WesWorld

Designs go below.

I saw that the original Dante Algiere had her guns striped and stored before she was scraped. Seeing as Italy does not have anything short of a modern battleship capable of both running down and out-gunning rebuilt treaty cruisers and some of the larger cruisers that have shown up since the treaty collapsed, I decided to use the guns on a single Super-CA. Given her high speed, a powerful AA battery is included so she can double-dip as a AA escort.

Principessa Reale, Italian Large Armored Cruiser laid down 1941

Displacement:
30,000 t light; 31,784 t standard; 37,208 t normal; 41,548 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
885.83 ft / 853.02 ft x 88.58 ft (Bulges 91.86 ft) x 31.82 ft (normal load)
270.00 m / 260.00 m x 27.00 m (Bulges 28.00 m) x 9.70 m

Armament:
12 - 12.01" / 305 mm guns (4x3 guns), 996.49lbs / 452.00kg shells, 1909 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
24 - 2.99" / 76.0 mm guns (12x2 guns), 14.86lbs / 6.74kg shells, 1941 Model
Automatic rapid fire guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, 6 raised mounts - superfiring
40 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm guns (10x4 guns), 0.53lbs / 0.24kg shells, 1941 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 12,336 lbs / 5,595 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 7.87" / 200 mm 554.46 ft / 169.00 m 13.12 ft / 4.00 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead and Bulges:
1.57" / 40 mm 554.46 ft / 169.00 m 26.25 ft / 8.00 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 9.84" / 250 mm 3.94" / 100 mm 7.87" / 200 mm

- Armour deck: 3.54" / 90 mm, Conning tower: 2.76" / 70 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 200,000 shp / 149,200 Kw = 34.59 kts
Range 7,000nm at 25.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 9,764 tons

Complement:
1,339 - 1,741

Cost:
£18.071 million / $72.284 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,349 tons, 3.6 %
Armour: 8,637 tons, 23.2 %
- Belts: 2,395 tons, 6.4 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 848 tons, 2.3 %
- Armament: 1,823 tons, 4.9 %
- Armour Deck: 3,505 tons, 9.4 %
- Conning Tower: 66 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 5,285 tons, 14.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 14,228 tons, 38.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 7,208 tons, 19.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 500 tons, 1.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
49,202 lbs / 22,318 Kg = 56.8 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 6.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.14
Metacentric height 5.3 ft / 1.6 m
Roll period: 16.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 55 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.69
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.04

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.522
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.29 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 33.44 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 53
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 30.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 11.98 ft / 3.65 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 36.09 ft / 11.00 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 24.61 ft / 7.50 m
- Mid (50 %): 21.33 ft / 6.50 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 21.33 ft / 6.50 m
- Stern: 21.33 ft / 6.50 m
- Average freeboard: 23.39 ft / 7.13 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 98.9 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 167.9 %
Waterplane Area: 53,462 Square feet or 4,967 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 122 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 177 lbs/sq ft or 862 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.98
- Longitudinal: 1.12
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

Hum.

I think it needs some sort of gun somewhere between the 305mm and the 75mm guns. A 100mm at the very least...

I tend to agree. But the 100mm and 75mm may be too similar in AA performance and the 100mm still lacks the stopping power against anything small and manoverable, something you may encounter in the confined seas of the Med...

Regarding the design I think she is close to the idea that sparked the original German O-class. Fast with heavy firepower (this time by number instead of calibre) but relatively thin armor for a ship of 30+ thousand tons. So while she is an awesome and interesting while different design, I really wonder if the is up to the tasks intended. For AA escort in Italy's main theatre she is too large and expensive with a too weak AA suit while for anti-cruiser/super-cruiser work she has the speed, range and gunpower but lacks sufficient armor to be safe. For example, if we just assume for theoretical reason that Italy clashes with the SAE in East Africa, the imune zone against SAE's much older Radiance class 28cm gun is somewhere between 22000m and 25000m. In return the Radiance has no imune zone at all but that's not the point. Would you risk a 30k tons ship against a 18k tons ship if your imune zone is so small it virtually is of no use? Against the 25cm gun with the 238kg installed as installed on 15k tons Vengeance class or 8000ts CDS Excalibur the imune zone is about 19k to 25k meters. Assume commanders are aware of these imune zones that might do if conditions allow to stay in that range. But at least it means operating at the edge of where long range gunnery can be expected to be effective (longest range hits every accounted for were at about 24km). And again, you risk a hull twice the size against a much cheaper and easier to replace target.

As my own data is at hand easier then other I have not checked for other super-CA or light-BC but at least the old Argentine Patagonia class BC is very comparable in size and better balanced, though the concept behind her is much different that what you presented us here. Trade her SP secondaries against a useful DP and her old machinery against something more modern for more output and you may end up somewhere, although not at 34kn speed.

Note: The concept of imune zones shall not be a single indicator to judge a design because it is not without flaws. When a ship rolls and moves the angle of impact will never be as calculated - with practical results either better or worse towards the edge of an imune zone.

Maybe ditch one triple 12in turret and put the weight into armour? My gut feeling is that 30,000 tons is too big. 34.5kts seems high for something this big. This is why I'm not building any Super-CAs for the RN. The returns just aren't worth it.

Just for reference, how many super-CAs or super-supers inhabit the Med?

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
Just for reference, how many super-CAs or super-supers inhabit the Med?

Depends on how you're counting them. There are the Greek Konstantinoupolis and Hydra class cruisers (12x6" and 12x8", over 15,000t respectively). I can't speculate on what the Iberians keep in the Med these days. And the Italians have their three 6x12" Agustos.

Well, I really did not intend this for service in the Med. She is ment for the Indian Ocean. There I feel that her speed, large main guns, and powerful AA battery make up for the disadvantage of not having a "proper" secondary.

I feel that not having a gun in the 100mm to 150mm range means I can't describe her as having a "powerful AA battery".

...TBH, I feel it's actually pretty weak at the moment.

One thing you may wish to take under advisement if you wish to base this ship on the African coast: you don't have access to a large enough repair dock. The largest Italian-controlled dock on the Indian Ocean is a Type 3 dock at Massawa. This ship will need a Type 4 dock.

This is not necessarily something to stop you from building it, but if you did, I'd highly advise you to enlarge that slip in order to provide local repair. After all, if the ship gets damaged, you'd have to get it back to Italy, and it won't be allowed through the Suez Canal if there's too much damage. If I build a French ship for a specific station, then I try to ensure it fits in the local docks. For France, that generally means a D3.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
I feel that not having a gun in the 100mm to 150mm range means I can't describe her as having a "powerful AA battery".

...TBH, I feel it's actually pretty weak at the moment.

I'd tend to agree with Brock and the others here. You do have options though. According to the Italian Encyclopedia there is the aforementioned 100mm, there is also existing 130mm and 135mm guns that would required DP mounts to be developed. There is also the, likely under performing, 150mm DP gun. I also note that there is a 65mm gun in development, which could be used to replace the 76.2mm AA guns and allow enough 'gap' between the heavy (150,135,130,100) AA and the medium (76.2, 65, 47,37)

I think 34.5kts is a little to fast. Looking through some encyclopedias for ships you may encounter, they are either 32-33kts, which 1.5-2.5kts isn't enough of advantage over to be worth the cost, or simply outmatch your ship.

Speed eats up a ton of tonnage, after 32kts I feel diminishing returns are too high to be worth it. Also secondaries are light as others have pointed out.

Interesting how she compares to Chapultepec, a ship she could conceivably face: 34.5 kts vs 30kts, 12x12" vs 6x16", 8" belt & 3.5" deck vs 11" belt & 5" deck.

As I noted on IRC as well, in 1940 Italy was testing a 127mm DP gun. It would be perfect for this application, IMHO.

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Speed eats up a ton of tonnage, after 32kts I feel diminishing returns are too high to be worth it.

Although I never actually follow this advice, I generally agree with this.

Will be working 127mm guns into the design later today.

*continues scraping off SS-rust*

Given the large number of Early-Cileto era designs in the Italian inventory, a new class of affordable destroyer was needed. With the abandonment of the 127mm gun project [1], the decision was made to stick with the existing 152mm DP gun for new construction. Sighting concerns about the size of the previous classes, a smaller hull was adopted, and with it single mounts.

