WesWorld

There she goes, basically the vessel as simmed before, but with 5 more tons in the misc weights and 50 more shells per gun:

8000t Canadian Light Cruiser laid down 1931

Displacement:
7.592 t light; 8.000 t standard; 9.032 t normal; 9.857 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
567,50 ft / 560,00 ft x 56,00 ft x 18,00 ft (normal load)
172,97 m / 170,69 m x 17,07 m x 5,49 m

Armament:
15 - 5,51" / 140 mm guns (5x3 guns), 83,72lbs / 37,97kg shells, 1931 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, majority forward, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
8 - 4,02" / 102 mm guns (4x2 guns), 32,38lbs / 14,69kg shells, 1931 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships
16 - 1,57" / 40,0 mm guns (4x4 guns), 1,95lbs / 0,88kg shells, 1931 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
10 - 0,79" / 20,0 mm guns in single mounts, 0,24lbs / 0,11kg shells, 1931 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 1.548 lbs / 702 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 250
12 - 21,0" / 533 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4,00" / 102 mm 380,00 ft / 115,82 m 10,00 ft / 3,05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 104 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 4,00" / 102 mm 1,00" / 25 mm 2,00" / 51 mm
2nd: 2,00" / 51 mm - -
3rd: 1,00" / 25 mm - -
4th: 0,50" / 13 mm - -

- Armour deck: 2,00" / 51 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 72.676 shp / 54.216 Kw = 32,00 kts
Range 9.000nm at 15,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1.857 tons

Complement:
463 - 602

Cost:
£3,197 million / $12,787 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 194 tons, 2,1 %
Armour: 1.712 tons, 19,0 %
- Belts: 630 tons, 7,0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0 %
- Armament: 231 tons, 2,6 %
- Armour Deck: 851 tons, 9,4 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0,0 %
Machinery: 2.173 tons, 24,1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3.438 tons, 38,1 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1.439 tons, 15,9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0,8 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
11.457 lbs / 5.197 Kg = 136,8 x 5,5 " / 140 mm shells or 1,5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,15
Metacentric height 2,7 ft / 0,8 m
Roll period: 14,3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,50
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,21

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has raised forecastle
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0,560
Length to Beam Ratio: 10,00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 26,83 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 59 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 15,00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0,00 ft / 0,00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 28,00 ft / 8,53 m
- Forecastle (33 %): 27,00 ft / 8,23 m (18,00 ft / 5,49 m aft of break)
- Mid (50 %): 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Stern: 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Average freeboard: 21,10 ft / 6,43 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 97,1 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 125,5 %
Waterplane Area: 23.005 Square feet or 2.137 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 118 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 91 lbs/sq ft or 445 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0,94
- Longitudinal: 1,64
- Overall: 1,00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

So she has a Mogami arrangement?

I'd love to see her drawing, it would likley make my Cerasus class CL's look like luxury liners in reguards to deck space.

Quoted

So she has a Mogami arrangement?

Could be that, or Takao/Brooklyn.

I think she should be at least 15m longer and a few more metres beam as well. You probably need an even larger ship than Brooklyn as you are shipping torpedoes as well.

Brooklyn layout;


Mogami layout;


edit: d'oh, yes I know I forgot the belts again. I'll fix those in a bit

Here is Australias design for a 15 gun light cruiser.

Adelaide, Australia Light Cruiser laid down 1933

Displacement:
7,657 t light; 8,017 t standard; 9,390 t normal; 10,489 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
629.33 ft / 620.00 ft x 62.00 ft x 19.00 ft (normal load)
191.82 m / 188.98 m x 18.90 m x 5.79 m

Armament:
15 - 6.00" / 152 mm guns (5x3 guns), 108.00lbs / 48.99kg shells, 1933 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, majority forward, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
10 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1933 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts
12 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (3x4 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.88kg shells, 1933 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on centreline, evenly spread
20 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm guns (10x2 guns), 0.24lbs / 0.11kg shells, 1933 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 1,968 lbs / 893 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
12 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 390.00 ft / 118.87 m 9.00 ft / 2.74 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 97 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 1.50" / 38 mm -
2nd: 1.20" / 30 mm - -

