we also have the R class floating around
I saw mention of making a premium from one of the ships of the class the Warspite is from. I just mentioned who I’d want from the class if made into a premium.
Yes as a class leader its good to have her in-game I think however Warspite is more iconic and offers a better AA refit so would do best as the TT ship with QE as a premium/Squadron.
1 Like
I need to make posts on the QE and R class ships. I made one on Warspite but it didn’t get passed and because you can’t access posts that get denied I can’t copy it and just add a source in for the AA refit (I forgot). I really cant be bothered typing it all out again but I think its about time.
Either that or I see whats on the old forum and repost it with credit.
Hopefully the current G3 one gets approved and then I’ll start working on others.
Duke of York could make a good KGV class premium ship.
this i would do first, since most of the ships were already suggested in one form or another
1 Like
Actually I’ve got some official data of accuracy of German and UK naval guns:
| Range (m) | 15cm SK C/25 | 20.3cm SK C/34 | 28cm SK C/28 | 28cm SK C/34 | 38cm SK C/34 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5000 | 103 | 250 | 236 | 248 | 216 | |||
| 10000 | 144 | 273 | 318 | 284 | 216 | |||
| 15000 | 205 | 296 | 369 | 296 | 228 | |||
| 20000 | 287 | 341 | 410 | 355 | 239 | |||
| 25000 | 472 | 387 | 451 | 414 | 273 | |||
| 30000 | N/A | 523 | 543 | 485 | 330 | |||
| Source: 100/40 g.Kdos Unterlagen und Richtlinien zur Bestimmung der Hauptkampfentfernung und der Geschoßwahl. 1940 |
| Range (yd) | 12"/45 (yd) | 12"/50 (yd) | 13.5"/45 (yd) | 15"/42 (yd) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3000 | 84 | 2 | 84 | 2 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| 5000 | 104 | 4 | 104 | 4 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| 10000 | 186 | 12 | 186 | 12 | 83 | 4 | 80 | 5 |
| 15000 | 347 | 28 | 347 | 28 | 122 | 7 | 84 | 16 |
| 18000 | 472 | 38 | 472 | 38 | N/A | N/A | 85 | 23 |
| 20000 | N/A | N/A | 562 | 45 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Left column - Dispersion in range | ||||||||
| Right column - Disperison in direction | ||||||||
| Source: Range Tables for His Majesty’s Fleet, Volume I. 1918 |
The original data for both country was given as 50% zone, and I have converted it to the actual size of the pattern to give a more intuitive impression. It should be noted the British gun data was results from actual firing trials with relatively small sample size, but having two-digit yds of dispersion at 18,000 yds is a clear sign of an extremely accurate gun.
As comparison, I’ve also got data of American guns:
| Range (m) | 16"/50 (IA) | 16"/45 (NC & SD) | 16"/45 (CO) | 14"/50 (NM & TN) | 14"/45 (OK & PA) | 5"/38 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2500 | 47.5 | 47.5 | 45 | 60 | 73 | 40 |
| 5000 | 95 | 95 | 90 | 120 | 145 | 80 |
| 10000 | 190 | 190 | 180 | 240 | 290 | 160 |
| 15000 | 285 | 285 | 270 | 360 | 435 | 240 |
| 20000 | 380 | 380 | 360 | 480 | 580 | N/A |
| 30000 | 570 | 570 | 540 | 720 | 870 | N/A |
| Source: Bulletin of Ordnance Information, No.3, 1945 |
Ironically, the German and British 15" guns are the least accurate in game
7 Likes
I’m presuming the number under the gun is the dispersion in metres?
Edit: Just realised I apparently can’t read.
Metres for German guns and yards for British guns
1 Like
So this would mean British 15-inch guns are the most accurate of the guns shown here I converted from yards to metres and at 10,000 its ~73 metres.
I never bothered looking for hard data but that might be worth a bug report, I was using HMS Glorious today and the dispersion was in a different postcode.
