[REQ] Allied surface raider?

[CPT America]

Is anyone out there working on an allied cruiser/battlecruiser class vessel? The British battlecruisers were designed for the shipping iterdiction role, like the American Alaska class and the German "pocket battleships."

On a seperate note, since carriers arn't as effective in this game as in real life, what about some "what if" mods resulting from some of the projects abandoned after the london and washington naval conferences? The American Lexington class BC, which became the carriers Saratoga and Lexington, would be cool, as would the proposed Tillman battleships. It would be cool to take one of those mothers against a Yamato. (For those who don't know, Tillman was a pacifist american Senator who proposed outrageously large battleships and battlecruisers to make the American navy too imposing to fight. The vessels were to be armed with 18" and later 20" guns.)

[Raptor1]

The Allies did not use specific Surface Raider warships like the Germans as far as I know, the British Battlecruisers were supposed to be fleet scouts and anti-cruiser vessels, the American Alaska class were designed to counter a new supposed Japanese cruiser that was based on the same principles as the Pocket Battleships

So, unless you take something fictional, there are no surface raiders

[Captain Vlad]

There are, however, ships that could've been easily used as such had there been a reason to do so.

[CPT America]

The alaskas were obsolete for their intended role by the time they entered service. By the time they were commissioned in 1944 submarines and aircraft had superceded them, so they had increased AAA installed and were used as light battleships for carrier protection and shore bombardment.

[AntEater]

Dominant Seapowers like Britain or the US do not neet surface raiders. They can simply (in classical mahanese sense) block the enemy coast and then there is no enemy merchant traffic to raid.
The only allied power that did construct vessels with that purpose was France, and even that more out of habit than out of necessity.
While France was allied with Britain since 1912, much of its naval thinking was still influenced by the "jeune ecole", which postulated merchant raiding in a potential war against Britain.

[CPT America]

Look up the Alaska and Lexington classes, they were designed for scouting and convoy interception. Even the British and American navies could not be everywhere at once. In both world wars the Royal navy was pinned down by their need to protect england from a powerful German navy, leaving the fleet weak across the rest of the world. Hense the fear of the Bismark. Had the Bismark made it into open ocean, the only opposition the RN could have offered would have been from the destroyers and scattered cruisers in the atlantic, as the main fleet was kept in England to protect the shores from the percieved German threat. Battlecruisers were designed to operate seperate from the rest of the battle fleet and to provide the projected power of which you speak, to hunt down enemy vessels away from the blockaded area, and to force the enemy to waste assets away from the friendly fleet, aiding in improving superiority of firepower for the battle line.

[AntEater]

Actually Battlecruisers were a part in a hugely complicated plan to lure both sides into the decisive battle fleet encounter.
Today we can't imagine that, but a set piece naval battle like Jutland was every bit as formalized as a medieval joust.
Light forces gain initial contact, call for backup. If light forces are destroyers like at Jutland, backup is cruisers. Cruisers call for backup themselves if outmatched, which are the Battlecruisers. These fight aside the enemy screen and ultimately sight the enemy battlefleet, keep contact and vector own battlefleet towards it. Of course in doing that they ran into their own counterpart, which happened at Jutland and went quite badly for the RN.
Lighter forces like destroyers were to be kept back until the tactical opportunity or necessity for a mass torpedo attack arose.
Before the advent of the aircraft, every ship short of a battleship was mainly a scout.
In the 1930s, the US heavy cruisers were officially still the "scouting force" of the US Fleet, like the imperial german battlecruisers had been officially designated the 1st scouting squadron.
This role only became redundant with aircraft and aircraft carriers.
You're right that "raider killer" was a role of RN cruisers in WW1, but it was not their envisaged role, and in the 1920s the world's admirals (except the french and germans, and the few soviets) had come to the conclusion that WW1 was an abberation and the next naval war would be Tsushima all over again. In WW1, german battlecruisers or even light cruisers lacked the range to do raiding. Actually any capital ship raider with coal firing was doomed to fail sooner or later for sheer logistics.
So the actual role the Lexingtons were designed for was to scout ahead of the battle fleet, fight aside the Kongos and Akagis (which were designed as Battlecruisers) and shadow the IJN main force so the US battle squadron could destroy them.

The IJN pretty much thought in these terms, hence the whole pretty useless "distant cover groups" the IJN employed in nearly every battle without any useful purpose.
The only WW2 battles that were fought along that recipe were those in the med between the RN and the Italians, and those mostly ended in mutual (not cowardly italian, as mostly claimed) retreat because no side could gain any advantage.

[Raptor1]

The early Battlecruisers were designed as Fleet Scout and as Armored Cruiser killers, they were largely obsolete by WWII because of the events of Jutland

The Alaska class' history is rather ironic, they were designed to counter an imaginary super-heavy Japanese cruiser, but their appearance actually caused the Japanese to design such a cruiser, which became the Super Type A cruiser (B64 and B65), to counter them, so technically the Alaska class was designed to take out the cruiser class that was designed to destroy the Alaskas (Paradox, anyone?)

[AntEater]

Actually the Alaskas were quite nice ships, I've read and during their construction, the USN hoped that this size would be the new standard for heavy cruisers. It became kind of a size standard, as the Des Moines class was not much smaller, but with much more useful armament.
But Alaska and Guam were well liked by their task force commanders for being well armed Flak platforms able to keep up with the fast carriers and able to perform coastal bombardment or surface action if need arose.
I think in 1944, planes aside, the Alaskas could have thrashed anything the IJN had except for maybe Yamato herself. The caliber might not be that much, but the gun was modern, the fire control top notch and with radar they could have dictated the engagement.
But for postwar, these ships were white elepthants, of course, but there were numerous reconstruction plans proposed, especially for the third incomplete ship, Hawaii.
But then the USN had the Des Moines class, with AA capable fully automatic armament.

