What's the difference between battlecruiser and large/super heavy cruiser?

What's the difference between battlecruiser and large/super heavy cruiser?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    these are not exact terms but historically a battlecruiser either had equivalent guns to a battleship but sacrificed armor for speed or had cruiser sized guns but was heavily uparmored to be able to exist in a battle formation with battleships

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Battlecruisers as originally envisioned mixed a slimmed-down battery of battleship guns (6-10 guns, all 10" or more, plus a decent battery of QF guns) with high cruise speeds and (for the era) spectacular endurance. They got that by being as large as or larger than battleships, but packing about half to a third of the armor and using the saved weight for more fuel bunkerage. Their original purpose is what carriers are used for now, high-speed force projection. Unfortunately the Brits cheaped out on fire control and all but one of the BCs at Jutland and Dogger Bank handled their ammo like fricking morons, which ended poorly.

    The "armored" cruisers they superseded had cruiser-sized batteries of 8-10" guns, almost no armor, and a decent turn of emergency speed. They were meant for much the same role, but tended to have much poorer endurance at speed.

    Heavy Cruisers tended towards large batteries of cruiser guns and quick-fires, plus heavier armor, and were meant more for dealing with enemy escort ships. Then you get into weird shit like torpedo and aviation cruisers.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Unfortunately the Brits cheaped out on fire control
      NO

      the british fire control systems were good, better than the germans in many regard, all capital ships had director fire control and an early form of firecontrol computer. The BC squadrons poor performance was due to poor communication leading to multiple battlecruisers targeting on the same ship and prevailing weather and light conditions favouring the germans. the same equipment on other british ships in more favourable weather and light later in the battle produced the most accurate fire of the battle

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Jackie was still a moron nonetheless
        he was wedded to the idea that fast thinly-armoured ships could avoid shells better than slower thickly-armoured ships could withstand them, and was absolutely wrong on that score

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The one ship with an Argo dramatically outperformed the ships with Dreyers; in the battle of the Falklands, Invincible and Inflexible had to shut off their FCS because they couldn't handle the range and course corrections. At Dogger Bank the Dreyers failed again, although the gun crews also had been training hard on speed rather than accuracy. Queen Mary consistently outperformed the other ships in accuracy throughout her career, by a factor of about 2:1, right up until the aforementioned fricking moron school of ammo handling (and also of maneuver orders..) caught up to her.
        For the entire battles of Jutland and Dogger Bank the Krauts were outshooting the Brits, and it wasn't just visibility issues plus Beatty being King of the Tactical Speds.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    sage
    A battlecruiser has battleship guns or battleship armour or both
    >bbbbut the Alaska
    Has very big guns but they're not contemporary battleship grade

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Has very big guns but they're not contemporary battleship grade
      b-b-but

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >8x12"/50 main battery
        >Same gun mounted on thirteen out of seventeen Dreadnought battleships in the German inventory at the time, and outclasses the armament of the other four
        >(you)

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Derfflinger are WW1 battlecruisers, the Alaskas came 30 years later

        What you should wonder however is whether the Dunkerques should really be called battlecruisers

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/Cxbhbhq.jpg

      >Has very big guns but they're not contemporary battleship grade
      b-b-but

      Joke aside, the Alaska did seem like "WW2 version" of battlecruiser

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        sage
        A battlecruiser has battleship guns or battleship armour or both
        >bbbbut the Alaska
        Has very big guns but they're not contemporary battleship grade

        If the Alaska and Guam had been built in 1920, they would have unquestionably been battlecruisers. In 1941 not so much.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          In 1920s there was Hood battlecruiser.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Nothing, both terms split the difference between cruiser and battleship. There isn't enough room to split the difference again.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    American autism.

    Jokes aside, battlecruisers were constructed as battleships with less armor and bigger engines, while the Alaskas were literally designed by making a crusier hull bigger. This does make a differenc ein a number of design features. One of those was that the Alaskas had a rudder layout basedo n smaller cruisers, which scaled up weirdly and made them have an enormously wide turning circle even for their size.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >American
      what are you talking about battlecruisers were a british illness. we were smart enough to cancel ours and convert the remaining ones into aircraft carriers.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        We coughed politely, renamed them all "Armored Cruisers" and "Second-class battleships" and then threw them on the altar of the London and Washington Treaties while we thought no-one was looking.
        Other than the Maine, anyway.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The US Navy was toying with the idea of battlecruisers as late as the 30s

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Armament, mainly. It's supposed to have a battleships' guns, but at the sacrifice of being unable to withstand the same amount of firepower. Battleships were supposed to do both.
    >curveball
    This didn't extend to coastal Monitors, because the cruiser was supposed to cruise and both keep up with the fleet and go extended differences. I still like how they stuck big frick guns on tiny boat so much that the entire turret's underside workings is above freeboard.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I noticed people saying that there is russian bias in WoW and russian ships are OP, and yet 0 people play russian ships?
    german and japanese ships are used by 99% of the entire playerbase.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *