回帖33
主题1
精华0
积分35
金钱0
贡献0
阅读权限10
注册时间2016-11-20
最后登录2024-6-29
在线时间113 小时

列兵

|

楼主 |
发表于 2022-5-30 15:18
来自手机
|
显示全部楼层
就是这段话看到的13寸装甲带,图片传得好模糊。What was hidden in these figures was the extraor-dinary cost of protection against the very efficient12-in gun.For example,CA 2D was designed with13-in belt armor on 35-lb backing,which was con-siderably thicker than that of the lowas.On the otherhand,the short range ensured against underwater-trajectory shell hits,the threat of which had causedconsiderable problems in battleship design.Modestouter limits (20,000 rather than the 30,000 yards ofbattleships)made for reduced deck armor.In a majorchange from cruiser practice,side armor was main-tained at full height for its entire length rather thanbeing stepped down fore and aft of the machineryspaces,"to gain,without excessive depth of hull,ap-propriate resistance to gunfire through armored free-board,as well as to provide a degree of buoyancyprotection which is considered essential in a ship ofthis size."That is,in the eyes of Preliminary Designthe near-battleship size of CA 2 justified changes indesign practice which in themselves increased thesize of the ship and therefore contributed to the de-feat of its concept.Splinter protection was superiorto the usual cruiser standard,except in the minimumdesign,CA 2A. |
|