You are not logged in.

17inc

Unregistered

1

Monday, August 25th 2003, 8:01am

well hears my cheat BB desing

well hears my cheats for my nelson calss BBs the first one is for the new papers second ones what the Admiralty is going with shes 1,823 tons over the TC limit and a 1 kts fraster



Nelson, UK AUST Battleship laid down 1929

Displacement:
37,806 t light; 40,000 t standard; 43,192 t normal; 45,573 t full load
Loading submergence 1,659 tons/feet

Dimensions:
726.81 ft x 106.50 ft x 30.00 ft (normal load)
221.53 m x 32.46 m x 9.14 m

Armament:
9 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 3 guns, 1 superfiring turret)
Main turrets are grouped together
12 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
10 - 1.56" / 40 mm AA guns
15 - 0.80" / 20 mm guns
Weight of broadside 15,960 lbs / 7,239 kg

Armour:
Belt 15.00" / 381 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 89 % of normal area
Main belt does not fully protect magazines and engineering spaces
Main turrets 15.00" / 381 mm, 2nd turrets 4.00" / 102 mm
AA gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm, Light gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 5.00" / 127 mm, Conning tower 15.00" / 381 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 2.50" / 64 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 160,240 shp / 119,539 Kw = 29.66 kts
Range 24,000nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
1,498 - 1,947

Cost:
£14.752 million / $59.009 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,995 tons, 4.6 %
Armour: 14,800 tons, 34.3 %
Belts: 3,346 tons, 7.7 %, Armament: 4,373 tons, 10.1 %, Armour Deck: 5,370 tons, 12.4 %
Conning Tower: 400 tons, 0.9 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 1,311 tons, 3.0 %
Machinery: 4,921 tons, 11.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 16,090 tons, 37.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,386 tons, 12.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 5.5

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.00
Shellfire needed to sink: 45,912 lbs / 20,825 Kg = 27.2 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 6.5
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 67 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.64
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.00

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.651
Sharpness coefficient: 0.43
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.34
'Natural speed' for length: 26.96 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
Trim: 67
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 90.1 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 176.4 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 106 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.96
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 200 lbs / square foot or 976 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.41
(for 23.90 ft / 7.28 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 3.61 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00


Nelson, UK AUST Battleship laid down 1929

Displacement:
39,591 t light; 41,823 t standard; 45,091 t normal; 47,525 t full load
Loading submergence 1,723 tons/feet

Dimensions:
726.81 ft x 109.50 ft x 30.00 ft (normal load)
221.53 m x 33.38 m x 9.14 m

Armament:
9 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 3 guns, 1 superfiring turret)
Main turrets are grouped together
12 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
10 - 1.56" / 40 mm AA guns
15 - 0.80" / 20 mm guns
Weight of broadside 15,960 lbs / 7,239 kg

Armour:
Belt 15.00" / 381 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 89 % of normal area
Main belt does not fully protect magazines and engineering spaces
Main turrets 15.00" / 381 mm, 2nd turrets 4.00" / 102 mm
AA gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm, Light gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 5.00" / 127 mm, Conning tower 15.00" / 381 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 2.50" / 64 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 174,666 shp / 130,300 Kw = 30.02 kts
Range 24,000nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
1,547 - 2,011

Cost:
£15.250 million / $61.000 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,995 tons, 4.4 %
Armour: 15,308 tons, 33.9 %
Belts: 3,406 tons, 7.6 %, Armament: 4,601 tons, 10.2 %, Armour Deck: 5,578 tons, 12.4 %
Conning Tower: 411 tons, 0.9 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 1,311 tons, 2.9 %
Machinery: 5,364 tons, 11.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 16,924 tons, 37.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,500 tons, 12.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 6.4

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.06
Shellfire needed to sink: 51,233 lbs / 23,239 Kg = 30.4 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 7.1
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 61 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.57
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.02

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.661
Sharpness coefficient: 0.44
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.25
'Natural speed' for length: 26.96 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim: 60
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 89.8 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 192.3 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 107 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.95
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 202 lbs / square foot or 986 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.54
(for 25.90 ft / 7.89 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 5.43 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00



2

Monday, August 25th 2003, 10:41am

hmmm

If I were you I'd forget about the cheat, for 1 extra knot speed its not worth going over the limit by 1823 tons. The better way to get that extra knot is to drop an inch of the side and turret armour and a half inch off the torpedo bulkhead, tinker here tinker there and get closer to the treaty. A speed of 29 knots is still respectable.

17inc

Unregistered

3

Monday, August 25th 2003, 12:48pm

well can i take her up to 5,151tons

well this one has a 5,151tons over the the limit tell what you think of this one desing



Nelson, UK AUST Battleship laid down 1929

Displacement:
42,850 t light; 45,151 t standard; 48,536 t normal; 51,050 t full load
Loading submergence 1,739 tons/feet

Dimensions:
726.81 ft x 110.50 ft x 32.00 ft (normal load)
221.53 m x 33.68 m x 9.75 m

Armament:
9 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 3 guns, 1 superfiring turret)
Main turrets are grouped together
12 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
10 - 1.56" / 40 mm AA guns
15 - 0.80" / 20 mm guns
Weight of broadside 15,960 lbs / 7,239 kg

Armour:
Belt 15.30" / 389 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 95 % of normal area
Main turrets 15.00" / 381 mm, 2nd turrets 4.00" / 102 mm
AA gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm, Light gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 6.00" / 152 mm, Conning tower 15.00" / 381 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 1.50" / 38 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 211,310 shp / 157,638 Kw = 31.11 kts
Range 24,000nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
1,635 - 2,125

Cost:
£16.337 million / $65.347 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,995 tons, 4.1 %
Armour: 16,588 tons, 34.2 %
Belts: 3,730 tons, 7.7 %, Armament: 4,832 tons, 10.0 %, Armour Deck: 6,755 tons, 13.9 %
Conning Tower: 432 tons, 0.9 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 839 tons, 1.7 %
Machinery: 6,490 tons, 13.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 17,777 tons, 36.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,686 tons, 11.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 6.3

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.04
Shellfire needed to sink: 53,602 lbs / 24,313 Kg = 31.8 x 15.0 " / 381 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: 59 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.58
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.00

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.661
Sharpness coefficient: 0.44
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.10
'Natural speed' for length: 26.96 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 60 %
Trim: 59
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 92.4 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 197.8 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 107 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.95
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 205 lbs / square foot or 1,002 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.72
(for 27.90 ft / 8.50 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 7.13 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

4

Monday, August 25th 2003, 2:28pm

Yuck...

...By which I mean, "That's not something I really want to encounter." Even the treaty-compliant version is a brute.

It's no wonder I can't decide whether to build battleships or battlecruisers for India.

5

Monday, August 25th 2003, 6:42pm

of the three

Surprizingly the first two designs are more resistant to torpedo damage and marginally more resistant to shell fire, so I think the smaller designs are better.

6

Monday, August 25th 2003, 6:54pm

Well, that happens when you increase the speed of a ship. It'll probably be better if the gained hull strength is used for armor, rather than speed.

Walter

7

Monday, August 25th 2003, 7:28pm

wow it is smaller than 50,000t!

Magazines and turbines take up room in the ships hull. with 1 gun and 10knt speed it can take lots of damage because there is a lot of empty space. More speed means bigger turbines so there is less space in which the damage can be absorbed.

A way to make your ship able to take lots of damage is to make it huge and have a phenonmenol range. Take Nagato, the boiler, for example.

