WesWorld

I am posting here as I have not yet received an update regarding my application for control of Brazil. this is a hypothetical rebuild of the obsolete battleship Imperial.

When I saw that a pre-ww1 super-dreadnaught made up a key role in the Brazilian navy, I cried. I cannot fathom why such a ship was retained in service for so long. I decided that something had to be done. I have no intention to begin any new large capital ship projects in Brazil. The only options are to scrap, refurbish, or rebuild. because carriers are so vital, I decided I would try and rebuild her.

This left two options, one involves lengthening the ship by 55 feet to allow an additional 10 aircraft in the group. this gives a decent complement of 80 operational aircraft. I have posted the proposal below.


Imperial, Empire of Brazil Fleet Carrier laid down 1913 (Engine 1944)

Displacement:
29,704 t light; 31,009 t standard; 32,490 t normal; 33,676 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
679.50 ft / 679.50 ft x 88.50 ft x 30.50 ft (normal load)
207.11 m / 207.11 m x 26.97 m x 9.30 m

Armament:
20 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (10x2 guns), 62.50lbs / 28.35kg shells, 1944 Model
Dual purpose guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
60 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (15x4 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.88kg shells, 1913 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
60 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm guns in single mounts, 0.24lbs / 0.11kg shells, 1913 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 1,381 lbs / 627 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 800

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 13.0" / 330 mm 420.00 ft / 128.02 m 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
Ends: 6.00" / 152 mm 204.00 ft / 62.18 m 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
55.50 ft / 16.92 m Unarmoured ends
Upper: 6.00" / 152 mm 310.00 ft / 94.49 m 8.00 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 95 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
4.00" / 102 mm 510.00 ft / 155.45 m 28.00 ft / 8.53 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 3.00" / 76 mm - 1.00" / 25 mm
2nd: 1.00" / 25 mm - -
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm - -

- Armour deck: 3.00" / 76 mm, Conning tower: 8.00" / 203 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 67,562 shp / 50,401 Kw = 25.00 kts
Range 6,100nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,667 tons

Complement:
1,209 - 1,573

Cost:
£1.556 million / $6.224 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 173 tons, 0.5 %
Armour: 9,173 tons, 28.2 %
- Belts: 4,074 tons, 12.5 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 2,113 tons, 6.5 %
- Armament: 324 tons, 1.0 %
- Armour Deck: 2,487 tons, 7.7 %
- Conning Tower: 175 tons, 0.5 %
Machinery: 1,725 tons, 5.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 11,833 tons, 36.4 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,787 tons, 8.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 6,800 tons, 20.9 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
68,549 lbs / 31,093 Kg = 1,096.8 x 5.0 " / 127 mm shells or 14.5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.03
Metacentric height 4.4 ft / 1.3 m
Roll period: 17.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 75 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.14
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.51

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0.620
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.68 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 26.07 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 47 %
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: 26.00 ft / 7.92 m
- Forecastle (18 %): 25.00 ft / 7.62 m
- Mid (50 %): 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Quarterdeck (28 %): 16.00 ft / 4.88 m (24.00 ft / 7.32 m before break)
- Stern: 16.00 ft / 4.88 m
- Average freeboard: 22.21 ft / 6.77 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 60.9 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 171.5 %
Waterplane Area: 44,809 Square feet or 4,163 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 156 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 180 lbs/sq ft or 877 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.43
- Longitudinal: 1.73
- Overall: 1.46
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

5150 tons allocated for 80 plane airgroup.
ship lengthened at centre by 55 feet to accomodate airgroup.
10 planes added at 250 tons, in dissassembled form (spare parts).
150 tons retained but repurposed for enhanced electronics suite.
replacement of weaponry, casemates sealed, turrets removed, armor layout generally preserved.
torpedo bulkhead widened by 2in

I am in no position to comment on your request to play Brazil; ultimately that will be decided upon by our moderators.

Your proposal for an 80 plane air group would require a minimum of 6,400 tons of miscellaneous weight (80 * 80 = 6,400 tons), and changes to trim are about the most pricy changes to be effected under our rules. I suggest that you review the Design Rules for Gentlemen as they pertain to aircraft carriers and the Infrastructure Rules as they pertain to refits for greater details.

I currently have both tabs open and am calculating the costs now. Thank you for the reply. I realize it may be better to scrap her and build a new one.

It will likely take 75% cost all of it in a dry-dock to complete the rebuild. that is a little south of 20,000 tons, at 3000 a quarter for 7 quarters for the rebuild. the rebuild will be carried out at the level 3 dockyard at Arsenal de Marinha do Rio de Jeneiro

*edit I have adjusted the weight

Brazil already has four carriers of more modern vintage, which is more than the current fleet reasonably has a means to protect. Really, the thing Brazil needs now is more destroyers, which is what Hood and I have had them build over the last year.

I don't see it reasonable to spend over 21,000 tons to refit an old 'R' into a carrier. The ship is too slow to make a good carrier.

Quoted from "Brockpaine"

Brazil already has four carriers of more modern vintage, which is more than the current fleet reasonably has a means to protect. Really, the thing Brazil needs now is more destroyers, which is what Hood and I have had them build over the last year.

I don't see it reasonable to spend over 21,000 tons to refit an old 'R' into a carrier. The ship is too slow to make a good carrier.

This

I agree. Brazil has no need for more carriers, she does however have a need for more battlefleet protection from the RSAN's capital ships. Rebuilding the R to this extent makes no sense and I doubt her hull could carry 80 aircraft even with 55ft added. What the Imperial needs is a good refit/ rebuild with new engines etc. As caretakers me and Brock have devised a rebuild to extend Imperial's life. Had the previous Brazilian players refitted her, then her value would be higher than it currently appears.

Also, here at WW the hindsight of carrier-power is not widely shared here since there is not enough experience of wartime carrier battles to justify the pro-carrier stance, although that is slowly changing.

Quoted from "Hood"

I agree. Brazil has no need for more carriers, she does however have a need for more battlefleet protection from the RSAN's capital ships. Rebuilding the R to this extent makes no sense and I doubt her hull could carry 80 aircraft even with 55ft added. What the Imperial needs is a good refit/ rebuild with new engines etc. As caretakers me and Brock have devised a rebuild to extend Imperial's life. Had the previous Brazilian players refitted her, then her value would be higher than it currently appears.

Also, here at WW the hindsight of carrier-power is not widely shared here since there is not enough experience of wartime carrier battles to justify the pro-carrier stance, although that is slowly changing.

I never came up with a worthwhile way to do it.

Just FYI on my methodology. I was thinking on upgrading some infrastructure and stopping capital ship construction. but looking at the fleet I saw the R class and couldn't picture her fulfilling a decent roll as a gun ship. As converted she is still a better carrier than any other in the fleet. I estimate most of Brazil's carriers to have an airgroup of 65 planes.

I did have a plan to refit Imperial, but it wasn't going to happen until the two battlecruisers completed. The other option was to scrap her and build a Vanguard.

Quoted from "Alias72"

Just FYI on my methodology. I was thinking on upgrading some infrastructure and stopping capital ship construction. but looking at the fleet I saw the R class and couldn't picture her fulfilling a decent roll as a gun ship. As converted she is still a better carrier than any other in the fleet. I estimate most of Brazil's carriers to have an airgroup of 65 planes.

All four of Brazil's current carriers are superior to a refitted R-class as a carrier. For one thing, all four ships were actually built as carriers, and they have capabilities that this re-design just doesn't have. First, they have the speed necessary to operate modern aircraft, which a refitted dreadnought hull will never have. The lack of speed would require more regular use of catapults, which will slow down the launch rate by ~30-50% and thus remove a lot of the ostensible benefits of using the ship as a conversion. At best, a refit would use a lot of money to create a second-rate carrier on a hull which only has another five to ten years left on it anyway. If I were the SAE, I'd be delighted to see Brazil squandering their meager resources on this.

My policy with carriers is "if you're going to spend the money, don't cut corners."

You're right. It was still an interesting experiment. Honestly I'm surprised the R class was not scrapped a decade ago. it is inferior to the battlecruisers and carriers in the fleet. a heavy cruiser would have been a better investment.

Quoted from "Alias72"

You're right. It was still an interesting experiment. Honestly I'm surprised the R class was not scrapped a decade ago. it is inferior to the battlecruisers and carriers in the fleet. a heavy cruiser would have been a better investment.

Perhaps. As you will discover, the "Iron Law" of shipbuilding has its own effects - at 10,000 ton heavy cruiser would take a minimum of 19 months to construct, and a further 6 months to work up to operational status - that's two years. A second-hand battleship can obtained 'off the shelf' and placed in service almost immediately. There are times when time outweighs other constraints.

Quoted from "Alias72"

You're right. It was still an interesting experiment. Honestly I'm surprised the R class was not scrapped a decade ago. it is inferior to the battlecruisers and carriers in the fleet. a heavy cruiser would have been a better investment.

You can't buy a fully-operational heavy cruiser for 5,800 tons, which was the purchase price for Imperial.

Quoted from "Brockpaine"

Quoted from "Alias72"

You're right. It was still an interesting experiment. Honestly I'm surprised the R class was not scrapped a decade ago. it is inferior to the battlecruisers and carriers in the fleet. a heavy cruiser would have been a better investment.

You can't buy a fully-operational heavy cruiser for 5,800 tons, which was the purchase price for Imperial.

That was the piece of information I was missing. Considering we aren't really simming operational cost this becomes a much better investment, as long as operational doctrine does not make this ship a liability.

5500 IIRC. At the time of the purchase Brazil had the two old Minas Gerais battleships both of which were badly damaged. My thought dor buying her was something is better than nothing, and she could be refitted later.

The Marinha Imperial IMHO is in a better position today than it was in 1935. It was quite dreadful then. Destroyers with 3x3 armament, no modern capital ships, no modern destroyers, no submarines, no auxiliaries, no carriers.

It did have some good cruisers though.

Quoted from "TheCanadian"

It did have some good cruisers though.

Which is about the nicest thing that could be said for them at the time...

I agree that the Brazilian Navy of 1935 was more than battered. Imperial gave the navy some serious gunpower when it lacked anything else.
I disagree the R has no value, those 15in guns are more than adequate against anything afloat in WW even in 1945. I had toyed with rebuilding them in RN service but that made no sense since I had ample hulls. But the rebuilt QE Class and the rebuilt Sofia show what could have been done. I guess now the Imperial is getting too long in the tooth to rebuild now for it to be worth it as a long-term investment.
Argentina has had to choose between its rebuilt dreadnoughts and modern battlecruisers too. Generally the Great War era ships are fading but those old dreadnoughts could still pack a punch in the right hand and in the right scenarios.

Personally I'd not bother updating a battleship of this vintage, at least not in an extensive way.

I certainly wouldn't do a carrier conversion. The value isn't there. Under our rules set, yanking out the main battery barbettes is a 75% refit (or, 75% of original light displacement in cost). If you scrap the ship, you not only save the 75%, you also gain another 15% from the scrap. You'd have around 26,000 t to work with - almost enough to build an Essex-type carrier, or other stuff. While it would take longer to build, the end-produce would be all new, and far superior in performance to the rebuilt Imperial.

The guns have some value, and to my thinking, that suggests yanking them off the ship, scrapping the hull, and building a couple of monitors. These units can be your peace-time gunnery training ships and your war-time amphibious fire support guys.

I was definitely going to keep the guns. I was going to use them on a battlecruiser, unfortunately the battlecruisers in the marinha have a different turret arrangement and wouldn't benefit from this.

A Vanguard type ship would fit pretty well in the Marinha, alternatively you can always sell the ship in the open market for possibly more than scrap value. I know a few countries that might be interested, and a few more interested in keeping the ship from the first set.