WesWorld

This is entirely theoretical. Comments and criticisms are welcome.

H.

Springsharp for generic armored cruiser.

Armored cruiser, generic battlecruiser laid down 1936

Displacement:
12,133 t light; 12,804 t standard; 14,174 t normal; 15,269 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
543.23 ft / 530.00 ft x 80.00 ft x 26.00 ft (normal load)
165.58 m / 161.54 m x 24.38 m x 7.92 m

Armament:
6 - 10.83" / 275 mm guns (2x3 guns), 634.55lbs / 287.83kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 4.92" / 125 mm guns (4x2 guns), 59.59lbs / 27.03kg shells, 1936 Model
Dual purpose guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on side, all amidships
4 - 2.95" / 75.0 mm guns (2x2 guns), 12.87lbs / 5.84kg shells, 1936 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 2.95" / 75.0 mm guns (6x2 guns), 12.87lbs / 5.84kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 4,490 lbs / 2,037 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 6.00" / 152 mm 343.85 ft / 104.81 m 10.39 ft / 3.17 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 8.00" / 203 mm 6.00" / 152 mm 8.00" / 203 mm
2nd: 3.00" / 76 mm 3.00" / 76 mm 3.00" / 76 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm
4th: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm

- Armour deck: 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower: 4.00" / 102 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 2 shafts, 62,975 shp / 46,979 Kw = 29.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,465 tons

Complement:
649 - 844

Cost:
£6.029 million / $24.117 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 561 tons, 4.0 %
Armour: 3,936 tons, 27.8 %
- Belts: 923 tons, 6.5 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 884 tons, 6.2 %
- Armour Deck: 2,079 tons, 14.7 %
- Conning Tower: 50 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,767 tons, 12.5 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,718 tons, 40.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,041 tons, 14.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 150 tons, 1.1 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
21,290 lbs / 9,657 Kg = 33.6 x 10.8 " / 275 mm shells or 2.9 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.18
Metacentric height 4.8 ft / 1.5 m
Roll period: 15.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.35
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.01

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.450
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.63 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 27.43 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 18.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 5.00 ft / 1.52 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 25.32 ft / 7.72 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Mid (50 %): 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Stern: 18.00 ft / 5.49 m
- Average freeboard: 18.59 ft / 5.66 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 72.9 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 148.4 %
Waterplane Area: 28,094 Square feet or 2,610 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 117 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 142 lbs/sq ft or 693 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.93
- Longitudinal: 2.11
- Overall: 1.01
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent


Notes: coast defense ship designed for a small navy.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Hmmmm. I expect all the 75mm mounts should be dual purpose, rather than just a pair of them. The 275mm is an unusual caliber, not sure where it would be sourced from (Ireland not being a country I associate with the production of heavy artillery). The speed is a bit low for a cruiser, but the range is high for a coast defence ship, and while the deck armor is excellent the belt armor is a bit light in comparison to the main battery..

Design study armored cruiser 4 launched 1936

Displacement:
10,757 t light; 11,323 t standard; 12,113 t normal; 12,744 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
542.70 ft / 525.00 ft x 85.00 ft x 25.00 ft (normal load)
165.42 m / 160.02 m x 25.91 m x 7.62 m

Armament:
6 - 10.00" / 254 mm guns (2x3 guns), 500.00lbs / 226.80kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (4x2 guns), 62.50lbs / 28.35kg shells, 1936 Model
Dual purpose guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on side, evenly spread
4 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns (2x2 guns), 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1936 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts
12 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns in single mounts, 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1936 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 3,716 lbs / 1,686 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 341.25 ft / 104.01 m 11.06 ft / 3.37 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 4.00" / 102 mm 4.00" / 102 mm
2nd: 3.00" / 76 mm 2.00" / 51 mm 2.00" / 51 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm -
4th: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm -

- Armour deck: 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower: 4.00" / 102 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 62,663 shp / 46,746 Kw = 30.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1,421 tons

Complement:
576 - 750

Cost:
£5.340 million / $21.361 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 465 tons, 3.8 %
Armour: 3,265 tons, 27.0 %
- Belts: 648 tons, 5.3 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 483 tons, 4.0 %
- Armour Deck: 2,089 tons, 17.2 %
- Conning Tower: 45 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,758 tons, 14.5 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,268 tons, 43.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,356 tons, 11.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 1 tons, 0.0 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
18,852 lbs / 8,551 Kg = 37.7 x 10.0 " / 254 mm shells or 2.8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.28
Metacentric height 6.1 ft / 1.9 m
Roll period: 14.4 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.22
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.01

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.380
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.18 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 27.86 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 17.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 25.20 ft / 7.68 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Stern: 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Average freeboard: 17.66 ft / 5.38 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 77.4 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 139.1 %
Waterplane Area: 28,230 Square feet or 2,623 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 115 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 137 lbs/sq ft or 670 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.91
- Longitudinal: 2.17
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent.

