When was the design prepared? One could assume from the type number, but it's not explicitly stated in the text.
Done
I'd want to see more context - ideally, who designed the ships, what they were envisioning the ships would do (for instance, the return to turbines suggests an emphasis on shorter range, higher speed actions). For starters, I'd like to see some discussion of the role of the fleet post-Barents Sea. Also, give a bit more on the cancellation of the project than simply "the end of the war was rapidly approaching." And was the project simply academic? Many of these types of "late-war, on the losing side" projects were simply the work of bored designers with nothing else to do.
@
Parsecboy: I've checked all my books on the subject, and the only thing I have got (and have added) is that they were designed with the goal of being able to fight submarines, weak ships, and airplanes; I have done everything else. --
IazygesConsermonorOpus meum23:05, 3 November 2017 (UTC)reply
What I'm getting at is context about the German navy in 1945. By that time, the surface fleet was restricted to gunfire support in the Baltic and evacuating soldiers and civilians, and it and its ports were being bombed to smithereens by the 8th AF and BC. Ideally this would include a discussion on the Barents Sea debacle and Hitler's decision to basically abandon the surface fleet in favor of U-boats (and accordingly halt all construction and most repair work).
Parsecboy (
talk)
17:57, 6 November 2017 (UTC)reply
I'm still not thrilled with it - the loss of Bismarck and Tirpitz was much less relevant than the Battle of the Barents Sea, for instance. You might also talk about Soviet advances on the Eastern Front necessitating much more activity in the Baltic.
Parsecboy (
talk)
18:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)reply
You sure on the caliber of the main guns? German guns of the caliber were 12.7cm, not 12.8 - that's also not the proper nomenclature - it'd be
12.7 cm SK C/41. And explain what L/45 means. Also, twin mounts or individual? Ditto for the other guns. And add redlinks to the guns where necessary - no doubt
User:Snowdawg will be along to create the articles eventually.
Just Realized i never actually answered the "twin or single" question; all of the [non-usable] sources I've encountered looking for the answer claim it was four twin gun turrets, but I can't cite them. Might have to order Breyer.
IazygesConsermonorOpus meum22:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)reply
"They were calculated to have 12 kg/shp (35 lb/kW)." - what does this mean? (I know what figure you're referring to, but readers won't)
Done
File:Zerstörer Class 1945.jpg - as far as I'm aware, model kits are copyrighted so a photo of a completed model would be a derivative work (I know I've seen this discussed on Commons in the past, but likely could not locate the discussion even if I had the time to pore over things). You might be able to move it to en.wiki and switch it to Fair Use (or alternatively, scan in a line-drawing from Gröner or one of the others).
I am American but grew up in Malaysia and Singapore, which were both British colonies, so I learned formal writing in British English. Because of that I tend to do formal writing in British English even accidentally.
IazygesConsermonorOpus meum20:29, 31 October 2017 (UTC)reply
When was the design prepared? One could assume from the type number, but it's not explicitly stated in the text.
Done
I'd want to see more context - ideally, who designed the ships, what they were envisioning the ships would do (for instance, the return to turbines suggests an emphasis on shorter range, higher speed actions). For starters, I'd like to see some discussion of the role of the fleet post-Barents Sea. Also, give a bit more on the cancellation of the project than simply "the end of the war was rapidly approaching." And was the project simply academic? Many of these types of "late-war, on the losing side" projects were simply the work of bored designers with nothing else to do.
@
Parsecboy: I've checked all my books on the subject, and the only thing I have got (and have added) is that they were designed with the goal of being able to fight submarines, weak ships, and airplanes; I have done everything else. --
IazygesConsermonorOpus meum23:05, 3 November 2017 (UTC)reply
What I'm getting at is context about the German navy in 1945. By that time, the surface fleet was restricted to gunfire support in the Baltic and evacuating soldiers and civilians, and it and its ports were being bombed to smithereens by the 8th AF and BC. Ideally this would include a discussion on the Barents Sea debacle and Hitler's decision to basically abandon the surface fleet in favor of U-boats (and accordingly halt all construction and most repair work).
Parsecboy (
talk)
17:57, 6 November 2017 (UTC)reply
I'm still not thrilled with it - the loss of Bismarck and Tirpitz was much less relevant than the Battle of the Barents Sea, for instance. You might also talk about Soviet advances on the Eastern Front necessitating much more activity in the Baltic.
Parsecboy (
talk)
18:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)reply
You sure on the caliber of the main guns? German guns of the caliber were 12.7cm, not 12.8 - that's also not the proper nomenclature - it'd be
12.7 cm SK C/41. And explain what L/45 means. Also, twin mounts or individual? Ditto for the other guns. And add redlinks to the guns where necessary - no doubt
User:Snowdawg will be along to create the articles eventually.
Just Realized i never actually answered the "twin or single" question; all of the [non-usable] sources I've encountered looking for the answer claim it was four twin gun turrets, but I can't cite them. Might have to order Breyer.
IazygesConsermonorOpus meum22:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)reply
"They were calculated to have 12 kg/shp (35 lb/kW)." - what does this mean? (I know what figure you're referring to, but readers won't)
Done
File:Zerstörer Class 1945.jpg - as far as I'm aware, model kits are copyrighted so a photo of a completed model would be a derivative work (I know I've seen this discussed on Commons in the past, but likely could not locate the discussion even if I had the time to pore over things). You might be able to move it to en.wiki and switch it to Fair Use (or alternatively, scan in a line-drawing from Gröner or one of the others).
I am American but grew up in Malaysia and Singapore, which were both British colonies, so I learned formal writing in British English. Because of that I tend to do formal writing in British English even accidentally.
IazygesConsermonorOpus meum20:29, 31 October 2017 (UTC)reply