Remove ads

Changing Destiny (Kancolle)

Reader mode
Nah, I meant black. Sara has a black streak of hair through her hair, to represent the black stripe on her stacks.

 
Well, we know that Bismark(?) hit one of Hood´s aft magazines and that the explosion was brought to her other magazines via her air circulation system design, that literally connected all her main magazines together.
It is not just up-armouring her upper decks, it is literally redesigning her internals.
Depending on other factors, our temporal displaced admiral might just suggest lengthening the Hood, so to better use the old Lexington class Battlecruiser plans for some of her internals, like the engine rooms.
Kongô went from a (battle)cruiser to a Fast Light Battleship capable of 31 knots, could something like that be done with Hood, if better?

Mmm, he could even go radical with some of his suggestions and see what will happen with them, like a duel hull with anti-torpedo bulges, including one to reinforce the main beam, bow props, axis-pods, trimaran hull and so on.
It is not as if they will use it, but it could help with getting some future designs fast tracked, like the new modern bow form for future warships, that curve downwards into the water, instead of curving forward out of the water
Getting them thinking and who knows, it might piss of Hood enough to slap him while yelling Bitch, Asshole or so.
 
Vianca said:
Well, we know that Bismark(?) hit one of Hood´s aft magazines and that the explosion was brought to her other magazines via her air circulation system design, that literally connected all her main magazines together.
It is not just up-armouring her upper decks, it is literally redesigning her internals.
Depending on other factors, our temporal displaced admiral might just suggest lengthening the Hood, so to better use the old Lexington class Battlecruiser plans for some of her internals, like the engine rooms.
Kongô went from a (battle)cruiser to a Fast Light Battleship capable of 31 knots, could something like that be done with Hood, if better?

Mmm, he could even go radical with some of his suggestions and see what will happen with them, like a duel hull with anti-torpedo bulges, including one to reinforce the main beam, bow props, axis-pods, trimaran hull and so on.
It is not as if they will use it, but it could help with getting some future designs fast tracked, like the new modern bow form for future warships, that curve downwards into the water, instead of curving forward out of the water
Getting them thinking and who knows, it might piss of Hood enough to slap him while yelling Bitch, Asshole or so.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's a lot of work for most of those suggestions for a wartime refit. I know that the big issues would be on the plate for correction, but time and budget are probably going to keep major hull reworks off the board, unless someone can show compelling reasons to apply them, like baffling that air circulation ducting.
 
Vianca said:
Well, we know that Bismark(?) hit one of Hood´s aft magazines and that the explosion was brought to her other magazines via her air circulation system design, that literally connected all her main magazines together.
It is not just up-armouring her upper decks, it is literally redesigning her internals.
Depending on other factors, our temporal displaced admiral might just suggest lengthening the Hood, so to better use the old Lexington class Battlecruiser plans for some of her internals, like the engine rooms.
Kongô went from a (battle)cruiser to a Fast Light Battleship capable of 31 knots, could something like that be done with Hood, if better?

Mmm, he could even go radical with some of his suggestions and see what will happen with them, like a duel hull with anti-torpedo bulges, including one to reinforce the main beam, bow props, axis-pods, trimaran hull and so on.
It is not as if they will use it, but it could help with getting some future designs fast tracked, like the new modern bow form for future warships, that curve downwards into the water, instead of curving forward out of the water
Getting them thinking and who knows, it might piss of Hood enough to slap him while yelling Bitch, Asshole or so.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That 'Tumblehome' style bow, which is what you're referencing, actually was in use by the US Navy previously.

In WW1.

Its just that the more modern and highly swept back version wasn't designed until recently.
 
Sakuya's Butler said:
That 'Tumblehome' style bow, which is what you're referencing, actually was in use by the US Navy previously.

In WW1.

Its just that the more modern and highly swept back version wasn't designed until recently.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, such a bow linked with a trimaran hull, would at least make a good destroyer, especially with a turbo-electric drivetrain and axis-pods.
Perfect when the others start protesting that such changes would go to far.

Might even give it a single 16 inch gun turret for turret two, turret three would most likely become turret 3A & 3B, making that turret position useable in situations other then broadsides.
Ad in that those side hulls let you ad a bigger AA battery on either side...
Mmm, turrets 3A & 3B, make them more artillery like and ad flak ammo.
All in all, it could result in a complete redesign of the Fletcher class destroyer blueprints and turn the Yamato battle into something else.
 
Vianca said:
Well, such a bow linked with a trimaran hull, would at least make a good destroyer, especially with a turbo-electric drivetrain and axis-pods.
Perfect when the others start protesting that such changes would go to far.

