Petropavlovsk - WG Fantasy Ship or Actually Plausible
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 07. 2023
- So Petropavlovsk, actually plausible or pure Wargaming fantasy?
♥ Connect with me ♥
Discord: / discord
Twitch: / ichasegaming
Facebook: / ichasegaming
Twitter: / ichasegaming
♦ Become my Patron at / ichasegaming ♦
To contact me via e-mail send it to chasegamingtv@gmail.com - Hry
Still fighting some lingering COVID symptoms. voice still kinda bleh. Otherwise, lemme know what you all think :)
i think fair winds and following skies to you. Get your rest, my man. Get better soon.
ok, test - this time w/o link. so yeah, you blocked links in the comments and I wrote a fkng lot first time. I hate you !!! But I saved it, so here once again:
halloo budy, did you ever played with this ? ...xxx... - on this place was a link to fkng Springsharp, so yeah, google it yourself 😒
years ago, I tried... and I even checked their models how they made them, and they are matching pretty well...
but yeah, here, you would need to use too many estimates. But still, I dont have the time and last time I used it was like 5 years ago. So what, would you ? 😉
PS: Fight the fkng COVID and beat it already ! and the Springsharp can fullfill your free time pretty effectivly :)))
Quick google tells that it is one of project 82 variants, in concept closer to project 66 basically a bigger Moskva. In the end VMF had no idea what to do with project 66 and 82 cruisers. One of base ideas was a cruiser that will hunt other cruisers. In the end VMF switcher their attention guided missles
fascinating - I was thinking about training as a naval architect at one point so its super interesting to see all the stuff I'm missing! That aside, superb video and I would love to see more
Sending prayers your way , may the tides be in your favor!
In this single video, iChase did far more research than WG ever did.
Jokes aside, nice work, iChase. Would love to see more videos like this.
Haha, thanks. Definitely more videos like this in the future!
The nice thing about pixel boats and assets - they don't have to conform to real life. So - in depth, absolute research - isn't needed and is a waste of money.
Good video, Chase! I unironically like the "slideshow presentation" style for this type of video.
Yeah, I'm swinging more towards this direction in the future. It's one thing to just talk about the game, it's another to get into more detail behind the science of it all
HOLY MARY MOTHER OF JOSEPH, HE'S BACK!
YES, I'm back!
Well, regardless of Petropavlosk, I really liked hearing about the Naval Design Spiral. Very interesting.
:) then my job is complete. You learned something about ship design :P Petropavlovsk was just an interesting way to go about the topic
iChase is now going to become the Perun of Naval Architecture. Glory be to the PowerPoint!
Haha, Perun does amazing things. I'd be happy to reach even a fraction of the people he does. The powerpoint is gonna stay though, good way to present naval arch information
More videos like this anytime! I love the analysis of “paper” ships that never made it past (or in some cases even as far as) the design phase. I used to work for a company that did contract designs for the US Navy 15ish years ago, so there were many, many terms in this video I have not heard in a while!
Supposedly aren't Petro and Riga supposed to be based on the first few drafts 20-25,000t of Project 82 (Stalingrad) before they upgraded it to a 305mm gun design? Would be hard to verify without access to their archives though. Can't really find much pre-Stalingrad details on the project bar a very general outline of tonnage, armament and speed for the 220mm gun design online.
Actually, they're based on the final 220mm armed Project 82 proposals from 1947, although Riga is far closer to the actual design. There were 3 proposals in 1947, the first two were 305mm armed and varied in size and armor, while the 3rd was the 220mm proposal.
There's a very small amount of information on the 220mm designs in Stephen McLaughlin's article "Project 82: The Stalingrad class" in Warship 2006, although obviously the bulk of the information is on the final 1950s 305mm-armed design. The final 220mm design, Variant III drawn up in August 1947 displaced 30,000 tons, had an armament of 3 x 3 220mm guns, 6 x 2 130mm guns, 8 x 4 45mm, 6 x 4 25mm. Protection was to consist of a belt of 150mm and three decks of 50mm, 75mm and 20mm, with a complete torpedo protection scheme capable of resisting 500kg of TNT and a 5-compartment flooding scheme of survivability. Speed was 33.5 knots and complement was 1750 personnel.
Petro was Project 66, and actually came after Project 82. Kuznetsov temporarily convinced Stalin that the rate of fire of 220mm guns would be superior overall.
@@robdgaming Project 66 is already in game as Moskva.
The design features of Petropavlovsk are closed to early Project 82 designs than the later Project 66, which as you can see shares design features with the final Project 82 design and Project 24 design drawn up around the same time.
