WesWorld

I have been toying with an alternate Wesworld construct – where I control the naval program of late Tsarist Russia, commencing in 1890. Thus far it is amusing and I am learning that even what seems limitless tonnage does, eventually, have limits. It also has allowed me to exercise my ideas for minor warships, which I thought I would share.

The Najezdnik is intended as a ‘colonial’ sort of vessel, intended to represent Russian interests in the Far East – keeping pesky foreign sealers and fishermen away from Kamchatka and places like that. I could probably increase the armament, but given the circumstances I see no need.

-----

Najezdnik, Russian Sloop Gunboat laid down 1893

Displacement: 740 t light; 762 t standard; 856 t normal; 932 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

257.58 ft / 255.91 ft x 26.25 ft x 11.15 ft (normal load) [78.51 m / 78.00 m x 8.00 m x 3.40 m]

Armament:

2 - 2.99" / 76.0 mm guns in single mounts, 13.39lbs / 6.07kg shells, 1893 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
4 - 1.85" / 47.0 mm guns (2x2 guns), 3.17lbs / 1.44kg shells, 1893 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 39 lbs / 18 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 200

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines, Direct drive, 2 shafts, 3,795 ihp / 2,831 Kw = 20.00 kts
Range 1,700nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 170 tons (100% coal)

Complement: 78 - 102

Cost: £0.093 million / $0.370 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 5 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 447 tons, 52.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 273 tons, 31.9 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 117 tons, 13.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 15 tons, 1.8 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 333 lbs / 151 Kg = 24.9 x 3.0 " / 76 mm shells or 0.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.54
Metacentric height 1.4 ft / 0.4 m
Roll period: 9.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 77 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.04
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.19

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.400
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.75: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 16.00 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 65
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 12.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 7.87 ft / 2.40 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 7.22 ft / 2.20 m
- Mid (50 %): 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
- Stern: 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
- Average freeboard: 6.84 ft / 2.09 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 175.0 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 67.8 %
Waterplane Area: 4,135 Square feet or 384 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 62 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 40 lbs/sq ft or 197 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.25
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is cramped
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

The Grozyashchiy is another design I envision for the Russian Far East. She is too small and too slow to be classed as a cruiser, but a bit too large to be classed as a guard ship – her short legs would keep her close to her home port – which I would deep as Vladivostok, and her primary role would be to support local coastal batteries.

------

Grozyashchiy, Russian Armoured Gunboat laid down 1891

Displacement: 1,359 t light; 1,430 t standard; 1,487 t normal; 1,532 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

238.10 ft / 236.22 ft x 41.67 ft x 11.15 ft (normal load) [72.57 m / 72.00 m x 12.70 m x 3.40 m]

Armament:

2 - 5.98" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 107.15lbs / 48.60kg shells, 1891 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts with hoists on centreline ends, evenly spread
4 - 4.72" / 120 mm guns in single mounts, 52.72lbs / 23.91kg shells, 1891 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, all amidships
4 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns in single mounts, 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1891 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 448 lbs / 203 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:

Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3.15" / 80 mm 196.85 ft / 60.00 m 4.92 ft / 1.50 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 128 % of normal length

Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 2.36" / 60 mm 1.18" / 30 mm 2.36" / 60 mm
2nd: 0.98" / 25 mm 0.98" / 25 mm -

Armour deck: 0.98" / 25 mm, Conning tower: 1.97" / 50 mm

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines,
Direct drive, 2 shafts, 2,492 ihp / 1,859 Kw = 16.00 kts
Range 1,000nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 102 tons (100% coal)

Complement: 119 - 155

Cost: £0.154 million / $0.615 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 56 tons, 3.8 %
Armour: 278 tons, 18.7 %
- Belts: 125 tons, 8.4 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 31 tons, 2.1 %
- Armour Deck: 117 tons, 7.8 %
- Conning Tower: 6 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 423 tons, 28.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 592 tons, 39.8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 128 tons, 8.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 10 tons, 0.7 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 1,348 lbs / 611 Kg = 12.6 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 0.6 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.44
Metacentric height 2.5 ft / 0.8 m
Roll period: 11.0 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 87 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.24
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.73

