WesWorld

"Your mind tricks will not work on me...."

On the other hand I might build a 24knot cruiser for The Falklands station!!!! That might upset the argies a bit though!!

Do you care if the Argies are upset? That is the question....

Quoted

On the other hand I might build a 24knot cruiser for The Falklands station!!!! That might upset the argies a bit though!!

Or they might view it as easy pickings for their two battlecruisers. I wonder if the traditional monitor/MTB/minelayer formula might be an effective strategy there.

MTBs in the South Atlantic? Boy, I'm glad I've avoided that duty!

Certainly a slow cruiser might be regarded as lunch to the new Argie BCs, but it's possible that a cynical government in Nordmark might plan on that possibility as a casus belli against Argentina...

On the open ocean, a bad idea - but along the shores and in between the islands is what I'm wondering about. I vaguely recall that there are a heap of bays and fiords to offer hiding places for such craft.

MTB's have already been deployed to the Falklands, and will be followed after 1930 by a number of Frigates.
I will send a Minelayer when I build one!!!

I'm not sure how Chile will feel about this actually. On one hand, a foreign power is extending its power towards South America agian. On the other hand, it keeps the Argentinians looking east instead of west and south.

Chile might want to support the Nordmark base to some extent, but still has misgiving about the South African presence in South America. Not hostility like the other South American nations, but concern.

Here is a minelayer cruiser!!!

Lund Class, Nordmark Minelayers laid down 1930

Displacement:
6,900 t light; 7,092 t standard; 8,486 t normal; 9,600 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
613.99 ft / 600.00 ft x 50.00 ft x 18.00 ft (normal load)
187.14 m / 182.88 m x 15.24 m x 5.49 m

Armament:
4 - 4.30" / 109 mm guns (2x2 guns), 39.75lbs / 18.03kg shells, 1930 Model
Dual purpose guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline, all forward, 1 raised mount - superfiring
16 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (4x4 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1930 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm guns (8 mounts), 0.24lbs / 0.11kg shells, 1930 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 187 lbs / 85 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 200

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 440.00 ft / 134.11 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: 1.00" / 25 mm 160.00 ft / 48.77 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Main Belt covers 113 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 2.00" / 51 mm 4.00" / 102 mm
2nd: 1.00" / 25 mm - -
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm - -

- Armour deck: 1.50" / 38 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 75,659 shp / 56,442 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 12,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,508 tons

Complement:
441 - 574

Cost:
£2.434 million / $9.736 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 23 tons, 0.3 %
Armour: 1,447 tons, 17.1 %
- Belts: 771 tons, 9.1 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 95 tons, 1.1 %
- Armour Deck: 581 tons, 6.8 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 2,293 tons, 27.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2,796 tons, 33.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,586 tons, 18.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 340 tons, 4.0 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
10,855 lbs / 4,924 Kg = 273.1 x 4.3 " / 109 mm shells or 1.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.27
Metacentric height 2.7 ft / 0.8 m
Roll period: 12.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 64 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.07
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.28

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.550
Length to Beam Ratio: 12.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 24.49 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 55 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 30.00 ft / 9.14 m
- Forecastle (30 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Mid (50 %): 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Stern: 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Average freeboard: 18.76 ft / 5.72 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 94.8 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 148.3 %
Waterplane Area: 20,937 Square feet or 1,945 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 129 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 77 lbs/sq ft or 377 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.98
- Longitudinal: 1.14
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

2 ships built Lund & Malmö

Certainly has potential. Germany's looking at converting the Emdens into minelayers along the lines of the Great War's Brummer & Bremse, but the design hasn't been finalized yet and certainly no contract has been let. Those ships would be a bit more heavily armed than the Lund class shown here, they'd be keeping their fore and aft 150mms, but the side mounted 150mms would be pulled.

L:B ratio 12-0 (har har)

*snap*

(Ups!)

"Sorry, it broke in two.... I didn´t meant to have her ride that storm...."

Seriously, for her task she is

- not fast enough
- too weakly armed
- too long legged
- too heavy armored
- tpp good a seaboat

or in other words

- too unbalanced
- not worth the money

My opinion off course.

(I have mentioned her L:B ratio, haven´t I?)

Don´t get me wrong, Nordmark could make good use of a fast minelyer during a crisis but this one combines a weird and unbalanced design with too much SS-power gaming, methinks.

agreed, this design concept has been dropped (i think)

(And yeah, I can hear Walter say "HoOmAn at its best,,,")

Earl,

I just noticed the torpedo boats you posted in the Nordmark section have a cross-sectional hull strength of below 0,5. You might be interested to change that...

In general I´d like toi know why Nordmark favours such high L:B ratios in general? I mean, just take a look at the Lilehammer class CLs. They have a ratio above 11:2! I can´t think of even a single historical cruiser design with such a high L:B ratio. Or have I missed something?

To the board: Do our gentlemen´s rules regarding L:B ratios cover small light combatants only or all kind of vessel? Just wanna know if Í´m entirely off the mark. Thanks.

Fixed, fixed and fixed

My L:B ratio problem is a recent thing, possibly owing to a need for good seaboat ratings, and high speed, Also some of Peng's sim's have high L:B ratio's so it is slightly generic in Nordmarks shipping

Currently the design rules for gentlemen allow 12:1 ratios for ships up to light cruiser size (8,000 tons), while ships over that are limited to 10:1 l/b ratios.

Uhm, on the new torpedo boats: why are they called torpedo boats when they have no torpedo tubes?? I'm just puzzled here....

ahhhhhh, I knew I'd missed someting

The boat is the torpedo.

Somebody's been reading the Filipino design manual.

"First, take large bomb..."

Either that or they're counting on having a lot of Nordish berserks on thos vessels....

To be fair, though, the problem's now been fixed: each design is now carrying 4 457mm torpedo tubes.

Quoted

Somebody's been reading the Filipino design manual.

"First, take large bomb..."

note each design has lots of Misc weight (I wonder what for??????)

Some is for 18 reloads though!!