@@robdgaming Wrong. Project 66's main varient is in WoWs as Moskva. Petropavlovsk is not Project 66 at all.
what no talk about pipes for 45 minutes? I feel cheated XD
Glad you are back back mate :)
Hope we can get to see an in-depth look at the various Project 24 variants (Kremlin, Slava, Admiral Ushakov) that are in game. Really wish there was more literature about them.
It’s just nice to have you back. Congrats on getting through the meaty part of school. Welcome back. 👍🏼
Thank you!! I'm very glad to be back :) Now to subject all of you to ship nerd stuff! bwahahaha
Nice work: Aren't computer games wonderful! I do recall that WG did have some marine engineers on staff when it came to creating ships for the game, and maybe they didn't totally mail it in. Also, these ships would have been the last expression of Stalinist gigantomania, so yeah, looks good on paper, The Boss is happy, I'll let GOSPLAN worry about paying for it and the Heavy Machinery Ministry can come up with the machinery plant.
My favorite case of a real-life design spiral comes from Norman Friedman's book on World War II British battleships, and the post-war effort to design the model of a modern BB. Basically, if you put in all the improvements in seakeeping, logistics, electronics and habitability required, you wound up with a ship that would only fit in two British ports and would only carry 6 16" guns; assuming you could find the funding and personnel.
I get some serious Perun-vibes from this video, well done!
Well thank you! :)
Cool to learn that the most unrealistic part of this "paper ship" is how much of a submarine it is. Otherwise it's cool that it's at least reasonably feasible.
Next time you do a vid like this, can you have a brief chart explaining all these terms? Not all of us have naval backgrounds.
Wow. I haven't watched any WoWS content in a while and no longer play the game due to WG.... well... being WG (Puerto Rico event and the official response really started killing the game for me). But I loved this! Would love to see "Fantasy Ship or Actually Plausible" for other paper ships in the game. Would make a great series IMHO! If you make more you have at least 1 view and like from me (Maybe a comment too ;-D )
Yeah, the channel as a whole is heading more towards naval architecture and discussing naval ships etc
One of my main complaints about pretty much the entire Soviet tech tree after T5 is that it skips to mid 1950's designs, while most nations are stuck at late 30's early 40's tech. There's a lot of hand waving capabilities aside when you have a 10 year tech difference with engines and guns.
Yep, that's very true. But then they had to either do this or go real paper ships and I think that might have been worse.
Yes, but... a lot of those same 1930s and 40s ships did serve into the 50s due to financial reasons after the war.
Well one must create a viable line of fantasy ships when dealing with the Russian Navy. Not much to work with there. Russia never was considered a "Naval Power".
Good to have you back !!!
The lifeboats just float right off :)
Great Video and love all the technical stats.
Hurray! :) glad you liked it
We all know it's a magic game with magic boats, surrounded by magic circles, firing magic shells, protected by magic steel, powered by magic boilers and magic turbines.
Just name a few magic things happening in the game: ap shells over pen under waterline, water refuses to flow into the holes because they're not done by torpedoes; hull plating can bounce off shells because all plating on a ship are made out of the same steel, despite the fact armor plates need to be surface-hardened Krupp steel while hull plating has to be soft steel because on a riveted hull, the joints of plating must be sealed by caulking (literally punch some steel of one panel into another).
It's just a game, not simulator. If we can put these ships in real water, many of them may not be able to stay afloat cos they are seriously overweight. And we haven't even talked about weight distribution LOL. Weight distribution can greatly affect a ship's sea keeping characteristics. WG can install boilers and turbines that are as light as feathers, but now the ship can roll and pitch so badly her guns can't actually hit anything.
Consider the chess, all pieces such as knights or castles represent something in real life, but highly symbolically. The same applies to WOWS. :)
Fascinating video. Now I'm curious, though: Did the WG design simply get lucky when getting most of those values right, or did they use source material like the diagrams etc you used here to determine what the ship should look like? 🤔 (PS: We probably won't find out 😇)
It's hard to say. Back in the day I know they had a naval architect on staff at Lesta whose job was to look through historical documents and figure stuff out (including doing what I was doing in the video). Not sure what's going on these days...all the "imagine if" stuff indicates that the naval arch part is probably gone
Many thanks for video, hope for more. When comes to cost all post WW2 Soviet big ship designs are the exception, What Stalin whats he get, damn the cost. The reason they were cancel the minute he kick the bucket .
