WesWorld

Gjovik (1943 Refit), Nordmark Heavy Cruiser laid down 1925 (Engine 1943)

Displacement:
11,966 t light; 12,500 t standard; 14,606 t normal; 16,291 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
660.92 ft / 650.00 ft x 65.00 ft x 22.00 ft (normal load)
201.45 m / 198.12 m x 19.81 m x 6.71 m

Armament:
8 - 8.27" / 210 mm guns (4x2 guns), 282.57lbs / 128.17kg shells, 1925 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 1 raised mount - superfiring
12 - 4.33" / 110 mm guns (6x2 guns), 40.61lbs / 18.42kg shells, 1943 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
16 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (4x4 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1943 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 2,773 lbs / 1,258 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5.00" / 127 mm 450.00 ft / 137.16 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: 1.00" / 25 mm 200.00 ft / 60.96 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Main Belt covers 107 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 6.00" / 152 mm 3.00" / 76 mm 5.00" / 127 mm
2nd: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.50" / 38 mm
3rd: 0.50" / 13 mm - -

- Armour deck: 2.00" / 51 mm, Conning tower: 5.00" / 127 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 124,969 shp / 93,227 Kw = 33.40 kts
Range 14,870nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 3,791 tons

Complement:
663 - 863

Cost:
£3.802 million / $15.209 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 347 tons, 2.4 %
Armour: 2,774 tons, 19.0 %
- Belts: 1,004 tons, 6.9 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 615 tons, 4.2 %
- Armour Deck: 1,091 tons, 7.5 %
- Conning Tower: 64 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 3,228 tons, 22.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,518 tons, 37.8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,640 tons, 18.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 100 tons, 0.7 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
18,865 lbs / 8,557 Kg = 66.8 x 8.3 " / 210 mm shells or 2.0 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.12
Metacentric height 3.2 ft / 1.0 m
Roll period: 15.2 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 60 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.58
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.04

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.550
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 25.50 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20.00 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 (20 %): 26.00 ft / 7.92 m
- Mid (50 %): 21.00 ft / 6.40 m
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Stern: 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Average freeboard: 22.02 ft / 6.71 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 91.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 158.4 %
Waterplane Area: 29,486 Square feet or 2,739 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 121 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 116 lbs/sq ft or 569 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.30
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent





Nordmark's fleet has been... untended... for quite a while, and I've been somewhat overwhelmed trying to figure out where everything is, much less keep up with changes in employment status.

Which, yes, is me making excuses for being slow and lazy.

Anyway, here's the first of my refit ideas. Original design is in the first post of this thread.

Well-balanced, and great range. Just what you need to cover your routes to your South Atlantic possessions.

I personnally like better seakeeping, but then, my cruisers spend most of their service lives around the North Cape and the North Pacific.

Deck armor probably is on the lower end compared to more modern designs. I wonder if there was a chance to fix that in the process of modernization?

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
Deck armor probably is on the lower end compared to more modern designs. I wonder if there was a chance to fix that in the process of modernization?

Looking over the design, I don't see much slack to add more deck armour - unless the speed is knocked back down to 32 knots as on the original. 2" / 50mm deck armour's already pretty hefty compared to most designs considered OTL - more than the Hippers and the Counties. According to what information I can see, it's really matched OTL until the post-Treaty cruisers like the Baltimores.

Even in Wesworld, most cruisers of this era, even refitted, generally have about the same armour thickness. The ships with thicker deck protection are the post-Cleito ships which run up to 15-17k tons.

I like the redesign: it's a good balance of elements.

I see that the original design has _two_ superfiring turrets while the redesign only has one.

Yes, that would be a mistake on my part.

Here's a corrected version, with other tweaks like my having munged the refit year and forgotten to account for the new fire control gear.



Gjovik (1942 Refit), Nordmark Heavy Cruiser laid down 1925 (Engine 1942)

Displacement:
11,948 t light; 12,482 t standard; 14,606 t normal; 16,306 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
660.92 ft / 650.00 ft x 65.00 ft x 22.00 ft (normal load)
201.45 m / 198.12 m x 19.81 m x 6.71 m

Armament:
8 - 8.27" / 210 mm guns (4x2 guns), 282.57lbs / 128.17kg shells, 1925 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 4.33" / 110 mm guns (6x2 guns), 40.61lbs / 18.42kg shells, 1943 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
16 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (4x4 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1943 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 2,773 lbs / 1,258 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 24.0" / 610 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5.00" / 127 mm 450.00 ft / 137.16 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: 1.00" / 25 mm 200.00 ft / 60.96 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Main Belt covers 107 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 6.00" / 152 mm 3.00" / 76 mm 5.00" / 127 mm
2nd: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.50" / 38 mm
3rd: 0.50" / 13 mm - -

