WesWorld

c

Raise the freeboard. You will increase your hull strength by doing so.

And the treaty dosen't expire until 31 December 1936. So unless you intend to be a long time building it, it will be a capital ship.

nope. 6.5 m is the optimum point

Quoted

(for 19.69 ft / 6.00 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 2.18 ft)

With this, its cross-sectional hull strength is higher than its longitudinal.

c

Good speed, but a bit big for a cruiser killer. You will be over two years building her, and no small expense.

Also, while its over 40% larger than the Sviatoslav class, its gun firepower is just about the same. It'll sink a Sviatoslav of course, but will be sadly limping afterwards.

I try to keep cruiser-killers less than about 15ktons. Much more and I start to want to put capital ship armament on them:

1940 Heavy Cruiser, laid down 1940

Length, 225.0 m x Beam, 22.0 m x Depth, 7.5 m
16095 tonnes normal displacement (14496 tonnes standard)

Main battery: 9 x 24.0-cm (3 x 3; 1 superfiring)
Secondary battery: 8 x 13.0-cm (4 x 2)
AA battery: 16 x 3.7-cm (8 x 2)
Light battery: 16 x 1.3-cm (8 x 2)

Weight of broadside: 1981 kg

10 TT, 53.0 cm (2 quad tubes amidships, 2 single tubes forward)

Main belt, 15.0 cm; ends unarmored
Armor deck, average 6.0 cm
Conning tower, 20.0 cm

Battery armor:
Main, 20.0 cm / secondary, 2.5 cm
AA, 1.0 cm shields

Aircraft - 2 MBR-2 seaplanes

Maximum speed for 75441 shaft kw = 32.00 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 10000 nm / 15 knots

Typical complement: 714-929


Estimated cost, $31.666 million (£7.917 million)

Remarks:

Relative extent of belt armor, 82 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 ......................... 545 tonnes = 3 pct
Armor, total ..................... 3508 tonnes = 22 pct

Belt 968 tonnes = 6 pct
Deck 1322 tonnes = 8 pct
C.T. 108 tonnes = 1 pct
Armament 1110 tonnes = 7 pct

Machinery ........................ 2703 tonnes = 17 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 7005 tonnes = 44 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 2284 tonnes = 14 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 50 tonnes = 0 pct
-----
16095 tonnes = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 1.0 m

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 13811 tonnes
Standard displacement: 14496 tonnes
Normal service: 16095 tonnes
Full load: 17309 tonnes

Loading submergence 2835 tonnes/metre

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


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.05

Shellfire needed to sink: 9291 kg = 48.5 x 24.0-cm 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, 71 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.61

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.20

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


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.43
Sharpness coefficient: 0.31
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 8.94
'Natural speed' for length = 27.2 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 48 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 82 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 134 percent


Displacement factor: 122 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.99
(Structure weight per square
metre of hull surface: 686 kg)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.08
(for 5.80 m average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +0.72 m)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

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


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

738.00 x 72.16 x 24.60; 19.02 -- Dimensions
0.43 -- Block coefficient
1940 -- Year laid down
32.00 / 10000 / 15.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
50 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
9 x 9.45; 3; 1 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
8 x 5.12; 4 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
16 x 1.46 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
16 x 0.51 -- Fourth (light) battery
10 / 0 / 20.87 -- TT / submerged / size
++++++++++
5.91 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 0.00; 82 -- Belt armor; relative extent
2.36 / 7.87 -- Deck / CT
7.87 / 0.98 / 0.39 / 0.00 -- Battery armor


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


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

I can't resist posting a design in responce to some of these designs. Take a look at this design and tell me where I can improve her.

CB1, Atlantis, heavy cruiser, laid down 1938

Displacement:
16,333 t light; 17,087 t standard; 18,171 t normal; 18,965 t full load
Loading submergence 1,006 tons/feet

Dimensions:
720.00 ft x 73.00 ft x 22.00 ft (normal load)
219.46 m x 22.25 m x 6.71 m

Armament:
15 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (5 Main turrets x 3 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
12 - 5.10" / 130 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
16 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
30 - 1.00" / 25 mm guns
Weight of broadside 4,682 lbs / 2,124 kg
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 6.00" / 152 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 90 % of normal area
Main turrets 6.00" / 152 mm, 2nd turrets 2.00" / 51 mm
AA gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 2.00" / 51 mm, Conning tower 2.00" / 51 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 124,617 shp / 92,964 Kw = 32.57 kts
Range 10,000nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
782 - 1,017

Cost:
£8.685 million / $34.742 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 585 tons, 3.2 %
Armour: 3,870 tons, 21.3 %
Belts: 1,063 tons, 5.9 %, Armament: 1,474 tons, 8.1 %, Armour Deck: 1,303 tons, 7.2 %
Conning Tower: 30 tons, 0.2 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 3,412 tons, 18.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 8,391 tons, 46.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,838 tons, 10.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0.4 %

Metacentric height 3.1

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent
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: 24,172 lbs / 10,964 Kg = 94.4 x 8.0 " / 203 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 3.1
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 70 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.80
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.16

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.550
Sharpness coefficient: 0.35
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8.38
'Natural speed' for length: 26.83 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim: 60
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 86.7 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 184.3 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 118 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.07
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 150 lbs / square foot or 731 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.30
(for 24.00 ft / 7.32 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 6.94 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.09

I don't believe it. Other than that: what a fearsome vessel! A bit lightly armoured for my taste but still....

