WesWorld

It occured to me that a ship depending on speed for survival against more heavily armed/armored opponents might want her heavy firepower aft, while having forward armament capable of quickly dispaching cruisers. The design below is a bit of a departure for me, since I don't think speed is armor, but it might have uses. It's under LordArpad's late 1930s treaty notions:



Battlecruiser, laid down 1938

Length, 270.0 m x Beam, 35.0 m x Depth, 9.8 m
47619 tonnes normal displacement (43290 tonnes standard)

Main battery: 9 x 25.4-cm (3 x 3; 2 superfiring (2 fwd, 1 aft))
Secondary battery: 3 x 40.6-cm (1 x 3, aft)
AA battery: 16 x 13.0-cm
Light battery: 40 x 3.7-cm

Weight of broadside: 5346 kg

Main belt, 30.0 cm @ 15 degrees; bow and stern, 3.0 cm
Torpedo bulkhead, 5.0 cm
Armor deck, average 12.0 cm
Conning tower, 40.0 cm

Battery armor:
Main, 35.0 cm / secondary, 35.0 cm
AA, 2.5 cm shields / light guns, 2.5 cm shields

Maximum speed for 187284 shaft kw = 34.00 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 14000 nm / 15 knots

Typical complement: 1612-2095


Estimated cost, $82.165 million (£20.541 million)

Remarks:

Relative extent of belt armor, 88 percent of 'typical' coverage.

Ship has slow, easy roll; a good, steady gun platform.

Ship is roomy, with superior accommodation and working space.


Distribution of weights:
Percent
normal
displacement:

Armament ......................... 1470 tonnes = 3 pct
Armor, total ..................... 14352 tonnes = 30 pct

Belt 3397 tonnes = 7 pct
Torpedo bulkhead 1348 tonnes = 3 pct
Deck 5659 tonnes = 12 pct
C.T. 448 tonnes = 1 pct
Armament 3500 tonnes = 7 pct

Machinery ........................ 6872 tonnes = 14 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 18588 tonnes = 39 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 6262 tonnes = 13 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 75 tonnes = 0 pct
-----
47619 tonnes = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 2.2 m

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 41358 tonnes
Standard displacement: 43290 tonnes
Normal service: 47619 tonnes
Full load: 50892 tonnes

Loading submergence 6068 tonnes/metre

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.09

Shellfire needed to sink: 24796 kg = 109.1 x 25.4-cm shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 7.8
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 70 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.33

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.01

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.51
Sharpness coefficient: 0.36
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 7.48
'Natural speed' for length = 29.8 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 53 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 87 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 178 percent


Displacement factor: 121 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.99
(Structure weight per square
metre of hull surface: 989 kg)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.07
(for 7.10 m average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +0.79 m)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


[Machine-readable parameters: Spring Style v. 1.2.1]

885.60 x 114.80 x 32.14; 23.29 -- Dimensions
0.51 -- Block coefficient
1938 -- Year laid down
34.00 / 14000 / 15.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
75 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
9 x 10.00; 3; 1 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
3 x 15.98; 1 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
16 x 5.12 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
40 x 1.46 -- Fourth (light) battery
0 -- No torpedo armament
++++++++++
11.81 / 1.18 / 0.00 / 1.97; 88 -- Belt armor; relative extent
4.72 / 15.75 -- Deck / CT
13.78 / 13.78 / 0.98 / 0.98 -- Battery armor


(Note: For portability, values are stored in Anglo-American units)


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It's definitely different if not practical. maybe a challenger for Lord Arpad's Royal Yacht in a wierdness contest.

There was one thing that I missed on that Royal Yacht of Lord Arpad: A swimming pool for His Majesty.
:-)
I got one on a design for a special 'Island Hopper' DD for the Empress. The ship does not use a standard grey color paint for the hull above the waterline and the superstructure.

But I think that battlecruiser is an interesting design. There would be quite a size difference between the 10 inch turrets and the 16 inch turret.

Walter

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
It's definitely different if not practical. maybe a challenger for Lord Arpad's Royal Yacht in a wierdness contest.

Beats it hands down IMHO :-))

Bernhard