WesWorld

http://www.geocities.com/red_admiral_italy/1921bb01.html

Something a lot smaller than 40,000t but very capable nonetheless. On comparison to my Sicilia design, she is 7,500t smaller, mounts 2 less guns, is 0.8knts slower, and has very similar armour.

MM Roma, Italian Battleship laid down 1931

Displacement:
30,675 t light; 32,590 t standard; 35,999 t normal; 38,582 t full load
Loading submergence 1,386 tons/feet

Dimensions:
635.00 ft x 103.00 ft x 30.10 ft (normal load)
193.55 m x 31.39 m x 9.17 m

Armament:
8 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (2 Main turrets x 4 guns)
12 - 5.12" / 130 mm guns (6 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
16 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
Weight of broadside 14,336 lbs / 6,503 kg

Armour:
Belt 16.00" / 406 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 89 % of normal area
Main turrets 18.00" / 457 mm, 2nd turrets 2.00" / 51 mm
Armour deck 5.91" / 150 mm, Conning tower 3.00" / 76 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 1.80" / 46 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 104,231 shp / 77,756 Kw = 27.00 kts Expect top speed to be around 27.5-28knts due to transom stern.
Range 12,000nm at 15.00 kts

Complement:
1,306 - 1,698

Cost:
£13.157 million / $52.630 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,792 tons, 5.0 %
Armour: 12,518 tons, 34.8 %
Belts: 3,108 tons, 8.6 %, Armament: 3,210 tons, 8.9 %, Armour Deck: 5,303 tons, 14.7 %
Conning Tower: 71 tons, 0.2 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 827 tons, 2.3 %
Machinery: 3,117 tons, 8.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 13,198 tons, 36.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,324 tons, 14.8 %
Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 0.1 %

Metacentric height 5.7

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: 1.04
Shellfire needed to sink: 41,085 lbs / 18,636 Kg = 24.3 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 6.0
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 74 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.64
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.08

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.640
Sharpness coefficient: 0.44
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 5.88
'Natural speed' for length: 25.20 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 56 %
Trim: 68
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 83.6 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 159.2 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 109 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.96
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 195 lbs / square foot or 953 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.74
(for 22.50 ft / 6.86 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 2.94 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.02

....she is a very nice looking ship compairable to a KGV, which was historically built about 10 years later. She definately takes the smart route to battleship design by empasizing armor and guns first and then speed, rather than consintrate on speed and get a poorly protected ship. I would make only one suggestion, and that would be on her layout. Even though I like the unique look of having lifeboats on one side and a catipult on the other, I would reposition the lifeboats on both sides on the main deck and swap the AA and catipult positions. That said the current layout gives her a unique look.

I like the catapult on one side and a don't want a catapult right in the middle of the ship. I also want something that will stand out. her speed is very respectable at the moment but a later ship would have to be a little faster.