You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

1

Monday, March 14th 2005, 6:13pm

Basilan Rides Again



Filipino Basilan-class heavy cruiser, laid down 1930

PRS Basilan (C-7)
PRS Masbate (C-8)

Displacement:
12,468 t light; 13,131 t standard; 15,048 t normal; 16,581 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
669.72 ft / 656.17 ft x 68.24 ft x 23.52 ft (normal load)
204.13 m / 200.00 m x 20.80 m x 7.17 m

Armament:
12 - 8.27" / 210 mm guns (3x4 guns), 300.00lbs / 136.08kg shells, 1930 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, majority forward, 1 raised mount - superfiring
8 - 5.12" / 130 mm guns (4x2 guns), 70.00lbs / 31.75kg shells, 1930 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side ends, evenly spread
4 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns (1x4 guns), 6.00lbs / 2.72kg shells, 1930 Model
Dual purpose guns in a deck mount with hoist
on centreline aft, all raised guns - superfiring
8 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (2x4 guns), 2.00lbs / 0.91kg shells, 1930 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm guns (4x3 guns), 0.57lbs / 0.26kg shells, 1930 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts

Weight of broadside 4,207 lbs / 1,908 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

4 - 24.0" / 610 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.92" / 125 mm 369.59 ft / 112.65 m 10.17 ft / 3.10 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Upper: 1.57" / 40 mm 369.59 ft / 112.65 m 11.48 ft / 3.50 m
Main Belt covers 87 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 6.50" / 165 mm 3.94" / 100 mm 5.51" / 140 mm
2nd: 2.17" / 55 mm 1.38" / 35 mm 1.97" / 50 mm
3rd: 1.18" / 30 mm 0.79" / 20 mm 0.98" / 25 mm
4th: 0.79" / 20 mm - -
5th: 0.59" / 15 mm - -

- Armour deck: 2.17" / 55 mm, Conning tower: 3.15" / 80 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 91,294 shp / 68,106 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 12,300nm at 15.00 kts (Bunkerage = 3,451 tons)

Complement:
679 - 883

Cost:
£5.188 million / $20.753 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 496 tons, 3.3 %
Armour: 3,032 tons, 20.1 %
- Belts: 1,077 tons, 7.2 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 671 tons, 4.5 %
- Armour Deck: 1,243 tons, 8.3 %
- Conning Tower: 41 tons, 0.3 %
Machinery: 2,766 tons, 18.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 6,058 tons, 40.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,580 tons, 17.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 115 tons, 0.8 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
18,672 lbs / 8,469 Kg = 66.1 x 8.3 " / 210 mm shells or 2.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.04
Metacentric height 3.0 ft / 0.9 m
Roll period: 16.4 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.77
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.07

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.500
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.62 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 29.32 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 65
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: 28.22 ft / 8.60 m
- Forecastle (22 %): 21.33 ft / 6.50 m
- Mid (50 %): 18.21 ft / 5.55 m
- Quarterdeck (22 %): 18.21 ft / 5.55 m
- Stern: 18.21 ft / 5.55 m
- Average freeboard: 19.93 ft / 6.07 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 86.6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 152.0 %
Waterplane Area: 31,025 Square feet or 2,882 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 119 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 128 lbs/sq ft or 626 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.30
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

2

Monday, March 14th 2005, 9:35pm

I think you need some really extensive aircraft facilities if you are going to try and operate the S.55. Its a much larger and heavier aircraft than normal. Note the size of the catapult on Francesco Ferrucio.

You probably need to increase the length of the 210mm turrets by 2 pixels or so.

Overall comments;

-uurgghh quadruple 210mm turrets on such a narrow beamed hull.

- Armour is better than average, but still probably not adequate.

- Seems a bit unfair to incorporate a transom stern into the design when everyone else doesn't, at least until you get to about 34knts+

- Having quick firing 130mm guns is going to bring their rate of fire down to about 5 rpm, or less considering that asians are generally smaller than caucasians.

3

Monday, March 14th 2005, 10:01pm

Maybe there are using a primarily spanish descent crew?


And yes....three quad turrets. I wonder how much the structure around the barbettes is going to weaken from the pounding on a full salvo from those things?

4

Monday, March 14th 2005, 10:23pm

Hmmm...

Well, I grabbed the biggest cat off of your template...

Quoted

You probably need to increase the length of the 210mm turrets by 2 pixels or so.

Wilco.

Quoted

-uurgghh quadruple 210mm turrets on such a narrow beamed hull.

My rationalisation is that a quad 210mm would probably be about the same size as a triple 10"...?

Quoted

Armour is better than average, but still probably not adequate.

More armour than most cruisers of that vintage...at least historical ones. (Compare, for example, the Spanish Canarias.)