[W4lt3r]

I just looked up on the Des Moines class, and seemingly it has the 3" 70 caliber dual cannonade system with automatic loaders, that would be pretty sweet ship for the americans.. Not too powerful or not too weak. Even though the USN didnt employ the surface raiding scheme like germans, this game isn't also about 100% realism, games are ment to be fun aswell..

At least that is the way i think of most PC games i play.

[CPT America]

Well, seeing as the idea of the American Battlecruisers is not accepted here, does anyone have any news about the error occuring with the Northampton class cruiser posted someplace around here?

[Sailor Steve]

"Not accepted?" Just because someone disagrees doesn't mean they're making light of the idea. If a modder decided he liked the idea, he would try to make it happen. Barring that, nobody would complain if you made one. I'm sure many would love it.

[CPT America]

Would love to make it myself, but a little busy as i'm a new army officer.

Trying to mod, making the other allied CA playable, we'll see how this half assed attempt goes, might take a while. if it works if there is an Alaska class out there somewhere i'll try with it. i'm using the guide posted here: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=134575. any additional help or an existing usable model of an Alaska class ship would be very helpful... Thanks in advance!

[Raptor1]

It's not that it isn't accepted, was just pointing out that you would need to make it fictional

Good luck with your mod, I tried to model the Alaska a while ago (It being one of my favourite WWII ships) but like always I stopped halfway through :damn:

The Des Moines class shouldn't be hard to do either, it's basically a Baltimore with super-fast-firing guns (The 8"/55RF Mark 16s could refire every 5 seconds)

[Sailor Steve]

Would love to make it myself, but a little busy as i'm a new army officer.
Cool! Best of luck in your new career.:sunny:

[CPT America]

What program were you using Raptor?

[W4lt3r]

Hey Raptor, you thought to give the alaska class, the Guam's camo painting? That would be shweet looking... Not sure did the Alaska get painting tho...

Maybe i should give a shot to the on making a new playable unit.. with something easy to start, like a somers or something...

[Raptor1]

Hey Raptor, you thought to give the alaska class, the Guam's camo painting? That would be shweet looking... Not sure did the Alaska get painting tho...

Maybe i should give a shot to the on making a new playable unit.. with something easy to start, like a somers or something...
Yes, I was going to give her the Guam camo, in fact

CPT, 3ds max ATM, but I'm thinking of switching to Wings 3D and seeing how that goes

[Captain Vlad]

I tried to model the Alaska a while ago.

They were beautiful ships.

[CPT America]

Hmm, can't remember the name of the program I used to model a battlestar for a BSG mod, it was free though, I never felt like shelling out the money for 3D max.

[Raptor1]

Probably Gmax, that's probably the most popular mod-making 3d modeling program

Indeed, the Alaskas were very nice looking ships, I could try modeling it again if I could get some decent blueprints...

[CPT America]

I don't have my Janes with me right now, but i think its got a couple decent line drawings and photos.

Edit: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/usnshtp/cru/cb1cl-d.htm does this help any? I just wish it showed below the waterline

[CPT America]

The Alaskas were beautiful ships though, combining the clean lines of the treaty cruisers with the technology and lethality of late war ships. Too bad the navy didn't have them to assist with the cruiser battles around Guadalcanal.

[Raptor1]

Unfortunatly it doesn't show the general shape of the hull vertically or below the waterline

I could try guessing it from pictures...

[CPT America]

Guessing is better than nothing... i guess.

[CPT America]

Looking at the Battleships designed around the time of Alaska, I'd guess it had verticle sides.

[Raptor1]

I could look at the Baltimore and some other ships, I'll see later today (Most chances are that I'll never finish it, but whatever)

[CPT America]

Whenever you give up on it send me the files and i'll try to finish it.

[CPT America]

Ok, i know people here seem more hot about the Alaskas than the Lexingtons, but heres a beautiful perspective drawing of the Lexington for anyone who knows more than be about making models: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/usnshtp/cru/cb1cl-d.htm

[W4lt3r]

I only found some model pictures last night but cant recall the links to them. found one good model shot from 1 model at stern portside towards the main bridge.. Might this work a bit? even though it isnt a waterline image. But at least another image from similar model is needed from bow star board side. *shrug*

http://www.totalnavy.com/350images/350guam.JPG

*Edit* Found a link for the whole model in several different angles. http://www.motionmodels.com/ships/cc/cb1.html

[Mush Martin]

Unfortunatly it doesn't show the general shape of the hull vertically or below the waterline

I could try guessing it from pictures...


http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=Alaska+Class+Cruiser&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

[CPT America]

Actually, a "what if" mod based on Plan Orange would be cool, but alot of work, and knowledge that I don't have. Since it would be based on surface and submarine combat, not airpower, the SH4 engine wouldn't be too unsuited for it.

[Raptor1]

A War Plan Orange mod could be very fun (With both Submarines and Surface Ships playable), even though it would take a looooong time to make (Properly, at least)

Anyway, I can't do the Alaska model, due to my general laziness and the fact that I have some other things to do

[CPT America]

I hear you there brother