WesWorld

The Rock Doctor
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 37
(4/16/03 4:19:59 pm)
Coastal Defense Armorclads
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having no experience in building, operating, avoiding or sinking coastal defence armorclads (as defined in the treaty), the Indian Design Bureau invites comment on two possible design variants:

Variant 1:

ironclad, laid down 1922

Length, 450 ft x Beam, 69.0 ft x Depth, 17.5 ft
8539 tons normal displacement (8062 tons standard)

Main battery: 6 x 11.0-inch (2 x 3)
Secondary battery: 8 x 4.1-inch (4 x 2)
AA battery: 8 x 1.4-inch
Light battery: 8 x 0.6-inch

Weight of broadside: 4281 lbs

Main belt, 8.0 inches; ends unarmored
Armor deck, average 2.5 inches
C.T., 8.0 inches

Battery armor:
Main, 6.0" / secondary, 1.0"
AA, 1.0" shields / light guns, 1.0" shields

Maximum speed for 14410 shp = 20.00 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 6000 nm / 12 kts

Typical complement: 444-577


Estimated cost, $8.527 million (£2.132 million)

Remarks:

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 ......................... 535 tons = 6 pct
Armor, total ..................... 2604 tons = 30 pct

Belt 1006 tons = 12 pct
Deck 962 tons = 11 pct
C.T. 72 tons = 1 pct
Armament 564 tons = 7 pct

Machinery ........................ 489 tons = 6 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 3882 tons = 45 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 1004 tons = 12 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 25 tons = 0 pct
-----
8539 tons = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 4.0 ft

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 7535 tons
Standard displacement: 8062 tons
Normal service: 8539 tons
Full load: 8886 tons

Loading submergence 594 tons/foot

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


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.19

Shellfire needed to sink: 14066 lbs = 21.1 x 11.0-inch shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 2.5
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 73 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.60

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.46

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


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.55
Sharpness coefficient: 0.40
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 6.73
'Natural speed' for length = 21.2 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 45 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 68 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 134 percent


Displacement factor: 108 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.96
(Structure weight per square
foot of hull surface: 134 lbs)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.72
(for 15.0 ft average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +0.3 ft)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.02

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


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

450.00 x 69.00 x 17.50; 15.00 -- Dimensions
0.55 -- Block coefficient
1922 -- Year laid down
20.00 / 6000 / 12.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
25 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
6 x 11.00; 2; 0 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
8 x 4.10; 4 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
8 x 1.40 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
8 x 0.60 -- Fourth (light) battery
0 -- No torpedo armament
++++++++++
8.00 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 0.00; 100 -- Belt armor; relative extent
2.50 / 8.00 -- Deck / CT
6.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 -- Battery armor


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

Variant 2

ironclad, laid down 1923

Length, 450 ft x Beam, 69.0 ft x Depth, 17.5 ft
8539 tons normal displacement (8069 tons standard)

Main battery: 6 x 11.0-inch (2 x 3)
Secondary battery: 8 x 4.1-inch (4 x 2)
AA battery: 8 x 1.4-inch
Light battery: 8 x 0.6-inch

Weight of broadside: 4281 lbs

Main belt, 6.0 inches; ends unarmored
Armor deck, average 2.0 inches
C.T., 6.0 inches

Battery armor:
Main, 6.0" / secondary, 1.0"
AA, 1.0" shields / light guns, 1.0" shields

Maximum speed for 20815 shp = 22.00 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 6000 nm / 12 kts

Typical complement: 444-577


Estimated cost, $9.435 million (£2.359 million)

Remarks:

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 ......................... 535 tons = 6 pct
Armor, total ..................... 2142 tons = 25 pct

Belt 754 tons = 9 pct
Deck 770 tons = 9 pct
C.T. 54 tons = 1 pct
Armament 564 tons = 7 pct

Machinery ........................ 696 tons = 8 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 4144 tons = 49 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 997 tons = 12 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 25 tons = 0 pct
-----
8539 tons = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 3.8 ft

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 7542 tons
Standard displacement: 8069 tons
Normal service: 8539 tons
Full load: 8880 tons

Loading submergence 594 tons/foot

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


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.16

Shellfire needed to sink: 12467 lbs = 18.7 x 11.0-inch shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 2.2
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 65 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.58

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.19

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


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.55
Sharpness coefficient: 0.40
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 6.73
'Natural speed' for length = 21.2 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 50 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 76 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 134 percent