Yep, there's gonna be much more of this style of video. More focused much more on the science of ship design
Hey Chase Would it be possible to break down a Star Trek Ship design using this method to see if they would be possible? or is space too different from the ocean (Which i know yeah it is but that's besides the point
Hmm...wouldn't really be possible since space is just a whole other realm of stuff XD
It's the guns that get me.
Apparently they actually build a prototype in the 50s but it was never approved for production. The only naval gun with "similar" stats that I could find was a 1970s 8inch/55 US prototype. I say "similar" because even that gun (build 20+ years later) is even remotely in the same postcode when it comes to chamber pressure. Yet it only produced 60% of the soviet wonderwaffles range. Meaning the 50s soviet shells somehow created a tunnel of near vacuum in front of themselves.
Nice video! Very informative and entertaining!
Yeah same, and it's well known that soviet ammunition quality was absolutely garbage, so where are those railguns coming from hmmm???? WG seemed really keen to give japanese ships shit AA for "historical accuracy" but the soviets with bad gun? Nah.
Supposedly they tested one of the Moskva guns which the Petro guns seem to be based on (but secretly buffed up the wazoo with krupp). Not a lot of details found online since it was after almost all naval projects got canned after Stalin croaked.
@@solidtoto was it as garbage as the Italian's shell quality? Aside from their BBs their DDs and cruisers seem to do quite well
@@Mii_Oh_Nine neither Soviet nor Italian shells suffered from *widespread* quality issues like many believe. It's almost completely a myth.
@@Kingpin6100 does that include instances of high shell spread from the Littorios at certain points or were those just rare moments or poor shell quality? Or even just being a completely different reason like barrel wear?
Hey ichase could you go over the realism of the supership design satsuma given Japan did have the ability to build superbattleships in ww2
I still don't get why Moskva and Stalingrad have artificially nerfed armor. The citadel and main belt should be seperate all the way to the top. Yet they put thinks like venezia.
balancing reasons, more than likely.
Thank you. Takes time to heal in some case's.
Definitely, it's taken a lot longer than I expected
Will you ever come back?
It would be nice if u provide in the video more explanations about the terminology that u are using. All these ratios... I could hardly follow. But very interesting indeed. Thank u.
It's a dumb idea to design a specific platform to counter another specific platform when odds are those two platforms would never meet. It speaks to insecurity on the scale of their "father of all bombs" in answer to the moab.
Well, this is basically how historical naval development worked, kind off.
I also feel you are neglecting that vessels of similar role kind of have a good chance to meet up when both put in the constraint of running an mission and counteracting it. Engagements do not happen by mere chance, people are actively orchestrating the circumstances where they meet up.
Kind of how the Deutschland class completely failed to acknowledge the existance of dedicated cruiser killer platforms like HMS Renown, Repulse and alternatively Hood, possibly fueled by the fantasy that the RN would not be an major player in German Naval plans again.
@@Tuning3434 When you develop a system, ideally it is to perform a task or series of tasks that synergize with the other units in your fleet. This goes for any military vehicle, but in this context you want to develop a cruiser that, say, screens your capital ships from air craft, provides some asw capability, and provides fire support for the fleet. We call this "combined arms". You don't build that cruiser simply to take out a single unit type of your likely opponent specifically. To perform the same role in your own fleet perhaps, but for a cruiser to be built entirely to counter another cruiser when it's more likely to encounter planes from that cruisers carrier battle group, or an attack sub, or destroyers is a waste of time and resources. Wars are started over ego, but fought successfully with intellect.
Yeah, there's a pretty lacking amount of material about what the vessel was expected to do. Hence why WG is able to fudge a ton of stuff lol
@@ichasegaming Given Russia's propensity to design weapons simply to one up notable western equipment I wouldn't put it past them to commission a super cruiser to do just that.
I think it's one of the earlier designs of Stalingrad from like 1949, but not sure how much WG changed the design
Petropavlosk is supposed to be based on version iii of Stalingrad from 1947, which was the final 220mm armed design. WG fudged it a fair bit. Riga is much closer to the actual final 220mm armed design.
@@Kingpin6100 Yeah, not a lot of information available in English bar tonnage, speed and armament for the proposal.
@@Kingpin6100 Nah Riga is actually the 1943 version. Stalingrad, like Kremlin aka Project 24, actually began design studies during early 40s. Finalized in 50s
ey you're back
just realised youve been back for a while lol
@@HGJHan1000 Yea, been back a lil bit. Getting back into the swing of things xD
I am 100% using the design spiral to make ships in Cosmoteer & UAD from now on.
