/k/ - Weapons and Militaria

carbon_nanotube_armour.png
[Hide] (105.7KB, 1302x420)

carbon_nanotube_armour_2_(note_that_14_feet_is_actually_4267.2mm).png
[Hide] (88.9KB, 1312x352)

carbon_nanotube_armour_3+Ford-class.png
[Hide] (96.5KB, 1301x370)

carbon_nanotube_barrel.png
[Hide] (42.8KB, 1310x225)

battleship_solution.png
[Hide] (168.1KB, 1313x507)

Let's start with some old but important screencaps.

scramjet_cannon_calibres.png
[Hide] (54KB, 1307x265)

scramjet_cannon_calibres_2.png
[Hide] (74.5KB, 1307x409)

battleship_armour.png
[Hide] (88.6KB, 1304x282)

battleship_funding.png
[Hide] (119.4KB, 1307x420)

US_Navy_18%22_Super-Montana_Preliminary_Design_-_Battleship_Study_-_Scheme_12b1_-_General_Layout.png
[Hide] (2MB, 9200x5000)

These should be vaguely in order.

How retarded are the Kraut MEKO Legalized Contractor Scam offerings compared to American Laughing Chinese Strategists?

I recall reading a few years ago that the navy was experimenting with giant lasers on ships, anyone kept up with that?

>>839
They're still trudging along with that.
They have a 'small' (CRAM-grade) laser that they expect to enter wide-scale service with the entire fleet within the next 3 years, possibly sooner.
The larger (CIWS-grade) laser they still expect by 2030.
The problems they've been having actually hasn't been the laser (they already can do that in megawatt ranges), but the targeting programming and mounting hardware to produce reliable accuracy with a beam the size of a #2 pencil.

I've seen fags postulate that China numba wan wouldn't be able to Taiwan because they'd have to use civilian cargo ships to supply their forces, which would then lead to every Chink-flagged or owned merchant vessel being interned worldwide thus nuking the bugconomy.
Would this hold true if the US were unable to enforce its hegemony the rules-based international order?

>>870
Probably not, but it would still be more difficult than "lol chink jump to da island" since the Chinese have made pretty much everyone that shares sea access with them into an enemy. Their economy is also still very heavily reliant on the US and other western powers, not to mention they get a lot of their materials from imports so they would be in a world of shit regardless of the US getting directly involved.
You never know if it would kick off internal power struggles either, China has a very long history of coups when shit gets even a little rough for the top dogs. Even with all the sabre rattling and bluster the USA and China are both in very precarious positions both internally and internationally.
>but Russia would help them
No guarantee of that by any means, trade partnerships tend to fall apart when one member demands anything from another member that has been bogged down in an unexpectedly tremendous clusterfuck on the other end of Eurasia.

ClipboardImage.png
[Hide] (315.1KB, 1920x1080)

I need a sanity check, would an all forward heavy cruiser with 2x 8inch cannons like pic related be a good idea in washington naval treaty era?  By having all forward arsenal you are a smaller target and due to treaty weight limitations you are incapable of mounting a decent amounts of armor, so it seems like the only way to increase survivability. 
>>870
>which would then lead to every Chink-flagged or owned merchant vessel being interned worldwide thus nuking the bugconomy.
Which would lead to every usa related vessal having the same done to it.
I dont think it is possible in this era. Like if anything goes down between these two global shipping dies. Just look at Yemen. Insurers will not insure you so you will risk losing millions every cruise, drones, missiles and torpedoes can be virtually everywhere, you are monitored via satelite 24/7, there is nowhere to hide. Think about it, in WW2 without real scouting and against smaller, more agile and faster ships german submarines managed to score what, thousand or so victories? Now meta is all about huge bulk carriers and container ships wit huge tonnage and speed, with maneuverability so low they almost always stick to predetermined trails. You need to destroy literally one of these in a strategic point to block global commerce for a few months. There is no way to defend against modern threats.

