WesWorld

The main change is the switch to a triple 16"/50 main battery instead of the twin 18" battery. Using the 2700lbs round gives it penetration comparable to an 18".

USS Montana, United States Battleship laid down 1937

Displacement:
57,084 t light; 60,837 t standard; 65,399 t normal; 69,049 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
960.90 ft / 925.00 ft x 115.00 ft x 37.10 ft (normal load)
292.88 m / 281.94 m x 35.05 m x 11.31 m

Armament:
12 - 16.00" / 406 mm guns (4x3 guns), 2,700.00lbs / 1,224.70kg shells, 1937 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
20 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (10x2 guns), 55.18lbs / 25.03kg shells, 1937 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, 4 raised mounts - superfiring
88 - 1.10" / 27.9 mm guns (22x4 guns), 0.77lbs / 0.35kg shells, 1937 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 6 raised mounts
36 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns in single mounts, 0.07lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1937 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 16 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 33,574 lbs / 15,229 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 130

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 17.0" / 432 mm 575.35 ft / 175.37 m 16.00 ft / 4.88 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Upper: 3.00" / 76 mm 575.35 ft / 175.37 m 4.00 ft / 1.22 m
Main Belt covers 96 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
3.00" / 76 mm 575.35 ft / 175.37 m 33.95 ft / 10.35 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 17.0" / 432 mm 10.0" / 254 mm 17.5" / 445 mm
2nd: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 2.00" / 51 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm 0.50" / 13 mm -

- Armour deck: 6.49" / 165 mm, Conning tower: 18.00" / 457 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 144,030 shp / 107,447 Kw = 28.00 kts
Range 12,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 8,212 tons

Complement:
2,044 - 2,658

Cost:
£28.772 million / $115.089 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 3,236 tons, 4.9 %
Armour: 24,062 tons, 36.8 %
- Belts: 7,027 tons, 10.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 2,168 tons, 3.3 %
- Armament: 5,070 tons, 7.8 %
- Armour Deck: 9,168 tons, 14.0 %
- Conning Tower: 629 tons, 1.0 %
Machinery: 3,992 tons, 6.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 25,534 tons, 39.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 8,316 tons, 12.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 260 tons, 0.4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
92,176 lbs / 41,810 Kg = 45.0 x 16.0 " / 406 mm shells or 16.5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.14
Metacentric height 7.8 ft / 2.4 m
Roll period: 17.2 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 49 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.60
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.03

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.580
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.04 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 30.41 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 44 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 46
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 45.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 5.00 ft / 1.52 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 30.90 ft / 9.42 m
- Forecastle (19 %): 24.90 ft / 7.59 m
- Mid (50 %): 14.90 ft / 4.54 m
- Quarterdeck (18 %): 14.90 ft / 4.54 m
- Stern: 14.90 ft / 4.54 m
- Average freeboard: 18.81 ft / 5.73 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 72.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 123.5 %
Waterplane Area: 76,357 Square feet or 7,094 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 112 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 247 lbs/sq ft or 1,208 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.06
- Longitudinal: 0.98
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

My name is Brock and I endorse this design!

Looks like saner heads have prevailed in BuShip's, putting ego's aside and going for a 16" gun equal to guns of larger caliber.

You could raise the freeboard on it a little and actually gain hull strength.

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
You could raise the freeboard on it a little and actually gain hull strength.

Or increase beam w/o losing hull strength. May help w/ your 49% steadiness rating, of course you could trim it up some and fix that anyway w/ the 1.14 stability.

Maybe Tex's is right, 1.03 ain't great seakeeping and raising the freeboard would help with that.

Still, damn scary overall.

Good catch. Anybody mind if I retcon the hull changes? The gun change can be done during construction but changing the freeboard would be a bit more complicated.