Venezia, Italian Destroyer laid down 1942

Displacement:
2,250 t light; 2,406 t standard; 2,802 t normal; 3,119 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
393.69 ft / 382.05 ft x 42.65 ft x 14.76 ft (normal load)
120.00 m / 116.45 m x 13.00 m x 4.50 m

Armament:
4 - 5.98" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 99.21lbs / 45.00kg shells, 1942 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
16 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (4x4 guns), 1.65lbs / 0.75kg shells, 1942 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
8 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm guns in single mounts, 0.53lbs / 0.24kg shells, 1942 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 428 lbs / 194 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 400
8 - 23.6" / 600 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 1.97" / 50 mm 1.18" / 30 mm 0.79" / 20 mm
2nd: 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm -
3rd: 0.39" / 10 mm - -

- Conning tower: 2.76" / 70 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 44,000 shp / 32,824 Kw = 33.25 kts
Range 4,000nm at 20.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 714 tons

Complement:
192 - 250

Cost:
£1.797 million / $7.189 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 57 tons, 2.0 %
Armour: 45 tons, 1.6 %
- Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 33 tons, 1.2 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 12 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,112 tons, 39.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 816 tons, 29.1 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 552 tons, 19.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 220 tons, 7.9 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
1,047 lbs / 475 Kg = 9.8 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 0.5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.22
Metacentric height 2.0 ft / 0.6 m
Roll period: 12.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 57 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.40
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.07

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.408
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.96 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 22.80 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 67 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 53
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.28 ft / 1.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Mid (50 %): 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Stern: 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Average freeboard: 17.81 ft / 5.43 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 154.8 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 101.8 %
Waterplane Area: 10,458 Square feet or 972 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 93 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 42 lbs/sq ft or 204 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.50
- Longitudinal: 2.08
- Overall: 0.57
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate

[1] The motivation for this is OOC, as it seems everyone and there brother has DDs with 6-8 120-130mm guns. Uniqueness was desired and past gun choices worked perfectly into this.

The yet unnamed replacements for Cristoforto Columbo and Lepanto. Construction will start in early 1942 for one ship, and late 1942 for the second. 13.57 quarter build time has the ships ready to go in 1945-46 which is when the two old BBs would be due for refits. The design is a modified Tripolitania with some of the 37mm quads swaped for 76mm automatics as found on the Andrea Doria's and some improvements to the TDS.

Corazzata 1942, Italian Battleship laid down 1942

Displacement:
45,275 t light; 47,847 t standard; 51,781 t normal; 54,928 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
847.61 ft / 820.21 ft x 108.27 ft (Bulges 111.55 ft) x 34.45 ft (normal load)
258.35 m / 250.00 m x 33.00 m (Bulges 34.00 m) x 10.50 m

Armament:
12 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (4x3 guns), 1,951.09lbs / 885.00kg shells, 1942 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 5.98" / 152 mm guns (6x2 guns), 99.21lbs / 45.00kg shells, 1942 Model
Dual purpose guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on side, evenly spread
12 - 2.99" / 76.0 mm guns (6x2 guns), 14.86lbs / 6.74kg shells, 1942 Model
Automatic rapid fire guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
32 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (8x4 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1942 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
18 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm guns in single mounts, 0.48lbs / 0.22kg shells, 1942 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 24,840 lbs / 11,267 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 110

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 16.1" / 410 mm 465.88 ft / 142.00 m 13.12 ft / 4.00 m
Ends: 2.36" / 60 mm 88.58 ft / 27.00 m 13.12 ft / 4.00 m
265.75 ft / 81.00 m Unarmoured ends
Upper: 2.76" / 70 mm 465.88 ft / 142.00 m 11.48 ft / 3.50 m
Main Belt covers 87 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead and Bulges:
3.15" / 80 mm 465.88 ft / 142.00 m 30.18 ft / 9.20 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 15.0" / 380 mm 9.06" / 230 mm 11.8" / 300 mm
2nd: 5.31" / 135 mm 2.76" / 70 mm 2.76" / 70 mm
3rd: 1.18" / 30 mm 0.79" / 20 mm 1.57" / 40 mm
4th: 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm -
5th: 0.39" / 10 mm - -

