WesWorld

For what they're intended to shoot, the 340mm guns are more than fine and the 15" is overkill and not worth the extra cost.

In general, I like the concept and definitely see the point. As an aside, this is larger/fast/powerful/protected enough that if they enemy wants it out of the way it will have to use one of it's "hyperuberbattleships" to stop it, which then would allow you the opportunity to isolate that ship, or strike elsewhere while it is dealing with you ship.

My thoughts:

I will point out Brock I did design a 9 14in ship in the US thread thats similar to this by the way .

Personally with the expenditure required to build a top-of-the-hill battleship it does make it difficult to justify using them in any sort of action other than a slogging match against the enemy's battleline. Using a Montana in an area like the Slot would be.....expensive. Even using an Alsace would be expensive there.

Personally, at least for the USN I could see Texas, the Nevada's, the Pennsylvania's, and the New Mexico's being used more than the Big Six or the Montana's. They are cheaper to run, and cheaper to lose. Losing a Gascogne is one thing, losing an Alsace is another especially if the coup de grace is a destroyer's torpedo after the ship has been slowed due to aerial attack and can't maneuver as well. That hurts.

Stepping back for a few moments to the E42...

Quoted

[SIZE=3]E42, French Escorteurs Rapide laid down 1942[/SIZE]

Displacement:
1,185 t light; 1,302 t standard; 1,547 t normal; 1,743 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
328.19 ft / 314.96 ft x 33.79 ft x 12.11 ft (normal load)
100.03 m / 96.00 m x 10.30 m x 3.69 m

Armament:
6 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns (3x2 guns), 35.27lbs / 16.00kg shells, 1942 Model
Automatic rapid fire guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, majority aft, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
8 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (4x2 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.89kg shells, 1942 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
2 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns in single mounts, 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1942 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 227 lbs / 103 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 650
6 - 21.7" / 550 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0.98" / 25 mm 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm
2nd: 0.39" / 10 mm 0.20" / 5 mm -

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines plus diesel motors,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 16,568 shp / 12,360 Kw = 28.00 kts
Range 4,500nm at 18.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 441 tons

Complement:
123 - 160

Cost:
£0.807 million / $3.227 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 29 tons, 1.9 %
Armour: 11 tons, 0.7 %
- Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 11 tons, 0.7 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 433 tons, 28.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 552 tons, 35.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 362 tons, 23.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 160 tons, 10.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
1,123 lbs / 509 Kg = 36.8 x 3.9 " / 100 mm shells or 0.5 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.12
Metacentric height 1.2 ft / 0.4 m
Roll period: 12.8 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 62 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.45
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.19

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.420
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.32 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 20.59 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 62 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 52
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 25.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.28 ft / 1.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 21.33 ft / 6.50 m
- Forecastle (25 %): 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Mid (55 %): 11.48 ft / 3.50 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 11.48 ft / 3.50 m
- Stern: 11.48 ft / 3.50 m
- Average freeboard: 13.94 ft / 4.25 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 121.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 79.6 %
Waterplane Area: 6,890 Square feet or 640 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 122 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 43 lbs/sq ft or 210 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.68
- Longitudinal: 2.44
- Overall: 0.77
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is cramped

Given the revised E42 design, I like the revisions. The inclusion of a mid-calibre AA battery gives them better balance, and the loss of a knot doesn't have much of an impact, given their stated role.

That was incidentally my original design for an escorteur rapide; I'd saved it on a different computer and, when I couldn't find it again, resimmed it (as above). Found it again today and gave it some miscellaneous tweaks.

Hi,

question: Are you serious about those super-heavy shells of 925kg for those 15" guns on Alsace? Seems too heavy to me.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
Hi,

question: Are you serious about those super-heavy shells of 925kg for those 15" guns on Alsace? Seems too heavy to me.

It's the weight of the shells on all previous French 15" guns in Wesworld. I set the weights for standardization with the previous guns and haven't spent any consideration as to whether or not they're too heavy or not.

I wasn't aware of shell weight before, else I would have commented because I think these shells are quite heavy, probably too much so.

The heaviest historical 15" shells were the French APC model 1943 at 890kg, followed by the Italian APC at 885kg and the British APC Mark XXIIB (6crh) at 879kg. Finally, the Germans used shells of 800kg.

Regardinf HE ammunition, the Italians and French used lighter shells, while the Germans and the British had a standard shell weight.

The historical French shells are usually dubbed heavy for their size, so I wondered if a shell of 925kg is pushing things a bit. But I may have missed something, probably some other ammo existed that provides a historical example of such a heavy 15" shell? Or have their been other, WW related reasons why the French would opt for an even heavier (larger) shell?

Btw, I also wonder about the 600kg shells you propose for the Bretagne guns used for your Gascogne design above.

Historically the 34cm guns of Bretagne were firing shells ranging from 382kg (HE M1926) to 575kg (APC M1934), the latter already made heavy as the original APC of 1912er design weighted only 555kg.

EDIT: While I am at it - I assume those 34cm guns have a maximum elevation of 18°, correct? Or have modifications been applied during your 1931 refit to increase elevation to 23° as happened historically in the 1920s? I cannot find any reference...

Quoted

question: Are you serious about those super-heavy shells of 925kg for those 15" guns on Alsace? Seems too heavy to me.

I liked what they did for deck penetration values. The 38cm/40 on the France class punctures 16cm deck armor at 23,000 meters.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
I wasn't aware of shell weight before, else I would have commented because I think these shells are quite heavy, probably too much so.

The heaviest historical 15" shells were the French APC model 1943 at 890kg, followed by the Italian APC at 885kg and the British APC Mark XXIIB (6crh) at 879kg. Finally, the Germans used shells of 800kg.

Regardinf HE ammunition, the Italians and French used lighter shells, while the Germans and the British had a standard shell weight.

The historical French shells are usually dubbed heavy for their size, so I wondered if a shell of 925kg is pushing things a bit. But I may have missed something, probably some other ammo existed that provides a historical example of such a heavy 15" shell? Or have their been other, WW related reasons why the French would opt for an even heavier (larger) shell?

ShinRa had a theory regarding shell weights, and the theory sounded good enough to me that I determined to adopt it. He suggested that the shell weights listed in Springsharp are not necessarily the weight of the shells being fired (though they may be) but rather the maximum weight rating of the shell hoists and the weight planned for in the magazines. Thus, I'd say "The weight of the French shells in use are not necessarily 925kg, but they can not be greater than 925kg in the current versions of the guns."

Like I said earlier, I'm just basically re-using the numbers handed down to me.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
EDIT: While I am at it - I assume those 34cm guns have a maximum elevation of 18°, correct? Or have modifications been applied during your 1931 refit to increase elevation to 23° as happened historically in the 1920s? I cannot find any reference...

It appeared to me that they were old guns recycled into new turrets, so I'd presume an elevation increase might or would have occurred. No data on it myself, and since the first two Bretagnes will be deactivated within the next two quarters, it's not really a big deal to me. It'd only become so if I reused the guns on a new ship; at which point, I'd cross that bridge when I came to it.

were 50%, so they could include work on the main battery turrets to increase elevation.

The 15" shell weight I use is 2000 lbs or a little over 907 kg and I looked a little bit at the US's super heavy 16" shells for that. Looking at SS, if we were to "shrink" the US's 2700 lbs 16" shells to 15" size, you'd get a weight of 2224.73 lbs for a super heavy 15" shell.

Quoted

ShinRa had a theory regarding shell weights, and the theory sounded good enough to me that I determined to adopt it. He suggested that the shell weights listed in Springsharp are not necessarily the weight of the shells being fired (though they may be) but rather the maximum weight rating of the shell hoists and the weight planned for in the magazines. Thus, I'd say "The weight of the French shells in use are not necessarily 925kg, but they can not be greater than 925kg in the current versions of the guns."

The way I look at it is that it is an average of the shells used so in case of Japan's 15" guns it's a 2100 lbs APC and a 1900 lbs HE. Using KISS and a 50-50 ratio, you're looking at a 2000 lbs average.

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10

Quoted

ShinRa had a theory regarding shell weights, and the theory sounded good enough to me that I determined to adopt it. He suggested that the shell weights listed in Springsharp are not necessarily the weight of the shells being fired (though they may be) but rather the maximum weight rating of the shell hoists and the weight planned for in the magazines. Thus, I'd say "The weight of the French shells in use are not necessarily 925kg, but they can not be greater than 925kg in the current versions of the guns."

The way I look at it is that it is an average of the shells used so in case of Japan's 15" guns it's a 2100 lbs APC and a 1900 lbs HE. Using KISS and a 50-50 ratio, you're looking at a 2000 lbs average.

Different strokes for different folks. *Shrugs* That's a viable interpretation, though.

Everybody likes what heavy shells do against decks but - speaking of the 34cm gun - fired from a low elevation mount it does not make that much sense. And somehow, it really has the smell of hindsight as we all know what superb shell the American 16" 2700lbs is. The historical French WW2 shells were already on the heavy side for their bore - why pushing it even further?

If the elevation was increased during the 50% refit, shall we assume the guns to have 23° elevation now (from the historical 12°)? I´d like to have that fixed in case the turrets are planned for reuse.

I do agree that the shell weight given by SS defines maximum weight, i.e. for APC while the HE projectile used might be lighter. Or for smaller shells in general. However, by saying so you imply the shells used are actually lighter. Please provide information what shells are currently in use.

Thanks.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
I do agree that the shell weight given by SS defines maximum weight, i.e. for APC while the HE projectile used might be lighter. Or for smaller shells in general. However, by saying so you imply the shells used are actually lighter. Please provide information what shells are currently in use.

I implied, rather than stated, the shells used might be lighter, because I have not laid out any details on different shell weights and types. I'd presume, though (*pulls something out of thin air*) that any shells manufactured in the last few years would be roughly similar to the historic ones.

[SIZE=3]Du Chayla, French Light Cruiser laid down 1944[/SIZE]

Displacement:
9,000 t light; 9,389 t standard; 10,817 t normal; 11,959 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
610.88 ft / 590.55 ft x 60.70 ft x 21.16 ft (normal load)
186.20 m / 180.00 m x 18.50 m x 6.45 m

Armament:
8 - 6.48" / 165 mm guns (4x2 guns), 143.30lbs / 65.00kg shells, 1944 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
8 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns (4x2 guns), 35.27lbs / 16.00kg shells, 1944 Model
Automatic rapid fire guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships
16 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (4x4 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.88kg shells, 1944 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
16 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm guns (4x4 guns), 0.24lbs / 0.11kg shells, 1944 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 1,464 lbs / 664 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 200
16 - 21.7" / 550 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3.94" / 100 mm 393.70 ft / 120.00 m 10.01 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 103 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 4.53" / 115 mm 1.57" / 40 mm 2.76" / 70 mm
2nd: 1.18" / 30 mm 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm
3rd: 0.79" / 20 mm 0.39" / 10 mm -

- Armour deck: 1.97" / 50 mm, Conning tower: 4.53" / 115 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines plus diesel motors,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 97,968 shp / 73,084 Kw = 34.00 kts
Range 8,500nm at 18.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,570 tons

Complement:
529 - 689

Cost:
£5.477 million / $21.909 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 177 tons, 1.6 %
Armour: 1,868 tons, 17.3 %
- Belts: 644 tons, 6.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 272 tons, 2.5 %
- Armour Deck: 904 tons, 8.4 %
- Conning Tower: 48 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 2,502 tons, 23.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 4,203 tons, 38.9 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,817 tons, 16.8 %
Miscellaneous weights: 250 tons, 2.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
14,853 lbs / 6,737 Kg = 109.0 x 6.5 " / 165 mm shells or 1.8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.14
Metacentric height 3.0 ft / 0.9 m
Roll period: 14.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 60 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.41
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.12

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.499
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.73 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 27.79 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 60 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 54
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 30.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.28 ft / 1.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 29.53 ft / 9.00 m
- Forecastle (25 %): 24.61 ft / 7.50 m
- Mid (50 %): 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Stern: 20.01 ft / 6.10 m
- Average freeboard: 22.05 ft / 6.72 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 91.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 124.5 %
Waterplane Area: 24,815 Square feet or 2,305 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 127 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 102 lbs/sq ft or 498 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.94
- Longitudinal: 1.76
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

Interesting choice of calibre for the main guns. Are they part of a new series of weapons?

Otherwise the design doesn't look too bad, if conventional. Rather heavy torpedo armament for a light cruiser though - planning for night actions?

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan
Interesting choice of calibre for the main guns. Are they part of a new series of weapons?

The 164.7mm guns are throwbacks to the late 1800s predreadnought secondary guns, just brought forward and thoroughly modernized. Just going for something different.

I suppose that they would give a bit more shell weight in the broadside without incuring to much of a penalty in the overall weight of the armament. Without the treaty system to enforce a cut off at 155mm for light cruisers, there is no reason not to.