- Armour deck: 2.00" / 51 mm, Conning tower: 5.00" / 127 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 117,526 shp / 87,674 Kw = 32.90 kts
Range 14,870nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 3,824 tons

Complement:
663 - 863

Cost:
£3.728 million / $14.912 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 347 tons, 2.4 %
Armour: 2,800 tons, 19.2 %
- Belts: 1,004 tons, 6.9 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 641 tons, 4.4 %
- Armour Deck: 1,091 tons, 7.5 %
- Conning Tower: 64 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 3,070 tons, 21.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,596 tons, 38.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,658 tons, 18.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 136 tons, 0.9 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
19,349 lbs / 8,777 Kg = 68.5 x 8.3 " / 210 mm shells or 2.1 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.09
Metacentric height 3.1 ft / 0.9 m
Roll period: 15.5 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 62 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.64
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.06

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.550
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 25.50 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20.00 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 (20 %): 26.00 ft / 7.92 m
- Mid (50 %): 21.00 ft / 6.40 m
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Stern: 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Average freeboard: 22.02 ft / 6.71 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 88.1 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 151.1 %
Waterplane Area: 29,486 Square feet or 2,739 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 123 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 118 lbs/sq ft or 577 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.30
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

3 tons search radar
3 tons elevation radar
6 tons man battery range radar
16 tons main battery fire control computer
4x 1 ton AA range radar
4x 1 ton AA fire control computer

No problem, figured it was a small oversight. One superfiring turret didn't make a lot of sense...

Currently working on art of this refit; latest draft is here

When looking at your draft I noted:

- Why are her funnels so closely spaced? Or to turn the question around - if her boilerrooms are all spaced together forward of her engine rooms, why not trunk those funnels together?

- Torps seem a tad bit short...

- Bridge lacks height... I would add several decks. Deck height also seems to vary.

- That AA mount aft of her forward superstructure is ill placed, lacks free arcs and should be relocated.

-

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
When looking at your draft I noted:

- Why are her funnels so closely spaced? Or to turn the question around - if her boilerrooms are all spaced together forward of her engine rooms, why not trunk those funnels together?

Pick your favorite combination of:

1. The funnels are over Boiler Rooms #2 and #3, and it wasn't considered desirable to pipe the draft from #1 and #4 any farther.

2. That's how they were when she was built and there wasn't felt to be any need to change it.

3. Nordmark just prefers dedicated funnels.

4. It looks better this way.

Quoted

- Torps seem a tad bit short...

IIRC, I based them off of German types in that size range, just to head off the 'Gee Whiz Long Lance' I was seeing in the existing design.

And if I got my data wrong, then I guess the Nordish ship-launched torpedo is just stubby.

Quoted

- Bridge lacks height... I would add several decks. Deck height also seems to vary.

My 'expectations' about what a superstructure 'should' look like are shaped around the WWI period, so it's not surprising that I haven't allowed enough cubage. That'll be changing in later drafts.

The deck height issue... Vey. Blame Earl and his absurdly shallow belt. I used a consistent height of nine feet. (FEET! ON A SHIP BUILT BY A POWER IN ITS OWN RIGHT THAT WAS NEVER A PART OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE! GAH!)

Quoted

- That AA mount aft of her forward superstructure is ill placed, lacks free arcs and should be relocated.

To where, I pray you tell, sir?

Quoted

(FEET! ON A SHIP BUILT BY A POWER IN ITS OWN RIGHT THAT WAS NEVER A PART OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE! GAH!)

... but who is saying that a Nordish feet is the same as the Imperial feet?

The AA aft of forward superstructure and either an additional mount (increase to 5) or the foremost mount on the aft superstructure could be mounted abreast the fore funnel between the fore and mid secondary mounts on bandstands. It would appear that the min mounts might have to be moved aft slightly to make room, question is do you have room to move the hoists for them?

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10
... but who is saying that a Nordish feet is the same as the Imperial feet?

Well, the ship is designed with even numbers of 'feet' as defined by Springsharp. Sweden and Norway both had their own, differing standards before metricisation...

Which Earl or whoever originally designed the ship very obviously failed to use. If he had, then I'd be actually rather impressed. As it is, the sloppiness offends me.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
The AA aft of forward superstructure and either an additional mount (increase to 5) or the foremost mount on the aft superstructure could be mounted abreast the fore funnel between the fore and mid secondary mounts on bandstands. It would appear that the min mounts might have to be moved aft slightly to make room, question is do you have room to move the hoists for them?

Five mounts, I think. Possibly move the forward funnel foreward a bit, which there is room for... Or both, I think there is room for the hoists since torpedo reloads are not carried.

According to your SS file those quads should be amidship on sides. No need to find space on centerline. Why not place them aft of the second pair of secondaries which I would turn facing forward anyway? You could also use tubes abreast her superstructure, either fore of aft. There is plenty of spce available on such a large ship.

Sloppyness no.

Still finding my feet with Springsharp when I simmed the ship, maybe.

More able to estimate height in feet rather than in metres, most definately.

I am after all, from good old England, where imperial and metric are interchangeable depending on what you are considering. I did, and still do spend much of my time around structures and machines built and drawn in imperial measurements, and therefore I used what I was comforable with at the time, within the constraints Peng had left me.

As to the depth of the belt, it is a-historical for a ship of that era to have such a shallow belt, for example the York Class CA's.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
According to your SS file those quads should be amidship on sides. No need to find space on centerline. Why not place them aft of the second pair of secondaries which I would turn facing forward anyway? You could also use tubes abreast her superstructure, either fore of aft. There is plenty of spce available on such a large ship.

One of the reasons I do these sketches is to find out if I've been visualizing the layout right. In this case, I wasn't - the original placements of the 40mm mounts would have fouled the arcs of the 110mm ones.

The raised 110mm mounts obviously have an arc of a little over 180 degrees as is - carrying them aimed aft puts the barrels 'zeroed' over a convenient deck for cleaning.

The current torpedo armament is felt to be somewhere between adequate and excessive for a vessel of this size - adding more is not under consideration. Too much risk of them being hit for not enough reward.


EDIT:

Let's try this updated SS, then...

Gjovik (1942 Refit), Nordmark Heavy Cruiser laid down 1925 (Engine 1942)

Displacement:
11,946 t light; 12,482 t standard; 14,606 t normal; 16,306 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
660.92 ft / 650.00 ft x 65.00 ft x 22.00 ft (normal load)
201.45 m / 198.12 m x 19.81 m x 6.71 m

Armament:
8 - 8.27" / 210 mm guns (4x2 guns), 282.57lbs / 128.17kg shells, 1925 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 4.33" / 110 mm guns (6x2 guns), 40.61lbs / 18.42kg shells, 1943 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (3x4 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.89kg shells, 1943 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on centreline ends, majority aft, all raised mounts - superfiring
8 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (2x4 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.89kg shells, 1925 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 2,787 lbs / 1,264 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 24.0" / 610 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 2.95" / 75 mm 450.00 ft / 137.16 m 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
Ends: 0.98" / 25 mm 200.00 ft / 60.96 m 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
Main Belt covers 107 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 5.00" / 127 mm 3.00" / 76 mm 5.00" / 127 mm
2nd: 1.97" / 50 mm 0.98" / 25 mm 1.50" / 38 mm
3rd: 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm -
4th: 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm -

- Armour deck: 2.00" / 51 mm, Conning tower: 2.95" / 75 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 117,526 shp / 87,674 Kw = 32.90 kts
Range 14,870nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 3,824 tons

Complement:
663 - 863

Cost:
£3.733 million / $14.931 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 348 tons, 2.4 %
Armour: 2,876 tons, 19.7 %
- Belts: 1,119 tons, 7.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 628 tons, 4.3 %
- Armour Deck: 1,091 tons, 7.5 %
- Conning Tower: 38 tons, 0.3 %
Machinery: 3,070 tons, 21.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,577 tons, 38.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,660 tons, 18.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 74 tons, 0.5 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
19,473 lbs / 8,833 Kg = 68.9 x 8.3 " / 210 mm shells or 2.1 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
Metacentric height 3.1 ft / 1.0 m
Roll period: 15.4 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 61 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.63
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.06

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.550
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 25.50 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20.00 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 (20 %): 26.00 ft / 7.92 m
- Mid (50 %): 21.00 ft / 6.40 m
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Stern: 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Average freeboard: 22.02 ft / 6.71 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 87.8 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 151.1 %
Waterplane Area: 29,486 Square feet or 2,739 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 123 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 118 lbs/sq ft or 575 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.29
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

5 tons general search radar
2 tons navgational radar
6 tons secondary fire control radar
12 tons primary fire control radar
15 tons fire control computers
10 tons electronic-suite generators

24 tons torpedoes and support equipment

And there's a new visual draft!

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c386/v…zps678685c2.png

Can you please provide some detail what kind of rangefinders we find on that drawing? Thanks.

Sadly, targeting techniques aren't my strong suite. I'm moderately on-the-ball as regards WWI-era fire direction, but the ranging gear you see in the drawing - which don't include the main-battery radars, yet - were basically produced with a reference in one window and Paint XP open in the other and then pulled out of my 'Nordish Bits' file when I needed them.

So, at the moment, no, there really isn't much detail to provide. If it becomes relevant, I can start researching to figure out what the actual performance and fiddly details are, but for the moment I'd just go with 'comparable to known foreign systems'.

And how in the earth did the image end up inlined, when I'd avoided doing that so there wouldn't be a chance of it breaking the forum's tables?

Looks to be coming along well. I'm presuming the open space amidships is reserved for aircraft and a catapult?