Bernhard

c

"Belts cover 75 % of normal area
Main belt does not fully protect magazines and engineering spaces

...

Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 109.6 % "

That's a lot of important stuff hanging out there...

This post oddly enough ended up as a new post dispite me responding to this one! Here is the design with increased cruising speed and a slight increase in armor.

CB5, Atlantis heavy cruiser laid down 1938

Displacement:
16,979 t light; 17,761 t standard; 19,593 t normal; 20,980 t full load
Loading submergence 1,065 tons/feet

Dimensions:
725.00 ft x 74.00 ft x 22.00 ft (normal load)
220.98 m x 22.56 m x 6.71 m

Armament:
15 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (5 Main turrets x 3 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
12 - 5.10" / 130 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
16 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
30 - 1.00" / 25 mm guns
Weight of broadside 4,682 lbs / 2,124 kg
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 8.00" / 203 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 90 % of normal area
Main turrets 6.00" / 152 mm, 2nd turrets 2.00" / 51 mm
AA gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 2.50" / 64 mm, Conning tower 2.00" / 51 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 132,205 shp / 98,625 Kw = 32.57 kts
Range 10,000nm at 15.00 kts

Complement:
828 - 1,076

Cost:
£8.977 million / $35.907 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 585 tons, 3.0 %
Armour: 4,669 tons, 23.8 %
Belts: 1,438 tons, 7.3 %, Armament: 1,475 tons, 7.5 %, Armour Deck: 1,725 tons, 8.8 %
Conning Tower: 31 tons, 0.2 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 3,620 tons, 18.5 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 8,029 tons, 41.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,614 tons, 13.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0.4 %

Metacentric height 3.4

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

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.03
Shellfire needed to sink: 27,313 lbs / 12,389 Kg = 106.7 x 8.0 " / 203 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 2.6
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 70 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.73
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.15

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.581
Sharpness coefficient: 0.36
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8.23
'Natural speed' for length: 26.93 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim: 61
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 84.0 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 184.7 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 118 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.00
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 138 lbs / square foot or 674 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.16
(for 24.00 ft / 7.32 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 6.68 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.01


!

If you used the buttons at the bottom of the page to get to the posting-window, you most likely hit the "New thread"-button rather than the "Reply"-button - they're next to each other.

Now I have to figure out how to delete the thread!
Anyway who here ponders alternate senarios for the washington treaty? I'm sure many have but how about this, alternate senarios to our own treaty? What if we had set tonnages for battlecruisers separate from battleships? Would armored cruisers and battlecruisers wind up being in the same classification? I ask this question because the very same Q came up on the warships1 board. Perhaps we could have seen battlecruisers be downgraded to the armored cruiser classification with a 12" gun, 27,000 ton limit. How would this affect BB and CA tonnage allotments?

I think at this point it would seem that the treaty would be long gone so the next lodgical step would be to build a ship to outclass all the rest. The following ship is classed as a heavy cruiser but like the Alaska class shes alot closer to a battlecruiser. Due to her BCE being in the battleship range (.575) she deserves torpedo protection in addition to significantly improved armor in comparasen to all those before her.

CB9, Atlantis heavy cruiser laid down 1940

Displacement:
27,157 t light; 28,494 t standard; 30,848 t normal; 32,608 t full load
Loading submergence 1,424 tons/feet

Dimensions:
785.00 ft x 92.00 ft x 26.00 ft (normal load)
239.27 m x 28.04 m x 7.92 m

Armament:
9 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 3 guns, 1 superfiring turret)
12 - 5.10" / 130 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
24 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
42 - 1.00" / 25 mm guns
Weight of broadside 8,639 lbs / 3,919 kg
6 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 10.00" / 254 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 90 % of normal area
Main belt does not fully protect magazines and engineering spaces
Main turrets 8.50" / 216 mm, 2nd turrets 2.00" / 51 mm
AA gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 3.00" / 76 mm, Conning tower 3.00" / 76 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 1.75" / 44 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 182,963 shp / 136,490 Kw = 33.05 kts
Range 10,000nm at 15.00 kts

