WesWorld

Alright, I designed this beastie somewhat after the M-Project Cruisers, though fitted it with some calibers that some might find odd. Thoughts are welcome. The main guns are based off the earlier German 17cm, but designed for longer range and effect. The rest, should be self explanatory. So, without further adieu, here we go:

Shel'keth, Khodan Shel'keth Class Cruiser laid down 1950

Displacement:
10,074 t light; 10,988 t standard; 34,326 t normal; 52,996 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(607.08 ft / 590.55 ft) x 55.77 ft (Bulges 65.62 ft) x (49.21 / 74.93 ft)
(185.04 m / 180.00 m) x 17.00 m (Bulges 20.00 m) x (15.00 / 22.84 m)

Armament:
8 - 6.69" / 170 mm 60.0 cal guns - 164.19lbs / 74.48kg shells, 150 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1942 Model
2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline, aft evenly spread
1 raised mount aft
2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline, forward evenly spread
1 raised mount
8 - 5.04" / 128 mm 61.0 cal guns - 57.32lbs / 26.00kg shells, 180 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1940 Model
4 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
10 - 2.17" / 55.0 mm 77.0 cal guns - 5.76lbs / 2.61kg shells, 2,000 per gun
Breech loading guns in deck mounts, 1944 Model
6 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
4 x Single mounts on centreline, evenly spread
2 double raised mounts
32 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm 45.0 cal guns - 0.25lbs / 0.11kg shells, 2,000 per gun
Breech loading guns in deck mounts, 1938 Model
8 x 2 row quad mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 1,838 lbs / 834 kg
Main Torpedoes
8 - 24.0" / 610 mm, 29.53 ft / 9.00 m torpedoes - 2.524 t each, 20.192 t total
In 2 sets of deck mounted side rotating tubes
2nd Torpedoes
16 - 24.0" / 610 mm, 29.53 ft / 9.00 m torpedoes - 2.524 t each, 40.384 t total
In 2 sets of deck mounted reloads

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 1.97" / 50 mm 379.59 ft / 115.70 m 8.96 ft / 2.73 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 99 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead - Additional damage containing bulkheads:
0.59" / 15 mm 379.59 ft / 115.70 m 20.93 ft / 6.38 m
Beam between torpedo bulkheads 39.37 ft / 12.00 m

- Hull Bulges:
0.20" / 5 mm 262.47 ft / 80.00 m 19.69 ft / 6.00 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0.59" / 15 mm 0.20" / 5 mm 0.39" / 10 mm
2nd: 0.20" / 5 mm - 0.20" / 5 mm
3rd: 0.12" / 3 mm - -

- Armoured deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 0.98" / 25 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 3 shafts, 91,883 shp / 68,545 Kw = 27.00 kts
Range 30,000nm at 25.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 42,007 tons

Complement:
1,260 - 1,639

Cost:
£7.069 million / $28.276 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 783 tons, 2.3 %
- Guns: 693 tons, 2.0 %
- Weapons: 91 tons, 0.3 %
Armour: 914 tons, 2.7 %
- Belts: 276 tons, 0.8 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 174 tons, 0.5 %
- Bulges: 38 tons, 0.1 %
- Armament: 48 tons, 0.1 %
- Armour Deck: 379 tons, 1.1 %
Machinery: 2,198 tons, 6.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 6,078 tons, 17.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 24,252 tons, 70.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 100 tons, 0.3 %
- Above deck: 100 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
110,978 lbs / 50,339 Kg = 740.3 x 6.7 " / 170 mm shells or 8.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.63
Metacentric height 4.7 ft / 1.4 m
Roll period: 12.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 100 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.29
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.68

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low quarterdeck ,
a normal bow and small transom stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.630 / 0.639
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 26.00 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 60
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.28 ft / 1.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 28.41 ft / 8.66 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Aft deck: 35.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 13.12 ft / 4.00 m, 13.12 ft / 4.00 m
- Average freeboard: 21.93 ft / 6.68 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 41.1 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 78.9 %
Waterplane Area: 25,409 Square feet or 2,361 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 444 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 112 lbs/sq ft or 546 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.89
- Longitudinal: 2.57
- Overall: 0.99
Caution: Hull subject to strain in open-sea
Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Cramped accommodation and workspace room
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather


She was done in SS3, and I couldn't figure out how to get it around the "you want one aft gun a deck below the weather deck, but not in a casemate?" situation - so for intents and purposes, the aft guns should be read as One Deck Lower for the main guns. She's based in everything else off late-war German weapons, and practices.