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.474
Length to Beam Ratio: 5.67: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 15.37 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 49 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 1.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 1.64 ft / 0.50 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 13.78 ft / 4.20 m
- Forecastle (30 %): 11.81 ft / 3.60 m
- Mid (50 %): 9.84 ft / 3.00 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 9.84 ft / 3.00 m
- Stern: 9.84 ft / 3.00 m
- Average freeboard: 10.87 ft / 3.31 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 122.2 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 104.6 %
Waterplane Area: 6,407 Square feet or 595 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 91 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 64 lbs/sq ft or 313 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.90
- Longitudinal: 2.50
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Quoted

The Najezdnik is intended as a ‘colonial’ sort of vessel, intended to represent Russian interests in the Far East – keeping pesky foreign sealers and fishermen away from Kamchatka and places like that. I could probably increase the armament, but given the circumstances I see no need.

Actually I think that a single 76mm might be enough to shoot at those pesky foreign sealers and fishermen and scare them away. I also think that the 47mm guns in singles might be more useful. That way if you were to come alongside a vessel filled with those pesky foreign sealers or fishermen, one could be aimed at the wheelhouse and the other at another part of the ship. Maybe add a small caliber to represent rifles that some of the crew may have to shoot at those pesky foreign sealers and fishermen whether it is on land or on deck.

A couple of very interesting designs, its nice to see these possible pre-sim WW ships.

Quoted from "Rooijen10"

Quoted

The Najezdnik is intended as a ‘colonial’ sort of vessel, intended to represent Russian interests in the Far East – keeping pesky foreign sealers and fishermen away from Kamchatka and places like that. I could probably increase the armament, but given the circumstances I see no need.

Actually I think that a single 76mm might be enough to shoot at those pesky foreign sealers and fishermen and scare them away. I also think that the 47mm guns in singles might be more useful. That way if you were to come alongside a vessel filled with those pesky foreign sealers or fishermen, one could be aimed at the wheelhouse and the other at another part of the ship. Maybe add a small caliber to represent rifles that some of the crew may have to shoot at those pesky foreign sealers and fishermen whether it is on land or on deck.

I think I'd keep the second 76mm in case the pesky fishermen have well-armed friends of their own.

So any significant changes to Russia's borders or neighbours, or are you essentially starting at historical 1890?

Quoted from "The Rock Doctor"

So any significant changes to Russia's borders or neighbours, or are you essentially starting at historical 1890?

In my thinking - and most of this is still in my head outside the ship sims and a spreadsheet of working calculations - I'm sticking to the historical borders. It is more an exercise in how well Russia would perform, given the application of our current rules.

My construction spreadsheet actually starts in 1891, as I have taken 1881-1890 as the baseline period for determining the starting number of factories and the quantity of IP available for the baseline. I believe that Russia would start out with 17 factories (our rules provide that everybody starts with ten and one factory per capital ship launched in the baseline period), with 30 IP plus 10 IP per capital ship launched in the baseline period.

Thus far it has been instructive to learn how to cope with the design options available with only coal and reciprocating steam engines. Battleships - strictly pre-dreadnoughts - are cheap and easy, cruisers not too bad, torpedo-boat destroyers a nightmare.

With those torpedo-boat destroyers, it depends on how you try to sim them. You might want to accept a lower seaboat rating, somewhere between 0.70 and 0.80. You could also sim them based on data from existing ships and use the given shp instead of the given speed

While perhaps larger than OTL torpedo craft, I have tried to follow the outlines of the designs of the period; the earlier designs were flush decked, but for 1894 I decided to introduce the raised forecastle, which improved seakeeping measurably. Radius of action is still quite poor. I know that when I can introduce oil fuel, things get far better. Can’t justify doing that quite yet.

Each successive class has gotten better and by about 1900 I ought to have a decent design.

-----

Delfin, Russian Torpedo Boat Destroyer laid down 1894

Displacement: 420 t light; 433 t standard; 465 t normal; 491 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

205.26 ft / 204.00 ft x 19.69 ft x 9.84 ft (normal load) [62.56 m / 62.18 m x 6.00 m x 3.00 m]

Armament:

1 - 2.99" / 76.0 mm guns in single mounts, 13.39lbs / 6.07kg shells, 1894 Model Quick firing gun in deck mount on centreline forward
3 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns in single mounts, 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1894 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on centreline, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 30 lbs / 14 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 200
2 - 17.7" / 450 mm above water torpedoes

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines, Direct drive, 2 shafts, 7,119 ihp / 5,311 Kw = 25.00 kts
Range 800nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 57 tons (100% coal)
Caution: Delicate, lightweight machinery

Complement: 49 - 65

Cost: £0.057 million / $0.229 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 4 tons, 0.8 %
Machinery: 280 tons, 60.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 131 tons, 28.1 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 45 tons, 9.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 5 tons, 1.1 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 97 lbs / 44 Kg = 7.2 x 3.0 " / 76 mm shells or 0.1 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.15
Metacentric height 0.6 ft / 0.2 m
Roll period: 11.0 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.13
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 0.90

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has rise forward of midbreak
Block coefficient: 0.412
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.36: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 14.28 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 65 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 79
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 3.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.66 ft / 0.20 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 11.48 ft / 3.50 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 10.50 ft / 3.20 m
- Mid (50 %): 9.19 ft / 2.80 m (5.91 ft / 1.80 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 5.91 ft / 1.80 m
- Stern: 5.91 ft / 1.80 m
- Average freeboard: 8.08 ft / 2.46 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 202.2 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 56.5 %
Waterplane Area: 2,490 Square feet or 231 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 19 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 25 lbs/sq ft or 123 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.64
- Longitudinal: 2.11
- Overall: 0.73
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is extremely poor
Room for accommodation and workspaces is cramped
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Poor seaboat, wet and uncomfortable, reduced performance in heavy weather

I researching some of the Imperial Russian Navy’s smaller warships, I found that a number of them were classed as mine transports, early minelayers. The Bug class is intended for work in home waters defending the Baltic.

-----

Bug, Russian Mine Transport laid down 1891

Displacement: 1,144 t light; 1,176 t standard; 1,351 t normal; 1,491 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

211.69 ft / 204.07 ft x 34.12 ft x 15.09 ft (normal load) [64.52 m / 62.20 m x 10.40 m x 4.60 m]

Armament:

1 - 2.99" / 76.0 mm guns in single mounts, 13.39lbs / 6.07kg shells, 1891 Model Quick firing gun in deck mount on centreline forward
4 - 1.85" / 47.0 mm guns in single mounts, 3.17lbs / 1.44kg shells, 1891 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, all amidships
Weight of broadside 26 lbs / 12 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 300

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines, Direct drive, 2 shafts, 1,095 ihp / 817 Kw = 13.00 kts
Range 3,600nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 315 tons (100% coal)

Complement: 110 - 144

Cost: £0.071 million / $0.283 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 3 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 199 tons, 14.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 591 tons, 43.8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 207 tons, 15.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 350 tons, 25.9 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 1,775 lbs / 805 Kg = 132.5 x 3.0 " / 76 mm shells or 0.8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
Metacentric height 1.2 ft / 0.4 m
Roll period: 13.1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 56 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.02
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 2.00

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has rise forward of midbreak
Block coefficient: 0.450
Length to Beam Ratio: 5.98: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 14.29 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 41 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 28
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 14.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.94 ft / 1.20 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 14.76 ft / 4.50 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 13.94 ft / 4.25 m
- Mid (50 %): 13.12 ft / 4.00 m (6.56 ft / 2.00 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (25 %): 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
- Stern: 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
- Average freeboard: 10.20 ft / 3.11 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 78.8 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 79.7 %
Waterplane Area: 4,441 Square feet or 413 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 174 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 78 lbs/sq ft or 381 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.42
- Longitudinal: 5.20
- Overall: 1.62
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is cramped
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Miscellaneous Weight - 500 mines @ 0.5-tons each, Minelaying gear 100 tons

Quoted from "BruceDuncan"

While perhaps larger than OTL torpedo craft, I have tried to follow the outlines of the designs of the period; the earlier designs were flush decked, but for 1894 I decided to introduce the raised forecastle, which improved seakeeping measurably. Radius of action is still quite poor. I know that when I can introduce oil fuel, things get far better. Can’t justify doing that quite yet.

You should get an improvement in range when you go to steam turbines, because of the space/tonnage gains in comparison to complex reciprocating engines.

Quoted from "gral"

Quoted from "BruceDuncan"

While perhaps larger than OTL torpedo craft, I have tried to follow the outlines of the designs of the period; the earlier designs were flush decked, but for 1894 I decided to introduce the raised forecastle, which improved seakeeping measurably. Radius of action is still quite poor. I know that when I can introduce oil fuel, things get far better. Can’t justify doing that quite yet.

You should get an improvement in range when you go to steam turbines, because of the space/tonnage gains in comparison to complex reciprocating engines.

Absolutely - but I can justify introducing oil fuel earlier than turbines. Given Russia's early status as an oil exporter I see mixed firing making it into service a few years before turbines. I would need to track down the references but I believe Russia was among the first nations to introduce oil fuel to surface vessels, albeit in minor warships.

I need some input from the Wesworld hive-mind. I am attempting to sim an icebreaker for my Imperial Russian Navy construct, based upon the OTL Kuzma Minin, which was built for the Russian Navy in 1916. What I know of the Kuzma Minin is – 3150 tons (4576 tons full load), six boilers, reciprocating VTE, 6400 ihp, 14 knots. She later ended up in the French Navy as the minelayer Castor.

So my questions:

1. Is using electric motors preferable than direct coupling for reciprocating engines at this point in time? Springsharp allows it, but I am uncertain whether it is proper context.

2. I bulked the speed up to 16.8 knots in order to shoehorn in the best match of horsepower. How would I best note this or is there a better approach to the issue?

3. Would there be a better approach to denoting any hull strengthening over and above the additional strength in the hull? Would belt armor or a TDS be a better way of simming such strengthening?

Any other comments are quite welcome.

-----

TBD, Russian Icebreaker laid down 1900

Displacement: 4,089 t light; 4,186 t standard; 4,575 t normal; 4,887 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

252.55 ft / 246.72 ft x 56.76 ft x 21.00 ft (normal load) [76.98 m / 75.20 m x 17.30 m x 6.40 m]

Armament:

2 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns in single mounts, 30.51lbs / 13.84kg shells, 1900 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 61 lbs / 28 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines, Electric motors, 2 shafts, 6,318 ihp / 4,714 Kw = 16.80 kts
Range 4,500nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 701 tons (100% coal)

Complement: 277 - 361

Cost: £0.288 million / $1.151 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 8 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 987 tons, 21.6 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,094 tons, 67.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 486 tons, 10.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 6,549 lbs / 2,971 Kg = 214.6 x 3.9 " / 100 mm shells or 1.6 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.54
Metacentric height 4.4 ft / 1.4 m
Roll period: 11.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 57 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.00
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.14

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.545
Length to Beam Ratio: 4.35 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 15.71 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 59 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 3.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 4.92 ft / 1.50 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 17.29 ft / 5.27 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 10.99 ft / 3.35 m
- Mid (50 %): 10.99 ft / 3.35 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 10.99 ft / 3.35 m
- Stern: 10.99 ft / 3.35 m
- Average freeboard: 11.49 ft / 3.50 m

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 72.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 73.5 %
Waterplane Area: 9,723 Square feet or 903 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 225 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 218 lbs/sq ft or 1,063 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 3.00
- Longitudinal: 9.97
- Overall: 3.39
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is cramped

I am continuing to experiment in the ethereal world of an alternate Tsarist Russia. My inspiration for the Dniestr (and her sisters – there could be a few) is the Russian gunboat Khivinets of 1904. I see them as the sort of vessel built to remind anyone that Russia has an interest (or thinks it has an interest) wherever they are deployed, yet are not that impressive on their own to worry any major power. At least that is the theory.

-----

Dniestr, Russian Foreign Service Gunboat laid down 1900

Displacement: 1,059 t light; 1,117 t standard; 1,359 t normal; 1,553 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

230.64 ft / 229.00 ft x 37.07 ft x 11.32 ft (normal load) [70.30 m / 69.80 m x 11.30 m x 3.45 m]

Armament:

2 - 4.72" / 120 mm guns in single mounts, 52.72lbs / 23.91kg shells, 1900 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts with hoists on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 2.99" / 76.0 mm guns in single mounts, 13.39lbs / 6.07kg shells, 1900 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, all amidships
4 - 0.30" / 7.6 mm guns in single mounts, 0.01lbs / 0.00kg shells, 1900 Model Machine guns in deck mounts on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 213 lbs / 96 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 220

Armour:

Conning tower: 1.97" / 50 mm

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines, Direct drive, 2 shafts, 1,849 ihp / 1,380 Kw = 15.00 kts
Range 4,700nm at 11.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 436 tons (100% coal)

Complement: 111 - 145

Cost: £0.100 million / $0.399 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 27 tons, 2.0 %
Armour: 5 tons, 0.4 %
- Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 5 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 289 tons, 21.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 439 tons, 32.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 300 tons, 22.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 300 tons, 22.1 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 1,439 lbs / 653 Kg = 27.3 x 4.7 " / 120 mm shells or 0.6 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.15
Metacentric height 1.5 ft / 0.4 m
Roll period: 12.8 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 100 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.26
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 2.00

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.495
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.18: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 15.13 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 46 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 1.64 ft / 0.50 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 13.45 ft / 4.10 m
- Mid (50 %): 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
- Stern: 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
- Average freeboard: 11.98 ft / 3.65 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 109.2 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 110.5 %
Waterplane Area: 5,631 Square feet or 523 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 124 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 50 lbs/sq ft or 243 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.89
- Longitudinal: 2.78
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Breakdown of Miscellaneous Weights:

100 tons for enhanced ventilation for tropical service
100 tons for accommodations for embarked marine infantry
100 tons for additional stores for extended voyages

Another couple of interesting designs.

My thoughts on the icebreaker are:

1. Geared might be better than electric motors. Electric motors probably would be feasible for 1900 but they would be very large and very heavy and probably unreliable. If you really want them, perhaps add some misc weight? Not sure how much though...
I don't know much about icebreakers to say if any did use electric drive around this time.

2. I normally keep the historical hp if possible. Probably the weight, space and the speed output never match the reality but its probably best practice. Perhaps the higher speed means you need a blockier hullform?

3. Armour belt seems to be the done thing in WW, and I've followed suit. Maybe add a bit of both. I'm sure Brock posted some icebreaker guidelines somewhere.

Quoted from "Hood"

Another couple of interesting designs.

My thoughts on the icebreaker are:

1. Geared might be better than electric motors. Electric motors probably would be feasible for 1900 but they would be very large and very heavy and probably unreliable. If you really want them, perhaps add some misc weight? Not sure how much though...
I don't know much about icebreakers to say if any did use electric drive around this time.

2. I normally keep the historical hp if possible. Probably the weight, space and the speed output never match the reality but its probably best practice. Perhaps the higher speed means you need a blockier hullform?

3. Armour belt seems to be the done thing in WW, and I've followed suit. Maybe add a bit of both. I'm sure Brock posted some icebreaker guidelines somewhere.

Regarding Point 1 - unfortunately, Springsharp does not allow geared engines as of 1900. Now, the original Kuzma Minin was build (in Scotland) in 1915; so I may have shot myself in the foot by casting her back in time.

Regarding Point 2 - If I use a blockier hull form I run into the problem of exceeding by a wider margin the historical normal displacement. I think that the proper solution might be to find data on a vessel closer in time - the early 1900s were a fast-changing time for ship technology.

Tsarist Russia is faced with rather difficult choices when it comes to naval development, particularly in the period before 1914. Russia does not really need a navy to project power across the seas, but it does need a navy to deter anyone else from sailing up to Russia’s doorstep. So coast defence ships, monitors and the like, have figured prominently in the Russian steam navy. I put together this design whose premise is to fight in the confined waters of the Gulf of Finland and adjacent areas.

-----

Ingermanland, Russian Coast Defence Ship laid down 1900

Displacement: 4,010 t light; 4,211 t standard; 4,592 t normal; 4,897 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

316.55 ft / 313.65 ft x 50.52 ft x 18.01 ft (normal load) [96.48 m / 95.60 m x 15.40 m x 5.49 m]

Armament:

4 - 7.09" / 180 mm guns (2x2 guns), 177.95lbs / 80.72kg shells, 1900 Model Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes) on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 4.72" / 120 mm guns (4x2 guns), 52.72lbs / 23.91kg shells, 1900 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts with hoists on side, all amidships
10 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns in single mounts, 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1900 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 1,190 lbs / 540 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:

Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 262.47 ft / 80.00 m 9.84 ft / 3.00 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 129 % of normal length

Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 5.12" / 130 mm 5.12" / 130 mm
2nd: 4.72" / 120 mm 2.36" / 60 mm 2.36" / 60 mm

Armour deck: 1.18" / 30 mm, Conning tower: 5.91" / 150 mm

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines, Direct drive, 2 shafts, 7,308 ihp / 5,452 Kw = 18.00 kts
Range 3,000nm at 11.75 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 686 tons (100% coal)

Complement: 278 - 362

Cost: £0.425 million / $1.699 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 149 tons, 3.2 %
Armour: 1,192 tons, 26.0 %
- Belts: 629 tons, 13.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 283 tons, 6.2 %
- Armour Deck: 245 tons, 5.3 %
- Conning Tower: 35 tons, 0.8 %
Machinery: 1,139 tons, 24.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 1,451 tons, 31.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 582 tons, 12.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 80 tons, 1.7 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 4,038 lbs / 1,832 Kg = 22.7 x 7.1 " / 180 mm shells or 1.0 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.15
Metacentric height 2.3 ft / 0.7 m
Roll period: 13.9 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 82 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.50
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.51

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.563
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.21: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 17.71 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 51 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 54
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 4.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 1.64 ft / 0.50 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 18.04 ft / 5.50 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 15.09 ft / 4.60 m
- Mid (50 %): 12.40 ft / 3.78 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 12.40 ft / 3.78 m
- Stern: 12.40 ft / 3.78 m
- Average freeboard: 13.58 ft / 4.14 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 107.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 99.9 %
Waterplane Area: 11,196 Square feet or 1,040 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 97 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 85 lbs/sq ft or 415 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.91
- Longitudinal: 2.27
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

I still continue to play with my construct for the Tsarist Navy. Having determined to invest in a small naval station for the White Sea at Alexandrovsk (modern-day Polyarny) there is the need to defend the region by sea. The Archangelgorod was designed for the Baltic, but out to be able to do adequate coastal duty in the North; the Lefort is an attempt at an ice-strengthened gunboat; thus far I have posited two of her class.

-----

Archangelgorod, Russian Coast Defence Ship laid down 1900

Displacement: 4,010 t light; 4,210 t standard; 4,591 t normal; 4,896 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

316.55 ft / 313.65 ft x 50.52 ft x 18.01 ft (normal load) [96.48 m / 95.60 m x 15.40 m x 5.49 m]

Armament:

4 - 7.09" / 180 mm guns (2x2 guns), 177.95lbs / 80.72kg shells, 1900 Model Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes) on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 4.72" / 120 mm guns (4x2 guns), 52.72lbs / 23.91kg shells, 1900 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts with hoists on side, all amidships
10 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns in single mounts, 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1900 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 1,190 lbs / 540 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:

Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 262.47 ft / 80.00 m 9.84 ft / 3.00 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 129 % of normal length

Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 5.12" / 130 mm 5.12" / 130 mm
2nd: 4.72" / 120 mm 2.36" / 60 mm 2.36" / 60 mm

Armour deck: 1.18" / 30 mm, Conning tower: 5.91" / 150 mm

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines,
Direct drive, 2 shafts, 7,308 ihp / 5,452 Kw = 18.00 kts
Range 3,000nm at 11.75 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 686 tons (100% coal)

Complement: 278 - 362

Cost: £0.425 million / $1.699 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 149 tons, 3.2 %
Armour: 1,192 tons, 26.0 %
- Belts: 629 tons, 13.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 283 tons, 6.2 %
- Armour Deck: 245 tons, 5.3 %
- Conning Tower: 35 tons, 0.8 %
Machinery: 1,139 tons, 24.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 1,450 tons, 31.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 581 tons, 12.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 80 tons, 1.7 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 4,036 lbs / 1,831 Kg = 22.7 x 7.1 " / 180 mm shells or 1.0 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.15
Metacentric height 2.3 ft / 0.7 m
Roll period: 13.9 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 82 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.50
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.51

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.563
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.21: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 17.71 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 51 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 54
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 4.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 1.64 ft / 0.50 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 18.04 ft / 5.50 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 15.09 ft / 4.60 m
- Mid (50 %): 12.40 ft / 3.78 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 12.40 ft / 3.78 m
- Stern: 12.40 ft / 3.78 m
- Average freeboard: 13.58 ft / 4.14 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 107.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 99.9 %
Waterplane Area: 11,195 Square feet or 1,040 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 97 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 85 lbs/sq ft or 415 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.91
- Longitudinal: 2.27
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather



Lefort, Russian Guard Ship for Northern Waters laid down 1901

Displacement: 895 t light; 957 t standard; 1,096 t normal; 1,208 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

229.66 ft / 229.66 ft x 29.86 ft x 12.14 ft (normal load) [70.00 m / 70.00 m x 9.10 m x 3.70 m]

Armament:

2 - 4.72" / 120 mm guns in single mounts, 52.72lbs / 23.91kg shells, 1901 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
4 - 4.72" / 120 mm guns in single mounts, 52.72lbs / 23.91kg shells, 1901 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, all amidships
4 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns in single mounts, 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1901 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 339 lbs / 154 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 180

Armour:

Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 0.98" / 25 mm 229.66 ft / 70.00 m 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 154 % of normal length

Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0.98" / 25 mm 0.98" / 25 mm -
2nd: 0.98" / 25 mm 0.98" / 25 mm -
3rd: 0.39" / 10 mm - -

Conning tower: 1.97" / 50 mm

Machinery:

Coal fired boilers, complex reciprocating steam engines, Direct drive, 2 shafts, 2,539 ihp / 1,894 Kw = 17.00 kts
Range 3,900nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 251 tons (100% coal)

Complement: 94 - 123

Cost: £0.116 million / $0.465 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 42 tons, 3.9 %
Armour: 83 tons, 7.6 %
- Belts: 55 tons, 5.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 24 tons, 2.2 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 5 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 352 tons, 32.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 368 tons, 33.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 201 tons, 18.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 4.6 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 742 lbs / 337 Kg = 14.1 x 4.7 " / 120 mm shells or 0.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.36
Metacentric height 1.4 ft / 0.4 m
Roll period: 10.6 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 100 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.47
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 2.00

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.461
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.69: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 15.15 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 49 %
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: 12.14 ft / 3.70 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 11.48 ft / 3.50 m
- Mid (50 %): 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
- Stern: 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
- Average freeboard: 11.11 ft / 3.39 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 139.5 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 98.3 %
Waterplane Area: 4,413 Square feet or 410 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 87 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 46 lbs/sq ft or 223 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.88
- Longitudinal: 3.26
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Belt represents hull strengthened to resist ice in northern waters.