Complement:
1,163 - 1,512

Cost:
£15.255 million / $61.020 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,080 tons, 3.5 %
Armour: 8,029 tons, 26.0 %
Belts: 2,203 tons, 7.1 %, Armament: 2,137 tons, 6.9 %, Armour Deck: 2,766 tons, 9.0 %
Conning Tower: 64 tons, 0.2 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 859 tons, 2.8 %
Machinery: 4,892 tons, 15.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 13,082 tons, 42.4 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,691 tons, 12.0 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0.2 %

Metacentric height 5.0

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

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.07
Shellfire needed to sink: 35,558 lbs / 16,129 Kg = 41.2 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.3
(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: 0.68
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.18

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.575
Sharpness coefficient: 0.37
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 7.66
'Natural speed' for length: 28.02 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 55 %
Trim: 60
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 101.3 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 215.5 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 116 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.98
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 172 lbs / square foot or 841 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.37
(for 28.00 ft / 8.53 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 9.03 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.01

By 1936, the Izmail class battlecruisers will be 18 years old. Long before then, they will be useless in the battlecruiser role, since they are already much too slow to catch cruisers (only 27 kts), and will soon be too slow to run from battleships. So they'll be treated as moderately fast, well armed (12x14") 2nd class battleships in Russian naval doctrine. When they're replaced however, there will be a chance to re-introduce the battlecruiser concept (whether that's a good idea in 1936 is another question). The following displace less than 1000 tons more than the Izmail class, while being much more capable in the battlecruiser role:

Russian Battlecruiser, laid down 1936

Length, 270.0 m x Beam, 30.5 m x Depth, 8.0 m
35934 tonnes normal displacement (33216 tonnes standard)

Main battery: 6 x 35.6-cm (3 x 2; 1 superfiring)
Secondary battery: 16 x 13.0-cm (8 x 2)
AA battery: 40 x 3.7-cm

Weight of broadside: 4270 kg

Main belt, 30.0 cm@ 15 degrees; ends unarmored
Armor deck, average 12.0 cm
Conning tower, 10.0 cm

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

Aircraft - 3 Seaplanes, 1 Catapult

Maximum speed for 140267 shaft kw = 33.00 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 10000 nm / 15 knots

Typical complement: 1305-1696


Estimated cost, $59.787 million (£14.947 million)

Remarks:

Relative extent of belt armor, 74 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 ......................... 1174 tonnes = 3 pct
Armor, total ..................... 10247 tonnes = 29 pct

Belt 2506 tonnes = 7 pct
Deck 5131 tonnes = 14 pct
C.T. 93 tonnes = 0 pct
Armament 2518 tonnes = 7 pct

Machinery ........................ 5274 tonnes = 15 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 14944 tonnes = 42 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 4220 tonnes = 12 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 75 tonnes = 0 pct
-----
35934 tonnes = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 1.9 m

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 31714 tonnes
Standard displacement: 33216 tonnes
Normal service: 35934 tonnes
Full load: 37965 tonnes

Loading submergence 5501 tonnes/metre

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


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.14

Shellfire needed to sink: 25567 kg = 40.9 x 35.6-cm shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.3
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 70 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.45

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.20

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


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.54
Sharpness coefficient: 0.36
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 8.21
'Natural speed' for length = 29.8 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: 74 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 214 percent


Displacement factor: 121 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.00
(Structure weight per square
metre of hull surface: 862 kg)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.00
(for 7.61 m average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +1.65 m)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

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


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

885.60 x 100.04 x 26.24; 24.96 -- Dimensions
0.54 -- Block coefficient
1936 -- Year laid down
33.00 / 10000 / 15.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
75 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
6 x 14.02; 3; 1 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
16 x 5.12; 8 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
40 x 1.46 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
0 -- No fourth (light) battery
0 -- No torpedo armament
++++++++++
11.81 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 0.00; 74 -- Belt armor; relative extent
4.72 / 3.94 -- Deck / CT
11.81 / 0.98 / 0.98 / 0.00 -- Battery armor


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


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

Although the various designs are interesting, I can't possibly guess at what I'll be building in the thirties. I'm still hashing out the twenties.

India will be laying down something vaguely along these lines in 1923, but I will refrain from posting the specifications and line drawing until the ship is officially ordered in mid-1922...