Might even give it a single 16 inch gun turret for turret two, turret three would most likely become turret 3A & 3B, making that turret position useable in situations other then broadsides.
Ad in that those side hulls let you ad a bigger AA battery on either side...
Mmm, turrets 3A & 3B, make them more artillery like and ad flak ammo.
All in all, it could result in a complete redesign of the Fletcher class destroyer blueprints and turn the Yamato battle into something else.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Pretty sure sky has already said that while Thompson can make suggestions, he doesn't know the engineering behind it all.

Trimiran designs, while not new aren't mass produceable. The Fletcher's design is. Perfect is the enemy of good enough. And that's what the Fletchers were, good enough.
 
Last edited:
Dirtnap said:
Pretty sure sky has already said that while Thompson can make suggestions, he doesn't know the engineering behind it all.

Trimiran designs, while not new aren't mass produceable. The Fletcher's design is. Perfect is the enemy of good enough. And that's what the Fletchers were, good enough.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
True, but do you think not one admiral that comes on board the Hood, for that inspection, has such a degree?
I think one or two might just have one, since that is part of their job, look up the Lexington design process, somebody like the current admiral of that department, could work.
Besides, it would solve the escort speed problem the carriers are having, while still relative fast to build.
Thing is, they had the tech, back then, if less refined, thus they should be capable of doing so.

And considering they are going to possibly meet the president, also a time to talk about the Sherman vs Panzer & Tiger problem (three to one kill count), they should have based their future tank on the Matilda II, considering Rommel had to use his 88mm AA guns as artillery pieces, since his at that time current tank guns, where being deflected.
What is paying a bit more money, if it lets your soldiers survive more easily and thus takes less money training replacement crews AND keep potential voters alive in such a way, they would vote on you, next time.

What I mean to say, is this:
Do not just tackle the shipgirl problem, try to tackle some other stuff as well, see what sticks.
Change of a live time, speaking with the president, while you know what the future will bring, in general.
Like knowing about the fact nuclear fission produces radiation that just happens to be deadly.

Say the sun produces it to, but the amount we receive is small, thought man made fission is more like lead, since the build-up happens too fast.
Somebody already used this as the setting of a book, as early as 1939 or 1940.
Too much light blinds you, like a flashlight,
Prime time to talk about such things, I think.

Who knows, maybe after Bismark and her sister are dealed with, they could borrow Hood and some other British battlecruisers to act as carrier escorts in the east.
True, they need to offer the use of some of their own ships, most likely, a couple of old battleships could still be good enough for this.
But they might like destroyers more, what with all those U-boats.
 
Last edited:
If we are throwing "what ifs" out there, what if the plan the German Admiral (I forgot his name :p ) has is to head to neutral America to protect his ships/shipgirls? Also coming from the future would Thompson suggest changing the layout/storage/handling procedures of ammunition inside Hood. He could also suggest the removal of the torpedoes from Hood as well, I don't think they were ever used at all.
 
Vianca said:
True, but do you think not one admiral that comes on board the Hood, for that inspection, has such a degree?
I think one or two might just have one, since that is part of their job, look up the Lexington design process, somebody like the current admiral of that department, could work.
Besides, it would solve the escort speed problem the carriers are having, while still relative fast to build.
Thing is, they had the tech, back then, if less refined, thus they should be capable of doing so.

And considering they are going to possibly meet the president, also a time to talk about the Sherman vs Panzer & Tiger problem (three to one kill count), they should have based their future tank on the Matilda II, considering Rommel had to use his 88mm AA guns as artillery pieces, since his at that time current tank guns, where being deflected.
What is paying a bit more money, if it lets your soldiers survive more easily and thus takes less money training replacement crews AND keep potential voters alive in such a way, they would vote on you, next time.

What I mean to say, is this:
Do not just tackle the shipgirl problem, try to tackle some other stuff as well, see what sticks.
Change of a live time, speaking with the president, while you know what the future will bring, in general.
Like knowing about the fact nuclear fission produces radiation that just happens to be deadly.

Say the sun produces it to, but the amount we receive is small, thought man made fission is more like lead, since the build-up happens too fast.
Somebody already used this as the setting of a book, as early as 1939 or 1940.
Too much light blinds you, like a flashlight,
Prime time to talk about such things, I think.

Who knows, maybe after Bismark and her sister are dealed with, they could borrow Hood and some other British battlecruisers to act as carrier escorts in the east.
True, they need to offer the use of some of their own ships, most likely, a couple of old battleships could still be good enough for this.
But they might like destroyers more, what with all those U-boats.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Or they're going to think this one guy is spouting total bullshit about topics the don't exist like Tiger's performance against Shermans (doesn't happen till Operation Torch next year) or has no education in (Nuclear Physics, Naval engineering, Armored ground combat) and the commit him to an asylum.

