It’s not his report
Damn, I got screwed again with someone else’s nickname now xD I apologize for that.
Spoiler
I definitely need to restore my sleep pattern and not sleep 2/3 hours a day…
Just spaded HMS Rodney and final impression
Pros
- Mega thick armor and Wonderful module layout
- Decent mobility and hydroplane
- Wonderful firing angle of main guns on front
Cons
- Loading time
- lifeboats in side limits firing angle of auxiliary guns and main guns(when firing backward)
- hull-destroy part cover both unarmored and armored part of ship
Nelson class is one of my favorite design for all naval ships(including non-comissioned or paper plans), and especially as most cons of her is by developers problem, not by her own, I wish her to be fixed soon. Also I’ll give my thanks to @Vota_piedra who makes wonderful ‘historical accurate’ camo of HMS Rodney when she fought against Bismarck.
5 Likes
6 Likes
Can’t wait to see how they mess it up
1 Like
cant wait for the AI BB’s to give like no rewards
dont ya worry, they will 70% crew you per shot.
Yeah honestly im not sure giving the ai the best possible tools is a good idea
Oh god. Laser guided 16" shells here we come
the only way british battle ship guns will be acurate
3 Likes
not only ec, but on every battle
Rodneys rate of fire compared to in game is quite accurate.
Looking at other of the British BB guns they all are relatively correct with the 15inch being around 2 rounds per minute. And the 13.5 between 1.5-2 rounds per min
Nah, usually other cases given designed status or ‘reload for single gun’ time, so it should be 30 seconds or 35 seconds. And 25 seconds for 15’’ too.
2 Likes
You got a source for that? That is faster than the mounts loading cycle which is given at 36sec for the Mark I mount
We are not talking about tanks here where it’s all relying on the human element.
| Target and Number of Practices | Mean Range | Full Gun Salvos per Min | Output, per cent. | Spread | Hits per Gun/Min | Direct – D.Aircraft – A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16-inch | ||||||
| 145 ft. B.P.T. 3 | 17,300 | 1.85 | 99 | 296 | .092 | D |
| 145 ft. B.P.T. 3 | 18,300(17,700) | 1.64(1.60) | 82.6(94.4) | 418(276) | .124(.057) | A |
| H.S.B.P.T. 4 | 16,000 | 1.88 | 95.9 | 328 | .087 | D |
| H.S.B.P.T. 1 | 19,400(16,000) | 1.60(1.95) | 87(93.4) | 178(326) | .155(.390) | A |
| 6-inch with 16-inch M.A.C. | ||||||
| Centurion 2 | 15,600 | 2.13 | 100. | 197(3) | -152 | A |
| 15-inch | ||||||
| 145 ft. B.P.T. 3 | 15,000(14,000) | 2.01(2.02) | 90.6(91.9) | 246(253) | .165(.220) | D |
| 145 ft. B.P.T. 2 | 11,200 | 1.92 | 86.3 | 227 | .152 | A |
| H.S.B.P.T. 4 | 14,200(13,400) | 1.92(2.07) | 93.5(88.6) | 190(258) | .088(.110) | D |
| H.S.B.P.T. 12 | 15.300(14,400) | 1.90(1.90) | 89.9(88.5) | 226(182) | .139(.126) | A |
| Throw-off 3 | 15,900(14,000) | 1.90(1.91) | 87.9 | - | .073(.064) | D |
| Throw-off 4 | 16,500(15,700) | 1.71(1.86) | - | - | .035(.073) | A (simulated) |
| 6-inch with 15-inch M.A.C. | ||||||
| Centurion 6 | 10,200 | 2.48 | 100 | 171 | .078 | D |
ADM 239/137: C.B. 3001 (39) Progress in Naval Gunnery 1939
Compared to gunnery practice in 1935:
Spoiler
Maximum full salvo per minute increased from 1.48 spm in 1935 to 1.88spm in 1939.
During the entire action against Bismarck, Rodney’s average RoF was 1.6spm. It should be noted that Bismarck’s main batteries, as opposed to most of public sources which suggest an incredibly fast reload, was actually slower than Rodney’s as it never exceeded 1.5spm during this battle.
5 Likes
Does it also say what ship/mount conducted the respective tests?
Also nice that It mentions the 6inch training guns that were used for drilling by inserting them into the gun breeches
AFAIK you’ve uploaded link to some organization related to Royal Navy, right?
I’m currently thinking about asking them if they have manual of turret for Nelson class as similar as OP 769 of Iowa class. Can you upload link again pls?
I think if they can make full salvo of 32 seconds in drill, in manual even can reduce to 30 seconds considering gun aligning time.
This one would probably the document in question
1 Like