources than CIWS? My primary reason for the minimal point-defense was to squeeze in a third catapult (with the EMALs being a little smaller than CATOBAR), and leaving that up to the escorts. If volume/space is not an issue with them, though, that sounds like a good idea.

Thank you both for the feedback.

RAM is a CIWS. I'm unsure of the exact interior requirements but I doubt the space requirement is very large. I also doubt that the interior needs of RAM would significantly alter the ability to fit a another catapult. Of course there's also Sea-RAM which you can just plop on the deck like phalanx, no interior space needed.

[The Akasha Colony]

I may be mistaken-don't RAMs generally require more internal volume/resources than CIWS? My primary reason for the minimal point-defense was to squeeze in a third catapult (with the EMALs being a little smaller than CATOBAR), and leaving that up to the escorts. If volume/space is not an issue with them, though, that sounds like a good idea.

RAM has the same physical footprint as Phalanx, and both are smaller than Goalkeeper. The standard RAM mount requires some kind of radar direction to operate as it has no onboard sensors, but SeaRAM is self-contained with onboard sensors.

[Laritaia]

steel is cheap, and you don't want to end up with a CdG.

I was not planning on dropping down that low, but what are the main issues with the de Gaulle?

it's entire procurement and service life has been a never ending list of poor design choices, breakdowns and general ineptitude.

it's no Kuznetsov but it's easily the worst western carrier, the french themselves once described it as a "half-carrier".

[Wesontia]

I had actually forgotten to put the rotary wing in there-I was still guessing at some numbers for it.

"Fleet Carrier" is more of a show title, as it would be the only active carrier in the fleet.

I may be mistaken-don't RAMs generally require more internal volume/resources than CIWS? My primary reason for the minimal point-defense was to squeeze in a third catapult (with the EMALs being a little smaller than CATOBAR), and leaving that up to the escorts. If volume/space is not an issue with them, though, that sounds like a good idea.

Thank you both for the feedback.

RAM is a CIWS. I'm unsure of the exact interior requirements but I doubt the space requirement is very large. I also doubt that the interior needs of RAM would significantly alter the ability to fit a another catapult. Of course there's also Sea-RAM which you can just plop on the deck like phalanx, no interior space needed.

Understood. Thanks.

(I was using CIWS to refer to the 30mm weapons. I ought to have said "the" CIWS to be more specific. That is on me.)

[Gallia-]

steel is cheap, and you don't want to end up with a CdG.

I was not planning on dropping down that low, but what are the main issues with the de Gaulle?

That they didn't build two of them. The "half-aircraft-carrier" comment by d'Estaing is quite literally a reference to that. This was when d'Estaing wanted France to build neutron bombs and spend >4% GDP on defense, in the 1990s. A true Gallic candidate.

The "problems" with the CdG are exaggerated as par the course for these threads:

She had some old propellers because the production ones suffered from quality control problems (one of them broke) and she had to use Foch's props for a while. The French couldn't make new propellers because the designs had burned in a fire, so they had to remake them. She had to have her flight deck extended for the princely sum of US$800,000 FY99 because of something to do with Hawkeye, and she had some vibration issues because of the old props. Pretty much everything else met design requirements. All of these problems were of course solved either during sea trials or after her first refit and now she reaches her design speed of 27 knots and can attack Jihadists from the Mediterranean for 6 months a year.

Typical first-in-class problems become forefront when first-in-class equates to only-in-class. People start to confuse the two. It's not like D32 or LPD-17 don't have their own issues, but the subsequent ships fixed them as they were identified during trials or operations.

A rerun of R91 would have fixed most of the issues besides maybe the propellers, which could be prevented by simply saying you didn't have a fire because that is comically unusual.

[Laritaia]

a while back(liek years ago) i actually started blocking out a 75k ton, three catapult conventional carrier.

it's a lot harder then then it first appears when you consider the list of requirements for hangar space, deck park, launch and landing zone clearance, elevator movement clearance, and a whole host of other things


this is about as far as i got and i hadn't even started on things like weapons lifts, recovery cranes, or proper weapons sponsons.

-snip-

there were also iirc a whole host off issues related to the choice of modified Sub reactors.