Re: FT-IJN Designs?

In message <01c101c1a8cb$5887b240$2a8287d9@inty>
	  "Bif Smith" <bif@bifsmith.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

[snip]
> 
> Speed/thrust-Good (6) for the smaller ships (upto cruisers, mabe
BC`s?),
> average for the BB`s and CV`s (4), the heavies would be good to poor
(4 or
> 2).

I'd prefer MD 8 for escorts, 6-8 for cruisers, and 4-6 for capitals
(make them a bit faster than most FB1 fleets)
> 
> Hull-Average, except maybe the heavies (strong?).

Ok, may have to cut back abit for extra speed.
> 
> Weapons-For something different (from what we have already got), how
about
> the small ships being equipt with a pluse torp as the main weapon of
choice
> (it would fit with the IJN ship designs for the WW1-2). It doesn`t
have to
> be the PT, but this would fit with the use of the torpedos fitted to
the
> smaller IJN ships. For the larger ships, how about copying a
historical
> parallel and just using the biggest guns (and only a few of them),
that can
> be fitted on said ship (thinking the dreadnought revolution in capital
ship
> design, brought about by the battle the IJN had with the russians).
For
> example, we could have a BB with 3 or 4 Cl.3 batts (5 or 6 arcs, but
thats
> just me), and 3 Cl.1 bats (same number as FC`s, to allow for dual use
as
> PDS). This would probably not be the best or most optimal design
posible,
> but who says the navy doesn`t have to have some design deficences
built in
> (after all, all the fleets at the moment have some faults designed in,
don`t
> they?). It would also be different from everything else officially
> published.

Ok, but with faster speed, you could cut back on the arcs a bit. From
the models I'd give each design 1 large F-only weapon, but the models
can be interpreted in so many different ways :-)
> 
> Protection-Armour used on everything (except maybe smaller than DD`s),
with
> level1 sheilds used as well on capitols.

I'd like to see as heavy use of level 2 screens as possible, as no FB1
fleet uses this philospohy (bad vs. KV I know, but good v.s Phalons,
and, to a varying but lesser extent, everyone else :-).
> 
> PDS-Heavy (heavier than even the NSL). This would have good historical
> parallels. The IJN had started fitting it`s ships with AA guns even
from
> WW1, and have experiance how deadly aircraft can be (think pearl
harbour).
>
Ok, but what area defence philosophy? Specialised area-defence craft vs.
fitting ADFC to any hull that has room (and enough PDS to make it worth
it).

> Fighters-For something different, how about fighters JUST being
carried on
> carriers, none on DN/SD`s* (just a idea, that would be different from
> everyone else, and allow creation and casting of light carriers).
> 
> *This someone will disagree with. But being different, it would force
people
> to play them differently.

But not different to Phalons. I prefer Bob's solution - Fighters on
_all_ capital ships, say 1 group on BC & BB, 2 on DN & SDN. Carriers are
a bit like NSL, only 4 groups on CV ?

> 
> The above is just a idea I had, but we on the list have a chance to
design a
> different design doctorine for a fleet (remember, don`t try and make
them a
> uber fleet design style, and these guys I would see as a second tier
power,
> on the par with the FSE/NSL).
> 
> Heres a example of a BB design as I would see it-
> 
> M=120 NPV=409
> 
> FTL (12/24)
> Thrust=4 (24/48)
> Hull=30 (30/60)
> Screens x1 (6/18)
> FC`s x3 (3/9)
> Cl.1 x3 (3/9)
> Cl.3 (5A) x4 (32/96)
> Armour x5 (5/10)
> PDS x5 (5/15)
> 
> Please feel free to critisize at will <G>
> 
> BIF
> 
> 
Well, I've made some suggestions... :-)

Charles