A fitting point to call a halt to design concepts is the arrival of the dreadnought. Named in honor of Ivan IV, commonly called Ivan the Terrible in the West, his sobriquet in Russian actually means “the Formidable”. And as a design, the Ivan Grozny is formidable enough for her era.

The ship is also totally wrong for the strategic situation in which Russia of 1907 would find herself – with or without a Russo-Japanese War.

For the relatively shallow waters of the upper Baltic, her draft limits where she could sail and fight effectively – so defensively she would have less than optimal use; though her deterrent effect would be considerable. For the lower Baltic, what would be the point? To try conclusions with a large German fleet fighting in its home waters? To lead the Russian fleet fighting its way out of the Baltic? Again, her load draft would come into play. Build her in the Black Sea and she could certainly overawe most any of the vessels of the Turkish Navy up until 1914 – but again, try to force the Dardanelles with battleships alone? Somebody tried that a couple of times and came up short.

Stationing any sort of major battle fleet in either the White Sea or the Pacific is a rather dubious idea at this point in time. Such would require far greater investment in logistics and trans-Continental supply lines than Russia could effectively afford at this time – and no amount of hand-waving would make that go away.

Still, I like the design.

-----

Ivan Grozny, Russian Battleship laid down 1907

Displacement: 21,490 t light; 22,843 t standard; 24,436 t normal; 25,710 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught

594.20 ft / 590.55 ft x 85.30 ft x 27.56 ft (normal load) [181.11 m / 180.00 m x 26.00 m x 8.40 m]

Armament:

10 - 12.01" / 305 mm guns (5x2 guns), 865.70lbs / 392.67kg shells, 1907 Model Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes) on centreline, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts
12 - 5.98" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 107.15lbs / 48.60kg shells, 1907 Model Quick firing guns in casemate mounts on side, evenly spread
12 - 2.99" / 76.0 mm guns in single mounts, 13.39lbs / 6.07kg shells, 1907 Model Quick firing guns in deck mounts on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 10,103 lbs / 4,583 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:

Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 12.0" / 305 mm 459.32 ft / 140.00 m 11.48 ft / 3.50 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Upper: 5.91" / 150 mm 459.32 ft / 140.00 m 9.84 ft / 3.00 m
Main Belt covers 120 % of normal length

Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 12.0" / 305 mm 5.91" / 150 mm 12.0" / 305 mm
2nd: 4.72" / 120 mm 4.72" / 120 mm 4.72" / 120 mm
3rd: 0.79" / 20 mm 0.79" / 20 mm -

Armour deck: 3.15" / 80 mm, Conning tower: 12.01" / 305 mm

Machinery:

Oil fired boilers, steam turbines, Direct drive, 4 shafts, 51,261 shp / 38,240 Kw = 24.00 kts
Range 6,000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,867 tons

Complement: 976 - 1,270

Cost: £2.221 million / $8.883 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 1,263 tons, 5.2 %
Armour: 8,703 tons, 35.6 %
- Belts: 3,766 tons, 15.4 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 2,540 tons, 10.4 %
- Armour Deck: 2,179 tons, 8.9 %
- Conning Tower: 218 tons, 0.9 %
Machinery: 2,913 tons, 11.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 8,512 tons, 34.8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,946 tons, 12.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 100 tons, 0.4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 29,234 lbs / 13,260 Kg = 33.8 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 3.0 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
Metacentric height 4.7 ft / 1.4 m
Roll period: 16.5 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 54 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.65
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.25

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.616
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.92: 1
'Natural speed' for length: 24.30 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 50 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 43
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 5.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 1.64 ft / 0.50 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 20.51 ft / 6.25 m
- Mid (50 %): 18.04 ft / 5.50 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 18.04 ft / 5.50 m
- Stern: 18.04 ft / 5.50 m
- Average freeboard: 19.10 ft / 5.82 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:

Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 79.6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 135.8 %
Waterplane Area: 37,399 Square feet or 3,474 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 99 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 161 lbs/sq ft or 785 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.96
- Longitudinal: 1.45
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily