WesWorld

What does your coastal unit need such a long range for?

If she's intended to act as a monitor, I'd reduce the belt armor just a bit and increase the deck armor - then she's better equipped to handle long range coastal artillery

The ship's hull form is almost rectangular as I understand it, and consequently your seakeeping ability is woeful. Try a more typical battleship hull in the .65 range. Seakeeping will improve, and your required power to hit 20.34 knots will likely drop somewhat.

J

Its strong point is the number of shell hits it will take. Its quite survivable against capital ships.

But, the percent of hull protected by armor is 110%, while magazines and hull take up only 70.4%.

With a hull strength of 2.13, you can get another 12" dual turret on it.

On such a small beam, a torpedo bulkhead does you more harm than good. The French coast defense monitor below dosen't have one, but will take more torpedo hits than yours.

And the poor seakeeping makes it an unstable gunnery platform. You're going to have a hard time hitting much except when the seas are very calm.

Here's something I worked up for the French. The speed isn't great, but it's potent and moderately well armored:

French Monitor, laid down 1925

Length, 141.0 m x Beam, 22.0 m x Depth, 5.4 m
8444 tonnes normal displacement (8127 tonnes standard)

Main battery: 4 x 30.5-cm (2 x 2)
Secondary battery: 8 x 12.0-cm
AA battery: 4 x 10.0-cm
Light battery: 12 x 4.0-cm

Weight of broadside: 1832 kg

4 TT, 53.0 cm

Main belt, 24.0 cm; ends unarmored
Armor deck, average 10.0 cm
Conning tower, 30.0 cm

Battery armor:
Main, 30.0 cm / secondary, 5.0 cm shields
AA, 2.5 cm shields / light guns, 2.5 cm shields

Aircraft - 2 Seaplanes, 1 Catapult

Maximum speed for 7061 shaft kw = 18.00 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 4200 nm / 12 knots

Typical complement: 440-573


Estimated cost, $9.595 million (£2.399 million)

Remarks:

Relative extent of belt armor, 60 percent of 'typical' coverage.

Magazines and engineering spaces are roomy, with superior
watertight subdivision.

Cramped ship; poor crew accommodation, limited working space.


Distribution of weights:
Percent
normal
displacement:

Armament ......................... 504 tonnes = 6 pct
Armor, total ..................... 3198 tonnes = 38 pct

Belt 751 tonnes = 9 pct
Deck 1528 tonnes = 18 pct
C.T. 105 tonnes = 1 pct
Armament 815 tonnes = 10 pct

Machinery ........................ 307 tonnes = 4 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 3563 tonnes = 42 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 822 tonnes = 10 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 50 tonnes = 1 pct
-----
8444 tonnes = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 1.4 m

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 7623 tonnes
Standard displacement: 8127 tonnes
Normal service: 8444 tonnes
Full load: 8664 tonnes

Loading submergence 1966 tonnes/metre

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.23

Shellfire needed to sink: 6260 kg = 15.9 x 30.5-cm shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 3.0
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 50 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.29

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.00

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.50
Sharpness coefficient: 0.38
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 6.95
'Natural speed' for length = 21.5 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 37 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 59 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 87 percent


Displacement factor: 105 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.99
(Structure weight per square
metre of hull surface: 638 kg)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.12
(for 3.19 m average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment -1.27 m)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


[Machine-readable parameters: Spring Style v. 1.2.1]

462.48 x 72.16 x 17.71; 10.46 -- Dimensions
0.50 -- Block coefficient
1925 -- Year laid down
18.00 / 4200 / 12.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
50 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
4 x 12.01; 2; 0 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
8 x 4.72; 0 -- Secondary battery; turrets
Gun-shields
:
4 x 3.94 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
12 x 1.57 -- Fourth (light) battery
4 / 0 / 20.87 -- TT / submerged / size
++++++++++
9.45 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 0.00; 60 -- Belt armor; relative extent
3.94 / 11.81 -- Deck / CT
11.81 / 1.97 / 0.98 / 0.98 -- Battery armor


(Note: For portability, values are stored in Anglo-American units)


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Visit my Russian/French fantasy fleet page:
http://admkuznetsov.tripod.com

Quoted

What does your coastal unit need such a long range for?

That should be obvious. It's to keep the standard displacement down. I do the same if a design is over the limit. I try to adjust the range until I am under the limit (as long as there is hull strength left to allow this).

Walter

India has been contemplating monitor-type vessels for shore bombardment (not to mention large caliber gun testing), but doesn't buy into the traditional "coastal defence battleship" concept.

The Design Bureau is instead suggesting that the incomplete Type A cruiser Male, be converted to an "escort cruiser". Although the dimensions and some of the armor scheme would remain the same as the original Hyderabad class, the armament would be much heavier and the speed somewhat lower. The ship could be classified as a coastal defence ship as completed.

Essentially a slow heavy cruiser, the ship would probably be the center of escort, patrol, or amphibious assault groups.

As an added bonus, she'd also allow experimentation with these crazy twin 8.2" and 4.1" guns and 23.7" torpedoes that the Ordnance Bureau has produced, and perhaps serve as a model for future (larger and faster) Type A cruisers...


Escort cruiser SR Male, laid down 1920

Length, 600 ft x Beam, 60.0 ft x Depth, 18.5 ft
8943 tons normal displacement (7934 tons standard)

Main battery: 8 x 8.2-inch (4 x 2; 2 superfiring)
Secondary battery: 8 x 4.1-inch (4 x 2)
AA battery: 6 x 1.4-inch
Light battery: 6 x 0.6-inch

Weight of broadside: 2490 lbs

6 TT, 23.7"

Main belt, 4.5 inches; ends unarmored
Armor deck, average 2.5 inches
C.T., 6.0 inches

Battery armor:
Main, 5.0" / secondary, 2.0"
AA, 1.0" shields / light guns, 1.0" shields

Maximum speed for 25630 shp = 24.00 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 12000 nm / 12 kts

Typical complement: 460-598


Estimated cost, $6.156 million (£1.539 million)

Remarks:

Relative extent of belt armor, 80 percent of 'typical' coverage.

Ship has slow, easy roll; a good, steady gun platform.

Good seaboat; rides out heavy weather easily.

Magazines and engineering spaces are roomy, with superior
watertight subdivision.

Ship is roomy, with superior accommodation and working space.


Distribution of weights:
Percent
normal
displacement:

Armament ......................... 311 tons = 3 pct
Armor, total ..................... 2260 tons = 25 pct

Belt 535 tons = 6 pct
Deck 1004 tons = 11 pct
C.T. 56 tons = 1 pct
Armament 665 tons = 7 pct

Machinery ........................ 896 tons = 10 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 3981 tons = 45 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 1395 tons = 16 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 100 tons = 1 pct
-----
8943 tons = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 2.6 ft

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 7548 tons
Standard displacement: 7934 tons
Normal service: 8943 tons
Full load: 9715 tons

Loading submergence 620 tons/foot

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.06

Shellfire needed to sink: 15812 lbs = 57.4 x 8.2-inch shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 2.7
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 71 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.62

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.32

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.47
Sharpness coefficient: 0.32
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 8.84
'Natural speed' for length = 24.5 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 39 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 61 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 123 percent


Displacement factor: 135 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.04
(Structure weight per square
foot of hull surface: 116 lbs)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.07
(for 16.0 ft average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +1.2 ft)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.04

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


[Machine-readable parameters: Spring Style v. 1.2.1]

600.00 x 60.00 x 18.50; 16.00 -- Dimensions
0.47 -- Block coefficient
1920 -- Year laid down
24.00 / 12000 / 12.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
100 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
8 x 8.20; 4; 2 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
8 x 4.10; 4 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
6 x 1.40 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
6 x 0.60 -- Fourth (light) battery
6 / 0 / 23.70 -- TT / submerged / size
++++++++++
4.50 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 0.00; 80 -- Belt armor; relative extent
2.50 / 6.00 -- Deck / CT
5.00 / 2.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 -- Battery armor


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This is an interesting thread seeing as Atlantis will soon have 2 spare twin 14" turrets when the
ANS Agamemnon completes her convertion to a training ship.
Would it be wise to salvage the 6" casemate mounts as well, or go with the new 5.5" shielded mounts? Does a moniter really need a secondary gun or should I instead mount more AA guns?

But Coastal defense battleships cannot have 14" guns-only 12" guns. 6" guns aren't necessary in a monitor. Abercrombie had 8 4.7" guns.

Italy is going for a concept similar to that of India. San marco will be rearmed with new 8.25" turrets and duple 6" turrets as a test bed for these new weapons.

One could look at it as a small capital ship - if you've got 9 hulls and 280,000 tons, you could put together:

5 x 40 kt ships (BB)
2 x 32 kt ships (BC)
2 x 8 kt ships (monitors)

Depends on what your concept of a coastal defence ships is; personally, I don't see much use in a slow ships with four big, slow guns except against stationary targets.

Well i guess those 14" turrets will just have to go into storage! I also have several 12" turrets that i could use.
I think a 4x12" (2x2),8x4.5" (4x2) layout would be good for such a ship. I could use them to patrol my southern coast.

Cacafuego, Iberia Monitor laid down 1925

Displacement:
7,377 t light; 7,995 t standard; 8,969 t normal; 9,712 t full load
Loading submergence 638 tons/feet

Dimensions:
459.32 ft x 72.18 ft x 17.06 ft (normal load)
140.00 m x 22.00 m x 5.20 m

Armament:
6 - 12.01" / 305 mm guns (2 Main turrets x 3 guns)
12 - 2.24" / 57 mm AA guns
Weight of broadside 5,262 lbs / 2,387 kg

Armour:
Belt 5.91" / 150 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 69 % of normal area
Main turrets 7.87" / 200 mm
Armour deck 3.54" / 90 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 6,573 shp / 4,903 Kw = 16.00 kts
Range 12,000nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
460 - 599

Cost:
£2.751 million / $11.004 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 658 tons, 7.3 %
Armour: 2,633 tons, 29.4 %
Belts: 537 tons, 6.0 %, Armament: 632 tons, 7.0 %, Armour Deck: 1,465 tons, 16.3 %
Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 213 tons, 2.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,872 tons, 43.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,592 tons, 17.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 3.7

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation & workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Poor seaboat, wet and uncomfortable, reduced performance in heavy weather

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.11
Shellfire needed to sink: 12,392 lbs / 5,621 Kg = 14.3 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 2.7
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 71 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.44
Relative quality as seaboat: 0.94

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.555
Sharpness coefficient: 0.41
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.76
'Natural speed' for length: 21.43 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 33 %
Trim: 76
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 64.9 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 91.1 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 108 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.00
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 137 lbs / square foot or 671 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.06
(for 9.84 ft / 3.00 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment -4.97 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.01

Armour is 15° inclined
Mission is amphibious assault
Remember that deck armour strength is _average_. Maximum is around 160 mm
The name is BTW traditional to the Armada

Cacafuego, Iberia Monitor laid down 1925

Displacement:
7,388 t light; 8,006 t standard; 9,003 t normal; 9,765 t full load
Loading submergence 608 tons/feet

Dimensions:
393.70 ft x 72.18 ft x 17.06 ft (normal load)
120.00 m x 22.00 m x 5.20 m

Armament:
6 - 12.01" / 305 mm guns (2 Main turrets x 3 guns)
12 - 2.24" / 57 mm AA guns
Weight of broadside 5,262 lbs / 2,387 kg

Armour:
Belt 7.48" / 190 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 70 % of normal area
Main turrets 7.87" / 200 mm
Armour deck 4.13" / 105 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 10,997 shp / 8,204 Kw = 18.00 kts
Range 12,000nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
462 - 600

Cost:
£2.818 million / $11.272 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 658 tons, 7.3 %
Armour: 2,866 tons, 31.8 %
Belts: 605 tons, 6.7 %, Armament: 632 tons, 7.0 %, Armour Deck: 1,628 tons, 18.1 %
Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 357 tons, 4.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,507 tons, 39.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,616 tons, 17.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 3.8

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation & workspaces is cramped
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Poor seaboat, wet and uncomfortable, reduced performance in heavy weather

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.12
Shellfire needed to sink: 11,321 lbs / 5,135 Kg = 13.1 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 2.4
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 73 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.45
Relative quality as seaboat: 0.96

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.650
Sharpness coefficient: 0.46
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 5.79
'Natural speed' for length: 19.84 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 47 %
Trim: 76
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 69.7 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 86.4 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 102 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.97
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 133 lbs / square foot or 651 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.29
(for 9.84 ft / 3.00 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment -4.99 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

Armour is 15° inclined
Mission is amphibious assault
Remember that deck armour strength is _average_. Maximum is around 180 mm
The name is BTW traditional to the Armada

we seem to come from different directions here 17inc

I do not see the need for that kind of heavy armour in a monitor, let's face it, most artillery used on land is a lot lighter than naval artillery. Therefore I am maximising punch.

cheers

Bernhard

Quoted

we seem to come from different directions here 17inc

Indeed. One favors protection, the other protection. Of course, one can always go for a design between these two. A ship with less protection than the RamRod, but more than the Cacafuego. A ship with less armament than the Cacafuego, but more than the RamRod.
17inc, if you want more armor on it, remove the torpedo bulkhead (as AdmKuznetsov pointed out before).

