WesWorld

hooray! finally i am making a website for Italy. There is very little at the moment but it should grow very quickly.

http://www.geocities.com/red_admiral_italy

Comments would be welcome.

Any comments ?

Well...

... It's rather empty at the moment (except the BBL) :-)
That and the BBL pic doesn't appear on the screen :-(

Walter

The URL given to the picture is
file:///D:/Gavin/my%20fleet/pictures/BBL.jpg

This means the link points to somewhere on your harddrive - the file must be placed on the server, and the link pointing the its location, for the rest of the us to be able to see it.

i'll try to sort it tomorrow

follow this

to whet your apetite

It's looking good so far. Will you be posting any additional items such as fleet organization, etc.?

One comment on BBL - her funnels seem rather small. Otherwise, she does have a "lean and mean" look to her.

It is easier to discuss the drawing if it is at hand....



BBL, laid down 1934

Displacement:

19,043 t light; 20,239 t standard; 22,702 t normal; 24,581 t full load

Loading submergence 986 tons/feet

Dimensions:

590.00 ft x 84.00 ft x 27.50 ft (normal load)

179.83 m x 25.60 m x 8.38 m

Armament:

6 - 14.00" / 356 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 2 guns, 1 superfiring turret)

12 - 4.70" / 119 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)

24 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns

Weight of broadside 8,902 lbs / 4,038 kg

Armour:

Belt 12.00" / 305 mm, ends unarmoured

Belts cover 70 % of normal area

Main turrets 13.00" / 330 mm, 2nd turrets 2.00" / 51 mm

Armour deck 5.00" / 127 mm, Conning tower 3.00" / 76 mm

Machinery:

Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,

Geared drive, 4 shafts, 77,053 shp / 57,481 Kw = 27.00 kts

Range 12,000nm at 15.00 kts

Complement:

924 - 1,202

Cost:

£9.384 million / $37.536 million


Distribution of weights at normal displacement:

Armament: 1,113 tons, 4.9 %

Armour: 7,209 tons, 31.8 %

Belts: 1,516 tons, 6.7 %, Armament: 2,448 tons, 10.8 %, Armour Deck: 3,194 tons, 14.1 %

Conning Tower: 52 tons, 0.2 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Machinery: 2,217 tons, 9.8 %

Hull, fittings & equipment: 8,504 tons, 37.5 %

Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,659 tons, 16.1 %

Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 4.2

Remarks:

Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is excellent

Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent


I think, her turrets/barbets are way too massive and large compared to the rest of the ship. Well, maybe her hull and turrets are in scale but then the superstructure is not. A 14" turret on the weatherdeck (like A or C turret) and thus without much barbet has a high of about 1 1/2 decks normally. I also think the 11,9cm gunhouses are somewhat small and - round what doesn´t look too realistic to me. Her funnels are a little bit too small and low, too.

In general her overall appearance heavily reminds of one of my own designs I posted on the warships1 Design Board some month ago - especially her bridge and attached FC equipement. Looks like we had the same ideas....



The similarities are really striking if one also compares the technical stats like year, armor (especially belt and main guns) or range....

For comparision, here are the full stats of my own design (just for those of you that don´t know both the pic and the stats yet because as I said I already posted this months ago):

Länder Klasse, laid down 1934

Length, 245.0 m x Beam, 28.5 m x Depth, 9.0 m
34214 tonnes normal displacement (31273 tonnes standard)

Main battery: 8 x 33.0-cm (2 x 4)
Secondary battery: 16 x 11.5-cm (8 x 2)
AA battery: 32 x 4.0-cm
Light battery: 24 x 2.0-cm

Weight of broadside: 4356 kg

Main belt, 30.0 cm; ends unarmored
Torpedo bulkhead, 4.0 cm
Armor deck, average 15.0 cm
Conning tower, 33.0 cm

Battery armor:
Main, 33.0 cm / secondary, 4.0 cm
AA, 1.0 cm shields / light guns, 1.0 cm shields

Maximum speed for 132042 shaft kw = 32.50 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 12000 nm / 15 knots

Typical complement: 1258-1635


Estimated cost, $68.624 million (£17.156 million)

Remarks:

Relative extent of belt armor, 92 percent of 'typical' coverage.

Ship is roomy, with superior accommodation and working space.