Quoted

Seems a bit unfair to incorporate a transom stern into the design when everyone else doesn't, at least until you get to about 34knts+

I'm not using transoms...as a rule...until 1930, which is the schedule for this ship, and when IIRC we agreed they'd be fair game.

Quoted

Having quick firing 130mm guns is going to bring their rate of fire down to about 5 rpm

I thought 'quick firing' would be, well, quicker than a plain breech-loader?

Quoted

I wonder how much the structure around the barbettes is going to weaken from the pounding on a full salvo from those things?

We'll find out the first time they cross paths with El Cid. ;-)

5

Monday, March 14th 2005, 10:35pm

Quoted

We'll find out the first time they cross paths with El Cid. ;-)


Only if Tylor or an Oyama does not beat you to him.

6

Monday, March 14th 2005, 10:42pm

Quoted

More armour than most cruisers of that vintage...at least historical ones. (Compare, for example, the Spanish Canarias.)


Basilan is 3000tons larger.

Quoted

I thought 'quick firing' would be, well, quicker than a plain breech-loader?


Quick firing guns have a shell and charge all in one piece. This is heavier than having seperated shell and charge. A shell of about 70lb is heavy enough to lift for long periods of time by itself without having a charge attached as well.

We'll hopefully have SSv3 by 1930 anyway.

7

Monday, March 14th 2005, 10:47pm

Ah well, ya gotta sacrafice somewhere...

Quoted

Quick firing guns have a shell and charge all in one piece. This is heavier than having seperated shell and charge. A shell of about 70lb is heavy enough to lift for long periods of time by itself without having a charge attached as well.

Thanks. *goes off to change from "quick firing" all guns over 100mm...*

8

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 12:20am

I thought the agreement on Transom Sterns was size related also!

9

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 12:39am

It's she a bit heavy for a "treaty" cruiser at 15,048 tons normal?

10

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 12:50am

Quoted

Originally posted by Ithekro
It's she a bit heavy for a "treaty" cruiser at 15,048 tons normal?


She is only over by 131 tons, and I would imagine the Japanese inspectors would not be too worried about that!

My HEL design is about 300 tons heavier!

11

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 1:51am

Quoted

I thought the agreement on Transom Sterns was size related also

Only until 1930. After that it's Open Season.

Quoted

Isn't she a bit heavy for a "treaty" cruiser at 15,048 tons normal?

The limit is 13,000 standard tons, and 13,131 is well within the 5% "fudge factor".

Quoted

I would imagine the Japanese inspectors would not be too worried about that!

Who? :-)

12

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 2:52am

I see, however you worded that wrong. 13,000 tons standard..the other way means you are in serious trouble (as a standard ton is 2,000 pounds....it seems naval tonnage is in long tons of 2,240 pound each).

13

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 6:53am

Turkey and Chile don't have 8" quad designs in the works, how does the Philippines manage to find the money to design turrets that the big nations don't spend?

14

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 7:33am

Cheap construction?

Cast-off Italian designs?

False design to allow for twin or triple 10-13 inch guns?

HoOmAn

Keeper of the Sacred Block Coefficient

  • Send private message

15

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 9:36am

Quoted

Originally posted by Swamphen

Quoted

I thought the agreement on Transom Sterns was size related also

Only until 1930. After that it's Open Season.


We agreed on something? Including Walter?!?

Seriously, I can´t remember what/if we agreed on something finally but I know that speed was a compenent involved (34+kn). I could be wrong, though. So could you please link me to the discussion in question? I can´t find it in the Gentlemen´s Rules thread - which got hijacked by treaty talkers anyway. >(

Thanks,

HoOmAn

16

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 10:24am

We need to keep those Gentlemens rules up to date, so if we don't find the agreement, we need to make one.

17

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 12:50pm

What I understand (and understood back then) of all the mess is 34 knots and faster or smaller than 8,000 tons.
And no I never agreed to anything like that, but I think that had to do with the fact that I was in Canada at that moment.

18

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 6:33pm

I don't remember where it was, but there was a big hoo-rah about the G3's transom and it was finally decided - or at least seemed to be decided - that prior to 1930 a transom (with the exception of the G3) would be allowed by the gentlemen (gentlemen? where?!) on ships of 34 knots and up only, and from 1930 onwards it could be used on any ship...

19

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 6:36pm

Quoted

Turkey and Chile don't have 8" quad designs in the works, how does the Philippines manage to find the money to design turrets that the big nations don't spend?


I'd tell ya...but then you'd get a visit from a FIB*...

(* - Filipino In Black)

:-)

---

Whether I chose a triple 210mm or a quad 210mm, it would have to be a "new design", so I went for the quad.

And also...post-Treaty, if I re-engine the ships I can fit triple 240mm turrets on them... ;-)


20

Tuesday, March 15th 2005, 7:01pm

Having seen some of the other Filipinos, you don't happen to have a picture of the FIB.