<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/feed/bypass/styles/feed.css" media="screen"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/feed/bypass/styles/feed.xsl"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/">

	<channel>
	  <!-- main channel info -->
        <title>armored destroyer needed </title>
        <link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/6178/t/armored-destroyer-needed.html</link>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[ Ahoy, there:


The specs for this design are as follows:


1) 5&quot; armor belt, inclined at 15-19 degrees,


2) 2.5&quot; reinforced torpedo bulkhead, 2&quot; deck armor


3) 3 2-gun turrets (2 fore, 1 aft), armed with 5&quot;/54-caliber rifles, ammo loadout to be 500 rounds per gun, 5&quot; turret face/3&quot; sides-top/4&quot;
barbette


4) secondary armament to be a mix of 3&quot;/50&#39;s and 40-mm Bofors quad mounts


5) quintuple-tube torpedo launcher amidships (trainable deck mount);... ]]>
        </description>

		<!-- optional elements -->
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2006, Yuku</copyright>
		<managingEditor>feeds@yuku.com (FeedMaster)</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>webmaster@yuku.com (WebMaster)</webMaster>
		<!-- note: dates need to be RFC 822 formated "Sat, 07 Sep 2002 00:00:01 GMT" -->
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 06:19:30 GMT</pubDate>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 19:23:25 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>Yuku Feeds 1.0</generator>
		<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
		<!-- <cloud domain="rpc.yuku.com" port="80" path="/RPC2" registerProcedure="pingMe" protocol="soap"/>-->
		<ttl>60</ttl>
		<!-- feed image -->
		
		<rating>
		{pics-1.1 &quot;http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html&quot; l gen true for &quot;http://yuku.com&quot; r (nz 1 vz 1 lz 1 oz 1 cz 1 ) &quot;http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html&quot; l gen true for &quot;http://yuku.com&quot; r (n 0 s 0 v 0 l 0 ))
		</rating>
		<textInput>
			<title>Search</title>
			<description>Search Domain</description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://yuku.com/search/direct/</link>
		</textInput>
		<!-- skip
		<skipHours>
			<hour>23</hour>
		</skipHours>
		<skipDays>
			<day>Monday</day>
			<day>Wednesday</day>
			<day>Friday</day>
		</skipDays>-->
		<!-- extensions -->


		<!-- channel items -->
		<!-- descriptions should be shorter than 500 char to be polite -->
		<!-- html shoud be stripped or escaped -->
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: armored destroyer needed  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/79161/t/armored-destroyer-needed.html#reply-79161</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ The &quot;Armored Destroyer&quot; is something like an impossibility, since the addition of armor on a small hulled ship, with weight almost primarily put in
propulsion and medium caliber firepower is impossible to give armor, without greatly increasing its size into a cruiser sized vessel. So the vessel you are
trying to design certainly is a small light cruiser or CLAA, if given a DP main armament. Given its spcication of long range of radius and solitary action
indicates it is a cruiser,... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (E F Draaijers)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/79161</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 19:23:21 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: armored destroyer needed  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/79125/t/armored-destroyer-needed.html#reply-79125</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ One of the oddest requests here ever.
<br>
<br>
There was some post WWI discussion of the vulnerability of destroyer machinery, whilst the USN experimented with heavier plating abreast machinery spaces for
splinter protection, probably a good move for destroyers larger than 1500 tons.
<br>
<br>
But this? I think the torpedo bulkhead is the most odd of all. You need a great deal of beam to fit the appropriate voids to make a torpedo bulkhead work.
<br>
<br>
Far better to build 10 2000t... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (NewGolconda)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/79125</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 08:14:01 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ armored destroyer needed  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/6178/t/armored-destroyer-needed.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Ahoy, there:
<br>
<br>
The specs for this design are as follows:
<br>
<br>
1) 5&quot; armor belt, inclined at 15-19 degrees,
<br>
<br>
2) 2.5&quot; reinforced torpedo bulkhead, 2&quot; deck armor
<br>
<br>
3) 3 2-gun turrets (2 fore, 1 aft), armed with 5&quot;/54-caliber rifles, ammo loadout to be 500 rounds per gun, 5&quot; turret face/3&quot; sides-top/4&quot;
barbette
<br>
<br>
4) secondary armament to be a mix of 3&quot;/50&#39;s and 40-mm Bofors quad mounts
<br>
<br>
5) quintuple-tube... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Michael Garrity)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/6178</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 06:19:30 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
    <!-- end items -->

  </channel>
</rss>