5,419 COMMENTS :

  1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

    Taylor just posted the new Nancy version on his FB page.

    Reply
  2. AvatarBy John Lyle on

    Would it be possible to have the recognition silhouettes of all ships in the series shown in the art section? I am wondering about Mahan silhouette. I know she is now different from Walker (shorter ) but I forget what she looks like from silhouettes shown in previous books.

    Reply
  3. AvatarBy Justin on

    Would U-112 have been carrying G7a torps or G7e/T2s?

    Because the former was noisy and left a bubble trail, but was pretty reliable otherwise. Might be worth studying.
    OTOH the latter was almost undetectable, but was slow and short ranged.. and had the same magnetic detonator problems as the Mark 14s in the first few books. Not much to learn from those.

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

      I doubt that Alliance have much need for a completely new torpedo type. They aren’t that resource-rich.

      “OTOH the latter was almost undetectable, but was slow and short ranged.. and had the same magnetic detonator problems as the Mark 14s in the first few books. Not much to learn from those.”

      Well… considering that France and Italy played a larger role in CES than Germany, they could actually have ITALIAN magnetic detonator. Which, if I recall correctly, was considered by German engineers as more reliable and robust than German design.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Matt White on

        The problem with magnetic detonators is they have to be calibrated. The earth’s magnetic field is not consistent everywhere and locally it can be effected by many things. This is the big issue everyone who developed them, the Americans, Germans, British etc, found out during the war.

        The Italians probably had better luck because they tended to use their torpedoes where they tested them, the Mediterranean. This wasn’t the case for everyone else who’s submarines fought in many different theaters.

        For our heroes I think they don’t have to worry about any magnetic detonators the league may have as this earth almost certainly has a different magnetic field than our own.

        Reply
  4. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

    Are our guys using the Star Shell mechanical fuses for the 4″ DP AA work?

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

      I really doubt that. Mechanical fuses are… complex. They probably have only pyrotechnical fuses of poor quality (justified, since they did not actually expect to meet either Kurokawa’s bombers, or League modern aircraft).

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

        While I agree they probably hadn’t even considered the need for them prior to Kurokawa’s surprise air show, I think reproductions of the star shell’s time fuses are within their capabilities. Mechanical time fuses were in general use in WW1 & they are about at a 1925 time period technology wise. It may take them some time to produce & test them however. They may or may not be available yet.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Justin on

          Sounds reasonable. A star shell’s basically a larger lum round, and IIRC the Allies already have those… though if they need VT fuses to work against aircraft, that might be a problem.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            The 4″/50’s had star shell ammo, hopefully Walker or Mahan had some to work with. Mechanical timed fuses were used up until the VT radio proximity fuses came out. They weren’t real effective but that’s all that was available. They definitely don’t have the tech for VT fuses, but should be able to come up with mechanical fuses. It’s a question of how long they’ve been working on them using star shell fuses as templates. They still won’t be real great against modern LOT aircraft designs though, but better than chemical fuses.

          2. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

            VT fuses are impossible for Alliance. Don’t forget, it was technology, that eat almost as much resources as atom bomb, and in became possible only because of a great progress in centimeter-long wave radars & great experience of US industry in electronics.

            Some other kind of proximity fuse – infrared, or photoelectric one, for example – are within Alliance capabilities. But not for gun shells. It would took them decades to be able to make acceleration-resistant electronic, capable of gun-launch acceleration (thousands of “g”!)

            Rocket or missile fuses are perfectly possible. The photoelectric cells were rather common in pre-war photo cameras to measure the lighting, so (if Courtney, or someone other, could figure out how to produce selenium from products of copper refining, they could actually make them. And, bolometers (infrared-sensitive devices) are 1870s technology.

        2. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

          “Mechanical time fuses were in general use in WW1 & they are about at a 1925 time period technology wise.”

          The problem is not exactly the technology; the problem is the industry. To produce mechanical fuses in large number – not hand-made each one – you need highly trained workforce, precise equipment and good materials. Alliance currently have exactly nothing of this. Most of their workforce are out-of-bronze age, their industry is hastily build, and their materials are “as good as they could be”.

          I just knew how long & painful was the way for reliable AA fuses in 1930s USSR. It took YEARS to actually perfect the technology. Just too demanding. On small scale yes, it could be done. But made THOUSANDS of reliable fuses required far more efforts than crude build machining tools, operated by Lemurians who are mostly trained on level “put this thing here, rotate it around, pull it out, and don’t ask stupid questions”.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            Quite right, they’re probably using chemical fuses, but are probably trying to get a practical mechanical fuse tested & into production. Especially since they now know of the LOT’s modern aircraft. Reverse engineering the 4″ star shells would be the quickest way to go.

          2. AvatarBy Matt White on

            If they have the ability to manufacture the gunnery computer of Walker for her sister ships then they should be able to make mechanical time fuzes. The catch is that we have no idea how resource intensive that production is so it’s entirely possible that while mechanical fuzes are within their capability they aren’t practical for mass production. Which is likely the case. The machine tools taken from Walker should be high enough precision to fabricate most parts the crew could be reasonably expected to replace in the field. And they started working on trying to replicate those tools early on. The question is how many of those lathes and drills have they managed to produce, how widespread are they and are the tool bits anywhere near the quality of the originals. Tool steel is a different formulation from carbon steel which is different from spring steel and structural steel. They all require separate development.

