Im debating building one of these two ships. With Treaty rules, I believe either are legal, but am wondering what really holds the best advantage in the game. I am unsure of the maneuverability of both these battlecruisers as they are about 800', making for a large model. The stats are below, can anyone offer insight? Thanks! Stalingrad: Type: Battlecruiser Displacement: 36,500 tonnes (35,900 long tons) (standard) 42,300 tonnes (41,600 long tons) (full load) Length: 273.6 m (897 ft 8 in) Beam: 32 m (105 ft 0 in) Draught: 9.2 m (30 ft 2 in) Speed: 35.5 knots (40.9 mph; 65.7 km/h) Armament: 3 x 3 - 305-millimeter (12.0 in) guns 6 x 2 - 130-millimeter (5.1 in) guns 6 x 4 - 45-millimeter (1.8 in) guns 10 x 4 - 25-millimeter (0.98 in) guns Armor: Waterline belt: 180 mm (7.1 in) Upper deck: 50 mm (2.0 in) each Middle deck: 70 mm (2.8 in) Turrets: 240 mm (9.4 in) Barbettes: 235 mm (9.3 in) Secondary turrets: 25 mm (0.98 in) Conning tower: 250 mm (9.8 in) Bulkheads: 140–125 mm (5.5–4.9 in) Kronshtadt: Type: Battlecruiser Displacement: 39,660 metric tons (39,034 long tons) (standard) 42,831 metric tons (42,155 long tons) (full load) Length: 242.1 m (794 ft 3 in) Beam: 31.6 m (103 ft 8 in) Draft: 9.7 m (31 ft 10 in) (full load) Speed: 32 knots (59 km/h; 37 mph) Armament: 3 × 2 - 38-centimeter (15.0 in) SKC/34 guns 4 × 2 - 152-millimeter (6.0 in) guns 4 × 2 - 100-millimeter (3.9 in) DP guns 6 × 4 - 37-millimeter (1.5 in) AA guns Armor: Waterline belt: 230 mm (9.1 in) Decks: 14–90 mm (0.55–3.5 in) Turrets: 305 mm (12.0 in) Barbettes: 330 mm (13.0 in) Conning tower: 330 mm Bulkheads: 275–330 mm (10.8–13.0 in)
Im unsure, but it was designed in 41, approved in 43, redesigned and approved again 27 November 1945 with the projected finish date of 48. Because it was approved for build in 43 and 46, I think its legal, the hold up was the German invasion of Russia. The plans for the ship itself existed over a decade before the hull was laid. It was projected after the war to be restarted in 1946 and finished in 1950, but underwent another redesign and the finish date was pushed to 54. It was never finished.
I would think that the triple turrets and significantly faster speed would make the Stalingrad more appealing. More speed equals more thrust, which can be redirected into turning. Do you know the prop/rudder arrangements of the two ships?
The dates I've got say it was laid down in 1951, and never finished. It'd be a cool ship, but I'd try for one that's indisputably legal. Have you asked one of the Treaty guys what they think?
It's too modern and does not fall between the dates for the Treaty guidelines. I think the cut off is 1946? Bobosan
The Kronshtadt is listed in Conways as being laid down in 1939, so it would be a legal ship for Treaty. However, I believe the ship would have to conform to the design approved 12/4/40, not the 1950s redesign. So the specs out of Conways are: 35,240t Standard, 38,360 deep load displacement 816ft 8 in x 103 ft x 29 ft 10 in 4 shafts, 33 knots 9 12" (3x3) main guns It's listed as a large cruiser, but with 12" guns it falls in the capital ship category according to the (1922) treaty rules. So I guess that it would best fall in the battlecruiser category like the Alaska does.
I don't have anything that shows the Stalingrad is legal in Treaty. The ship is not listed in Conway's (1922-1946). The Wikipedia entry says " The specification, or OTZ in Russian, was issued in May 1941, ... The Stalingrad's were proposed for construction again in 1943. ...keels for two ships were laid at the Marti South Shipyard in Nikolayev (1951) and the Baltic Works in Leningrad (1952)" The keel laying in 1951 is past the 1946 cutoff. According to Treaty rules, it must have been "authorized for construction or had an order placed" between 1895 and 1946 to be legal. Wikipedia (which would not be an authorized source) only says a specification was issued and construction was proposed, not that it was ordered. So if you want to build a Stalingrad you need to find a couple of reputable references to show it was authorized or ordered before 1946.
Thanks for everyone's input. I'll do some more research and see if anything turns up, otherwise I guess I'll stick with a different ship. Best wishes!
It actually is in conways All The Worlds Battleships (1906-present), but it does not list anything on the class prior to 1950, and the speed listed was 33kts. Honestly, I wouldn't have a problem with it being run at my local club (which uses ircwcc rules), the more the merrier I think, but thats just my opinion.
Chase, while I agree with you that it'd be cool at my local club, the more the merrier... As he is new to the hobby and asking advice on what to build, I don't want to advise him that it'd be okay to build something outside the rules, as it might be an issue if he decided to go to Nats where the rules are generally more tightly observed than at local battles (not meaning safety rules obviously, but stuff like 'all turrets in place', or 'all superstructure with a volume greater than 1 cubic inch in place', or 'built between years X and Y'). Just trying to look out for his best interest With disagreement between many good sources (even between editions of Conway's), I wouldn't say it's a good ship to build.
All things considered, I'll probably just stick with the Kronshtadt since Its legal. Anyone have its max speed?
Since they were never finished that is an open question. Conways gives 33 knots as the designed speed.
Yes. As the ship was not completed, and therefore was not able to run sea trials, her speed would be based on her designed speed. Which Conways lists as 33 knots. Mikey
There is nothing in the rules. One isn't required to utilize any sort of scale paint colors, or camo scheme. Although that is what most folks like to see. Mikey
