WesWorld

Since all Siam's ships have top speeds in the 29-30 knot range, so this ship was designed with that top speed in mind. With 2200 n.mi. @ 20 knots, she's got good range and speed for local duties, and can cruise with the fastest ships in the fleet. She's heavy on AA armament since most of Siam's ships seem to be lacking a bit in that department. I might even do a really light gunboat specifically for subchasing/anti-aircraft escort duties next.



Tantang, Siamese Coastal Destroyer laid down 1935

Displacement:
450 t light; 473 t standard; 584 t normal; 673 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
246.06 ft / 246.06 ft x 24.61 ft x 8.20 ft (normal load)
75.00 m / 75.00 m x 7.50 m x 2.50 m

Armament:
3 - 3.46" / 88.0 mm guns in single mounts, 22.05lbs / 10.00kg shells, 1935 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on centreline ends, majority aft
4 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (2x2 guns), 1.65lbs / 0.75kg shells, 1935 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on centreline, evenly spread, all raised mounts
12 - 0.49" / 12.5 mm guns (6x2 guns), 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1935 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 73 lbs / 33 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 250
3 - 23.6" / 600 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0.79" / 20 mm - -
2nd: 0.59" / 15 mm - -
3rd: 0.20" / 5 mm - -

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 2 shafts, 14,000 shp / 10,444 Kw = 29.04 kts
Range 2,200nm at 20.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 199 tons

Complement:
59 - 77

Cost:
£0.316 million / $1.262 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 9 tons, 1.5 %
Armour: 6 tons, 1.0 %
- Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 6 tons, 1.0 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 278 tons, 47.6 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 152 tons, 26.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 134 tons, 22.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 6 tons, 1.0 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
180 lbs / 82 Kg = 8.7 x 3.5 " / 88 mm shells or 0.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.48
Metacentric height 1.2 ft / 0.4 m
Roll period: 9.5 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.11
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 0.80

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak
Block coefficient: 0.412
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 15.69 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 68 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 62
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 17.22 ft / 5.25 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 15.58 ft / 4.75 m
- Mid (35 %): 14.76 ft / 4.50 m (6.56 ft / 2.00 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
- Stern: 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
- Average freeboard: 9.79 ft / 2.98 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 167.4 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 58.8 %
Waterplane Area: 3,753 Square feet or 349 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 67 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 22 lbs/sq ft or 108 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.50
- Longitudinal: 1.44
- Overall: 0.55
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is cramped
Poor seaboat, wet and uncomfortable, reduced performance in heavy weather

Might be prudent to uparm her with a 4.5" gun or somthing in that range. As it is her torpedo's are her deadliest weapon and if I'm correct she has reloads for a total of 6?

A quick re-rendering.

A decent ship, but I would suggest something bigger, with a multi role capability and 100mm guns. A better idea would probably be go shopping for old boats to refit. There's probably some good ones out there.

Oh and BTW Siam also has an aircraft carrier.

I think it´s a good design for the Siamese. Cheap enough to get a few of them and with the armament necessary to deal with coastal shipping and similar sized enemies.

thesmilingassassin:

Thanks. My drawing skills are coming along, but still not up to the level yours are. I didn't intend for there to be reloads, as I thought that a torp that large would take up 2 tons (given the weights that the NavWeps site has).


Desertfox:

Why rebuild old when you can build or order new? Also, when you have only a total of 4 capital ships (and one of those under construction) why would I need something 'bigger' and more 'multi-role'? Siam needs an AA escort and perhaps something able to attack older capital ships that might be used in such a generally secondary theater.


HoOmAn:

Cheap is one of my hallmarks.
http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=…g21752#msg21752
A 16,000 ton BC for my Confederate Navy... 4000 tons cheaper than my neighbor's.
http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=…g21782#msg21782
My design for a 4x2x13.5" battleship... the Royal Navy can eat it's heart out. Comes in at only 18,500 tons.
http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=…g21782#msg21782
Lastly, my newest 'cruiser'... a 900t super-destroyer meant to patrol the Gulf of Mexico in place of the 3000 ton designs that are becoming vogue in the area.

Quoted

Originally posted by Carthaginian
Lastly, my newest 'cruiser'... a 900t super-destroyer meant to patrol the Gulf of Mexico in place of the 3000 ton designs that are becoming vogue in the area.

Honestly, even a flotilla of these could not replace a true cruiser. There is more about size than just the number of guns and speed. A 900ts unit will never be a good seaboat or a stable gun platform. A cruiser will be able shelling her when the smaller vessels crew can´t even stand on the deck anymore. Then there is armour and the general capability to absorb hits without getting cripped etc.

On you mini-BB or BC: I doubt the vessels hull form will allo such main gun layout. Have you ever tried a top view of your designs? At least on the BC A barbets diameter and weight of the turret will not allow to install the guns were you put them on the drawing, I´m sure..... In OTL the SCHARNHORST and GNEISENAU were known to be very wet ships forward because they were too heavy forward. Now compare that to your design. :o/

The 900-tonners are not meant to 'replace' cruisers, just to threaten them. If a 3000t cruiser has to face 2.5x the number of guns on 4 hulls... well, it's still outnumbered and outmaneuvered. This was the idea behind them, not so much to replace on a 1:1 basis, but to have the firepower devided in order to maximize damage to the other side while minimizing losses to my side. They are more 'large destroyers' and I know it... they just have the firepower to conduct hit-and-run attacks on cruisers.

Also, with the average seas in the Gulf being 5-8 feet, seaboat qualities aren't the most important thing. They are quite solid for their environment.


The BC the guns probably won't fit on. The battleship they should work on... I don't know how to draw top views correctly, so I don't do it. If the guns won't fit on the BB, where would you put them? The length is suffcient for the turrets, and the beam as well. The block coefficient is also higher than normal, meaning that the hull has enough 'wide part' to fit it, right?

'Wet Forward' isn't a warning I take too seriously in my environment. The only time the seas in the Gulf of Mexico get rough enough that they would be in seas comprable to what S&G served in would be during hurricane conditions... and they wouldn't be out in that unless things were really bad.

Quoted

Why rebuild old when you can build or order new?

Why? Because it is a lot cheaper to do so. Mexico got 9 of these at only 340tons a piece (including reffit cost):

E-07 (ex-1915 type), Mexico (ex-Nordmark) Destroyer laid down 1915

Displacement:
1,145 t light; 1,201 t standard; 1,347 t normal; 1,464 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
315.00 ft / 315.00 ft x 28.00 ft x 11.75 ft (normal load)
96.01 m / 96.01 m x 8.53 m x 3.58 m

Armament:
4 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns in single mounts, 62.50lbs / 28.35kg shells, 1932 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
4 - 1.10" / 27.9 mm guns (1x4 guns), 0.67lbs / 0.30kg shells, 1932 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mount
on centreline amidships
8 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm guns (4x2 guns), 0.24lbs / 0.11kg shells, 1915 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 255 lbs / 115 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 200
4 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 1.00" / 25 mm 0.50" / 13 mm -

- Conning tower: 1.00" / 25 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 27,565 shp / 20,563 Kw = 31.00 kts
Range 2,750nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 263 tons

Complement:
110 - 144

Cost:
£0.238 million / $0.951 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 32 tons, 2.4 %
Armour: 13 tons, 1.0 %
- Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 10 tons, 0.8 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 3 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 690 tons, 51.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 391 tons, 29.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 202 tons, 15.0 %
Miscellaneous weights: 20 tons, 1.5 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
320 lbs / 145 Kg = 5.1 x 5.0 " / 127 mm shells or 0.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.29
Metacentric height 1.2 ft / 0.4 m
Roll period: 10.9 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 51 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.73
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.01

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.455
Length to Beam Ratio: 11.25 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 17.75 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 66 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 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 (20 %): 12.50 ft / 3.81 m
- Mid (50 %): 12.50 ft / 3.81 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 12.50 ft / 3.81 m
- Stern: 12.50 ft / 3.81 m
- Average freeboard: 13.10 ft / 3.99 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 185.5 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 84.1 %
Waterplane Area: 5,649 Square feet or 525 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 57 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 32 lbs/sq ft or 155 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.50
- Longitudinal: 1.96
- Overall: 0.58
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is cramped

Quoted

Also, when you have only a total of 4 capital ships (and one of those under construction) why would I need something 'bigger' and more 'multi-role'? Siam needs an AA escort and perhaps something able to attack older capital ships that might be used in such a generally secondary theater

Precisely because you only have 4 capital ships. Something bigger can operate independantly, plus it actually stands a chance against true destroyers. The light gunboat is probably a better idea, combined with a true destroyer and some heavy TBs like the Mexican 100 tonners (of which Mexico is willing to sell the license to Siam...).

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Why? Because it is a lot cheaper to do so. Mexico got 9 of these at only 340tons a piece

I must also man, maintain and fund these ships.
Bigger is not equal to better... especially for a small nation.

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Precisely because you only have 4 capital ships. Something bigger can operate independantly, plus it actually stands a chance against true destroyers. The light gunboat is probably a better idea, combined with a true destroyer and some heavy TBs like the Mexican 100 tonners (of which Mexico is willing to sell the license to Siam...).

1.) Siam, Poland, nor any other nation I have would be interested in liscenced designs. I'd take care to design my own designs if at all possible. As far as 'unsimmable' historical designs, I have enough picked out to make it.

2.) Again, though they might be bigger, they couldn't be fielded in as large a numbers, couldn't cover as much area nor have their losses sustained as easily. For a nation on a budget with small populations and infrastructures, small is a good thing. In fact, I'm wondering why in the Blue Blazes Siam has a pre-dread battle cruiser!

Im trying to figure out where Siam hid the CV LOL

I'd forgotten about that myself...

http://88.198.26.117/kunden/oponn/wbblit…eadid=4649&sid=

It's camouflaged of course. It now looks like an island.

It's that island over there...
... no, I'm wrong. It's that one...
... or was it that one?
... or maybe that one?
... maybe it broke loose and drifted away...

Remember the term cruiser would inticate that the vessel can operate alone for an extened period of time. Generally with the job of scouting or trade protection. Also generally with superior speed to any enemy it intends to engage. (This is why the Chilean Oyama still functions as a cruiser as she can catch and kill about any cruiser in the world while still not being able to engage most capital ships) Of course the definition changes after each war, so we may be at a very different place then one would be in 1911.

That is probably the smallest carrier in the world.

Is a length of 140m suffice to start and land aircrafts? What was flight deck length on the British and American CVEs?

Why two elevators?

Well USS Long Island was 150 m long. However you don't use the whole deck to land. That is what the wires and hooks are for. HMS Archer was about 142 m long with late model CVEs going up to about 170 m in length.

IMO a catapult is a needed part of this ship.