J

my first try on a heavy cruiser. I've standed at a standard displacement of 13000 just for the challenge of it. All in all I think this ends being a very good ship, even while it can't be compared with the heavy ones in the posts up in this same thread





Vizcaya, Spanish Heavy Cruiser laid down 1936

Displacement:
12.374 t light; 12.923 t standard; 14.056 t normal; 14.905 t full load
Loading submergence 825 tons/feet

Dimensions:
680,00 ft x 65,00 ft x 21,00 ft (normal load)
207,26 m x 19,81 m x 6,40 m

Armament:
9 - 8,00" / 203 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 3 guns, 1 superfiring turret)
12 - 5,00" / 127 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
12 - 1,57" / 40 mm AA guns
10 - 3,00" / 76 mm guns
Weight of broadside 3.212 lbs / 1.457 kg
8 - 21,0" / 533,4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 5,50" / 140 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 125 % of normal area
Main turrets 6,00" / 152 mm, 2nd turrets 0,50" / 13 mm
Armour deck 2,00" / 51 mm, Conning tower 6,00" / 152 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 1,00" / 25 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 93.532 shp / 69.775 Kw = 31,50 kts
Range 12.000nm at 12,00 kts

Complement:
645 - 839

Cost:
£5,999 million / $23,997 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 402 tons, 2,9 %
Armour: 3.440 tons, 24,5 %
Belts: 1.200 tons, 8,5 %, Armament: 752 tons, 5,4 %, Armour Deck: 1.069 tons, 7,6 %
Conning Tower: 75 tons, 0,5 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 343 tons, 2,4 %
Machinery: 2.624 tons, 18,7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5.909 tons, 42,0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1.681 tons, 12,0 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0,0 %

Metacentric height 3,0

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is cramped
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: 1,07
Shellfire needed to sink: 11.514 lbs / 5.223 Kg = 45,0 x 8,0 " / 203 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 1,6
(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: 0,73
Relative quality as seaboat: 1,24

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0,530
Sharpness coefficient: 0,34
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8,62
'Natural speed' for length: 26,08 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 52 %
Trim: 57
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 120,2 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 164,3 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 118 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0,99
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 124 lbs / square foot or 607 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1,16
(for 22,00 ft / 6,71 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 5,79 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1,01







as always, any comments will be welcome

you're still caught in the WT, the CT allows a main calibre of 210mm ;-)

also a cruiser with morethan 1:10 L:B? we kind of have a gentleman's agreement not to do that.

Bernhard

I ran a test this morning on BigGun (Yep, I found that program too ). 210mm guns don't give great advantages over 203mm, and the hull structural integrity doesn't suffer that much with the lighter main battery.


about the L/B ratio ,well didn't know about that. Will try to rework the design with more beamy dimensions .



[edit] ok, I modified it. I increased beam, decreased lenght, erased the torpedo bulkhead and modified a bit the block coeficient. All this had the side effect of reducing the overall volume for machinery so I could lower the lenght of the armor belt cover, too.

Thanks to all that, I was able to increase slightly the main and secondary battery caliber (from 203mm to 205mm, from 5inch to 130mm), increase speed for about .75knots; and resistance against damages went waaaay up, even against torpedoes. And now the ship compartmentation&Space is no longer cramped, but adequate, and the ship still is great in heavy seas.

Lesson learnt: Never use a bulkhead as a substitute for more beam in a cruiser. It ain't worth it


new design specs:


Vizcaya, Spanish Heavy Cruiser laid down 1930

Displacement:
12.386 t light; 12.942 t standard; 13.929 t normal; 14.664 t full load
Loading submergence 820 tons/feet

Dimensions:
660,00 ft x 67,00 ft x 21,00 ft (normal load)
201,17 m x 20,42 m x 6,40 m

Armament:
9 - 8,07" / 205 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 3 guns, 1 superfiring turret)
12 - 5,12" / 130 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
12 - 1,57" / 40 mm AA guns
10 - 3,00" / 76 mm guns
Weight of broadside 3.329 lbs / 1.510 kg
8 - 21,0" / 533,4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 5,50" / 140 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 98 % of normal area
Main turrets 6,00" / 152 mm, 2nd turrets 0,50" / 13 mm
Armour deck 2,00" / 51 mm, Conning tower 6,00" / 152 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 103.922 shp / 77.526 Kw = 32,25 kts
Range 10.000nm at 12,00 kts

Complement:
641 - 833

Cost:
£5,118 million / $20,472 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 416 tons, 3,0 %
Armour: 2.849 tons, 20,5 %
Belts: 932 tons, 6,7 %, Armament: 780 tons, 5,6 %, Armour Deck: 1.062 tons, 7,6 %
Conning Tower: 75 tons, 0,5 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0 %
Machinery: 3.149 tons, 22,6 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5.971 tons, 42,9 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1.544 tons, 11,1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0,0 %

Metacentric height 3,0

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
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: 1,06
Shellfire needed to sink: 17.399 lbs / 7.892 Kg = 66,2 x 8,1 " / 205 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 1,9
(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: 0,74
Relative quality as seaboat: 1,22

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0,525
Sharpness coefficient: 0,34
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8,39
'Natural speed' for length: 25,69 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 55 %
Trim: 58
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 96,7 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 171,8 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 112 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0,97
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 126 lbs / square foot or 617 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1,35
(for 23,00 ft / 7,01 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 6,82 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1,00