Shipbucket

Seems strange to do a kitbash of my own drawing

Anyway, this is my take on an E class cruiser conversion with twin 6" replacing the single 6". The biggest problem I can see with this is to get the aft twins as far forward as possible so that the barbettes, handling rooms and magazines do not interfere with the inboard shafts. The E's were very narrow aft so this was a priority.



As it is now is like an Arethusa on steroids to get the extra 1 1/2 knots of speed.

Armament at this stage of career:
6 x 6" (6x1)
8 x 4" (4x2)
8 x 2pd (2x4)
12 x 0.5" mg (3x4)

That would probably just fit I think.
I guess you could ditch the aft HACS to free a little more space. Or you could try a radical switch and replace the searchlight/torpedo control position with the catapult amidships.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

I like this, although as you said such a design might not be practical without a larger hull.

An interesting concept, and one that seems entirely plausible.
I'll change the positions of catapult and HACS with the searchlight control position, so that the two aft turrets can be moved slightly forward.

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

Interesting, but I would move it all forward (they weigh quite a lot and put the cat in the gap where you have the secondary rangefinders that I'm not sure you need with 3 HACS, I might only fit 2 Hacs as well in 37)

JSB

Thanks for your comments guys, I will work on a 2nd version with the catapult between the funnels and the aft twins further forward.

JSB: the secondary rangefinder is actually the torpedo rangefinder, so I will need to keep that somewhere. The placement area for the HACS I had gives me maximum of 2 active units per side, I might look at altering the bridge a bit to enable the forward HACS to be mounted behind the DCT.

Version 2 done with catapult between funnels, and other tweaks to fit everything in to place.

Would this ship be converted or built with the turrets ? (re HMS Enterprise thread) ?
Would moving (forward or back or splitting up) the 4 inch guns allow you to lower the cat ? (and move the mid torps so you can drop it down 2 decks ?)

JSB

Enterprise was completed with forward turret, if Euphrates had been continued with (instead of cancelled) it would have completed after Enterprise so could well have been fitted with all turret arrangement.

One of the reasons most catapults are kept to a certain height above water is for when the aircraft is launched it does not sink to the water and crash, there is a lag time between the launch and the aircraft attaining flying speed. The extra height above water gives the aircraft that extra few seconds of drop to attain flying speed. The catapult height/placement is the same as used on the Leander class, no need to change.

With weight at a premium I would consider dumping the aviation facilities...