17inc

Unregistered

8

Tuesday, September 2nd 2003, 6:35am

well hears number 3 with more Armour

this one has more Armour then other 3 and a bit slower. by the way any one seen Harrythered





Nelson, UK AUST Battleship laid down 1929

Displacement:
42,850 t light; 45,151 t standard; 48,536 t normal; 51,050 t full load
Loading submergence 1,739 tons/feet

Dimensions:
726.81 ft x 110.50 ft x 32.00 ft (normal load)
221.53 m x 33.68 m x 9.75 m

Armament:
9 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 3 guns, 1 superfiring turret)
Main turrets are grouped together
12 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
10 - 1.56" / 40 mm AA guns
15 - 0.80" / 20 mm guns
Weight of broadside 15,960 lbs / 7,239 kg

Armour:
Belt 15.40" / 391 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 95 % of normal area
Main turrets 15.40" / 391 mm, 2nd turrets 4.00" / 102 mm
AA gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm, Light gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 6.00" / 152 mm, Conning tower 16.00" / 406 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 2.70" / 69 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 185,516 shp / 138,395 Kw = 30.15 kts
Range 24,000nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
1,635 - 2,125

Cost:
£15.893 million / $63.572 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,995 tons, 4.1 %
Armour: 17,429 tons, 35.9 %
Belts: 3,754 tons, 7.7 %, Armament: 4,948 tons, 10.2 %, Armour Deck: 6,755 tons, 13.9 %
Conning Tower: 461 tons, 0.9 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 1,510 tons, 3.1 %
Machinery: 5,698 tons, 11.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 17,729 tons, 36.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,686 tons, 11.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 6.2

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.04
Shellfire needed to sink: 57,423 lbs / 26,047 Kg = 34.0 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 8.0
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 64 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.60
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.09

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.661
Sharpness coefficient: 0.44
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.10
'Natural speed' for length: 26.96 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim: 59
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 86.1 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 197.8 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 108 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.94
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 205 lbs / square foot or 999 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.74
(for 27.90 ft / 8.50 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 7.13 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

9

Tuesday, September 2nd 2003, 5:22pm

Regarding the latest cheat version: instead of incrementally increasing all aspects of your armor, leave the belt and bulkheads alone and add a full inch to your battery armor.

A couple hundred tons of miscellaneous weight for a floatplane and flag facilities wouldn't be a bad thing either. Unless RAN admirals work out of cruisers, that is.

To echo comments made elsewhere, the design is solid enough on 40,000 t that I don't see cheating as necessary in your case. Are you playing Australia as a treaty-breaker or a treaty-observer?

Think I saw Harry visiting a week or two ago; I assume he's still around in order for the Greco-Italian events to be taking place.

J

10

Tuesday, September 2nd 2003, 6:29pm

Harry emailed me today and has visited the board recently. If you want his email then PM me.

I echo the Rock doctor's comments. Do you really need to cheat? A floatplane would be an asset to an ocean going navy such as the RAN.

11

Tuesday, September 2nd 2003, 7:01pm

Well, I guess you would cheat because:
- You want to have a slightly bigger ship than other nations.
- You want to have a slightly better ship than other nations.
- You would otherwise exceed the maximum tonnage allowed for a certain type of vessel.
I guess in 17inc's case, he would go for the first option. :-)

Floatplane? Always useful to have one aboard.

Walter

12

Tuesday, September 2nd 2003, 8:00pm

Going for a bigger ship would have been my guess too...

Those are all possible reasons for somebody to cheat; I'm specifically interested in 17inc's rationale, is all.

J

13

Tuesday, September 2nd 2003, 10:32pm

well

I personally think all this talk on cheating so early in the sim is pointless. Very few ships were being designed to displace around 35,000 tons, and off hand I think Hood and the Nagatos were the only ships that made it to the build stage and completion. 40,000 tons is to me a very generous tonnage alotment considering what you can do to a KGV or Nelson class BB with an extra 5000 tons. A nelson with 5000 extra tons gets you a conventional main armament layout and more speed. KGV with and extra 5000 tons gets you several more knots speed, 12x14", 9x15" or 9x16" guns.