          3. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

            “the gunnery computer of Walker for her sister ships then they should be able to make mechanical time fuzes”

            No, that’s the problem. The gunnery calculator is a relatively rare piece of equipment, produced in very small numbers. They could allow to threw disproportional resources on it. But fuses must be produced in tens of thousands, to have any value. And you could not hand-craft each fuse as you could do with computer.

  5. AvatarBy Justin on

    Any guesses as to the Empire’s new steel hulls?

    Not really a spoiler, since RoB mentions them too: lightest are on par with the Walkers, and the heavier ones might be able to square off with the League’s. So DDs and something heavier….. but what?

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

      ” and the heavier ones might be able to square off with the League’s. ”

      Considering the Republic lack of shipbuilding experience, probably a bit… overoptimistic.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Justin on

        Well the Empire does have a few centuries of experience with steam-propelled wooden hulls. From the description, it sounds like they’re on an A/B-class and Emerald/Hawkins level; nothing revolutionary, but still impressive.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

          Er, I seriously doubt that “a few centuries”. They didn’t have them when they were transferred, so it must be later invention. Probably no earlier than 1850-1880s.

          Reply
        2. AvatarBy Matt White on

          More likely a few decades of experience with steam power. If it wasn’t SS Amerika that brought that technology then it wasn’t that much before her arrival.

          They certainly have experience with armored steam powered warships however given the constant maelstrom around the cape it seems they have focused on coastal ships like their harbor monitors. They don’t seem to have much experiencing in building oceangoing ships.

          I think it depends on how much help they request from the Union. If they do ask for help in designing ships then we may very well see something that roughly shares some kind of lineage with hullforms the Union is familiar with. If they don’t then it will probably be what they are most familiar with. Perhaps a hullform similar to Amerika or depending on how good the memory of the WW1 sailors is, reminiscent of warships from their era.

          Reply
        3. AvatarBy Justin on

          Empire – the British/Indian blokes in Hawaii.

          Though it’s more than likely the Republic figured out steam before Amerika showed up.

          Reply
  6. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

    A bit of relevant technical data that I found in “Guided missiles and techniques”. Summary technical reports of Division 5, NDRC (Vol.1), published in 1946. Quite a good source about old USA guided weapons, but it is not the point here.

    The point is, that in April, 1945, the Dahlgren Naval Ordnance Station tested the effect of shaped-charge aerial bomb against the model of battleship’s hull. They used a standard 1000-pdr GP bomb casting, equipped with shaped charge of about 18 inches diameter. It was placed on the test rig, composed of several metal plates, separated from each other with 8-ft spaces.

    The plates were, from up to down:

    * 11-inch (28 cm) hardened cemented plate or armor steel.

    * 4-inch (10 cm) hardened cemented plate or armor steel.

    * 0,75-inch mild steel plate

    * 0,75-inch mild steel plate

    * 0,75-inch mild steel plate

    Between fourth and fifth plates, several 100-pdr bombs (without fuses) were placed. The whole test rig imitated the horizontal protection of battleship’s main turret magazines. Navy wanted to knew: would shaped charge be able to penetrate into ship’s magazines & would it have enough power to detonate ammunition in case of such hit?

    As it happens, it would.

    When the charge was detonated, the metal jet penetrated the whole test rig, from the first to the last plate, and caused detonation of 100-pdr bombs inside.

    This was one of the reasons, why armored fleets disappeared shortly after World War 2 and never returned.

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Justin on

      Cripes, that’s a definite mission kill for even a Yamato. The battlewagons were already becoming too expensive to justify themselves – I suppose this was the last straw.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

        Yep. Incidentally (I think, it was just a coincidence, but…) the design of target rig was quite similar to the “Yamato” main turret protection.

        Reply
    2. AvatarBy Paul Smith on

      what if they used reactive applique armor to break up the jet? Armor still has a purpose in ships.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Justin on

        My guess, not worth the cost. The opposition would just create a better missile, so to keep the Iowas you’d have to sink more and more money into an arms race for four already-expensive capital ships that’ve mostly been made redundant.

        These days, the only thing a BB can do that a CV or DD can’t is shore bombardment, and that’s what the arsenal cruiser is for.

        Reply
      2. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

        To put it simply – the reactive armor needed to break such jet would probably cause nearly as much damage as the jet itself. Let’s not forget, that 1000-pdr shaped charge warhead is also a VERY powerful HE bomb. Adding more explosives to its detonation… this may just cause the armor to be destroyed by simple shock of surface explosion.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

          Not to mention the massive weight it would add to the ship. It would slow them down & likely make them a bit unstable & that’s just belt armor. You want to put reactive armor on the deck also, since we’re talking bombs & guided missiles. You’re liable to blow your own superstructure overboard with one hit. It’s OK on tanks & APCs, since they don’t tend to sink or capsize & can be covered fairly well, but it still slows them down.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

            Exactly, Lou. Basically that’s why naval armor went out almost immediately after World War 2: it was simply impractical to put it on anymore. Too many new methods of attack – shaped charges, supersonic guided bombs, nuclear weapons – for the armor to be worth putting on a warships.