Awesome! I'm glad I have taught someone something new today :) I'm getting more into UAD as well, gonna do stuff there in the future
@@ichasegaming Its got issues, but its great fun.
i frequently hear that this ship is topheavy, and because of the weight and low freeboard the ship would become a sub, or would at least do so in choppy russian-atlantic weather
is that realistic?
Isn't Kremlin the one who'd turn over and sink just because of her armour before she even fires her guns?
WG promised to do a stream about it many years back.
Also isn't this just as easy as looking at engine tech the soviets had at the time and seeing how many of those engines used in ships made at that time would be required to get it up to WG speeds?
I suspect just looking into could the soviets run this ship on those engines without a tanker keeping it company, though the complete design theory is good i think it does need more focus in those areas which would just make these soviet era ships impossible to make, at least if we are going to make up pretend ships i'd have all the other nations have a special tier 10-11 and scale the Yamato to 9, Just let that ship be the best Tier 9 bb hands down, rather than just filling up all the tier ten slots with pretend could've been made near matches.
Not necessarily, one always has to wonder about new possible developments, ability to acquire foreign products etc. Not nearly as simple as it first appears.
I highly doubt that firing Kremlin's guns would turn her over lol. Not really how vessel stability works :)
Why would it turn over? Have you seen how big Kremlin is under the water? It is not top heavy at all. It's probably the most stable ship instead.
It'd be an interesting topic to talk about perhaps her displacement and power plants, all the small details that soviet Russia would keep screwing up.
I don't believe they could've just pulled a properly powerful engine out of nowhere without a huge cost in experience and money.
Yeah i don't really think Kremlin would've tipped from firing the guns its just a good funny thing i could see the Soviets doing, But i have seen more than one opinion on that the Kremlin just wouldn't float because it was too heavy, surely there are work arounds for that but at the size/power plant stated by WG i imagine is the context.
Plus we have to remember that Soviet era ports were pretty restrictive as well just like the Germans had huge issues with which ships could dock where, If you build something like either of these ships where it is going to home at, and whats it for?
Those guns are utter fantasy either way. At nothing but point blank range should they ever penetrate BB belt armor.
What about her freeboard? Isn't it a bit low above the water? Wouldn't she be taking a lot of water?
The only concession I could give there is the possibility of a Soviet assumption that it'd serve in the Black Sea or Baltic, perhaps the Med as well, but oceangoing would be problematic. That said, it's still typical WG Soviet fantasy with how the ships perform.
@@eirinym the Black Sea tends to be surprisingly rough with chopped waves. The Baltic is calmer, but it also has its share of gales and storms. Sure, it's much worse on oceans, but even in the Baltic these ships would have to stay in the littoral like monitors :-))) so yeah, I guess the only explanation is it's down to WG's russian bias, trying to make the ships lower=harder to hit. :)
But the spreadsheet says this should work.
Kek, can't argue with WG's spreadsheet...you'll never win
Thus, even Decadent Canadian Capitalist Kebab-eaters prove the natural superiority of glorious russian naval design?
In modern times the Russians could not even build a carrier. They built horrible heavy cruisers so a battleship, I seriously doubt it. But that does not stop wargaming from making these paper ships into some sort of arcad-ish god-like vessel.
I mean, bar Stalin's insistence most of the other highers didn't even want to waste money on his naval ambitions but had to keep quiet or else lol.
well-
the CCCP DID have 4 or 5 BBs during the war
@@angelapolinar5343 but the Ganguts were pre-World War I dreadnoughts, basically useless heaps of scrap metal, weren't they? The Sovetsky Soyuz class never came to pass (none of them was completed). Also, the Ganguts were built by Imperial Russia. The USSR/CCCP never built a battleship.
@@johnnyenglish583 Well they person I was replying to said he doubted Russians could build a BB, not Soviets. And while the Ganguts almost never sailed out to fight they weren't useless either. Marat participated in the defense of Leningrad, where she ravaged troop convoys and panzergruppen
@@angelapolinar5343 the person asked asked about Russians but you replied about the USSR, which led me to think that you were confusing the two (as many people in the West do). Russia built them, Russia used them. USSR used them too but it didn't build any :) And the USSR != Russians.
Plausible fantasy.
If Petropavlovsk existed in the real world it would be a glorified river monitor and nothing more. Great job WG. 🙄🙄🙄
Google ”how to design a swing” for some good references to the design spiral thing ☺️
By the way; lovely vid!! I’m a merchant mariner and find this super interesting
Well thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed it!