As for Admirals having naval engineering degrees. They probably won't have them, naval engineers tend to not actually go into staff work where you would find Admirals. They would be familiar with traditional design processes and concepts for things like the Lexington class Battlecruisers or the Standards, not some weird-ass triple hull design that looks like someone glued a pair of cruisers to a battleship hull.

Less refined tech is also less capable. You could probably make a Saturn V rocket out of 1940's tech, but you'd have to substitute materials you don't know how to make, or certain things will be far bulkier because you don't know how to miniaturize it. The end result is a massive downgrade in capability that is greatly more expensive, and complex than what a more simple solution might have been.

Besides, the entire point is that the protags want to stick as close to the original time line as possible so as to not fuck things even further than they already have. That's why Thompson hasn't gone full bore with Pearl, that's why Schrieber isn't denouncing Hitler in the streets.

-SK
 
Maybe so, but he also knows what the future holds and getting a few more modern ships build, right now, could change the future quite a lot.
And I am not talking about the future of WWII, I´m talking about the time period he originally came from.
Yes, that Abyssal War, some changes now and you have better gear then.
Tempting, ain´t it?

As for a triple hull, the side hulls also act as anti-torpedo bulges, AA platforms and so on.
Which is a big plus, but would require replacement of main frame cross beam members.
A duel layered hull is easier to pull off, I think and even that gives trouble.

Listing all the options possible for the Hood Upgrade, even if outrages, might help in time.
Like saying this set might work better for Destroyers, if taken together in one hull.
Could even include a joke about converting her to a carrier with a more modern deck layout.
He just has to admit from the start, that some of the options are quite outrageous for Hood and he is including them for perspective, hoping to better nail down what might just be possible with her.
And if somebody is making notes...
 
Last edited:
Vianca said:
And considering they are going to possibly meet the president, also a time to talk about the Sherman vs Panzer & Tiger problem (three to one kill count), they should have based their future tank on the Matilda II, considering Rommel had to use his 88mm AA guns as artillery pieces, since his at that time current tank guns, where being deflected.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No, noo, no, nononononononoooooooo
The Sherman was hands down the best tank of WW2, the only competition being the T-34, and you want to fuck up the simplicity of design that amde it so?
Nooooooooooo
The 3:1 kill ratio was the inevitable result of being on the attack; when roles were reversed, your vaunted Big Cats did even worse!
 
Remember that Thompson is a carrier/aviation man. Having him make engineering suggestions to a battleship would be a serious faux pas. Besides, the Admirals are not there to do any engineering suggestions, that is a polite political fig leaf for what they really want to do which is find the girl Hood.

If Hood gets any serious refit, someone like Richardson might offer something along the lines of installing new turbo electric engines and completely reboilering Hood to get her speed back up to snuff. Which might allow some corrections to the air system and maybe some additional deck armor, but most likely the refit will be only damcom and maybe, radar and new AA guns.
 
Last edited:
Vianca said:
Tempting, ain´t it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No, it's just stupid.

Any advances would inevitably be stymied by two things:
  1. Thompson isn't a studied naval architect
  2. The tech base hasn't matured enough
While he could provide hints, clues or suggestions, when pressed for more information or to elaborate on his 'ideas' he won't be able to back it up other than 'it should work'. I'm not seeing the BeuOrd dropping millions of dollars on an R&D project inspired by one man's idle musings.

There is also nearly 5 decades of refinement and advancement of technologies that goes into modern ships and designs. An attempt at building something like a Kitty-Hawk CV is going to end up hilariously over complicated, massively expensive and likely have the complete opposite effect than what you wanted. The USS Enterprise nearly put the USN off the concept of Nuclear Carriers due to how mind-bogglingly expensive her and her reactors were to run and this was with over two decades of experience making Super Carriers.

What is possible if for Thompson to conduct tests and trials of existing systems and put forth conclusions and recommendations. He has a picture of the end goal, so he can guide the process away from research dead-ends. He's already done something to this degree with the Mk14 air dropped torpedos and the advancement of the ACM used by the Navy pilots.

The problem is that the more you change shit, the less valuable your knowledge of the future becomes as the situation it was based on is invalidated.

-SK
 
Last edited:
And again, why trimaran hulls when we don't need them much with 70 years tech advancement? It's too radical a departure from WW2 era design principles for it to be a small job that existing shipyards can take care of. The more conservative "upgrades" are the sort of thing that you implement when you've started comfortably winning and have enough of a logistical and industrial lead to add in complications. Right now, the key is to slap together what you know you can shit out en masse, en masse. The increase in capabilities is irrelevant at best and idiotic at worst, because then you get WW2 German armoured production strategies.
 