          2. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            It might be an interesting experiment to build a ship using Chobham armor instead of the usual steel plate. The latest Chobham type composites are supposed to be 10 times better than regular armor steel at defeating HEAT & kinetic rounds.

          3. AvatarBy Matt White on

            NERA composites like Chobham are more effective but tanks still only have to deal with HEAT projectiles of a certain size. Be it fired from a cannon or an atgm there is a limit to how big you can make the round before its impractical and the effectiveness of shaped charges is in large part related to their diameter.

            With an aircraft or ship launched missile you don’t have that limitation. You can make a much larger diameter warhead so I think it’s still a losing proposition. Weight will still increase very quickly and composite armor is much more expensive than steel.

      1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

        Thanks for the pointer! Every time I do a new one I’m back to hunting through MS Paint’s fonts, trying to find something semi-close. I’ll try it out & see if Paint accepts it.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Nestor on

          No prob! You can use it for lettering on most of your allied plane and ship drawings. I can forward you my copy if you have issues with downloading and installing.

          Reply
        2. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

          Hey Lou. I’ve been working on a Cantet drawing and thought I’d send it to you for your input (as a fellow Aviation enthusiast and reasoned critic of my previous designs). Trouble is, I seem to have misplaced your e-mail address. I’d just post it here for all to see and comment on but I don’t have a discreet way of doing that by which the “rough draft” would not “get out there” as widely as the finished version.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Nestor on

            Taylor, I think I’ve got Lou’s email, I’ll send it to you. Maybe in return you can reply with your Cantet drawing? You’ve picked the curiosity of this other aviation enthusiast… 😉

          2. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            He has mine already! You’ll have to bribe him with something else! :)

          3. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            Plus, he already posted it on the DDmen Fan Club FB page.

          4. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

            If it’s on the fan association page, I didn’t put it there. That’s fine, I put it on my author facebook page, figuring if you guys like it, it’s good to go–and anything there is fair game for re-post–but I didn’t do it. Everybody have a look, and if it meets broad approval, I’ll post it here.

          5. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            My bad! It’s on Taylor’s page, sorry.

          6. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            Just out of curiosity Taylor, do you hand draw your stuff & then scan it & touch it up, or do you do it totally digitally?

          7. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

            Well, I basically hand draw it with a mouse in paint. I know, Nestor has already explained how limited and archaic that that is. I used to do a lot of pen and ink stuff and got passable at it but gunmaking for so many years (carving, lock filing, etc.) pretty much wore my hands out. If I try to hold a pen or pencil more than a few minutes my hand hurts-then goes numb! Ha!

          8. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            Sounds like Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. My hands tend to start shaking when I try to do fine work… like holding a spoon of soup steady while I blow on it to cool it down. Getting a screw driver into the slots is a biatch also. Old age sucks.

          9. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

            Yeah, carpal tunnel and bone on bone. It ain’t the years, it’s the off road miles. The worst joint is the left thumb to wrist because that was the “pushing” thumb for the carving knife. Compression with tight gloves helps, and since I have such big hands, all gloves are tight. See? Always look on the bright side of things.
            Back the original discussion though, I’ve done all my own maps etc ever since the second book. I worked with somebody the publisher recommended on the first one, but though he was a pro and did a good job, that presented several problems. First, since he hadn’t read the book, it was a nightmare getting what I wanted across to him. Also, I often need at least rough sketches of the maps before I write what happens there. Might as well just do the whole thing myself so, professional or not, they show what I want them to.

          10. AvatarBy Nestor on

            On long drawing sessions I put on a wrist brace with a stiff back while on my drawing tablet. The stylus is fat with a rubber grip, which is another plus except when I inadvertently squeeze it too hard and tire my fingers out. I’m still learning to wean myself off that bad habit.

            As far as having someone else draw a map for a yet to be published story I concur it will be a challenge unless the artist has spent time reading the relevant parts of the script. Otherwise you can commission fancier artwork after the fact, say on a reissue or second printing.

  7. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

    Guys, seems that we have a problem. I found definite proofs, that French military designed sub-caliber armor-piercing rounds as early as in 1937 (for 20-mm gun initially). In fact, it seems that German sub-caliber rounds – which very suspiciously appeared around 1940-1941 – were stolen from French designs.

    What it means for “Destroyermen”, is that League quite possibly have MUCH more capable anti-tank guns than France or Germany have in our world. And basically, the Alliance would be totally incapable of making light tanks of any military value. They would just be too vulnerable. They would not provide any real protection.

    So it seems, that the Alliance armor development must be seriously re-thought. To be effective, they need tanks with at least 2-3 inch armor. Or more. With their technology, it means more and more weight (albeit the small size of Lemurians would probably allow to make tanks more compact.

    Frankly, but I started to think about something like the Alliance variant of Char B1. Heavy frontal armor, 3-inch hull-mounted gun/howitzer, light gun/autocannon/double MG’s in turret. Due to Lemurian small size, they would probably be able to actually put two-man turret in the place, where human could fit only single-man one.

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Justin on

      (https://panzerworld.com/armor-penetration-table)

      Before launching into full panic mode, let’s keep in mind that A) most tank fights are at 500m or longer, B) most ’39 AT guns were 50mm or less, and C) APC or APCBC of that era yielded around 38-53 of penetration.

      So in theory, 1.5-2 inch plate at a 45-degree angle should bounce anything up to an 75 or 88, and those will likely kill an Allied tank no matter what. Let’s not sacrifice too much mobility for a little armour.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

        Considering that the “mobility” of Allied tanks would be very limited either way – they simply could not refine engines, gears and tracks fast enough – I think, they we could safely sacrifice it for better cross-terrain ability (i.e. rhomboid hull with overlapping track) and better protection.

        After all, the main goal for Allied tanks would be – for quite a long – the support of landing operations & near-sea campaigns. Basically it wouldn’t matter, that they are slow and have limited range; they would be moved by sea & would fought using the sea supply routes. So, there aren’t may reasons to even try to make them fast. And slow tanks are much simpler to produce.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Justin on

          We don’t really know what a war with the League would look like. What we do know is that tanks with minimal mobility can be defeated by even infantry or rough terrain; Char B1s would make horrible amphibious tanks.

          Without spoiling anything, a 150hp engine should be able to do 30 to 40kph on flat ground, and Baalkpan seems to be slowly getting closer to achieving that end. A semi-armoured SPG might work fine as an infantry tank in tandem with a light-medium, but the Chars are a dead end.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

            ” What we do know is that tanks with minimal mobility can be defeated by even infantry or rough terrain; ”

            Er, the Char B1 have excellent cross-terrain mobility. Rhomboid tanks were specifically designed for that.

          2. AvatarBy Justin on

            By that definition of “rhomboid,” Churchills qualify too – methinks that they’d also be more useful to the Allies.

          3. AvatarBy Steve White on

            A 150 hp engine? That’s a Nancy F radial. I recall that American light tanks of the late 30s used aircraft engines; they were lightweight (comparatively) and had great power, even when detuned a bit to run on regular octane rather than av-gas. So Nancy engines would be plenty good for the type of armor the Alliance can build.

      2. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

        The current Union tanks are designed to do the job tanks were initially called for, breaking trench lines for the foot soldier to exploit. Light tanks, by definition are all vulnerable to anti-tank guns to various degrees. The Union’s current tank is probably vulnerable to .50 cal BMG fire. The Finns made a nice AT gun called the Lahti-39 in 20mm. Silva’s Doom Whomper might do well against light armor (maybe necked down to 15mm or so to increase velocity).
        Currently the allies can do decent enough armor & have good enough engine to carry it, but need experience with suspensions & transmissions to haul it. If/when they mix it up with the LOT on land a few years from now, they should be able to field something at least closely comparable to what the LOT currently might have. A tank with a 25mm gun variant & sloped armor would make an excellent light tank, using their 6-cylinder engine. The 3″/23 might make a good self propelled howitzer/Tank killer.

        The point is mute, however, since tanks have restricted mobility in forests & jungles. The Lot would be insane (OK, more insane) to bring heavy tanks into a Central African or South American campaign & I don’t see the Alliance invading North Africa any time soon.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Justin on

          The German 37mm off U-112 might be helpful as well, if they can get it reverse-engineered in time.

          Maybe the League’ll just straight-up invade the Republic? From what little we know, the west coast is mostly lowlands and it’s doubtful that Colonia would have adequate defences.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            The 37mm would make a decent gun. They’d have to shorten it some to make it handier.

            I seem to recall the LOT does have designs on the Republic & South African terrain is better for tank warfare than Central African jungles. They’d have to invade from the western coasts though, since the perpetual storm off Cape Horn would destroy any small craft being deployed from transports there.

  8. AvatarBy Justin on

    Given the existing level of tech and expertise, how much HP could the Allies cram into an engine within a six-month period?

    There, no spoilers!

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Matt White on

      Hard to say because there are a lot of variables. However the next step in engine development they need is forced induction. The only union engines with boost at the moment are the P-40s. Fuel that is high enough grade will be a logistics problem. They can make it but they’ve only had to make enough for the P-40s so far. A simple positive displacement supercharger would be inefficient but also the easiest to implement. A centrifugal supercharger or turbocharger would be better but harder to do. The only possible examples of turbos they may have would be from wrecked Machi-Messerschmits although I’m sure Ben is familiar with the concept.

      But yeah there are a lot of variables at play that we don’t know so actual horsepower figures are hard to estimate. What octane fuel can they provide in quantities large enough to support large scale air operations? How tight are union manufacturing tolerances? What grades of high temperature steel are available? Also are they ready for fuel injection? You can do forced induction on carbs but it’s not as reliable and makes for less power. Fuel injection is much more complicated though.

