Considerations about naval designs

End? No, Don. Yet racism is a pathetically weak thing compared to what it used to be. Largely because the youth that looked beyond it ridiculed their elders that held on to it so tightly.

PeterZ wrote:End? No, Don. Yet racism is a pathetically weak thing compared to what it used to be. Largely because the youth that looked beyond it ridiculed their elders that held on to it so tightly.

I guess I sometimes get overwhelmed by the news, Peter. I just wish we were all beige or whatever. It can be wearisome.

Don

Heavens no, Don! I thank God that He created is with so many distracting but ultimately irrelevant differences. We must work to achieve MLK's ideal that we judge by the content of another's character and not by the color of his or her skin. Yet the work is so very worth it. All of us are so very different and yet underneath it all we share so much in common.

I found my other half half a world away from where I was born. She has Nordic features to my more swarthy complexion. Our children split our differences in delightful ways. I look at them and thank God He created His children with so many differences.

Even though my father faced racism because of his Dutch heritage, his complexion was too light for his neighbor's sensibilities and blacks face difficulties here for the opposite reason, the circumstances that fuel these prejudices are weakening.

PeterZ wrote:Don,

The grumpy old Dukes will be the best advertisement fir the new ventures. The younger and more junior peers will see the prosperity the new ventures will bring their people, the new influence and admiration they wield and find confirmation in the grumpiness of their fadind seniors.

Nothing convinces the next generation better than the misplaced convictions of their elders.

fallsfromtrees wrote:
The only thing I would add to this is to have the nobles who decline to allow the factories on their land sign a statement saying that they understand that they are forgoing the opportunity to get rich. Then three years down the road, when they complain that the crown had favored their neighbors and discriminated against them because they had opposed the crown, you whip out the papers and point out that they had had the opportunity and declined. There was in fact no discrimination on the part of the crown. Rather spikes that argument.

n7axw wrote:Hi fallsfromtrees,

My friend, if you think whipping out papers, reason or conscience are going to do anything to spike the grumps of the bellyachers, I have some bottom land to sell you. I'm just not going to tell you what it is on the bottom of. What's even worse is that there are always plenty of people to listen to the bunk and believe the worst. I often marvel that civilization has progressed as far as it has.

Don

It won't do anything for the bellyachers, but it will have an effect of his peers, many of whom will be able to say - you brought it on yourself. Perhaps it would be appropriate to publish all of the documents in about a year, before they have time to realize they have "screwed the pooch", but after you have gotten most of the dissenters to sign off on it. Just might encourage a few to change their minds, or at least give their heirs a chance to lean on them to change their minds.

If they don't want cooperate maybe we should try method from 1633, when they were trying to get ironclad from Magdeburg to the sea. When owner of dam was opposing, they just were blowing them up and paying nothing, if somebody was willing to cooperate he got his dam upgraded.
If somebody don't want to cooperate with Crown what about don't asking them, if they don't want to cooperate it's problem for them, not for us. Also few dukes should wind up in jail soon, cus they have some problems with ruler.

Back to the naval designs. As to the arguments about aiming guns and hull rolling, catamarans and trimarans. A twin destroyer or battleship trimaran will counteract most wave action rolling and as a plus will be better able to handle the winter storms mentioned in the books. As BB design that could be built with current tech but as a possible dead end, I would suggest the Civil War design Dunderberg. Lastly instead of building Dreadnought or pre-Dreadnought battleships, a 1900 era UK armored cruiser with unified caliber main guns would work just as well.

doug941 wrote:Back to the naval designs. As to the arguments about aiming guns and hull rolling, catamarans and trimarans. A twin destroyer or battleship trimaran will counteract most wave action rolling and as a plus will be better able to handle the winter storms mentioned in the books. As BB design that could be built with current tech but as a possible dead end, I would suggest the Civil War design Dunderberg. Lastly instead of building Dreadnought or pre-Dreadnought battleships, a 1900 era UK armored cruiser with unified caliber main guns would work just as well.

Catamaran or trimaran would be great with paddle wheel drive, we put wheels between hulls and they will be hard to destroy and we would have easy access to them in yards.
About guns, bigger caliber is better and guns around 25-35 cm would be best for our current needs.

Draken wrote:

doug941 wrote:Back to the naval designs. As to the arguments about aiming guns and hull rolling, catamarans and trimarans. A twin destroyer or battleship trimaran will counteract most wave action rolling and as a plus will be better able to handle the winter storms mentioned in the books. As BB design that could be built with current tech but as a possible dead end, I would suggest the Civil War design Dunderberg. Lastly instead of building Dreadnought or pre-Dreadnought battleships, a 1900 era UK armored cruiser with unified caliber main guns would work just as well.

Catamaran or trimaran would be great with paddle wheel drive, we put wheels between hulls and they will be hard to destroy and we would have easy access to them in yards.
About guns, bigger caliber is better and guns around 25-35 cm would be best for our current needs.

Until the CoGA gets REALLY serious about armoring their naval vessels, a 5-7 inch caliber gun firing HEI shells should do the trick. High Explosive to penetrate and break up the hull and Incendiary action to insure there is not enough hull left to patch. When they do get effective armor, a mix of HE and HESH. For those unfamiliar with HESH, think shooting a pane of glass with a BB but without a hole all the way thru. The downside of HESH is you need plastic explosives for them to work.

What about AP and HEAT ammunition? It shouldn't have problems with destroying ships? Is it possible to put napalm inside shell?
We don't need big caliber to destroy ships, but it's better against buildings and to support troops.
If they can built ships around 30-50k tons range it will be possible to create nice ships. If not there will be huge problem with putting everything needed for fast battleship.

PeterZ wrote:End? No, Don. Yet racism is a pathetically weak thing compared to what it used to be. Largely because the youth that looked beyond it ridiculed their elders that held on to it so tightly.

Racism will never be allowed to die whilst nonentities like Peter Hain(UK) or Al Sharpton(USA) Can make a living by invoking it to sustain a "career" of "indoor work with no heavy lifting" at others' expense.

There are many more in the "Race Industry" and all, IMNVHO, qualify as total wastes of space, food and air.