USS Montana, United States Battleship laid down 1937

Displacement:
55,819 t light; 59,545 t standard; 64,046 t normal; 67,647 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
963.00 ft / 925.00 ft x 115.00 ft x 37.10 ft (normal load)
293.52 m / 281.94 m x 35.05 m x 11.31 m

Armament:
12 - 16.00" / 406 mm guns (4x3 guns), 2,700.00lbs / 1,224.70kg shells, 1937 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
20 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (10x2 guns), 55.18lbs / 25.03kg shells, 1937 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, 4 raised mounts - superfiring
88 - 1.10" / 27.9 mm guns (22x4 guns), 0.77lbs / 0.35kg shells, 1937 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 6 raised mounts
36 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns in single mounts, 0.07lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1937 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 16 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 33,574 lbs / 15,229 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 130

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 17.0" / 432 mm 583.68 ft / 177.91 m 12.87 ft / 3.92 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Upper: 3.00" / 76 mm 583.68 ft / 177.91 m 8.00 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 97 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
3.00" / 76 mm 583.68 ft / 177.91 m 34.58 ft / 10.54 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 17.0" / 432 mm 10.0" / 254 mm 17.5" / 445 mm
2nd: 2.00" / 51 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 2.00" / 51 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm 0.50" / 13 mm -

- Armour deck: 6.49" / 165 mm, Conning tower: 18.00" / 457 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 141,653 shp / 105,673 Kw = 28.00 kts
Range 12,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 8,102 tons

Complement:
2,012 - 2,616

Cost:
£28.481 million / $113.922 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 3,236 tons, 5.1 %
Armour: 23,439 tons, 36.6 %
- Belts: 6,074 tons, 9.5 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 2,240 tons, 3.5 %
- Armament: 5,438 tons, 8.5 %
- Armour Deck: 9,065 tons, 14.2 %
- Conning Tower: 621 tons, 1.0 %
Machinery: 3,926 tons, 6.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 24,958 tons, 39.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 8,227 tons, 12.8 %
Miscellaneous weights: 260 tons, 0.4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
91,992 lbs / 41,727 Kg = 44.9 x 16.0 " / 406 mm shells or 16.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.11
Metacentric height 7.5 ft / 2.3 m
Roll period: 17.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 54 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.72
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.16

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.568
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.04 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 30.41 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 43 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 46
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 45.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 5.00 ft / 1.52 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 33.00 ft / 10.06 m
- Forecastle (19 %): 27.00 ft / 8.23 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Quarterdeck (18 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Stern: 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Average freeboard: 20.91 ft / 6.37 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 73.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 139.1 %
Waterplane Area: 75,502 Square feet or 7,014 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 112 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 240 lbs/sq ft or 1,172 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.00
- Longitudinal: 1.04
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

I forgot these were already "laid down". BTW, I count 38 .50cals in your drawing, not 36.

Whoops! My eyes ain't the best these days. Leave it to the Navy to sneak in a couple extra guns.

The hull hasn't been launched yet, so IMHO, it shouldn't be too big of an issue.

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
The hull hasn't been launched yet, so IMHO, it shouldn't be too big of an issue.

This is covered in the infrastructure rules. The incomplete hull would have to undergo a 50% rebuild to accommodate the 16" turrets before construction could continue.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
The hull hasn't been launched yet, so IMHO, it shouldn't be too big of an issue.

This is covered in the infrastructure rules. The incomplete hull would have to undergo a 50% rebuild to accommodate the 16" turrets before construction could continue.

I am unable to find the relevant section in the rules. And as far as can be determined, no substantial modification is being made to the ship's structure; An option of which armament to use is being excersized, similar to the decision made by the USN to complete the North Carolinas with 16" rather than 14" turrets. (There seem to be a few minor changes, but these seem to be an artifact of Canis not using SS3, while Hrolf did)

Quoted

2.2.5 Conversion of Incomplete Vessels

Incomplete hulls may be converted as an expediency measure in cases of emergencies or when treaty restrictions make it desirable to do so. The process is nothing more than a reconstruction of the hull that exists, followed by normal construction of the remainder of the ship in its new form. Possible conversions include aircraft carriers built from capital ships, cruisers, oilers, seaplane tenders, or cruise liners. Battlecruisers might be converted to battleships and vice-versa.

To convert the hull, first reconstruct the incomplete hull as described in 2.2.4. Your end-product will be an incomplete hull of the type of ship you now wish to complete.

To then complete the hull, simply build in materials equal to the light displacement of the completed ship, minus the light displacement of the incomplete hull. The minimum time to complete is equal to the ship’s construction time from scratch, minus the length of time spent building the ship’s hull in its old form.

It is reasonable for a player to spend an extra one to six months just planning the conversion, before undertaking the reconstruction. However, this is left as an option for players with a sense for realism.

Example: An opportunistic signatory of the Treaty has an incomplete battleship hull that will have to be scrapped if not completed as an aircraft carrier. The battleship’s light displacement was to be 31,000 tons, and would have taken 40 months to complete. However, she is currently only 25% complete - 10 months of construction and 7,750 tons of materials so far.

Reconstructing the hull will take 75% of that - 7.5 months, and 5,812.5 tons. The navy now has an incomplete aircraft carrier hull, with 10 months of construction and 7,750 tons of materials put into her.

As a carrier, the ship will have a light displacement of 25,000 tons and would take 34 months to build from scratch. Since the reconstructed hull has seen 10 months of construction and 7,750 tons of construction, she will require just 24 months and 17,250 tons of material to complete.

In total, however, the construction, reconstruction and completion of the ship has taken 41.5 months and 30,812.5 tons of materials.

Swapping between triple and duple turrets isn't a simple switch around. They're the most expensive and one of the most complicated parts of the ship.

Weight of a volley goes up by 180kg/turret, a touch more than 5%. That's probably well within the hull structure's tolerance for the stress.

Barbett diameter is likely adequate. They've not been launched, so the shell hoist mechanisms and turrets probably haven't been installed.

However, being items with long lead times, the guns, shell hoist mechanisms, and turrets are probably now being manufactured.

I suggest you "write off" some tonnage to reflect that, or complete them separately as coast artillery.

....rather curious, I cannot find that section is not in the rules.

As a compromise, I'd suggest paying for the new turrets seperately. Springsharp yeilds 1189 per turret, so 4756 per ship, 19024 total for the class of 4. This proposal would also allow for the USN to have 16 twin 18" turrets 'spare', as they would be produced under the original cost of the ship.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

2.2.5 Conversion of Incomplete Vessels

Incomplete hulls may be converted as an expediency measure in cases of emergencies or when treaty restrictions make it desirable to do so. The process is nothing more than a reconstruction of the hull that exists, followed by normal construction of the remainder of the ship in its new form. Possible conversions include aircraft carriers built from capital ships, cruisers, oilers, seaplane tenders, or cruise liners. Battlecruisers might be converted to battleships and vice-versa.

To convert the hull, first reconstruct the incomplete hull as described in 2.2.4. Your end-product will be an incomplete hull of the type of ship you now wish to complete.

To then complete the hull, simply build in materials equal to the light displacement of the completed ship, minus the light displacement of the incomplete hull. The minimum time to complete is equal to the ship’s construction time from scratch, minus the length of time spent building the ship’s hull in its old form.

It is reasonable for a player to spend an extra one to six months just planning the conversion, before undertaking the reconstruction. However, this is left as an option for players with a sense for realism.

Example: An opportunistic signatory of the Treaty has an incomplete battleship hull that will have to be scrapped if not completed as an aircraft carrier. The battleship’s light displacement was to be 31,000 tons, and would have taken 40 months to complete. However, she is currently only 25% complete - 10 months of construction and 7,750 tons of materials so far.

Reconstructing the hull will take 75% of that - 7.5 months, and 5,812.5 tons. The navy now has an incomplete aircraft carrier hull, with 10 months of construction and 7,750 tons of materials put into her.

As a carrier, the ship will have a light displacement of 25,000 tons and would take 34 months to build from scratch. Since the reconstructed hull has seen 10 months of construction and 7,750 tons of construction, she will require just 24 months and 17,250 tons of material to complete.

In total, however, the construction, reconstruction and completion of the ship has taken 41.5 months and 30,812.5 tons of materials.

Swapping between triple and duple turrets isn't a simple switch around. They're the most expensive and one of the most complicated parts of the ship.

This is a citation from an older version of the infrastructure rules, which can be found in the archive. They are not part of the current infrastructure rules.

Quoted

.rather curious, I cannot find that section is not in the rules.

Quite a few things seem to have disappeared from the current rules without explanation? I was operating under the assumption that this rule was still in place. Last usage was in converting some armoured cruisers into carriers for Denmark a few years back.

Quoted

However, being items with long lead times, the guns, shell hoist mechanisms, and turrets are probably now being manufactured.

Indeed. Supplying guns and turrets is difficult, expensive, and takes a long time. You might not need to re-stress the hull, but some design will be necessary for the new equipment and storage schemes for the new guns and ammunition.

Quoted

As a compromise, I'd suggest paying for the new turrets seperately. Springsharp yeilds 1189 per turret, so 4756 per ship, 19024 total for the class of 4. This proposal would also allow for the USN to have 16 twin 18" turrets 'spare', as they would be produced under the original cost of the ship.

Seems reasonable to me but the actual turrets weighed ~1700t (probably a bit more than that for Montana with more armour)

The player has to remove barbettes that are already in the structure to complete the ships as a CV.

In my battleship rebuilds, the shell hoist mechisms had to be removed and the magazines refurbished, to accomodate going from triples to bigger twins.

In Montana case, the barbettes are empty, and adequate for the new guns/turrets, no shell hoist mechanisms to remove or magazines to change, though some of the parts are likely being manufactured, as are the guns and turrets.

"Indeed. Supplying guns and turrets is difficult, expensive, and takes a long time. You might not need to re-stress the hull, but some design will be necessary for the new equipment and storage schemes for the new guns and ammunition."

I'm sure there are 12x16" Montana plans that were prepared as an option.

I see no problem rules-wise with exchanging the guns. The ships aren't very far along, and if memory serves, the original sim used 12x16" anyway, then replaced it with 8x18". The 18" guns were obviously disinformation.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

.rather curious, I cannot find that section is not in the rules.

Quite a few things seem to have disappeared from the current rules without explanation? I was operating under the assumption that this rule was still in place. Last usage was in converting some armoured cruisers into carriers for Denmark a few years back.

As I said, this is most curious. It definately needs to be looked into at this point.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

As a compromise, I'd suggest paying for the new turrets seperately. Springsharp yeilds 1189 per turret, so 4756 per ship, 19024 total for the class of 4. This proposal would also allow for the USN to have 16 twin 18" turrets 'spare', as they would be produced under the original cost of the ship.

Seems reasonable to me but the actual turrets weighed ~1700t (probably a bit more than that for Montana with more armour)

I went by the Springsharp method; plug in one turret into an otherwise empty ship with the appropriate settings (Number/size of guns, shell weight/RpG, armour) and add the Armament/Armour tonnage from the report breakdown. While it's appearently a bit 'off' from historical weights, it's the method everyone can use, regardless of having a historical turret to base off of.

Quoted

Originally posted by AdmKuznetsov
The player has to remove barbettes that are already in the structure to complete the ships as a CV.
. . .
I'm sure there are 12x16" Montana plans that were prepared as an option.

Hence my mention of North Carolina's original plans with 14", as well I imagine this was a similar situation, with a decent amount of indecisiveness within the USN General Board on which direction to go in regards to armament. A month or two into construction, a final verdict was made to (once again) revert to the 16" battery.

This is really strange. I also work under the assumption that part of the rules is still active. I am not aware of any discussion that allowed to remove that part from the active rule.