      Reply
  9. AvatarBy Steve White on

    By any chance, is there a drawing / plan of the Cantet, the biplane used by the Republic? I know it’s based on the Albatros C-I of WWI Imperial Germany, and I’ve seen the photo of it at Wiki. But I’d like to see the drawing (much like the drawings we have of the Nancy) in Republic colors. If such a drawing exists I’d appreciate the pointer.

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

      I haven’t done one yet but I’ve been meaning to—if someone doesn’t beat me to it. Glad you liked Pass of Fire. It was a tough one to write for a lot of reasons and pretty emotional from time to time, even for me.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

        I did an extremely small seaplane version of the Cantet for my Republic Quick Build Cruiser version 2.

        Reply
          1. AvatarBy Steve White on

            Lou, that’s an excellent starting point for the artists around here!

  10. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

    Someone on Facebook asked for a deck plan of the Gray a while back. It took me some time to do, because I kept finding mistakes to correct. The worst were the 4″/50 guns, which bore NO resemblance to the real thing. Plus matching deck arrangements with side view can get finicky to say the least. I also finally tracked down what that Rube Goldberg anchor crane thing was actually supposed to look like. Anyway, here she is. Finally!
    https://www.deviantart.com/loupy59/art/Revised-Alliance-CL-USS-Gray-by-Lou-Schirmer-aka-L-767012018

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

      Very nice! And that anchor crane was dopey looking. I suspect if Spanky had been involved more closely in final construction he would’ve done away with the whole hoist it on a billboard setup. A few Clemson’s did if I recall.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

        Thanks! It looks like that crane thing was to get the old style anchors onto their recessed beds aft of the chain hawse, instead of letting them dangle. Later ships had the newer anchors they could just bring up tight against the hawse shaft.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

          Yeah. That recessed bed was called the “billboard.” I sure would’ve hated to secure one of those anchors with that dopey crane while rolling or pitching in a choppy anchorage.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            I have to redo her again! I did the 4″ “wet” (submarine) mount, instead of the standard “dry” mount, because I’m a dumbass. The major difference being the sights on the wet mount are on top of the sight frame & the dry mount has them under it

  11. AvatarBy Drew on

    One thing I’ve wondered about small arms in universe. I’m guessing the UH is going to copy the Springfield as its next generation rifle to replace the Allin-Silvas, but will they still be chambered in 30 caliber? Though maybe with a heavyweight 200-220 grain bullet to help with dealing with the wildlife rather than the service standard 150gr. Or would they keep the 50-80 cartridge of the AS since its already in production and proven?

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Generalstarwars333 on

      I would imagine they’d go with the normal. 30-06 round since it’s already in production for their .30 cal MGs.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy donald j johnson on

        Hey starwars what you doing here arn’t you supposed to be shut down without access the entire summer 😉

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Generalstarwars on

          Oh no, they’re onto me! *distant sirens are heard in the distance) LOL
          The reason I’m here is because I still have my school computer. I’m in a specialty center where we get an associate’s degree in the social sciences before our high school diploma, so I got to keep my school computer over the summer this year because I need it for the online college elective I’m taking. I also have other means of getting on here(the message about the .30-06 round was typed on my phone, for example), but generally the only time I lack a more enticing option(e.g. videogames or a book) is when I’m doing homework on my school computer. That’s when I procrastinate and go on this site and a few others.

          Reply
  12. AvatarBy Justin on

    Human/mi-anaaka ingenuity and Galla trees aside, how practical would a 800-foot ironclad actually be? Longest documented wooden ships in OTL were 400-500′ and even then many would flex in heavy weather.

    I’m guessing the Imperators are probably coppered like the Homes, and that would partially offset structural problems, but wouldn’t the Aratas have had some trouble? Or does the casemate absorb most of the wave action?

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

      Well, they probably used a lot of metal to strengthen the structure.

      Reply
    2. AvatarBy Drew on

      I’d suspect the only thing that makes them or the Homes possible is the Galla trees being so strong. Diagonal bracing and 6 foot thick sides only go so far.

      It would be a neat engineering exercise to see what exactly you’d need to make one happen though.

      Reply
      1. Taylor AndersonBy Taylor Anderson (Post author) on

        Hi Drew! Actually, except for ships built for the initial “evacuation” of Madagascar, (probably actually considerably smaller), Galla trees weren’t available for their construction. On the other hand, without going back over some of the numerous examples, (sometimes in passing, I grant), of durable woods their descendants might use, design remained more critical to the structural integrity of Homes than the materials they were made of. They weren’t just diagonally braced, their timbers were diagonally cross-laminated in multiple layers.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Drew on

          Ok, I’m with you now.

          The image I had in my head was they were built like the Constitution, with diagonal bracing and extra thick bulwarks. What they actually sound like is the polar explorer ships on a massive scale, with multiple layers of diagonal and normal planking and bracing.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy donald j johnson on

            And due to the cross lamentations they would be extreemly strong and if even 3 feet thick then would be nearly unsinkable as they would flex with the worst weather.