Genolution said:
No, noo, no, nononononononoooooooo
The Sherman was hands down the best tank of WW2, the only competition being the T-34, and you want to fuck up the simplicity of design that amde it so?
Nooooooooooo
The 3:1 kill ratio was the inevitable result of being on the attack; when roles were reversed, your vaunted Big Cats did even worse!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Only the Sherman Firefly had a gun that outgunned the German tanks, in range.
That's where the kill ratio comes from, for the most part.
They need a Panzer Howitzer 2000 in terms of Tank needs, basically a Long Tom on a Tank cassis.
MagisterAurelius said:
Remember that Thompson is a carrier/aviation man. Having him make engineering suggestions to a battleship would be a serious faux pas. Besides, the Admirals are not there to do any engineering suggestions, that is a polite political fig leaf for what they really want to do which is find the girl Hood.

If Hood gets any serious refit, someone like Richardson might offer something along the lines of installing new turbo electric engines and completely reboilering Hood to get her speed back up to snuff. Which might allow some corrections to the air system and maybe some additional deck armor, or more likely, radar and new AA guns.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They might have to walk around in order to find her anyway, might as well use the time.
SKsniper128 said:
No, it's just stupid.

Any advances would inevitably be stymied by two things:
  1. Thompson isn't a studied naval architect
  2. The tech base hasn't matured enough
While he could provide hints, clues or suggestions, when pressed for more information or to elaborate on his 'ideas' he won't be able to back it up other than 'it should work'. I'm not seeing the BeuOrd dropping millions of dollars on an R&D project inspired by one man's idle musings.

There is also nearly 5 decades of refinement and advancement of technologies that goes into modern ships and designs. An attempt at building something like a Kitty-Hawk CV is going to end up hilariously over complicated, massively expensive and likely have the complete opposite effect than what you wanted. The USS Enterprise nearly put the USN off the concept of Nuclear Carriers due to how mind-bogglingly expensive her and her reactors were to run and this was with over two decades of experience making Super Carriers.

What is possible if for Thompson to conduct tests and trials of existing systems and put forth conclusions and recommendations. He has a picture of the end goal, so he can guide the process away from research dead-ends. He's already done something to this degree with the Mk14 air dropped torpedos and the advancement of the ACM used by the Navy pilots.

The problem is that the more you change shit, the less valuable your knowledge of the future becomes as the situation it was based on is invalidated.

-SK


-SK
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Essex, only a few meters shorter then the first modern carrier, which was based on her.
Getting a mix of something like that on the design table, in 1940...
Just try and push true they make any new design, turbo electric, then you can later always replace things for diesel generators or so, in the future, during a overhaul.
it certainly lets you play with bow props or axis-pods (which happen to be props mounted on a electric engine, mounted on a upside down turret, that turns around using electric energy).

Things are already different, his presence should not have altered the Europa battlefront, yet it has already changed and he knows this, Hood proves this.
So the Eastern Front could also be different, like better use of their submarines, for one.
Since change is already there, better see if some ship builds could be made, while there is still a year or so, left to pull it off.
Genolution said:
And again, why trimaran hulls when we don't need them much with 70 years tech advancement? It's too radical a departure from WW2 era design principles for it to be a small job that existing shipyards can take care of. The more conservative "upgrades" are the sort of thing that you implement when you've started comfortably winning and have enough of a logistical and industrial lead to add in complications. Right now, the key is to slap together what you know you can shit out en masse, en masse. The increase in capabilities is irrelevant at best and idiotic at worst, because then you get WW2 German armoured production strategies.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Anti-torpedo wall/bulge and AA platform mountings, among other, is a good reason for a triple hull.
It is 1940, 1941 is when they join the war, still enough time to try and see a couple of prototypes to be designed & builded, that you can nick for carrier escorts, might just be in time to save Lex, Sara, Hornet and Yorktown.
 
Last edited:
Vianca said:
Only the Sherman Firefly had a gun that outgunned the German tanks, in range.
That's where the kill ratio comes from, for the most part.
They need a Panzer Howitzer 2000 in terms of Tank needs, basically a Long Tom on a Tank cassis.

They might have to walk around in order to find her anyway, might as well use the time.

Essex, only a few meters shorter then the first modern carrier, which was based on her.
Getting a mix of something like that on the design table, in 1940...
Just try and push true they make any new design, turbo electric, then you can later always replace things for diesel generators or so, in the future, during a overhaul.
it certainly lets you play with bow props or axis-pods (which happen to be props mounted on a electric engine, mounted on a upside down turret, that turns around using electric energy).