Displacement factor: 109 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.02
(Structure weight per square
foot of hull surface: 143 lbs)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.80
(for 15.0 ft average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +0.3 ft)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.08

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


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

450.00 x 69.00 x 17.50; 15.00 -- Dimensions
0.55 -- Block coefficient
1923 -- Year laid down
22.00 / 6000 / 12.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
25 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
6 x 11.00; 2; 0 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
8 x 4.10; 4 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
8 x 1.40 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
8 x 0.60 -- Fourth (light) battery
0 -- No torpedo armament
++++++++++
6.00 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 0.00; 100 -- Belt armor; relative extent
2.00 / 6.00 -- Deck / CT
6.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 -- Battery armor


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



King of Riva
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 39
(4/16/03 4:24:52 pm)
Re: Coastal Defense Armorclads
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Especially the second one reminds me of a Deutschland-class vessel. Just smaller, without 15cmers, less range and with 5kn less speed. But the armor layout really looks familiar...

Is this were you got your initial ideas from?

Ciao..

(Btw, I would build variant A if any of these two.)

The Rock Doctor
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 38
(4/16/03 4:45:33 pm)
Re: Coastal Defense Armorclads
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Deutschlands were part of it; although the initial design (not posted here) featured four twin 9.45" for a main battery. The main battery makes sense since it's the same weapon installed on the Queen Fallatia.

The Coast Defense Armorclad is a problematic one for India, which sees the opportunity to build up to 40,000 tons of...something. There is some question as to whether the tons should be used for patrol/escort cruisers, monitors, or other types. I'm not aware of many post-war vessels that would fit into the category defined under the treaty, apart from Scandanavian-style coastal defense battleships that don't strike me as being overly effective.

King of Riva
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 43
(4/16/03 4:59:09 pm)
Re: Coastal Defense Armorclads
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weren´t there also some coastal defence vessels in Thailand, Taiwan or so... Can´t really remember. Something with 2x2 20,3cm guns on 3500ts....?!?!?! Not sure.

thesmilingassassin
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 14
(4/16/03 7:25:21 pm)
indian coastal defence ships
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seeing as the SAE has had a big hand in the jump start of indias capital ship program would it make sence to aquire some twin 12" turrets from older SAE battleships as they are taken out of service? Would selling ships turrets violate the treaty rules of scraping?

King of Riva
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 44
(4/17/03 2:58:50 am)
Guns
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The guns of Queen Fallatias sistership are not available. The ship sank after hitting a drifting mine in 1917 - one reason why the SAE finally entered war on the Entente side.

But these guns were also used on the last two pre-dread classes. Some of these guns are too worn out, some others are used as coastal artillery. But there are enough guns of said type in the depots to outfit one of the proposed CDS. Selling them should not be a problem. First of all the treaty is still not in effect and second even if it were, there´s no paragraph that says one is not allowed to sell guns (and turrets).

Another idea is to build new guns of that type. The plans are still there.

Tigger on Coffee
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 2
(4/17/03 7:41:51 pm)
Thai Coast Def Ships
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted

Weren´t there also some coastal defence vessels in Thailand,

Warships of World War II

These things ? look quite cool, I think there were a pair of smaller ones too.

Tom

Pengolodh
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 2
(4/18/03 1:10:16 pm)
Re: Thai Coast Def Ships
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One or both of those were engaged by the French light cruiser Duguay-Trouain, being shot up very badly in the process, without inflicting comparable damage in return.

In the historical 1930s, the Swedish navy evaluated several variants, at one proposal advocated by Admiral de Champ (who did not have an 8000-ton limit to contend with) envisaged two types of CDS - Type A would be a 12,000 ton 23knot armourclad with six 11inch guns, and up to 8 inch armour, while Type B would be 8000-ton armoured cruisers, with six 21cm guns and 28 knots speed, with comparable armour, IIRC.

The Scandinavian-style coast-defence armourclads come in two distinct types - the 3000-5000ton 15-18knot variant with two main-guns of 8.2inch calibre, or the Sverige-class, of 7200 tons, 23 knots, with four 11inch guns. Armour remained at around 6-8 inches on the belt for most armourclads.
Best regards
Pengolodh
"Iraq will not be defeated. Iraq has now already achieved victory - apart from some technicalities."
- Mohsen Khalil, Iraqi Ambassador to the Arab League