Alliance "Arata Amagi" refit

As we knew, the Alliance captured two intact "Arata Amagi"-class battleships in India. While not perfect, this ships are pretty large and durable, and so may be a quite valuable part of Alliance war efforts. A lot of theories about their possible refit or even rebuilding was suggested. Well, i decide to do some work on them...

This is my design of possible refit:





https://i.servimg.com/u/f21/19/33/14/59/retrib12.png

During the refit:

- The upper casemate was removed with armored roof and a large part of old armored deck.
- The forecastle was added to improve the seakeeping ability and habitability (after all, cats clearly need  more accomodation than Ulu).
- Four republican-made 32-cm (12,5 inch)/45 wire-wound breechnoading guns were added in barbette mounts as the main calibre.
- Parts of "Amagi" fire control were salvaged to use on the ship.
- The secondray artillery remained the same - after all, Alliance have a lot of captured Grik's 100-pdr guns - but was repositioned and supplied with rudimentary fire control system.
- The flying deck was added above the casemate roof
- Pneumatic rotated catapult and platform for a three PB-1 was placed on the stern for reconnaisance and gunnery targeting

Hm, i like this gal! Maybe i would wrote some fanfiction about her, travelling the Pacific to fight the Dom's...

Hmm intresting. Hope to see her on DA where one can look at large scale. She's certainly settle Kurokawa's hash, but Savoie?

She's certainly settle Kurokawa's hash, but Savoie?

Definitely not. It's simply impossible to make wooden ironclad capable of fighting the true battleship. But, she would be perfectly capable of dealing with Grik's counterpants.

As you suggested - http://dilandu.deviantart.com/art/Retribution-class-Alliance-battleship-563999633?ga_submit_new=10%253A1443893612

Thanks image to small to read easily.

Here's the latest decks pic for the RORO Carrier:

Well, with all respect - but for my point of view, Alliance needed battleships more.

Hm, and you completely redesinged all propulsion system. It would be VERY costly and took quite a long time.

And the numbers of bilers, i'm afraid, is insufficient to move ship that big. After all, they are more than 20000 tons!

Those are 10' by 20 ' boilers nor the 10'x10' of Walker. Those are copies of Walker's turbines fire up four big boilers and you have twice Walker's power when she needs speed, 8 boilers will handle the jug jumpers, that LP cylinder is 10 feet in diameter the medium pressure 5 feet, and the two HP cylinders 1 foot in diameter Six feet of stroke allows plenty of expansion in each cylinder with the gear notched up to save steam. Exhaust steam is used to pre heat feed water, and condence some of the steep before going to the condenser.

Those are copies of Walker's turbines fire up four big boilers and you have twice Walker's power when she needs speed,

But so excessive rebuilding of perfectly fine powerplant - for what? The cost would be clearly prohibite; and the ship stern must be completely rebuild.

What are you want to achieve with this rebuilding?

This is built up not a retrofit, however I used Salisa drawing as a starting place other than the turbine she's close. Ben thinking of re doing the stern a hemisphere where the stern narrows to twice the diamater of the round section of the side, the solid black line that is also the center line of the shaft. this would shorten the skeg as is she has too much ass in her britches. comes of drawing side first then decks. Note decks above have little above the stern open space for militay passengers to drill ect. "Idle hands are soon at the Devil's work," as my old chief used to say.

Oh Why I'm into aircraft carriers rather than Battleships?



This is my Chief from NJROTC class in High School.  He was a radioman on USS Pennsylvania when the Japanese attacked pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.  His ship was Flag Ship Pacific Fleet in Dry Dock, she caught a little bomb fragment damage but otherwise came through with no major wounds, the Least damaged BB there  The Battleships other than Pennsylvania were all damaged, the Arizona had a magazine explosion most were sunk but eventually repaired and re-floated.  I learned of Pearl Harbor over chess games with the Chief, not books.  Thus the American experience, Carriers the future, Battleships obsolete targets for air strikes.  

The small pic shows the summer Khaki and the long one shows dress blues, note chief's hat mentioned in the books a chief's hat has a black chin strap while an officers is gold, you can see part of the 'crow' (eagle) on the chief's shoulders three chevrons down and one rocker above.  My cadet rank Master chief three chevrons and three rockers Note marines the chevrons point up, the joke Marines always have a hard on. The stripes on the sleeve are service stripes, one for each four years in the navy so 4 x 8 is 32 years in the Navy meaning he severed 12 years longer than need to retire as a 20 year man.

You probably don't remember veterans of WW 2 as active strong men but aged pensioners, like Russia we were attacked and these were the men who turned them back.

That is one mean looking unit! Now a pair of these with carrier support would be a very capable task force. As a matter of interest what sort of range would the main battery have?

Pokermind wrote: I learned of Pearl Harbor over chess games with the Chief, not books.  Thus the American experience, Carriers the future, Battleships obsolete targets for air strikes.  

Colleague, i have deep respect to all veterans of World War II, but your assumption aren't completely correct. The Pearl Harbour wasn't the typical situation; the battleships here were immibile, not combat-ready and depended of protection of the base defenses . Who screwed. If the US carriers were caugth in the same situation, they would also be destroyed.

The subsequent course of war clearly demonstrated, that battleships are vunerable without aerial cover - but with some aerial cover they almost invunerable to air attacks. A lot of carriers were damaged or destroyed by aerial attacks, despite their fighter protection. No one battleship, that have aerial cover, was destroyed by air attack during the war.

The World War II demonstrated, that the perfect combination was the combination of fast carriers and fast battleships; this diadem was self-supporting and capable to deal with any situation. Either the carriers without the battleships or the battleships without carriers were too vunerable.

The disappearance of battleships after World War II was caused by:

- The nuclear weapon, whose destruction capabilites made even heaviest passive defense (i.e. armor) obsolete
- The guided weapon, that allow the smallest ships - cruisers and destroyers - be armed with the same destructive power as the battleships main guns. The RIM-2 "Talos" missile weighted as much as battleship shell; but the "Talos" (in anti-surface mode), strike target near vertically, and on the high supersonic speed.

In the Destroyermen's world, the battleships currently held a deciesive advantage. Remember the results of Alliance aerial attack against just one modern japanese destroyer! Their tiny and slow planes were just incapable of dealing with aerial defense, that was considered insufficient by real world measures! If the allied air forces would be forced to strike against something like "Savoie", their losses would be horryfic - and if the "Savoie" would have any fighter screen, any attack would failed miserably.

Ceejay wrote:That is one mean looking unit! Now a pair of these with carrier support would be a very capable task force. As a matter of interest what sort of range would the main battery have?

Hm, probably around 14-15 km. Not very far, but still impressive.

In the Destroyermen's world, the battleships currently held a deciesive advantage. Remember the results of Alliance aerial attack against just one modern japanese destroyer! Their tiny and slow planes were just incapable of dealing with aerial defense, that was considered insufficient by real world measures! If the allied air forces would be forced to strike against something like "Savoie", their losses would be horryfic - and if the "Savoie" would have any fighter screen, any attack would failed miserably.

They better get cracking and develop some more capable air then because I can't see them developing a battle cruiser!

Seriously maybe some work on 2nd generation torps with more speed and longer legs and a torpedo bomber/ dive bomber combo. I agree that they will take a big hit, but I don't see the alternative. Even your Revenge class ironclads can't go toe to toe with a "modern" BB. And the Alliance can't yet build anything that could. The only thing in our favour is that the mysterious strangers don't seem keen to engage just yet so there is time.

I could see the revenges succeeding if acting in concert with a squadron of 35 knot DDs but how far off are they and would they tie up even more resources than aircraft development.

What about MTBs?

Hmm in the Salvage of Hidoiame it is possible that a Japanese Long Lance torpedo (Type 93) may be found and reverse engineered.



Japanese, Type 93, "Long Lance" torpedo, on display outside U.S. Navy headquarters in Washington, DC, during World War II.

The Type 93 (九三式魚雷?, designated for Imperial Japanese calendar year 2593) was a 61 cm (24 in)-diameter torpedo of the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN), launched from surface ships. It is commonly referred to as the Long Lance[1] by most modern English-language naval historians, a nickname given it after the war by Samuel Eliot Morison, the chief historian of the U.S. Navy, who spent much of the war in the Pacific Theater. In Japanese references, the term Sanso gyorai (酸素魚雷?, lit. "oxygen torpedo") is also used, in reference to its propulsion system. It was by far the most advanced naval torpedo in the world at the time.

Wikipedia gives it's specifications thus:

Weight 2.7 tonnes (5952.48 lb)
Length 9 metres (29 ft 6 5⁄16 in)
Diameter 610 mm (2 ft 1⁄64 in)
Effective firing range 22,000 metres (at 48–50 knots (89–93 km/h; 55–58 mph))
Maximum firing range 40,400 metres (at 34–36 knots (63–67 km/h; 39–41 mph))
Warhead weight 490 kg (1080.27 lb)
Speed 52 knots (96 km/h; 60 mph)

This was a ship killer and had long range, with it Japanese destroyers sunk American and Australian cruisers in the famous Battle of Iron Bottom Sound off Guadalcanal. Its compressed oxygen could be dangerous see article by hitting the link Wikipedia.

Hmm in the Salvage of Hidoiame it is possible that a Japanese Long Lance torpedo (Type 93) may be found and reverse engineered.

It would be enormously hard and, frankly, dangerous. Japan need more than seven years to develope such torpedo. And, as i mentioned above - it's quite dangerous. One hit near torpedo mounts, and the ship is doomed. This weapon is usefull when we have a lot of destroyers, so we could afford to lose few.

As i recall, i suggested the long-range torpedo with engine, that worked on sodium superoxede. It's far more safe substance, but it is harder to obtain...

because I can't see them developing a battle cruiser!

Well, it isn't as hard as it may look. The Republic already have industrial level capable of producing guns, armor plates and onter components, and Alliance have the shipbuilding capabilites to produce the large hulls and steam engines. And they have "Amagi" fire control systems as prototype to their own fire control. There would be some problems, but neither of them is unsolvable.

This is the casement of a Grik Arata-Amagi Class BB note how narrow it gets on top:



This shows the Anti Air mortars  The plate lines are 5' (1.47 M) apart.  I agree to the need of big gun ships and Matt Reddy is of the Big Gun school himself note his thoughts of air as the eyes of the fleet early in the books, so I think we will see Big Gun ships in the future.

This shows the Anti Air mortars The plate lines are 5' (1.47 M) apart. I agree to the need of big gun ships and Matt Reddy is of the Big Gun school himself note his thoughts of air as the eyes of the fleet early in the books, so I think we will see Big Gun ships in the future.

I definitely hope so! Must admit, i always was more to Machan school of naval strategy and fond of combined fleets, that included both carriers and battleships.

This is the casement of a Grik Arata-Amagi Class BB note how narrow it gets on top:

Could you please show, where the upper and lower gundecks is located? I have some problems, trying to calculate the lower gundeck height.

The frontal guns show the upper deck the line below the guns is the upper gun deck skip one and the second line down is the lower gun deck.

The frontal guns show the upper deck the line below the guns is the upper gun deck skip one and the second line down is the lower gun deck.

Thank you!

Hm, with the casemate that tall they could easily have a third gun deck below... they would still have about 2 meters above the waterline.

They added the upper portion so fire bombs would have no where flat to land and drip flaming liquid to the interior.

They added the upper portion so fire bombs would have no where flat to land and drip flaming liquid to the interior.

Actually, pretty strange solution... It would be much easier to just cover the upper parts with interlocking iron sheets, and have a Ulu firefighting team with equipment on standby.