Things are already different, his presence should not have altered the Europa battlefront, yet it has already changed and he knows this, Hood proves this.
So the Eastern Front could also be different, like better use of their submarines, for one.
Since change is already there, better see if some ship builds could be made, while there is still a year or so, left to pull it off.

Anti-torpedo wall/bulge and AA platform mountings, among other, is a good reason for a triple hull.
It is 1940, 1941 is when they join the war, still enough time to try and see a couple of prototypes to be designed & builded, that you can nick for carrier escorts, might just be in time to save Lex, Sara, Hornet and Yorktown.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
no its 41 right now in story.
and frankly he's already done the things that will save Lex (teaching crews to purge Avgas lines before their attacked), Yorktown (The combined air group tactic that the carriers aircrews lacked have already begun spreading around the fleet) and Hornet (See point about Yorktown) and Sara's doomed to a date at the scrapyards at best regardless of what he does.
 
Last edited:
Vianca said:
Essex, only a few meters shorter then the first modern carrier, which was based on her.
Getting a mix of something like that on the design table, in 1940...
Just try and push true they make any new design, turbo electric, then you can later always replace things for diesel generators or so, in the future, during a overhaul.
it certainly lets you play with bow props or axis-pods (which happen to be props mounted on a electric engine, mounted on a upside down turret, that turns around using electric energy).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Essex was a 1941 design, the designers are still putting pen to paper drawing her.

You don't go from


A straight decked carrier with a single or double hydraulic catapult.

To this

Without a solid understanding of the technology, concepts and capabilities of the time.

The Essex class needed 7 overhauls in nearly 15 years and they still came up short.


The more capable Midway was so expensive to modernize in the 60's the Navy refused to give the other ships in her class the same treatment.

At the most Settle could push for the Essex's production being bumped up in priority after they actually finish designing them.

EDIT: There is something different in the European theater, it's called Schrieber. If you were referring to Barbarossa then nothing could change, because unless Hitler magically received about 2 million more troops and all the gear needed to arm them for war, the Red Army is going to steam roller him and the Wehrmacht come 1943-44.

As for better use of subs, you literally couldn't use them any better than what the Germans already had them doing, merchant interdiction and destruction.

-SK
 
Last edited:
Actually it's still only early November 1940 I think due to the last hard time from Skywalker.

The Hood refit is a wartime refit so off the shelf parts and time are the biggest issues right now.
 
MagisterAurelius said:
Actually it's still only early November 1940 I think due to the last hard time from Skywalker.

The Hood refit is a wartime refit so off the shelf parts and time are the biggest issues right now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
except Thompson's comment about hood sinking in a couple of months puts it at Feb 41 at least if not later.
 
Vianca said:
Only the Sherman Firefly had a gun that outgunned the German tanks, in range.
That's where the kill ratio comes from, for the most part.
They need a Panzer Howitzer 2000 in terms of Tank needs, basically a Long Tom o
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Incorrect.
Sherman consistently outgunned Pz IV and STuG III in all iterations.
17 pounder was inaccurate and had mediocre HE round.
Kill ratio comes from being on the attack, you pud.
Sherman had best crew survivability of any tank in WW2 and lowest rate of burning.
In Western Europe, average engagement range of tanks was under 800 m. 76 mm gun was more than adequate at these ranges and 75 mm was capable from sides and rear.
The tank serves multiple roles, including infantry support. A superior AT gun would have impaired its role in that respect.
Panthers attacking Shermans often experienced 5:1 to 8:1 loss ratios.
Such a gun would have been a logistical and technical nightmare. Your idea is not the "superior tanks om field" option, it is the "no tanks on field" option.
Vianca said:
Anti-torpedo wall/bulge and AA platform mountings, among other, is a good reason for a triple hull.
It is 1940, 1941 is when they join the war, still enough time to try and see a couple of prototypes to be designed & builded, that you can nick for carrier escorts, might just be in time to save Lex, Sara, Hornet and Yorktown
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Use of prototypes on battlefields are daft.
"A few" are merely fgoing to complicate logistics.
No one uses trimaran hulls on major warships even after 70 years technological advancement.
Again, minor technical superiority is irrelevant at best.
This is the same reason the Allies refrained from deploying their IR, guided bomb, jets, and other superprototypes on the battlefield, even though they were at times superior to equivalent German designs that did see battlefield service.
Unless they are mass-producable, their presence on the battlefield will actively harm you.
They are not mass-producable. The expertise and equipment to do so properly does not exist in American shipyards.
Your proposals amount to the military equivalent of party tricks.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top