WesWorld

Hows this for a cruiser just under 11,000 tons? What improvements can I make?

Peleus/Menelaus, Atlantis Cruiser laid down 1923

Displacement:
10,563 t light; 10,997 t standard; 11,625 t normal; 12,082 t full load
Loading submergence 717 tons/feet

Dimensions:
652.00 ft x 62.00 ft x 20.50 ft (normal load)
198.73 m x 18.90 m x 6.25 m

Armament:
8 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 2 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
8 - 4.50" / 114 mm AA guns
12 - 1.00" / 25 mm guns
Weight of broadside 2,419 lbs / 1,097 kg
12 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 4.00" / 102 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 120 % of normal area
Main turrets 3.92" / 100 mm,
Armour deck 1.57" / 40 mm, Conning tower 1.57" / 40 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 99,882 shp / 74,512 Kw = 33.00 kts
Range 9,500nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
559 - 727

Cost:
£3.174 million / $12.695 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 302 tons, 2.6 %
Armour: 2,015 tons, 17.3 %
Belts: 784 tons, 6.7 %, Armament: 484 tons, 4.2 %, Armour Deck: 729 tons, 6.3 %
Conning Tower: 17 tons, 0.1 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 3,338 tons, 28.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 4,857 tons, 41.8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,063 tons, 9.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 0.4 %

Metacentric height 2.6

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.04
Shellfire needed to sink: 10,232 lbs / 4,641 Kg = 40.0 x 8.0 " / 203 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 1.4
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 71 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.63
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.07

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.491
Sharpness coefficient: 0.32
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8.80
'Natural speed' for length: 25.53 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim: 66
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 113.8 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 136.1 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 104 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.99
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 116 lbs / square foot or 567 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.14
(for 20.00 ft / 6.10 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 4.39 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.01

something that i have been thinking: don't twin turrets have a higher ROF than all the other multiples? so maybe 4*2 actually has a higher ROF than 3*3?

You´re right, LA.

It somewhat depends on the complexity of the triple turret in question (number of hoists etc.) but in general triples have a lower ROF than twins. So overall firepower of a 4x2 armed cruiser should be quite similar to a 3x3 cousin. However, triples still offer the advantage of having more guns in a single gunhouse allowing a reduction in total number of turrets that have to be armored and thus saving weight. Of course you buy disadvantages too: A higher percentage of guns can be knocked out by a single hit or system failure and fire distribution is less optimal than with a ship with a equal firepower fore and aft. One also has to mention that you need larger barbets (diameter) for a triple - especially if you have all guns in single craddles. This means you´ve to live with a larger hole in your armored deck but then again you´ve one hole less than on a ship with 4 turrets where more barbets also mean more stress to longitudal structure elements.

So in the end it´s a give and take and personally I don´t see much difference between early 3x3 and 4x2 armed cruisers.

Regards,

HoOmAn

The difference is in the looks, for some reason, at least to me a four turret layout seems very symetrical for early designs. I take it the design seems fine?

Plenty of speed to stay out of the way of BCs and supercruisers, and enough torpedos to cause havoc. Good armor too. Are the torpedos in two triples on each beam, or one sextuple mount?

she is a very nice cruiser TM. excellent AAA, high redundancy because of 4x2, decent armour and brilliant speed.

She´s a nice one, no doubt.

The only thing to complain about maybe is her l:b ratio. Compare her to the HIPPERs which had a waterline length of ~194+m but a beam of ~21+m or TAKAO (~198m x ~20+m -> very similar to your design) and you´ll see that she´s really a slender one but I don´t think she´s unrealistic.

Regards,

HoOmAn

ouch, I acctually just noticed the length to beam ratio, orriginally she started out beamier. My design requirements of 4 turrets and a speed of 33 knots has taken its toll on my sanity as I have spend waaaaay to much time on my CA designs!

To answer my FAR alliance freind the torpedos are indeed in two triples on each beam.

Heres a redesign to incorperate Hoomans consearns. she basically keeps all her design features on a new hull.

Peleus/Menelaus, Atlantis Cruiser laid down 1923

Displacement:
10,545 t light; 10,979 t standard; 11,628 t normal; 12,101 t full load
Loading submergence 678 tons/feet

Dimensions:
615.00 ft x 64.00 ft x 22.00 ft (normal load)
187.45 m x 19.51 m x 6.71 m

Armament:
8 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 2 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
8 - 4.50" / 114 mm AA guns
12 - 1.00" / 25 mm guns
Weight of broadside 2,419 lbs / 1,097 kg
12 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 4.00" / 102 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 120 % of normal area
Main turrets 3.92" / 100 mm,
Armour deck 1.57" / 40 mm, Conning tower 1.57" / 40 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 102,444 shp / 76,423 Kw = 33.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
559 - 727

Cost:
£3.207 million / $12.827 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 302 tons, 2.6 %
Armour: 1,949 tons, 16.8 %
Belts: 758 tons, 6.5 %, Armament: 484 tons, 4.2 %, Armour Deck: 689 tons, 5.9 %
Conning Tower: 17 tons, 0.1 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 3,424 tons, 29.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 4,819 tons, 41.4 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,083 tons, 9.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 0.4 %

Metacentric height 2.6

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.01
Shellfire needed to sink: 9,410 lbs / 4,268 Kg = 36.8 x 8.0 " / 203 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 1.3
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 71 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.59
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.01

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.470
Sharpness coefficient: 0.33
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8.30
'Natural speed' for length: 24.80 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 56 %
Trim: 70
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 116.1 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 127.8 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 103 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.99
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 120 lbs / square foot or 587 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.36
(for 20.00 ft / 6.10 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 4.39 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.02

You´ve done quite a good job on her. I´d build her as she is...

...there´s hardly more to say.

Ciao,

HoOmAn

Whew!!.....thats one pair of cruisers down!