  13. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

    Another couple of nit picky questions:

    1. On the Clemson & Wickes DDs decks, between the #4 stack & the aft deck house, there are two groupings of what could be hatches, skylights, ICBM launch tubes for all I know. Does anyone with access to better/more detailed blueprints know what these are? I’m doing a deck plan for the Gray & since she’s based off the Walker, she might have something similar. Does she Taylor?

    2. Walker has one blower to pressurize two boiler rooms. Grey has eight boilers. Does she have one, two or more blowers? I’d assume at least two, possibly as many as four. This is also for the deck plan I’m doing.

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

      Also, does she have directors for the 4″/50s, or are they in local control? I put the 5.5″ director where the old 4″ one was on the bridge. If you’re agreeable, I’ll put one on each side of the midships deck house.

      I noticed some mistakes on my original drawing & will be correcting them in this version. The most egregious was my 4″ guns bearing little resemblance to the actual guns on the Walker.

      Reply
    2. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

      You may be referring to the deck access hatches to the engine rooms. They’re there for the firerooms, too. I think, during hard-earned lessons in redundancy, Spanky would’ve insisted on redundant blowers. The question remains, which I honestly haven’t even considered, is how many firerooms does Gray have? Two or four? I think, for similar reasons, she’d have four–but the fireroom/engineroom layout would remain the same, for her class. Later efforts would probably attempt to stagger them for further redundancy.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

        And yes, Gray has directors for the 4″-50s. Those were copied as early as USS James Ellis. Each side of the amidships gun platform might work, or a single raised position between the stacks. Not the best for fore and aft work… I’ll consider that. There are not yet any anti-air directors and even the DP guns must go to local control for that. I think the question has been raised about rangefinders? The Impies have the optics to make them, but they’d probably be just as useless at speed on the new Wickes/Walker Class as they were on Walker and Mahan, unless they were buffered in some way. Vibration was always the issue that made them useless, so spotting ladders were employed from the start. Gray might actually be able to make use of an available rangefinder, but her crew would probably still use spotting ladders. The good thing, with their superior eyesight, a well-trained Lemurian fire control team might actually be better at range estimations than Greg Garrett was.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

          If they went with simple copies, she probably has four boiler rooms. From your silhouette’s stack spacing, they appear to be eight in-line taking up a hull length of about 150′ (double Walker’s). This gives them more protection with compartments & fuel tanks outboard of the boiler rooms, but makes for very long steam lines from the forward boiler rooms. I’m going to give her four blowers (one for each boiler room) unless you say otherwise.

          There appears to be a range finder on the spotting top in the silhouette. That may be where the 4″ range finder was relocated to, to make room for the 5.5″ director? You’re right about the vibration though, especially up in a spotting top, waving around in the breeze, where every bit of a ship’s motion is amplified. If Amagi’s 4.7″ DP directors have been adapted to control the Gray’s 5.5″ DP’s, they could also be adapted to control the 4″/50 DPs using different ballistics tables. That’d be a quick way to get a DP secondary director & if it worked well enough, retrofit it to the DDs.

          Spotting Ladders? Is that similar to the Ladder Method of ranging salvos? Or is it an actual device?

          Reply
        2. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

          I’d go with two 4″ directors, one on each side of the mid-ships deck house. It gives them the ability to engage two targets at once with directed fire & the directors would have an increased action arc by being placed closer to the ship’s side.

          As far as fore & aft fire goes, only the stern 4″ has a direct line aft. The other mounts would be damaging the ship & concussing the crew if they fired directly forward or aft. They may have combined the Walker’s range finder & director in one unit to simplify things by the time Gray commissioned.

          Reply
      2. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

        ” I think, for similar reasons, she’d have four–”

        Well, considering that she is a product of more primitive tech than “Walker”, I would bet on four. Maybe even more, because her equipment would probably be bulky, underpowered and unreliable. IMHO, of course)

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

          Probably another reason he went with eight boilers for three turbines, instead of six. They weren’t sure of their boiler tech when designing & building Gray, so they gave her a little something extra to make up for any deficiencies.

          Reply
    3. AvatarBy donald johnson on

      I was wondering if any of the ships have any kind of medium rapid fire weapons. A 1 inch he could do wonders against any kind of wooden ship that the doms use. or phosphor incendiary’s. I suspect a one inch rifle would out range anything the doms have or at least be considerably more accurate at range. Set them on fire and they won’t be shooting at you.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Justin on

        Closest they’ve got is the Type 96s, and they’re still in R&D. That might change in a book or two.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Matt White on

          I also have a feeling that wooden ships are going to stop being a problem very soon. At least for the union their era has ended.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Justin on

            Yeah, from now on it’s ironclads or better.

  14. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

    Just out of curiosity & for future nit picking purposes, are the twin .50 cal MGs on the Gray air or water cooled. I think they’ve got the air cooled in production, but don’t know about the water cooled variant.

