Weird ships, who else has the love?

I read somewhere that the French ships had what appeared to be ram bows from the olden days.
But that they were actually designed that way in order to reduce the blast damage from the bow guns.
M

 

from what I have read, that's like a lot of the ships with wing turrets, where they couldn't shoot across the deck without seriously damaging the ship. neat-o solution, and it produced some really cool looking lines

 

I read (although I don't remember the reference) that the tumblehome shape, ram bows, and other goofy-looking structures on French ships were primarily to maximize displacement while minimizing top-weight. It was an attempt to min-max their ships that looked really cool but did terrible things to their high-speed and foul-weather handling.

 

This is a review of a model of the Henri IV but the author gives a great synopsis (with references) of French naval design principles of the day.

http://www.steelnavy.com/CombrigHenriIV.htm

 

I Like TO add that the weird ships were fun to sink and they certainly were main attractions for the club .All were admired for the exceptional quality and skill that Bob puts into them .

 

Thanks Curt!

I didn't build the Furious and have sold the hull. I bought Canarias back from Larry Dingle 2 years ago but have done nothing to refit it or the HMS Suffolk I bought back from Brechin Piper at the same time. Larry's son misses the Canarias so I'll probably sell it back to him along with Suffolk in a few weeks.

 

The early japanese heavy cruisers also had a weird bow gun setup.

 

Here the Furutaka

 

I wonder if that was to allow for more close in engagement? I.E. depression.

 

They were built mainly for hit-and-run attacks.

 

Japs were pretty savy, I imagine they had many scenarios in mind.

 

Furutaka class as built




Rebuild

 

The original has the weird setup

 

Not that weird. Same front turret arrangement as on the Nelson's. Both designs were developed to meet the weight limitations of the Washington Naval Treaty (save as much weight as possible by consolidating magazines and armor).

 

Well, Nelson class also counts as weird.

 

Anyways, I’ll never understand why putting all of your heavy artillery in front of the ss

 

There is a very significant benefit to putting it all forward: weight savings. With all the turrets in one area, you have simpler/more compact engine room and magazine arrangements, which means a shorter length of the ship's overall length needs heavy armor. Less heavy armor means less weight, which means you get better stats overall on a 35K ton Treaty battleship. Each nation had to find ways to get their desired performance within treaty limitations. France and Britain used all-forward turret arrangements, America used advanced materials, Germany lied about their tonnages, and Japan withdrew from the treaty to build their Yamatos.

 

Also with all guns forward you don't have to present a broadside to get all guns on target. You can cross the t as it were and still have a full broadside worth of firepower.

 

Could they fire the rear turret over the middle turret if firing of the bow?

 

Beyond a certain range, yes the guns of C turret would clear B turret's housing. I don't think they fired that way very often, though, due to the shock to the crew in B turret.