This design is the virtually the same as the Mk. 5. However it does not have a torpedo bulkhead and the coverage of the main belt is reduced. The gained hull strength I used to increase deck armor, turret armor and belt armor. It can take 6 more hits than the Mk.5 and only 0.2 less torpedo hits.

RamRod, Australia CDS laid down 1935

Displacement:
7,662 t light; 8,000 t standard; 8,773 t normal; 9,356 t full load
Loading submergence 530 tons/feet

Dimensions:
405.29 ft x 67.40 ft x 20.00 ft (normal load)
123.53 m x 20.54 m x 6.10 m

Armament:
2 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (1 Main turrets x 2 guns)
4 - 4.50" / 114 mm guns (2 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
14 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
20 - 0.79" / 20 mm guns
Weight of broadside 1,942 lbs / 881 kg

Armour:
Belt 15.00" / 381 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 48 % of normal area
Main turrets 15.00" / 381 mm, 2nd turrets 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 6.00" / 152 mm, Conning tower 12.00" / 305 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 22,166 shp / 16,536 Kw = 22.00 kts
Range 17,200nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
453 - 589

Cost:
£2.852 million / $11.410 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 243 tons, 2.8 %
Armour: 3,612 tons, 41.2 %
Belts: 815 tons, 9.3 %, Armament: 626 tons, 7.1 %, Armour Deck: 2,061 tons, 23.5 %
Conning Tower: 110 tons, 1.3 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 630 tons, 7.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,079 tons, 35.1 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,110 tons, 12.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 99 tons, 1.1 %

Metacentric height 2.7

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

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.00
Shellfire needed to sink: 18,348 lbs / 8,322 Kg = 21.2 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 6.6
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 93 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.46
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.32

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.562
Sharpness coefficient: 0.42
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.01
'Natural speed' for length: 20.13 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 55 %
Trim: 71
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 47.0 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 129.6 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 127 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.92
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 113 lbs / square foot or 551 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 2.23
(for 16.60 ft / 5.06 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 1.85 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00


All in all, I think 15" is waaaayyyyy too much for this type of ship. So you might shift toward LordArpad's design, adding a 2 gun turret. This will reduce the number of hits it can take though but its firepower is doubled. In order to get the additional turret, you'll have to reduce armor a bit in order to gain the necessary hull strength.


RamRod, Australia CDS laid down 1935

Displacement:
7,507 t light; 7,989 t standard; 8,773 t normal; 9,365 t full load
Loading submergence 530 tons/feet

Dimensions:
405.29 ft x 67.40 ft x 20.00 ft (normal load)
123.53 m x 20.54 m x 6.10 m

Armament:
4 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (2 Main turrets x 2 guns)
4 - 4.50" / 114 mm guns (2 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
14 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
20 - 0.79" / 20 mm guns
Weight of broadside 3,670 lbs / 1,665 kg

Armour:
Belt 10.00" / 254 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 68 % of normal area
Main turrets 10.00" / 254 mm, 2nd turrets 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower 12.00" / 305 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 22,166 shp / 16,536 Kw = 22.00 kts
Range 17,200nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
453 - 589

Cost:
£3.749 million / $14.994 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 459 tons, 5.2 %
Armour: 3,012 tons, 34.3 %
Belts: 770 tons, 8.8 %, Armament: 758 tons, 8.6 %, Armour Deck: 1,374 tons, 15.7 %
Conning Tower: 110 tons, 1.3 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 630 tons, 7.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,308 tons, 37.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,265 tons, 14.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 99 tons, 1.1 %

Metacentric height 2.8

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation & workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.00
Shellfire needed to sink: 12,229 lbs / 5,547 Kg = 14.2 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.2
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 72 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.60
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.04

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.562
Sharpness coefficient: 0.42
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.01
'Natural speed' for length: 20.13 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 55 %
Trim: 69
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 65.6 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 107.7 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 109 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.93
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 126 lbs / square foot or 614 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.89
(for 13.80 ft / 4.21 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment -0.95 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00


Walter

Well i think the real question is does a nation have a need for moniters or coastal defence ships. A nation with a large coastline and/or island territory's could use this type of vessel, and if a nation lacks suficient numbers of capital ships moniters and coastal defence ships can fill the gap somewhat.

Yep, that is indeed the question. I am of two minds really. the slow speed makes them feasible but not overly useful. I am thinking of building some and stationing them in the Caribbean and the Pacific.

cheers

Bernhard