    Reply
        1. AvatarBy donald j johnson on

          Lou, you are so vehement about no spoilers then you go and try and trick taylor into giving one

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            The Gray was already out there from ROB, but I see your point.
            On the other claw, I could care less about spoilers. I just bow to the will of the swarm.

    1. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

      Water cooled. All land, ship, and tank-borne MGs are water cooled. Some air-cooled versions are being installed on SOME aircraft.

      Reply
  15. AvatarBy Paul Smith on

    Just some random thoughts. To get ANY high altitude aircraft, they’ll have to develop an oxygen system the Lemurians can use. Just compressing the air would be a wasted effort. They should have a few spares for the P-40’s left, hopefully the demand regulators & masks for the O2 system would be some of them. Could they use something like vaseline to help seal a mask to their faces? With rubber becoming available, reproducing at least a modified mask should be possible. Next gen hulls should also be in the design pipeline. The Walker/ Mahan hull design is pretty dated. Maybe Spanky could get some smart ‘cats at BuShip to look at the goldplater designs he drew from memory. Plus they have Hidoiame’s carcass to look at.
    The next ship I’d like to see come through would be something like the Medusa (AR-1). Imagine the possibilities, with the knowledge and information the crew would have at their fingers!

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Justin on

      If you’re willing to wade through the previous pages, there’s talk of regulators or even full-body flight suits.

      Book 7 mentioned the Farraguts as an inspiration; IMO they’d be best served by merging the Walker-class and the Gray-class into one 2000t DD hull and going from there.

      Reply
    2. AvatarBy Steve Moore on

      Funny, was thinking about my college football mouthguard when you mentioned rubber masks. Why not a ‘mask’ that goes inside the mouth, with an oxygen tube running up into it. Sort of like a scuba regulator. Think sub escape lungs had rubber mouthpieces too, but will leave that to the research experts here.

      See, Taylor, I can think about other things besides rockets.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Paul Smith on

        Didn’t the escape lungs also have clips for the nose?

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

          Lemurian noses may be too sensitive for clips, like a dog’s or cat’s nose.

          Reply
  16. AvatarBy Charles Simpson on

    We are currently having a discussion on this on the Destroyermen Fan Association page on Facebook. Current American Navy Clan carrier aircraft are probably unarmored or lightly armored. The crew of the Hidoiame might know of the “Kido Buti” or “Attack Force” with two or more carriers task groups opposed to the American single carrier taskforce of the early war known to Walker and Mahan’s crews. This may have some unfamiliar buzz words for future carrier tactics of the union. Sorry the video is by a German so the accent is a might thick at times: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8U3rkTXAlM&t=536s&fbclid=IwAR2gv2LiDd7x9Xh-mH3v0Y0lZ35kfz22bJ5bQ89bBFZ0oe2PnKQrgmhnm6k

    Reply
  17. AvatarBy Joseph R Thorsky on

    For all of you suits and skirts wannabees:

    Just a friendly “Lemmy Caution” and reminder that just
    as the LOT’s insertion hasn’t strictly followed historical norms
    it can justifiably be rightly assumed with a high degree of confidence
    that GB and the Commonwealth has also undergone a similar type of Taylor-
    made transformation.
    For Example: Suppose the Easter Rebellion had
    succeeded with a United Ireland dominating over a diminished British Monarchy.
    It would put the military powers/forces facing each other in the Atlantic and the Med in very similar circumstances/positions.
    Uncertainty, caution and paralysis in decision-making would be the predominant order of the day!

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Joseph R. Thorsky on

      As Corrected
      For you suits and skirts and all youse “PC Correct” don’t ever wannabees:

      Just a friendly “Lemmy Caution” and reminder that just
      as the LOT’s insertion hasn’t strictly followed historical norms
      it can justifiably be rightly assumed with a high degree of confidence
      that GB and the Commonwealth has also undergone a similar type of Taylor-
      made transformation.
      For Example: Suppose the Easter Rebellion had
      succeeded with a United Ireland dominating over a politically diminished
      British Monarchy.
      It would put the military powers/forces facing each other in the Atlantic and
      the Med in very similar untenable circumstances/positions.
      Uncertainty, of the unknown automatically dictates caution and paralysis in decision-making
      which would likely be the predominant order of the day!
      Atrophy and discretion would be the end result.

      Happy Birth Day NUS!1

      Reply
  18. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

    One thing I would like to get clarified is regarding Savoie’s main battery. Is it 13.5″ (343mm) or 13.4″ (340mm)? In our world the Bretagne class ships had the 13.4″ (the French never did make a 13.5″). The French used the metric system & went with an even metric number, while the British using Imperial measurements of inches wind up with odd numbers in metric. Are we going with the thought that they armed the Bretagne class with 13.5″ guns in the AU the LOT came from?

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Justin on

      That’s true, the other Bretagnes had 340mms. So either Mr. Anderson missed a decimal point somewhere, or the PFF Navy came to terms with numbers that weren’t multiples of five or ten.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

        …Sometimes I wonder: how long it would take for Americans to finally get rid of those “imperial” system? Seriously, there isn’t even any British Empire anymore)

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Justin on

          In fairness, there’s a lot of stuff that’d need changing, and it’s a big country. Imagine needing to swap out almost every road sign in Moscow… or Siberia.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

            Well, we done exactly that in 1917 (Russia used more traditional system before). And also modernized our grammar quite a bit)

        2. AvatarBy Charles Simpson on

          My guess is that screws will be the first crack in the dam of our stubbornness. Authoritarian countries find it easier to make sweeping changes too, even against popular will 😉

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Alexey Shiro on

            Well, one of the (frankly, very limited) advantages of authoritarian rule, is that it sometimes allow government to pursue right decisions, not the ones that public loved)

        3. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

          Automotive & machinery wise, as far as nuts & bolts go, we’re already metric. When you see speed limit signs in kilometers per hour is when we’ve come fully over to the dark side.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Justin on

            Yeah, but then you’ve got satellites crashing into Mars because NASA’s engineers use metric and Lockheed Martin’s don’t.

          2. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

            The irony is, we started out “metric” as far as machine screws were concerned, copying French muskets. And US military arms stayed metric until the ‘03–when we finally said the hell with it and went “standard” probably because we were making so many P-14s for the Brits. Then everybody went metric and left us by ourselves again!! I think Bekiaa is right. .50 caliber just sounds better than 12…whatever mm. Oh, look forward to more of her griping about stuff like that.

          3. AvatarBy Paul Smith on

            you haven’t driven by Tucson, AZ have you?

          4. AvatarBy donald j johnson on

            Were the French already into metric during the revolutionary war? I had thought that they didn’t go metric until after their own revolution.

    2. AvatarBy Taylor Anderson on

      It is 240 mm. The 13.5 came from characters rounding off to “13 and a half’s” in dialogue. Like usual, CEs are sometimes too literal.

      Reply
    1. AvatarBy Steve Moore on

      My guess is that as designs and manufacturing become more complex, the harder it is to scratch up the capital to invest in a plant. Just a thought.

      Reply
    2. AvatarBy Joseph R. Thorsky on

      Lou:
      With little more than 5 weeks until Pass of Fire is published.
      The Prewar WWI and WWII development of Aviation resulted not just from an unrestricted form of free-market capitalism as epitomized by The Calvin Coolidge Era. Development only resulted from some vitally important series of events which were remarkably adaptive, innovative and transformative. We’re even now still being effected and affected by, and are living in the shadow of the decisionmakers and leaders of that era.
      Suggest for further study review and reference the following British periodicals (FYI-no relation to
      pteradactal or the pteranodon is either implied or intended.)
      1 Modern Wonders-Modern World
      2 Fantasy Collector
      3 Pulpdom and Argosy
      No Trip for Biscuits Here!

      Reply
  19. AvatarBy Justin on

    Finally got around to scanning my motorjet Fleashooter. No idea how much of it’s aluminum or wood or steel – or if it can even fly – just wanted to see what it looked like.

    https://imgur.com/8S3Hh2O

    Reply
  20. AvatarBy Generalstarwars on

    So we’ve established that the single shot 37mm AA gun on the U-boat would probably make an excellent tank and anti-tank gun for the union. I guess this leaves the question of how that should be carried out. How quickly can they start producing copies of this weapon? Should they try mounting some in their current tank designs, or design a purpose based carrier for it? Heck, could they maybe mount one in the nose of a Nancy or whatever strike aircraft will be replacing it to use in tank busting? How practical would it be to try and make an automatic version of this weapon for possible AA use?

    Reply
    1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

      I think their current tanks are a bit small to handle the 37mm gun. A slightly larger tank with either a casemate or turret would be the way to go.
      The single shot version of the 37mm (if that’s what the U-boat has) would be fairly easy to reverse engineer.
      They’ll need a bigger plane to put it in than a Nancy. The gun itself weighs over 500 lbs. & the recoil would rip it right out of the fuselage.
      They could make an auto version of it, but it would take a while (1-3 years) to get it engineered, tested & the bugs worked out, but would be a good long term investment.

      Reply
      1. AvatarBy Justin on

        Baalkpan’s already busy on the Type 96, though. Pretty sure that logistically speaking it’s either one AA gun or the other.

        Reply
      2. AvatarBy Matt White on

        Given that the 37mm we are talking about is a single shot gun I don’t think it would be modified to automatic so as much as you would develop an entirely new gun that uses the same cartridge.

        Reply
      3. AvatarBy Steve Moore on

        Too heavy to put on a PT? Although a twin M2 mount would probably be more effective and already developed. Something sticks in my mind about this being a common modification to South Pacific USN PT’s, adding 37mm AT guns to use on Japanese barges.

        Reply
        1. AvatarBy Matt White on

          IRL 37mms were put on PTs by their crews. I think they got them from P-39s and the like.

          Reply
          1. AvatarBy Lou Schirmer on

            They were put on the 80′ boats as well as the occasional 40mm Bofors. The 37mm would be about as large as you could go on one of the DDmen MTBs, but it would fit…somewhere.

Leave a Reply to Steve Moore Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *