WesWorld

THE NAVALIST
- South Africans Official Navy Newspaper -
10th July 1922

Durban. Naval architects of the Naval Academy in Durban are currently discussing the value of the battlecruiser concept under the light of the experience from the Great War, the introduction of the fast battleship (HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH) and the latest Argentine-Nordmark-clash in the South Atlantic.

Accourding to the CT the RSAN is allowed to lay down up to two new capital units in replacement for units kept but laid down before 1911. So far no decision is known wether these vessel will be battlecruisers or battleships. Due to what happened at Jutland battlecruisers have lost much of their reputation. On the other hand a fast and heavily armed vessel still offers some strategical and tactical variants a battleship could not achieve. It can be deployed much faster thus allowing quicker reaction if necessary. It can cover a much greater area against enemy AMCs and finally it packs enough firepower combined with enough speed to hunt down those large cruisers of category A now build everywhere.

But to make a remarkable difference battlecuisers have to stay ~5kn ahead of the BBs when it comes down to max. speed and taking current developments into account like the latest italian battleships one would have to spend an awful lot of money into a very large hull allowing top speeds of 30+kn. This can be avoided only by either reducing armor or armament or both.

The picture below shows what the naval architects came up with (see apendix for technical data).



Shown is a vessel that got its main armament reduced to six barrels which are grouped together in two triple turrets to reduce weight. It is accepted that a single heavy hit could knock out half of the ships armamend but given that these vessels will operate against enemy ships armed with cruiser size weapons this shouldn´t be much of a problem because of the still thick armor used for the gunhouses. To support its role as a “guard” for convoy routes and sealanes against enemy raiders and as a fast, heavily armed scout for the battleline the ship is fitted out with a catapult and a hangar (abreast the second funnel) allowing two planes to be stored inside. The turreted secondaries offer good protection for their crews against cruiser weapons, splinters and weather. Further more the ship will feature a powerplant capable to provide up to 135.000kW allowing a maximum speed well in extend of 32kn together with a hull build for high speeds.

It is not yet decided if those vessel will be build but large parts of the RSAN are aging and several capital units including the HERTOG-class battlecruisers need to be replaced or heavily modified within the next five years.

Cape Town. A new cruiser was launched on the 28th of July on 170m slip in Cape Town. It will take 10 months to complete the ship. The cruiser is another unit of the so called CL22-class and named after the city of San Lorenzo.

Apendix:

BC Concept 22, South African Battlecruiser laid down 1922

Displacement:
30.689 t light; 32.358 t standard; 34.457 t normal; 35.998 t full load
Loading submergence 1.514 tons/feet

Dimensions:
787,40 ft x 101,71 ft x 27,89 ft (normal load)
240,00 m x 31,00 m x 8,50 m

Armament:
6 - 14,96" / 380 mm guns (2 Main turrets x 3 guns)
14 - 5,91" / 150 mm guns (7 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
12 - 3,46" / 88 mm AA guns
10 - 1,57" / 40 mm guns
Weight of broadside 11.756 lbs / 5.333 kg

Armour:
Belt 11,81" / 300 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 114% of normal area
Main turrets 12,60" / 320 mm, 2nd turrets 4,13" / 105 mm
AA gun shields 0,98" / 25 mm, Light gun shields 0,98" / 25 mm
Armour deck 1,97" / 50 mm, Conning tower 11,81" / 300 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 0,98" / 25 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 180.965 shp / 135.000 Kw = 32,44 kts
Range 7.000nm at 15,00 kts

Complement:
1.264 - 1.643

Cost:
£8,640 million / $34,559 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1.470 tons, 4,3%
Armour: 8.859 tons, 25,7%
Belts: 3.515 tons, 10,2%, Armament: 2.623 tons, 7,6%, Armour Deck: 1.930 tons, 5,6%
Conning Tower: 271 tons, 0,8%, Torpedo bulkhead: 520 tons, 1,5%
Machinery: 6.139 tons, 17,8%
Hull, fittings & equipment: 14.172 tons, 41,1%
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3.767 tons, 10,9%
Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 0,1%

Metacentric height 5,9

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: 1,07
Shellfire needed to sink: 27.822 lbs / 12.620 Kg = 16,6 x 15,0 " / 380 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 3,5
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 70 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0,54
Relative quality as seaboat: 1,00

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0,540
Sharpness coefficient: 0,37
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 7,40
'Natural speed' for length: 28,06 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim: 70
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 113,5%
Relative accommodation and working space: 184,7%
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 105%
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0,98
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 187 lbs / square foot or 912 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1,16
(for 23,13 ft / 7,05 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 3,74 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1,00

An intriguing design - but I wonder if the 15" guns are overkill. Any thought to using quad 13.8" guns?

J

Well, 15" guns offer the heaviest broadside. There aren´t that many sheels in the air in a gun duel so every strike has to be a telling blow. 8x 13,5" guns are heavier than 6x 15", I think, so I keep the 15 inchers.

Further more, that design could lead to one of my other BCs (you already know the drawing with those 33cm quads)..... It´s not decided yet.

True, a quad 13.8 is heavier by a bit. But against similarly thin skinned opponents, travelling at similar speeds, I do wonder if more shells are better than heavier shells.

Either way, cruiser captains will be well advised to avoid her.

J

Quoted

Either way, cruiser captains will be well advised to avoid her.

Oh, yes. Formidable armament, and a knot and a half more speed than El Cid. Fortunately, its also several thousand miles further away than El Cid.

EL CID is several thousand tons smaller and much cheaper, IIRC (couldn´t find her stats).

However, I´m glad you like her...

While I'm not going to go that route in my capital ships, staying out of the way of such ships, unless there's a friendly BB or CV or submarine nearby, is an important part of Franco-Russian cruiser doctrine. El Cid and he predecessor are also a significant part ot the reason for the French emphasis on cruiser speed. Russian designs tend to be a bit slower, but also more lethal and survivable. SAE's design gives even stronger reasons for that French design consideration.

Now, the Escort Cruisers I'm planning won't run from any fights (at 20-24 knots..), and ought to be able to hold up a raiding CB long enough for the convoy to get away. Might even inflict enough damage to send the raider home, too.

To avoid such a capital unit is every cruiser captains duty, I think.

Actually I´m still not sure if and when to build her. My slips are quite crowded and currently I can´t devote as many factories to infrastructure as I originally intended. :o( Looks like the RSAN will have to wait somewhat longer before they get their aging material replaced...

I´m also playing around with designs similar to the one posted but with a max. tonnage of up to 40kts and a speed well in extend of what the design above offers. However, looking at from another angle it could turn out to be a very expensive waste of material. I still haven´t decided on my carriers yet and no doctrine is laid out. Thus I don´t know exactly how fast they´ll be and - using hindsight - what kind of escorts they´ll need one fine day. :o/

It´s all really difficult.... And that´s just my internal perspective. Add to this I have to keep an eye on italian and other foreign developments things get even more difficult. :o(

Regards,

HoOmAn

Quoted

To avoid such a capital unit is every cruiser captains duty, I think.

... Unless he's a total lunatic. :-)

Quoted

Actually I´m still not sure if and when to build her. My slips are quite crowded and currently I can´t devote as many factories to infrastructure as I originally intended.

Ditto. With me, I only have one empty slip for the month of October and during the first two weeks of November, all of them are either in use ( or unavailable (1. Never easy to try and fit a new class into your building program.

Quoted

Looks like the RSAN will have to wait somewhat longer before they get their aging material replaced...

That is a problem. That means that you'll have to delay several designs or that you'll have to cancel them completely. I have a great deal of designs, a number having been delayed a few years due to the arrival of the three FSS classes and I doubt that all of them will be laid down.

Walter

Quoted

To avoid such a capital unit is every cruiser captains duty, I think.

Sure. But with only 20-24 kts and a convoy to guard, running won't be an option. Thus, they will turn and fight...

Quoted

But with only 20-24 kts and a convoy to guard, running won't be an option. Thus, they will turn and fight...

Yes, for them it is either flee and be blasted to bits or turn around, attack, do a bit of damage and get blasted to bits...

... and since you would be blasted to bits anyway, the latter would indeed be the best option in order to buy some time for your convoy to get away.

Walter

A single hit could ruin a raiders day - that´s no new news.

Have I missed the stats for your escort cruisers or aren´t they posted yet?

I'm still considering - 6x234mm or 4x254mm, and a wide range of secondary armament.

Other data - 6 ktons Standard, 10 cm deck, 20 cm belt & turrets, and around 20 knots.

So they've <definitely> got a chance to put one into an engine room through the deck. And with her 32.5 kts speed, your CC has a big engine room

Since she came up:

El Cid Class 1920 – 8 ships planned 1920-24

El Cid 01/10/1920 01/10/1921 01/11/1923

Displacement:
22,338 t light; 23,337 t standard; 25,208 t normal; 26,604 t full load

Dimensions:
235.00 m x 27.70 m x 7.60 m

Armament:
12 - 9.45" / 240 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 3 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
12 - 5.12" / 130 mm guns (4 2nd turrets x 3 guns)
12 - 2.24" / 57 mm AA guns
16 - 0.53" / 14 mm guns
Weight of broadside 5,935 lbs / 2,692 kg
12 - 23.6" / 600 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 9.06" / 230 mm, upper belt 5.91" / 150 mm, end belts 3.94" / 100 mm
Belts cover 80 % of normal area
Main turrets 9.06" / 230 mm, 2nd turrets 3.15" / 80 mm
AA gun shields 0.79" / 20 mm
Armour deck 1.97" / 50 mm, Conning tower 5.91" / 150 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 122,384 shp / 91,298 Kw = 31.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 13.00 kts

Complement:
1,000 - 1,300

Cost:
£4.737 million / $18.948 million


Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily