Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
of the five naval power 4 built so called London cruiser type, 6 inch guns, displacement under 10,000 tons standard (the Japanese navy built 6" cruiser only in the 40s when the treaty was off)...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
yes bager and Dido, or Hermione 1st LD&Launched, Bonaventure 1st completed why they are Didos?? this strange english spoken peple in this threat i'm ever referring to 6" inch cruisers
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
The RN Colony class were designed to 8,000tons. By the time they were completing war had started and the Naval Limitation treaties were effectively dead. So in that respect no one was concerned that...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
back on the topic on a italian navy book on italian cruiser in the chapter for the "Duca d'Aosta" type is reported talking of protection of british cruiser that the vertical protection of 1 inch and...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
nobody has data on 6" guns vs light cruisers? the italian Duca degl Abruzzi class had KC (actually i think Terni variant) vertical armour somebody known if the 6" shell can defeat their vertical...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
Imho - its very hard to asses. With capital ships the all or nothing citidel protects machinery, armerment and ammunition and reserve bouyancy. With cruisers, that was not really practicable - and...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
this is true NewGolconda, but within the treaties limit i don't think was possible protect a cruiser vs 8" inch shell (or larger, probably same is true for the soviet 180mm)
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
Vincenzo wrote:this is true NewGolconda, but within the treaties limit i don't think was possible protect a cruiser vs 8" inch shell (or larger, probably same is true for the soviet 180mm)No, and just...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
your ship can sunk also if magazine and machinery are not hit so the box protection is not a solution, you need to protect also the buoyancy however what cruiser (within treaties limit) had magazines...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
bager1968 wrote:Yes... the US took one look at the Mogami class, realized that they were over 8,000 tons std, and invoked par. 2 of Article 6.Do you have a reference for this?RegardsDavid
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
i try to compare machinery protection of this cruisers, i take out the Emile Bertin because it's too few armoured La Gallissonniere class had 105mm belt and 38mm deck Monteccucoli class had 60mm belt...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
NewGolconda wrote: a six inch cruiser could be hit by DD shells, or 6in shells, or 8in shells, or BB shells - the only shells that were never going to be a threat were the ships own guns!A six inch...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
I think the assumption was that a ship should always be able to stand up to other ships of the same class. Battlecruisers were unbalanced and seemed to end up holding the wrong end of the stick.
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
Yes, navies did both look at other nations' guns and their own when deciding how to armor their ships. This is because they always had better data on penetration/shell performance from their own guns....
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
But not "protected against its own ac" for carriers. No one really did that and no one calls carriers unbalanced.
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
ChrisPat wrote:But not "protected against its own ac" for carriers. No one really did that and no one calls carriers unbalanced.Maybe not exactly in those terms, but some carriers were. Take the RN's...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
Have a look at how many ac those carriers could or even would launch and how many targets their own fighters and AA could engage. IIRC Kaga is one of the most unbalanced, don't think I looked at the...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
data from adm 239/268 (from not british is intelligence so would be wrong) Class/Vertical Mag/Vertical Engine&Boiler/Horizontal Mag/Horizontal Engine&Boiler in inch Leander/3.5/3/2/1.25...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
A carrier is built around supporting an air group, and balance would be the ability to generate sorties for defensive and offensive operations, as well as being fast enough to keep out of trouble and...
View ArticleRe: Post London Treaty 6" cruisers were protected vs their guns?
Thanks for your earlier responses to my query, Bager and Condittiere.
View Article
