WesWorld

17inc
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 27
(4/26/03 12:39:40 am)
Reply these my aircarft carriers of this desing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this my Cv of 25,044tons its just over the limit the other date is just afthere the refit im useing the lay down date as a refit date she then in 1920 othere in1933
there names HMAS Parramater
Goulburn


Furirous Class, UK AUST Aircaft carrier laid down 1920

Displacement:
24,407 t light; 25,044 t standard; 28,105 t normal; 30,441 t full load
Loading submergence 1,361 tons/feet

Dimensions:
786.80 ft x 89.30 ft x 25.00 ft (normal load)

Armament:
10 - 5.5 " (140 mm))
5 - 3 " (76 mm) AA
5 - 0.4 " (10 mm)
Weight of broadside 900 lbs (408 kg)

Armour:
Belt 3.00 ", upper belt 3.00 ", end belts 2.00 ", belts cover 100 % of normal area
AA gun shields 2.00 ", Light gun shields 2.00 "
Armour deck 4.00 ", Conning tower 10.00 ", Torpedo bulkhead 5.00 "

Machinery:
169,707 shp steam turbines, oil fired boilers = 33.00 kts, range 26,500nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
1,085 - 1,410

Cost:
£4.206 million / $16.824 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 112 tons, 0.4 %
Armour: 7,579 tons, 27.0 %
Belts: 1,463 tons, 5.2 %, Armament: 25 tons, 0.1 %, Armour Deck: 3,526 tons, 12.5 %
Conning Tower: 200 tons, 0.7 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 2,365 tons, 8.4 %
Machinery: 5,934 tons, 21.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 9,906 tons, 35.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,698 tons, 13.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 875 tons, 3.1 %

Metacentric height 5.4

Remarks:
Room for 35 aircraft 15 figther + 15 torpedoe bomber and 5 reconisent palns
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: 1.14
Shellfire needed to sink: 33,191 lbs = 399.0 x 5.5 " shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.8
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 100 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.04
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.23

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.56
Sharpness coefficient: 0.37
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 7.92
'Natural speed' for length: 28.05 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim: 82
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 97.7 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 200.7 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 132 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.16
(Structure weight per square foot of hull surface: 140 lbs)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.12
(for 24.00 ft average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 5.38 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.13

Furirous Class, UK AUST Aircaft carrier laid down 1933

Displacement:
24,602 t light; 25,226 t standard; 28,105 t normal; 30,295 t full load
Loading submergence 1,361 tons/feet

Dimensions:
786.80 ft x 89.30 ft x 25.00 ft (normal load)

Armament:
15 - 4.5 " (114 mm))
25 - 1.56 " (40 mm) AA
59 - 0.8 " (20 mm)
Weight of broadside 746 lbs (339 kg)

Armour:
Belt 3.00 ", upper belt 3.00 ", end belts 2.00 ", belts cover 100 % of normal area
AA gun shields 2.00 ", Light gun shields 2.00 "
Armour deck 4.00 ", Conning tower 10.00 ", Torpedo bulkhead 5.00 "

Machinery:
169,707 shp steam turbines, oil fired boilers = 33.00 kts, range 28,500nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
1,085 - 1,410

Cost:
£7.713 million / $30.853 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 93 tons, 0.3 %
Armour: 7,672 tons, 27.3 %
Belts: 1,463 tons, 5.2 %, Armament: 118 tons, 0.4 %, Armour Deck: 3,526 tons, 12.5 %
Conning Tower: 200 tons, 0.7 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 2,365 tons, 8.4 %
Machinery: 4,945 tons, 17.6 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 11,016 tons, 39.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,503 tons, 12.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 875 tons, 3.1 %

Metacentric height 5.0

Remarks:
Aircraft 35 15 figther+15 torpedo 5 recon
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is excellent
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: 1.09
Shellfire needed to sink: 38,368 lbs = 842.1 x 4.5 " shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 6.1
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 100 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.04
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.20

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.56
Sharpness coefficient: 0.37
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 7.92
'Natural speed' for length: 28.05 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim: 83
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 82.6 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 200.7 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 147 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.29
(Structure weight per square foot of hull surface: 156 lbs)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.25
(for 24.00 ft average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 5.38 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.26




Edited by: 17inc at: 4/26/03 3:12:13 am

AdmKuznetsov
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 25
(4/26/03 6:57:55 am)
Reply Re: these my aircarft carriers of this desing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, a 25,000 ton carrier with an air wing of 29 aircraft? Tha's what you get for a miscellaneous weight of 875 tons. For a carrier of this size, you should try for a misc weight of 6400 tons or more, for an air wing of 80+ aircraft.

Visit my Russian/French fantasy fleet page:
admkuznetsov.tripod.com/

Rooijen10
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 89
(4/26/03 8:23:00 am)
Reply Re: these my aircarft carriers of this desing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This carrier has a standard displacement wich is more than three times that of my Hosho, yet carries less planes than the Hosho.

Regarding the springstyle rule of planes aboard a carrier, etc., I look at it differently than others may. While (according to the rules) 6400 tons is needed for 80 aircraft, I believe that 2000 tons (80 x 25 tons) can also be used (depending on the weight of the plane), however (!) this would have a serious impact on the aircraft operation abilities of the carrier. It would limit the range (i.e. number of missions) and the ammuntion of the aircraft and other stuff like maintenance crew and spare parts, space to work in, etc.
Remember that 6400 / 80 = 80 tons assigned to one plane. That is probably the same as one fully laden Tomcat (33 ton), with fuel and ammo for 2 more missions to waste (31 tons), crew, maintenance crew with their equipment, electronics, and spare parts (misc 16 tons; that is a rough guess though).
This is all based without applying the jet rule of 2/3. In that case, 120 tons would be assigned to one jet... in that case you have fuel and ammo for 2.5 more missions.
However we want to operate our carrier wing at full potential (at least I want to operate my planes at full potential) and in that case you'll use 6400 tons rather than 2000 tons. Truly, someone who would decide to assign 2000 tons to 80 aircraft would be pretty stupid. That is sacrificing airwing performance in favor of something else. An 80 plane airwing with 2000 tons assigned on the carrier will have a performance rating which is less than one third of an 80 plane airwing with 6400 tons assigned on the carrier.

Just my thoughts...

Walter

King of Riva
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 69
(4/26/03 9:30:21 am)
Reply Of course no purpose-build carrier beyond 22kts is allowed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nt

Rooijen10
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 91
(4/26/03 9:36:52 am)
Reply Re: Of course no purpose-build carrier beyond 22kts is allow
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True... only conversions.
How about that limit ? I thought it was 27,000 tons. I believe an error was made in the one currently posted and the maximum was listed as 33,000 tons, right ?

Walter

King of Riva
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 71
(4/26/03 11:16:47 am)
Reply Re: Of course no purpose-build carrier beyond 22kts is allow
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Convertions are allowed up to 27kts, only Atlantis is allowed to get two 30kts CV-convertions but should give away other stuff in return.

thesmilingassassin
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 44
(4/26/03 6:41:54 pm)
Reply carrier tonnage limit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpose built carriers cannot exceed 22,000, while conversions cannot exceed 27,000 tons. Atlantis gives up a 14" BB and two 12" BCs in order to retain these two large carriers.

Rooijen10
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 97
(4/27/03 4:39:06 am)
Reply Re: carrier tonnage limit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
... and of course, only two such conversions may be made.

About conversions:
Am I right when I think that combined freeboard + depth as a battleship is equal to combined freeboard + depth as a carrier ? Or was it usual to make adjustments in that area ?

Walter


thesmilingassassin
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 47
(4/27/03 5:09:15 am)
Reply no
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you look at ark royal a significant portion of combined freeboard is above water. If you were to convert a BC to a carrier the hull may sit slightly lower in the water but because of the added hangar structure the freeboard increases, sort of. The main deck would still be important, as even as a carier if the main deck is below water you are on your way to davey jones locker.
The glorious had a draft of 23 feet 4" as a BC and 24 feet as a carrier, her armor was unaltered.


Rooijen10
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 99
(4/27/03 5:55:41 am)
Reply Re: no
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought that the added hangar structure would be part of the ship's superstructure and that freeboard would still be the distance between the waterline and the main deck.

Walter

King of Riva
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 77
(4/27/03 7:57:57 am)
Reply That´s up to you...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can build your CVs like the IJN or the USN did. Then your hangar(s) and flightdeck is part of the superstructure. Or you can do it like the British or Germans and build the hangar(s) as an integral part of your hull.