Springsharp assumes a lowered quarterdeck to still be the 'weather deck' for any aft-mounted weapons.

Interesting.

It seems a bit too slow and too lightly-armoured for my taste, though. And I'd eliminate the TDS - too little beam for it to be effective.

Quoted

Range 30,000nm at 25.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 42,007 tons

Sure you want to be able to circumnavigate the Earth at top speed?

Looks more like 'M' crossed with a Panzerschiffe, since 'M' was not an extremely long-legged ship, and was a good deal faster.

Shinra - I wasn't sure if that was Springsharp's response to the concept, so I just kinda seperated them to make sure of it.

Brock - TDS? Not sure what you mean.

Fox - I was aiming for something with a length of leg, and SS3 for some reason doesn't define Which unit of measure it was going for.

Hrolf - My aim was for something a little harder hitting than the M, and meant for long cruising range - thus the diesels by design. I aimed for main guns with some relative punch, and I wanted to toy with the concept of some of the oddball calibers the Germans had as well, which is where the lengthened 17cm guns came from. Similarly, she's fitted for heavy aircraft situations, and features one thing stolen from the Japanese - beefy torpedoes. Granted, not by far the same number, but for her size not a horrible ammount. She's a little bigger than the M, necessity for her composite strength.

I might go for a Heavy Cruiser concept in time, but figured I'd bounce a few thoughts around with the "Oddball Calibers" concept with some of the ones that didn't see a lot of service.

Compare this:

Draft: (49.21 / 74.93 ft) (15.00 / 22.84 m)

and this:
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 28.41 ft / 8.66 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Aft deck: 35.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 13.12 ft / 4.00 m, 13.12 ft / 4.00 m
- Average freeboard: 21.93 ft / 6.68 m


So....

At full load, she's mostly a submarine...

TDS= Torpedo defence system.

Here in WW, the 60cm torpedoes that Imperial Germany introduced during WWI have been kept as the standard heavy surface torpedo size. The long-barreled 17cm is a questionable choice, the problem with it comes in the fact that the shell is really too heavy for efficient handloading aboard ship, and if you're going to have to use power-assisted loading, why not go on up to 20-21cm? That's why WW Germany hasn't developed such a weapon in the post-Cleito period (even though the Heer is developing the 17cm K18 ).

Would be terrible awesome if you draw it!!!

Hmm, thought I had enough draft/freeboard to compensate for things... It didn't gripe at me...

Wes - Thanks, for some reason I kept trying to figure out the meaning and getting things like "Tactical Depth Sonar? I have Sonar on this thing?"

Hrolf - Didn't know about the 60cm Torpedo - Not sure about its dimensions compared to the infamous Type 93, though I'm sure given things like a peroxide turbine might be faster or other things.

As to the 17cm, I was aiming for a harder hitting light cruiser, and my heavy cruiser concept hinged around a 24cm main battery concept - not quite as big as the Panzerschiffe, though there's a concept for one clunking around in my head as well - what can I say, I liked the Panzerschiffe, though mine isn't as limited and will feature some of the lessons learned, and a DP secondary battery overall.

The German H8 series torpedoes were a bit shorter than the Japanese Type 93, at 8m vs 9m. The current WW German 60cm torps are decalin powered, an enriched oxygen model was worked on but given up after years of failures and explosions.

Sauragnmon, in some cases you can shoehorn a TDS into smaller ships but it seriously cuts into how much space in the hull you have for other vital equipment like machinery and armour thus limiting what you can do with the ship. If you drop the TDS from this design for example you'll likely find you suddenly have more room for more machinery and other goody's.

The opinion on optimal hull size for a TDS varies from person to person but IMO the 20,000 ton range is where it starts to become practical given the beam measurements in that tonnage range. The U.S. didn't feel even that was large enough when they built the Alaska's.

Quoted

Originally posted by AdmKuznetsov
Compare this:

Draft: (49.21 / 74.93 ft) (15.00 / 22.84 m)

and this:
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 28.41 ft / 8.66 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Aft deck: 35.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 13.12 ft / 4.00 m, 13.12 ft / 4.00 m
- Average freeboard: 21.93 ft / 6.68 m


So....

At full load, she's mostly a submarine...

Here's the reason:

Quoted

Originally posted by Sauragnmon
Displacement:
10,074 t light; 10,988 t standard; 34,326 t normal; 52,996 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(607.08 ft / 590.55 ft) x 55.77 ft (Bulges 65.62 ft) x (49.21 / 74.93 ft)
(185.04 m / 180.00 m) x 17.00 m (Bulges 20.00 m) x (15.00 / 22.84 m)

For comparison, my ship design project last year at university was a tonne bulk carrier, with a lightship of 8,937 tonnes and a full load of 58,854 tonnes. That's designed to carry 48,000 tonnes of iron ore and have a range of 18,000 nautical miles at a speed of 13.5 knots.

The bunkerage on this ship is 42,000 tonnes. With that in mind, there's no surprise she's struggling under the weight. On a very approximate check, you've actually got a maximum speed of 24.5 knots at full load.

Seriously, 30,000 nautical miles at 25 knots (a full power endurance of 50 days, incidentally) is absurd. The US Navy's ships in World War II were considered long-ranged with 15,000 to 18,000 nautical miles at 15 knots, and the most I've heard of for a German long-range raider is 12,000 nautical miles at 19 knots.

Heck, this design pushes the limits of SS3 so far that the space algorithm breaks down. That bunkerage needs just over 50,000 cubic metres, whereas you have a total internal volume, on an approximate calculation, of about 56,000 cubic metres. That leaves 6,000 cubic metres for machinery, accomodation, weapons systems, and other useful things. No way on earth that has plenty of space.

Hrolf - Decalin eh? Wonder how that affects the range - I always admired the Type 93 for its range and warhead, nothing quite sows chaos in an enemy battle line like a brace of long range torpedoes that can ruin your weekend in a single hit scraggling along amongst the fleet. I always thought a peroxide turbine might yield a rather effective torpedo propulsion, and I seem to recall some Germans thought similar.

Wes - yeah, I should probably cut out the bulkhead and bulge armour - it might yield more weight clearance for some more general purpose armor for the ship. I already had to increase her size to balance her armament and other tonnage, and add bulges to her beam to help the floatation.

Alright, discussion and modifiction, here we go, the new report:

Shel'keth, Khodan Shel'keth Class Cruiser laid down 1950

Displacement:
12,398 t light; 13,034 t standard; 19,248 t normal; 24,219 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(639.89 ft / 623.36 ft) x 55.77 ft (Bulges 65.62 ft) x (32.81 / 40.13 ft)
(195.04 m / 190.00 m) x 17.00 m (Bulges 20.00 m) x (10.00 / 12.23 m)

Armament:
8 - 6.69" / 170 mm 60.0 cal guns - 164.20lbs / 74.48kg shells, 150 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1942 Model
2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline, aft evenly spread
1 raised mount aft
2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline, forward evenly spread
1 raised mount
12 - 5.04" / 128 mm 61.0 cal guns - 57.32lbs / 26.00kg shells, 180 per gun
Dual purpose guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1940 Model
6 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
2 raised mounts
10 - 2.17" / 55.0 mm 77.0 cal guns - 5.75lbs / 2.61kg shells, 2,000 per gun
Anti-air guns in deck mounts, 1944 Model
6 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
4 x Single mounts on centreline, evenly spread
2 double raised mounts
32 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm 45.0 cal guns - 0.24lbs / 0.11kg shells, 2,000 per gun
Machine guns in deck mounts, 1938 Model
8 x 2 row quad mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 2,067 lbs / 937 kg
Main Torpedoes
8 - 24.0" / 610 mm, 29.53 ft / 9.00 m torpedoes - 2.524 t each, 20.192 t total
In 2 sets of deck mounted side rotating tubes
2nd Torpedoes
16 - 24.0" / 610 mm, 29.53 ft / 9.00 m torpedoes - 2.524 t each, 40.384 t total
In 2 sets of deck mounted reloads

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3.94" / 100 mm 383.86 ft / 117.00 m 9.84 ft / 3.00 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 95 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0.59" / 15 mm 0.20" / 5 mm 0.39" / 10 mm
2nd: 0.20" / 5 mm - 0.20" / 5 mm
3rd: 0.12" / 3 mm - -

- Protected deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 5.91" / 150 mm
Forecastle: 5.91" / 150 mm Quarter deck: 5.91" / 150 mm

- Conning towers: Forward 3.94" / 100 mm, Aft 3.94" / 100 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 3 shafts, 115,815 shp / 86,398 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 12,000nm at 25.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 11,185 tons

Complement:
816 - 1,062

Cost:
£8.615 million / $34.460 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 892 tons, 4.6 %
- Guns: 801 tons, 4.2 %
- Weapons: 91 tons, 0.5 %
Armour: 3,401 tons, 17.7 %
- Belts: 609 tons, 3.2 %
- Armament: 52 tons, 0.3 %
- Armour Deck: 2,617 tons, 13.6 %
- Conning Towers: 122 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 2,771 tons, 14.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,235 tons, 27.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 6,850 tons, 35.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 100 tons, 0.5 %
- Above deck: 100 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
30,386 lbs / 13,783 Kg = 202.7 x 6.7 " / 170 mm shells or 1.7 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.14
Metacentric height 2.7 ft / 0.8 m
Roll period: 16.9 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 84 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.50
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.39

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low quarterdeck ,
a normal bow and small transom stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.502 / 0.516
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.50 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 26.85 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 56 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 60
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.28 ft / 1.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 28.41 ft / 8.66 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Aft deck: 35.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 13.12 ft / 4.00 m, 13.12 ft / 4.00 m
- Average freeboard: 21.93 ft / 6.68 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 61.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 113.1 %
Waterplane Area: 23,763 Square feet or 2,208 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 164 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 115 lbs/sq ft or 560 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.94
- Longitudinal: 2.18
- Overall: 1.03
Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Adequate accommodation and workspace room
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

EDIT - I didn't like her speed - great for a Battleship, but for a Cruiser?? the Max speed was not ideal, so I increased it. Had to trim a little armor in a couple places, but in general more than early ideas.

Anybody see problems I'm missing somewhere in here?

Quoted

Originally posted by Sauragnmon
- Protected deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 8.86" / 225 mm
Forecastle: 5.91" / 150 mm Quarter deck: 5.91" / 150 mm

Um, are you designing this ship to survive plunging fire from 21" guns, or maybe direct hits from Tallboy bombs?

Hey, you're the one who said she was underarmored - having freed up a massive chunk with the madman level of fuel she had (ok, so she Was a tanker with guns), I guess I went a little bit overkill on the armor.

Consider it a play on the Panzerschiffe's rule of "if we can't outrun it we'll outshoot it" with "If we can't outrun it, we'll outgun it and laugh at its gun power"

There's still an awful lot of range at high speed, but the mission the ship's designed for might need it, I suppose. Now you've just got an armed oiler . I don't kno what the mission is, though - there are cases where that kind of unrefuelled performance might be useful.

Also, ships with odd numbers of shafts are a pretty poor idea in most cases, see here. Unfortunately, that's not properly reflected in SpringSharp.

The long cruising range is primarily because she's meant as a patrol cruiser - I wanted her to give the ability to run long and at a decent speed in order to run down the enemy if need be. I might revise her number of shafts though, courtesy of the information... it just seemed to me like a good number as two struck me as perhaps too few for the requirements.