I’ve been passing these information internally about a year ago, unfortunately rework of gun accuracy doesn’t seem to be a high priority matter at this moment.
8 Likes
Well thanks anyway, I appreciate the work.
Perhaps its not high priority but at the very least its known to them.
What would Temeraire (1944) look like in general?
Its an iffy one, in my opinion the Lion class should be split into two sub-categories, the originals as they were laid up until vanguard was laid down in 1941. This was the original design but with a few wartime mods (AA) so Lion would be that design.
Temeraire was the sister to Lion and laid down to that original spec, however both were cancelled. But the development of battleship 16-inch 45-calibre guns proceeded until even 1948. The Lion class design was modified until 1945. Which would mean a late Lion (like the O-class battlecruiser), would be a viable suggestion. Guns were ordered in 1944.
A Montana style ‘Lion 16e-38’ which had 4x3 16-inch Mk.3 guns. I asked a naval historian and this was the most favoured however he thinks it would’ve used the Mk.4 guns as those were ordered just after the ship was finished, but those were never officially slated however these would take the already larger projectile and make it heavier and flashless.
It had 15-inches of armour but that is 25% more effective than its LoS thickness equivalent due to better British manufacturing techniques so you get circa 16.5-17.5 inches of armour depending on which source.
There are a few designs by Tzoli. Not official though.
I want to make it clear, Temeraire wouldn’t be necessary unless the US received the Montana and Germany received something like H-41 (as neither were laid down), in which case it would be more than fair to ask for it. But if not a 1942 Lion (which was their estimated completion year) would be more than satisfactory.
1 Like
So I was delving for a little bit and I finally found what I think is the inspiration for HMS Thunderer.
Introducing the L2 class Battleship armed with 8, 18-inch guns in twin turrets.
so… effectively a Montana equivalent. neat!
1 Like
Yeah but knowing Gaijin we ain’t gonna get that armour thickness buff so way less armour. Although there are sources so its worth a try
Imagine the artificial shell dispersal on that. You will be able to take out 2 different targets on the opposite sides of the map
3 Likes
Given the Hood of which L2 was (in very basic terms) a scaled up version, I wouldn’t be surprised, superior British engineering can engage 2 targets with one turret.
Given the Lion’s guns won’t be as punchy (unless we get the MK.4 gun) they had better be accurate as that was the entire purpose they were designed.
2 Likes
My concern for Britain is that there’s not much better shells left to get in the future, namely the 15" 6crh. Worse still, the 6crh is going to be significantly underperforming in this game as penetration is handled by a uniformed formula without taking consider of the shell quality. Irl Britain focused on improving the quality and design of their AP shells (such as hardness and shape designs) so they can penetrate thicker armour while having relatively lower kinetic energy. This was very different to the approach to increase shell weight and muzzle velocities for higher KE as many other navies did, as Royal Navy was obsessed with long barrel life. But in this game the penetration formula doesn’t take the shell quality into account as it greatly favours those shell with roaring KE. I’ve been recently found some real life trial results of the 15" Mk XVIIb APC and compared it with the gaijin formula output, it turns out that gaijin’s formula will underestimate the shell’s penetration by 30~40% when calculated with given velocities.
6 Likes
Same goes for the 14-inch on the KGV. Not fantastic news and unfortunately very much a common British Navy L. I truly wish they’d at least take into account historical sources when deciding on penetration characteristics.
Its similar to armour, the KGV had 14-inches LoS of armour but it was such high quality that it had effective thickness of up to 17.5 inches of US/French/Italian or Japanese armour depending on the source.
Its going to mean ships that aren’t armed with the 16-incher’s are going to be pretty shit. And even with the Lion’s they will pale in comparison to Iowa/H-39 without the armour and penetration considerations. For a late Lion luckily the Mk.4 mounting with heavier, longer and higher pressures might improve the penetration characteristics but that’s only valid if they let us have the late Lion at all and with the Mk.4 mountings which a prototype was made.
Will probably be better off playing other tree’s.