>>941
>2x 8inch cannons
Just do what the bongs did with their heavy cruisers: they built the ships with little armour, but conveniently made them so that they could quickly slap on some heavy cruiser grade armour plates once the war started. 4 main guns seem to be too little to me, because an enemy ship with more guns will be able to score more hits faster, and you cannot armour up a cruiser to the point that it genuinely is utterly invulnerable against enemy fire.

>>941
You're putting a battleship-grade TPS on a ship with a 2" main belt.

>>941
You've designed a raider, there's nothing inherently flawed about what you actually asked. Assuming you meant two 8in triple-gun turrets like your pic related. If you mean literally two 8in cannons, the ship is near pointless at almost 10k tons.
The only things I consider unreasonable about your RTW design there is the placement of your secondaries (they're just protected mounts so the crew would have to flee from their guns before the main battery could engage, which makes them completely pointless) and the fact you have 3in Quads as tertiaries. But RTW allows you to get away with pretty crazy stuff.

>>957
Yeah probably better to remove it and go with more speed. Especially since this is French and they are all about speed meta. 
>>976
>Assuming you meant two 8in triple-gun turrets like your pic related.
Yes, sorry, I meant two tripple 8 inch guns, forward mounted.
>The only things I consider unreasonable about your RTW design there is the placement of your secondaries (they're just protected mounts so the crew would have to flee from their guns before the main battery could engage, which makes them completely pointless)
Yeah I kind of wanted to originally put on outright 5inch turrets from Le Fantasque class, mounted on 3 different levels, one over the other like some american monstrosity. I will uparmor these turrets.
>and the fact you have 3in Quads as tertiaries.
Oh there are no tertiaries, I am using the (cosmetic) tertiary mounts to show placement of AA batteries (of the fun kind). 

Thanks everyone !

>houthis kicked burger ass so hard they had to ressurect USS Texas

>>1106
Can you elaborate?

>>1112
Its just a joke, they put it back on water for further restoration. 
Well, half joke since what the fuck could yemenis do with one of these right on their shore?

What is the objectively best historical pre-Dreadnought BB design by /k/ standards?

Which is your favourite ww2 ship? Mine is USS Enterprise.

ClipboardImage.png
[Hide] (347.4KB, 763x412)

>>1199
No idea, perhaps Danton class? Its basically a battleship built 7 years after Drednought herself so it has all the bells and whistles but it lacks the guns.
>>1202
I dont play favorites. Maybe Flower class, fucking T-34 of the seas. All british destroyers are great too but that os because they are crewed entirelly by shonen anime characters. Then there is Warspite.

>>1199
I hate being the no-fun guy, but there really is no such thing as an objective best when it comes to warships, at least if you're speaking globally. What is best for one navy could just about be the worst for another.
Take for example the Iowas (WW2 era, obviously), they were 'very good' warships (some would say the best battleships ever built), but they were only suitable for America's needs and would have been rightly rejected by basically any other navy as entirely unsuited to their own needs.

>>1226
>Then there is Warspite.
What do you mean, was it crewed by characters from a different sub genre?

>>1271
Well its not a destroyer.
And if destroyers are crewed by shonen characters, Warspites crew is entirely made out of Goku, from captain to cook.

Now that I think about it, all huns forward approach would work even better on a light cruiser/destroyer leader, since the saved weight might be used for example on putting a Shimekaze worth of torpedoes on the aft.

>>1239
To rephrase then, what is the best pre-Dreadnought Battleship commissioned prior to HMS Dreadnought for Battleship-on-Battleship action in the Northern central Atlantic?

>The Last Battleship Designs - The Good, the Bad and the Mad!
https://inv.tux.pizza/watch?v=WStdZfpVyCY

A video by Drachinifel that says nothing about 24" and 36" guns. Still, it has some quite creative soviet designs at the end.

Are Arsenal drone carriers conceptually retarded?