WesWorld

You mean you don't want the firepower of the 11 inch battleship guns and a heavy cruiser's guns similar to the Swiftsure-class Battleships?

Also you could use the 110mm DP guns of Nordmark or Chile.

Quoted

You mean you don't want the firepower of the 11 inch battleship guns and a heavy cruiser's guns similar to the Swiftsure-class Battleships?

Nah, that's tonnage that could be used for either more armor, or more 11" guns.

Quoted

Also you could use the 110mm DP guns of Nordmark or Chile.

Assuming any licensing issues were taken care of, yes. But there wouldn't be a lot of difference between those guns and the DP 105mm I am using.

Quoted

4 twin 28cms would result in more top weight and require more hull length than 3 triples.

I'm more worried about beam. Triple 280mm turret + TDS on 25m beam might be stretching things.

I make the barbette diameter on Scharnhorst to be about 11m which leaves 14m for a TDS. A fully functional TDS would be 5-6m across, on this size of ship about 3-4m. (I think SS assumes 3m but not sure). Basically it leaves about 2-3m gap between barbette and atpbk which is tiny and not much space for a magazine.

With regards to 130 vs. 105. Italians have calculated that the 130mm/45? gun is about 80-90% more effective than the 105/65 in the anti-surface role.

Romania can offer some realy nice 135mm guns curently used on New class of romanian destroyers.


I realy like this ship then again I realy like the modern armoured cruiser concept.I allways thot that BB CA gap of 25k t (10k tCA 35k t BB) in displacment was a streach in RL WT.
Cleito has a 27000t gap (13k t CA 40k t BB).

...and the Philippines can offer 115mm and 130mm guns, as well...

Quoted

I'm more worried about beam. Triple 280mm turret + TDS on 25m beam might be stretching things.

Given that the Admiral Scheer carried triple 280mm's on a beam 4.35m less than this design, I can easily see using that 4.35m for the TDS and associated fuel stowage. Now, that 4.35m might be a bit narrow for a full-blown, fully useful TDS, so it's possible it won't work to full effectiveness. If I remove TDS entirely, the ship sinks after 3.2 torps, while it's rated at 4.8 right now with the TDS. Say, assuming I don't tweak the design to add a little beam, 4.4 torpedoes instead of 4.8?

{chuckle} Lots of offers of new guns. There's no question that a 125mm, 130mm, 135mm gun would be more effective per hit against destroyers, the Admiralstab knows that. It's light cruisers that are the question mark, and those usually have armor over the belt area, armor not easily pierced by HE rounds from guns of that size.

Also, this design is pretty tight already to what the Admiralstab regards as the minimum armor for this size of a hull (it's absolutely right out to fall down to the same standards as Admiral Hipper), so there's not much weight that can be gained there for use by a heavier low angle secondary. Not to mention that adding such weapons will increase the length of the belt, etc.

If the designers had 6,000 tons more to work with, they'd end up with something like that had a full secondary battery, along with somewhat better armor. But doing that would cost the BBs 2,500-3,000 tons each, something the Admiralstab is not really keen on (though it remains a possibility).

Polish 'Admiralicja' likes this ship, lack of secondry weapons will help polish Conrad class ships to put a 12 torpedos bourdside in it. d^_^b
Then again i dont think this ship is bild to hunt down CL

If You lose one 280mm turrent you will have space or some secondary.Then 6 guns is little low.9x254mm guns may be an option germans like high RoF.

All in all this ship is good as it is.

{chuckle} Should hostilities break out between Germany and Poland, you can expect the 28cm guns to be tasked with Conrad's destruction (if the two ships found each other, of course). Besides, the 28cm gun fires pretty rapidly, 3.5 rpm firing 330 kg shells is nothing to sneeze at.

Germany's not going to go down the "two main turrets on the ship" road following India or other countries that have taken up that path, and as you mention, 6 main guns is marginal for this size of ship.

There also is a gentleman's agreement in place that ships beyond 17k I think? Hoo? have to have a TDS.

Quoted

There also is a gentleman's agreement in place that ships beyond 17k I think? Hoo? have to have a TDS.

Really??? That's news to me.....

Actually, it's warships with over 80' of beam.

I thought the agreement was that you didn't need one under 17,000 tons or a certain beam.

You don't have to have one. D K Brown notes that 24-25m or so is the minimum beam required for a TDS.

Ah, OK, that makes rather more sense than requiring one.

And here's a picture of the proposed CB. She clearly shows her ancestry from the Hipper class CAs, but the main turrets are a good deal larger (as they ought to be, given the differences between a 210mm and a 283mm gun).

And here's a revised design, with all of the beam 105mm's on the main deck level (after looking at the drawing and seeing there was room for them there).


Blucher, German Large Cruiser laid down 1931

Displacement:
20,038 t light; 20,982 t standard; 22,598 t normal; 23,890 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
711.67 ft / 688.98 ft x 82.84 ft x 25.43 ft (normal load)
216.92 m / 210.00 m x 25.25 m x 7.75 m

Armament:
9 - 11.14" / 283 mm guns (3x3 guns), 727.53lbs / 330.00kg shells, 1931 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, majority forward, 1 raised mount - superfiring
16 - 4.13" / 105 mm guns (8x2 guns), 35.32lbs / 16.02kg shells, 1931 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread
2 - 4.13" / 105 mm guns (1x2 guns), 35.32lbs / 16.02kg shells, 1931 Model
Dual purpose guns in a deck mount with hoist
on centreline aft, all raised guns - superfiring
16 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (8x2 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1931 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 7,208 lbs / 3,270 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 120

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 8.27" / 210 mm 444.39 ft / 135.45 m 10.93 ft / 3.33 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 99 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead:
1.18" / 30 mm 444.39 ft / 135.45 m 23.26 ft / 7.09 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 9.45" / 240 mm 5.51" / 140 mm 8.27" / 210 mm
2nd: 1.97" / 50 mm 0.79" / 20 mm 1.97" / 50 mm
3rd: 1.97" / 50 mm 0.79" / 20 mm 1.97" / 50 mm
4th: 0.79" / 20 mm 0.39" / 10 mm -

- Armour deck: 3.54" / 90 mm, Conning tower: 6.69" / 170 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines plus diesel motors,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 104,837 shp / 78,208 Kw = 31.00 kts
Range 8,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,908 tons

Complement:
921 - 1,198

Cost:
£8.130 million / $32.520 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 861 tons, 3.8 %
Armour: 6,430 tons, 28.5 %
- Belts: 1,705 tons, 7.5 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 452 tons, 2.0 %
- Armament: 1,452 tons, 6.4 %
- Armour Deck: 2,705 tons, 12.0 %
- Conning Tower: 115 tons, 0.5 %
Machinery: 3,135 tons, 13.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 9,493 tons, 42.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,559 tons, 11.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 120 tons, 0.5 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
35,373 lbs / 16,045 Kg = 51.2 x 11.1 " / 283 mm shells or 4.9 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
Metacentric height 4.5 ft / 1.4 m
Roll period: 16.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 60 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.72
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.20

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.545
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.32 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 30.24 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 55 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
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: 33.63 ft / 10.25 m
- Forecastle (21 %): 24.61 ft / 7.50 m
- Mid (50 %): 23.79 ft / 7.25 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 23.79 ft / 7.25 m
- Stern: 23.79 ft / 7.25 m
- Average freeboard: 24.82 ft / 7.56 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 99.2 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 204.6 %
Waterplane Area: 41,271 Square feet or 3,834 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 115 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 156 lbs/sq ft or 761 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.53
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

120 tons reserved for aircraft and growth.

I like her, she seems like a well balanced design.

Slight nit, one that also applies to the Hippers under construction;

All German ships up to Lutzow were initially built with straight stems, the clipper bows not added until after being launched all the way up to Bismarck and Tirpitz.

Personally, I'd like to see German ships retain straight stems until some of the ships are in service to prompt the move to the "Atlantic Bow", as historical

Leipzig and Nurnberg are already in service, with the clipper bow. Keep in mind that WW Germany has a lot more friends that are willing to give little hints than OTL Germany did. Also, the WW German fleet is designed to deal better with the rough seas of the North Sea than OTL German ships were: there's more emphasis on the local region and less on commerce raiding in calmer climes.