You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

41

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 4:31pm

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
I´m curious to see how you managed all that on 2000 tons. I expect a design not in line with our rules here but probably you can suprise me. :o)


After double-checking the Design Rules for Gentlemen, I found that I did break a rule. Cross sectional strength is 0.48, just below the 0.50 allowance. D'oh!

Quick question: are the rules based on standard tonnage or normal? I assumed standard, but thought I should double check.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Eidolon" (Sep 30th 2009, 4:52pm)


42

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 4:58pm

OK, let me have it. Just don't laugh too loudly.

Quoted


DBL39 class, Large Destroyer Leader laid down 1939

Displacement:
1,864 t light; 2,009 t standard; 2,982 t normal; 3,759 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(416.00 ft / 410.00 ft) x 42.00 ft x (15.00 / 17.47 ft)
(126.80 m / 124.97 m) x 12.80 m x (4.57 / 5.32 m)

Armament:
6 - 5.00" / 127 mm 38.0 cal guns - 59.33lbs / 26.91kg shells, 320 per gun
Dual purpose guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1939 Model
3 x Twin mounts on centreline ends, majority aft
1 raised mount aft - superfiring
12 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm 56.0 cal guns - 2.12lbs / 0.96kg shells, 1,500 per gun
Anti-air guns in deck mounts, 1939 Model
4 x Triple mounts on sides, forward deck aft
4 raised mounts
8 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm 62.0 cal guns - 0.07lbs / 0.03kg shells, 2,500 per gun
Machine guns in deck mounts, 1939 Model
4 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 382 lbs / 173 kg
Main Torpedoes
10 - 21.0" / 533 mm, 24.00 ft / 7.32 m torpedoes - 1.615 t each, 16.155 t total
In 2 sets of deck mounted centre rotating tubes
Main DC/AS Mortars
24 - 65.00 lbs / 29.48 kg ahead throwing AS Mortars + 6 reloads - 0.871 t total

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm -
2nd: 1.57" / 40 mm - -
3rd: 0.50" / 13 mm - -

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 33,259 shp / 24,811 Kw = 31.00 kts
Range 8,550nm at 20.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1,750 tons

Complement:
201 - 262

Cost:
£1.292 million / $5.168 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 110 tons, 3.7 %
- Guns: 76 tons, 2.6 %
- Weapons: 34 tons, 1.1 %
Armour: 32 tons, 1.1 %
- Armament: 32 tons, 1.1 %
Machinery: 900 tons, 30.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 783 tons, 26.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,117 tons, 37.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 40 tons, 1.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
2,379 lbs / 1,079 Kg = 38.1 x 5.0 " / 127 mm shells or 0.6 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.42
Metacentric height 2.5 ft / 0.8 m
Roll period: 11.2 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 77 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.37
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.54

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck,
a normal bow and large transom stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.404 / 0.437
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.76 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23.45 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 60 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 15.25 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 16.00 %, 22.00 ft / 6.71 m, 20.00 ft / 6.10 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 20.00 ft / 6.10 m, 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Aft deck: 42.00 %, 18.00 ft / 5.49 m, 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Quarter deck: 12.00 %, 15.00 ft / 4.57 m, 14.00 ft / 4.27 m
- Average freeboard: 17.70 ft / 5.39 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 109.9 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 146.6 %
Waterplane Area: 11,027 Square feet or 1,024 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 138 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 39 lbs/sq ft or 192 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.50
- Longitudinal: 1.84
- Overall: 0.57
Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Excellent accommodation and workspace room
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Miscellaneous weight reserved as torpedo reloads and growth potential.

43

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 5:02pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Eidolon
Quick question: are the rules based on standard tonnage or normal? I assumed standard, but thought I should double check.

Any time we discuss build rules, it's light tonnage; any time we discuss design rules, it's standard tonnage.

Design looks decent albeit slow. IMHO, good enough for an escort.

44

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 5:54pm

You've got masses of fuel onboard which is screwing the sim up somewhat. Bunkerage currently is 1750tons whereas Gearing for example had around 700tons. Really I wouldn't go much above 20% of the displacement as fuel.

Aside from that, it doesn't look too bad.

HoOmAn

Keeper of the Sacred Block Coefficient

  • Send private message

45

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 6:30pm

31kn is very, very low speed for such a vessel. Every light cruiser can easily catch her, the higher the waves the better as the larger ship will be a better seaboat anyway. She is not made to fight a CL, isn´t she?

So I´d add 3-4kn minimum.

I also agree with RA - you´ve devoted way too much weight on fuel which helps to explain why your vessel has such a low standard displacement compared to full load conditions.

46

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 8:32pm

Roger that. I was worried that it was a case of too good to be true. Like I said, she became a product of design insecurity. Aside from speed and fuel, how is it looking? Am I designing within acceptable limits? Is the armament looking balanced?

47

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 8:48pm

I'd say that if you dumped fuel down to, oh, 3,000nm @ 20kts (which I feel is quite good), and raised speed to 33-34 knots, you'd have a competent and well-balanced fleet DD on about 2,300 tons light / 2,700 tons normal.

HoOmAn

Keeper of the Sacred Block Coefficient

  • Send private message

48

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 8:53pm

For a ´39er design she is rather heavily armed. Have you tried a deck plan to see if you can find enough deckspace for all those guns? Those large TT tubes eat up a lot of room and you have quite some AA mounts to place too. Add (two?) funnels, boats, searchlights, masts, bridge and enough room for her crew....

I think she is not too bad a design to start from. However, you will learn that increasing her speed will quickly eat up tonnage currently used for other things AND add an issue with seakeeping. As a result you will either have a deisgn with a freeboard quite high compared to historical DDs or you will have to accept a rating as "poor seaboat" even though this will only be true for bad weather environment.

49

Wednesday, September 30th 2009, 9:06pm

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
For a ´39er design she is rather heavily armed. Have you tried a deck plan to see if you can find enough deckspace for all those guns? Those large TT tubes eat up a lot of room and you have quite some AA mounts to place too. Add (two?) funnels, boats, searchlights, masts, bridge and enough room for her crew....


I have not drawn a plan view, but having taken inspiration from the Keeling Isl class (bottom of page), I assumed there would be room.

50

Friday, October 2nd 2009, 4:59pm

When filling out the AS Mortar/Depth Charge fields, does Number and Reloads mean systems and system reloads, or the actual number of mortars and depth charges?

For example, if I want a single Hedgehog mortar, would that be one or twenty-four, since that is how many mortars it carried? Would the reloads then be six sets of twenty-four, or the actual two hundred eighty-eight individual mortars?

51

Saturday, October 3rd 2009, 9:57pm

Given the need to specify the weight of charges, I'd conclude that it means individual projectiles in a salvo, i.e. that the Hedgehog is a 24-'gun' mount.

Which would be silly with normal guns, but there you go.

Following from that, you'd require 288 individual charges as your reloads. Bear in mind that ahead-throwing A/S mortars weren't particularly commonplace in 1939 in reality, though I'm behind the curve for WesWorld so they might not be unusual here.

8550 nautical miles at 20 knots is a very long range for a 1930s destroyer, and would even be considered quite a long range for a modern ship. Admittedly, the modern ship can RAS, but even so, that sort of range on a small vessel is demanding far too much.

I'd also be skeptical whether it will all fit on a 410 foot hull, although the ship would need a sketch general arrangement to come to a definite conclusion. My hunch is that you need to lose either a five inch mount or the A/S mortar. And, as has been mentioned, the speed is really inadequate for a destroyer in this timeframe: Royal Navy tactics called for a ten knot margin above the battle line.