WesWorld

What is the UK had gone down that road?

Thunderer, UK CE laid down 1925

Displacement:
7,535 t light; 8,000 t standard; 8,621 t normal; 9,083 t full load
Loading submergence 642 tons/feet

Dimensions:
515.09 ft x 65.62 ft x 16.40 ft (normal load)
157.00 m x 20.00 m x 5.00 m

Armament:
8 - 9.20" / 234 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 2 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
8 - 4.50" / 114 mm guns (4 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
16 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
Weight of broadside 3,510 lbs / 1,592 kg

Armour:
Belt 4.00" / 102 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 76 % of normal area
Main turrets 5.00" / 127 mm
Armour deck 2.25" / 57 mm, Conning tower 2.00" / 51 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 27,544 shp / 20,548 Kw = 24.00 kts
Range 8,000nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
447 - 581

Cost:
£2.479 million / $9.917 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 439 tons, 5.1 %
Armour: 2,035 tons, 23.6 %
Belts: 415 tons, 4.8 %, Armament: 666 tons, 7.7 %, Armour Deck: 936 tons, 10.9 %
Conning Tower: 18 tons, 0.2 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 894 tons, 10.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,987 tons, 46.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,085 tons, 12.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 180 tons, 2.1 %

Metacentric height 3.0

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.06
Shellfire needed to sink: 13,001 lbs / 5,897 Kg = 33.4 x 9.2 " / 234 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 2.2
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 71 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.69
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.22

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.544
Sharpness coefficient: 0.37
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 7.68
'Natural speed' for length: 22.70 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim: 58
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 75.7 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 157.2 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 115 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.97
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 124 lbs / square foot or 604 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.27
(for 16.40 ft / 5.00 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 1.70 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

3 floatplanes, flag facilities, waterbombs

Well, another impressive CE-design. One can easily see how much weight is consumed by large machinery on fast units.

However, I doubt the Brits would build such a vessel. It seems to carry too many heavy guns compared to it´s armor. Some kind of slow mini-BC. I guess the Brits are cured from this cancer.

On the other hand she features more armore than any County-class CA ever had so who knows...

Please not, that you´re stretching things a bit. We´re talking a design here with a hull length that of an ARETHUSA-class CL. I can´t see how one could put four large turrets on her - even though there is enough beam.

Maybe you can provide a drawing?

Regards,

HoOmAn

I can't but I figure that since there is not a lot of machinery there, the center superstructure will be less than on a CL and thus allow the space for the turrets. I do admit that I am not sure though.