Distribution of weights:
Percent
normal
displacement:

Armament ......................... 1198 tonnes = 4 pct
Armor, total ..................... 11255 tonnes = 33 pct

Belt 2742 tonnes = 8 pct
Torpedo bulkhead 898 tonnes = 3 pct
Deck 5431 tonnes = 16 pct
C.T. 296 tonnes = 1 pct
Armament 1888 tonnes = 6 pct

Machinery ........................ 4622 tonnes = 14 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 12615 tonnes = 37 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 4424 tonnes = 13 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 100 tonnes = 0 pct
-----
34214 tonnes = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 2.0 m

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 29790 tonnes
Standard displacement: 31273 tonnes
Normal service: 34214 tonnes
Full load: 36430 tonnes

Loading submergence 4659 tonnes/metre

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


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.24

Shellfire needed to sink: 17452 kg = 35.0 x 33.0-cm shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.9
(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, 0.37

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.01

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


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.54
Sharpness coefficient: 0.36
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 7.57
'Natural speed' for length = 28.3 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 53 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 91 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 153 percent


Displacement factor: 114 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.02
(Structure weight per square
metre of hull surface: 848 kg)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.04
(for 6.20 m average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +0.30 m)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.02

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


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

803.60 x 93.48 x 29.52; 20.34 -- Dimensions
0.54 -- Block coefficient
1942 -- Year laid down
32.50 / 12000 / 15.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
100 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
8 x 12.99; 2; 0 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
16 x 4.53; 8 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
32 x 1.57 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
:
24 x 0.79 -- Fourth (light) battery
0 -- No torpedo armament
++++++++++
11.81 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 1.57; 92 -- Belt armor; relative extent
5.91 / 12.99 -- Deck / CT
12.99 / 1.57 / 0.00 / 0.00 -- Battery armor


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


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

Thanks guys for your comments. i'll add ship specs this week and carry on to other things later. Such as fleet dispostion.

I realised that i had worked the scale out wrong. My hand drawings are either 1:650 or 1:800. The computer images are 1 pixel:20cm, i think..... So something has gone wrong somewhere.

Hooman, unfortunately the drawing cannopt be at hand when using geocities. Linking to images is not allowed or something like that.

i have changed her aesthetically as well. The funnels were too small previously so i've incorporated them into 1 larger, higher funnel. The turrets, both 14" and 120mm, are now smaller and fit the scale. The sextuple 2pdr mount is the right scale however.


The concepts are both similar hooman, but i'd still call your's a battlecruiser and mine a battleship. Otherwise they are very similar.

Would it be possible to add a scale bar to your drawings? I find them to be the easiest way by which to judge the size of something.

What on earth is that ship serving as your wallpaper?

I still think her decks are too high but she looks much better with only one funnel.


Why do you call yours a BB and mine a BC?

Your ships look more british/Japanese than Italian. Do you have a story behind the change in asthetics or do your older historical battleships have this look also?

Rock doctor, i'll certainly add a scale bar when i get round to it. There are 2 ships as wallpaper. On the index there is G3 and on the ships page there is HMS Incomparable. Incomparable is the ultimate battlecruiser being over 1000ft long, 20" guns,35knt speed and an unrefeuled range of 35,000nm.

The decks are still a bit high, yes 3.2 metres high. so i'll lower them by about 1 metre. Well mine only goes at 27knts and yours does 32.5knts. Yours would outrun most battleships by a fair amount. BBL has to fight.

My style is really just a mix of various other navies. Bit from there, another bit from there. As for a story; all the old naval designers were shot for building Caio duilio as a repeat Conte di Cavour:-)

"My style is really just a mix of various other navies. Bit from there, another bit from there. As for a story; all the old naval designers were shot for building Caio duilio as a repeat Conte di Cavour:-)"

Jesus! I better never get into shipbuilding business in Italy.....

"Well mine only goes at 27knts and yours does 32.5knts. Yours would outrun most battleships by a fair amount. BBL has to fight."

You´re calling yours a BB just because it has to fight? Shouldn´t a BB also be heavier armored than a BC?

Well, I think the biggest problem here is that my vessel is ~10kts heavier than yours. Thus one can hardly compare those two. The only reason why I posted my pic again was its look and the similarities with your drawing.

Cheers,

HoOmAn