- Armour deck: 5.13" / 130 mm, Conning tower: 2.76" / 70 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 160,000 shp / 119,360 Kw = 30.62 kts
Range 4,000nm at 25.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 7,081 tons

Complement:
1,716 - 2,231

Cost:
£28.365 million / $113.461 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 2,723 tons, 5.3 %
Armour: 17,299 tons, 33.4 %
- Belts: 5,103 tons, 9.9 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 1,639 tons, 3.2 %
- Armament: 4,200 tons, 8.1 %
- Armour Deck: 6,275 tons, 12.1 %
- Conning Tower: 82 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 4,180 tons, 8.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 20,323 tons, 39.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 6,506 tons, 12.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 750 tons, 1.4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
71,089 lbs / 32,246 Kg = 42.1 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells or 11.5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
Metacentric height 6.7 ft / 2.1 m
Roll period: 18.0 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 51 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.68
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.03

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.575
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.35 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 33.23 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 49
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 30.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 36.09 ft / 11.00 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Mid (50 %): 21.33 ft / 6.50 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 21.33 ft / 6.50 m
- Stern: 21.33 ft / 6.50 m
- Average freeboard: 22.95 ft / 7.00 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 83.9 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 159.2 %
Waterplane Area: 66,089 Square feet or 6,140 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 107 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 223 lbs/sq ft or 1,088 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.98
- Longitudinal: 1.26
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

- Armoured deck - multiple decks: 6.26" / 159 mm For and Aft decks

Liking both designs. The Corazzata looks powerful. Saying that I still think Lepanto might have some life left given the extensive rebuilding she underwent, but probably not much beyond 1950. I'm curious as to the AA arrangements, looking at the picture many of the quad 37mm look quite tight and fitting six twin 3in and eight 37mm quads looks a little tight to me given the available superstructure space.

The Venezia looks good, 34kts might have been nice but it looks good overall. The 152mm option is surprising but seems to be an Italian foible.

Looking over the Venezia design, I can see a few things that would concern me, but they are more a case of "Builder's Preferences" than anything else.

The cross-sectional hull strength is right on the bubble at 0.50 - within in the Gents rules but leading to an overall strength on the low side at 0.57. I personally perfer a bit more cross-sectional strength and higher overall strength.

While the ship's stability is very good, her seaboat quality is barely above average; I personally would try increase the latter at the expense of the former, if that were possible. The design's steadiness as a gun platform would worry me; with a 'lively ship', maintaining good gunnery could be difficult. Again, it's preferences.

The design is rather short ranged, due to its high cruise speed. This could be driven by your perception of their offensive as opposed to screening role. It is something that would work for Italy in the Mediterranean, but could be at a disadvantage if committed elsewhere.


As far as the Corazzata design is concerned, many of the same questions of preference apply.

I am surprised that the 152mm mounts are in turrets with barbettes as opposed to mounts and hoists. Would you not save some tonnage here with the latter?

I would be very worried with the seaboat quality specified, and the steadiness as a gun platform. While below the threshold, the recoil effect at 0.68 seems very high.

I also question the short range of the design. While the Corazzata has a very high cruising speed (faster than the destroyers that would, in theory, screen her) her radius of action is very short. I think this is an aspect you might reconsider.

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan
The design is rather short ranged, due to its high cruise speed.

If the design was simmed at a lower speed, then the range would actually be quite high. I'd have to sim it to be certain, but it'd probably be about 9,500 nm at fifteen knots, which is very high indeed. The clue is that 19.7% of the ship's displacement is fuel...

Edit: simmed, and it's 8,000 nm range at 15 knots.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan
The design is rather short ranged, due to its high cruise speed.

If the design was simmed at a lower speed, then the range would actually be quite high. I'd have to sim it to be certain, but it'd probably be about 9,500 nm at fifteen knots, which is very high indeed. The clue is that 19.7% of the ship's displacement is fuel...

True. The question is, if the sim was drawn up at a lower cruise speed with a radius somewhere between the two extremes, might benefits in other areas be obtained? It is, after all, builder's preferences.

Please note all the other Italian designs have a high cruse speed, not just these two.