- Armour deck: 1.50" / 38 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 67,974 shp / 50,708 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 12,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,472 tons

Complement:
476 - 620

Cost:
£3.555 million / $14.219 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 246 tons, 2.6 %
Armour: 1,439 tons, 15.3 %
- Belts: 586 tons, 6.2 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 147 tons, 1.6 %
- Armour Deck: 707 tons, 7.5 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 1,981 tons, 21.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,966 tons, 42.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,734 tons, 18.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 25 tons, 0.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
14,382 lbs / 6,523 Kg = 133.2 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 1.8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.25
Metacentric height 3.6 ft / 1.1 m
Roll period: 13.6 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.44
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.24

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.450
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 28.59 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 57
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: 20.00 ft / 6.10 m
- Forecastle (30 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Mid (50 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Stern: 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Average freeboard: 19.12 ft / 5.83 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 89.5 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 152.0 %
Waterplane Area: 25,470 Square feet or 2,366 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 127 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 103 lbs/sq ft or 501 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.26
- Overall: 0.99
Caution: Hull subject to strain in open-sea
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc
Mogami layout;

Not too unattractive, IMHO. Personally, I'd shift the hangar and catapult forwards, and site the after funnel abreast the after torpedo tubes, but that might just be me.

Certainly, I'd be glad to have these ships safeguarding Canada and doing the cruiser thing...

Quoted

Originally posted by RLBH
Not too unattractive, IMHO. Personally, I'd shift the hangar and catapult forwards, and site the after funnel abreast the after torpedo tubes, but that might just be me.

ie;

like that?

That'd put the funnels too far aft, and make the ship look unbalanced (To me, anyway). That's why I didn't continue using that layout when the design evolved.

I'll take votes and opinions on the mogami vs. brooklyn layout, btw.

Aieee!

Ignore me, that's hideous.

Agreed...on both of the above. ;-)

Mogami style looks better, plus gives you better forward firepower, since one turret isn't totally blocked forward, just at lower elevations.

Would raising B turret a bit, not that it's superfiring, but just a bit higher than it is now affect the SS report? I'm figuring raising both B and C turrets to true superfiring would drastically affect it.

It's not really possible in SS to raise a turret or mount to a "half-superfiring" height. It's either super-firing or it's not. I would expect raising one of the bow turrets on the design to affect it's strength, so something would have to give elsewhere if this was done.

As to the looks, I prefer the Mogami look to the Brooklyn look, myself.

When designing the 5 turret HMS Northumberland, the DNC went for the Brooklyn arrangement. It is not detailed why, but I'd believe there was some rationale in doing this over the Mogami arrangement.

Unknown.
Perhaps there is a greater threat of getting all the turrets knocked out by a hit
because the barbette of the center turret is not blocking the after turret like in the Brooklyn.
Or maybe the idea that the second turret can fire over the first at long range is false (blast damage might be too great).
Didn't the Japanese use the Brooklyn arrangement on their earlier ten gun heavy cruisers?

I like the look of the "Canadian Mogami" over the Brooklyn visually.
I don't know if the two designs have any pluses or minuses between them. Would be good to know.

Quoted

Didn't the Japanese use the Brooklyn arrangement on their earlier ten gun heavy cruisers

Yes, they did.

The earlier Japanese cruisers were structually weak, well actually all the Japanese cruisers were structually weak...

Bringing the superfiring turret closer to the centre of the ship reduces the stress on the hull. Maybe the Japanese were mindful of this after having discovered the problems with Takao et al. and tried to compensate for it. It didn't work however, Mogami needing to be bulged and displacement increased by ~5000tons, quite an increase for a 7-8000ton ship.

The Mogami layout would have to have a longer belt due to the forward turret arrangement, Springsharp to my knowledge would not recognize this layout.

My guess is that SS if anything recognizes the Brooklyn layout for a three turrets forward configuration.