Armor belt is inclined at 19 degrees.

Ship is intended for defense.

__________________________________


Design study armored cruiser 5 launched 1936

Displacement:
11,121 t light; 11,687 t standard; 12,113 t normal; 12,453 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
542.70 ft / 525.00 ft x 85.00 ft x 25.00 ft (normal load)
165.42 m / 160.02 m x 25.91 m x 7.62 m

Armament:
6 - 10.00" / 254 mm guns (2x3 guns), 500.00lbs / 226.80kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (4x2 guns), 62.50lbs / 28.35kg shells, 1936 Model
Dual purpose guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on side, evenly spread
4 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns (2x2 guns), 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1936 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts
12 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns (6x2 guns), 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1936 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 3,716 lbs / 1,686 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 6.00" / 152 mm 341.25 ft / 104.01 m 11.06 ft / 3.37 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 4.00" / 102 mm 4.00" / 102 mm
2nd: 3.00" / 76 mm 2.00" / 51 mm 2.00" / 51 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm -
4th: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm -

- Armour deck: 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower: 4.00" / 102 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 62,663 shp / 46,746 Kw = 30.00 kts
Range 5,000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 765 tons

Complement:
576 - 750

Cost:
£5.408 million / $21.630 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 465 tons, 3.8 %
Armour: 3,585 tons, 29.6 %
- Belts: 971 tons, 8.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 479 tons, 4.0 %
- Armour Deck: 2,089 tons, 17.2 %
- Conning Tower: 45 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,758 tons, 14.5 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,313 tons, 43.9 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 991 tons, 8.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 1 tons, 0.0 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
18,773 lbs / 8,515 Kg = 37.5 x 10.0 " / 254 mm shells or 2.8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.27
Metacentric height 6.0 ft / 1.8 m
Roll period: 14.6 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.23
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.00

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.380
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.18 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 27.86 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 17.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 25.20 ft / 7.68 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Stern: 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Average freeboard: 17.66 ft / 5.38 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 77.4 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 139.1 %
Waterplane Area: 28,230 Square feet or 2,623 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 112 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 138 lbs/sq ft or 675 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.92
- Longitudinal: 2.19
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

Notes:

Armor belt inclined at 19 degrees.

Ship is a intended for defense.
_________________________________

The trade-off is armor for range, speed and size-given a constant ten inch gun.

As I stated elsewhere, once you get above 30 knots you hit the wall of diminishing returns as far as hull efficiency goes.

You design to your intended mission. The trade-offs match accordingly.

These are theoretical designs.

H.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
The 10"/254mm guns are probably the same as the Skodas Desertfox put on the Villas.

For what it's worth, Ireland is a bit interested in the Canadian 9.2" gun for coastal defense batteries.

Design study 6

HEBCO Irish seagoing monitor, HEBCO armored cruiser laid down 1936

Displacement:
11,113 t light; 11,630 t standard; 12,431 t normal; 13,072 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
542.64 ft / 525.00 ft x 85.00 ft x 25.00 ft (normal load)
165.40 m / 160.02 m x 25.91 m x 7.62 m

Armament:
6 - 9.20" / 234 mm guns (2x3 guns), 389.34lbs / 176.60kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (4x2 guns), 62.50lbs / 28.35kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread
4 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns in single mounts, 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns (6x2 guns), 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 3,052 lbs / 1,384 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 8.00" / 203 mm 341.25 ft / 104.01 m 11.06 ft / 3.37 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 8.00" / 203 mm 6.00" / 152 mm 6.00" / 152 mm
2nd: 3.00" / 76 mm 2.00" / 51 mm 3.00" / 76 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm
4th: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm

- Armour deck: 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower: 4.00" / 102 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 2 shafts, 56,206 shp / 41,930 Kw = 29.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1,442 tons

Complement:
588 - 765

Cost:
£4.905 million / $19.619 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 382 tons, 3.1 %
Armour: 4,007 tons, 32.2 %
- Belts: 1,297 tons, 10.4 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 565 tons, 4.5 %
- Armour Deck: 2,098 tons, 16.9 %
- Conning Tower: 46 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,577 tons, 12.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,047 tons, 40.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,319 tons, 10.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 100 tons, 0.8 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
22,075 lbs / 10,013 Kg = 56.7 x 9.2 " / 234 mm shells or 3.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.27
Metacentric height 6.0 ft / 1.8 m
Roll period: 14.6 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 54 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.19
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.08

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.390
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.18 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 27.80 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 17.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 25.00 ft / 7.62 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Stern: 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Average freeboard: 17.64 ft / 5.38 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 66.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 136.9 %
Waterplane Area: 28,354 Square feet or 2,634 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 121 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 131 lbs/sq ft or 637 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.92
- Longitudinal: 2.06
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

_________________________


Design study 7

Irish seagoing monitor

HEBCO seagoing monitor, HEBCO armored cruiser laid down 1936

Displacement:
11,100 t light; 11,630 t standard; 12,431 t normal; 13,072 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
542.64 ft / 525.00 ft x 85.00 ft x 25.00 ft (normal load)
165.40 m / 160.02 m x 25.91 m x 7.62 m

Armament:
6 - 9.20" / 234 mm guns (2x3 guns), 389.34lbs / 176.60kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 5.00" / 127 mm guns (4x2 guns), 62.50lbs / 28.35kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread
4 - 3.50" / 88.9 mm guns in single mounts, 21.44lbs / 9.72kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 3.50" / 88.9 mm guns (6x2 guns), 21.44lbs / 9.72kg shells, 1936 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 3,179 lbs / 1,442 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 7.00" / 178 mm 341.25 ft / 104.01 m 11.06 ft / 3.37 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 7.00" / 178 mm 6.00" / 152 mm 6.00" / 152 mm
2nd: 3.00" / 76 mm 2.00" / 51 mm 3.00" / 76 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm
4th: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm

- Armour deck: 4.00" / 102 mm, Conning tower: 4.00" / 102 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 2 shafts, 56,206 shp / 41,930 Kw = 29.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1,442 tons

Complement:
588 - 765

Cost:
£4.973 million / $19.890 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 397 tons, 3.2 %
Armour: 3,840 tons, 30.9 %
- Belts: 1,135 tons, 9.1 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 561 tons, 4.5 %
- Armour Deck: 2,098 tons, 16.9 %
- Conning Tower: 46 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,577 tons, 12.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,085 tons, 40.9 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,331 tons, 10.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 200 tons, 1.6 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
21,349 lbs / 9,684 Kg = 54.8 x 9.2 " / 234 mm shells or 3.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.25
Metacentric height 5.9 ft / 1.8 m
Roll period: 14.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 54 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.20
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.08

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0.390
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.18 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 27.80 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 17.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 25.00 ft / 7.62 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Stern: 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Average freeboard: 17.64 ft / 5.38 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 68.5 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 136.9 %
Waterplane Area: 28,354 Square feet or 2,634 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 120 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 132 lbs/sq ft or 642 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.92
- Longitudinal: 2.06
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
Interesting vessels, the later ones are nicely well rounded.

Thank you

Quoted

I do not care for the 29kt speed choice. It is starting to get in the range where you cannot ensure disengagement from current capital ships, much less the next generation. At the same time, there are substantial numbers of heavy and light cruisers which are 3+ knots faster and can ensure separation. The vessels should either be slower or faster.

If slower then they cannot chase those raiders in heavy seas they are designed to fight, If faster, they cannot carry the artillery to defeat those very raiders. Three knots is insignificant in normal sea states, where the raider is not likely to be able to make more than 25 knots. How are weather effects simulated? Consider also that if the raider has to get through the armored cruiser to reach its objective then the armored cruiser has to be defeated. Too slow a speed is a detriment. Too fast and you can't hurl enough throw weight [SMASH] to deal with the typical raider because you trade smaller gins and fewer guns for more engines.

Quoted

Not critical, but while boasting deck armor capable of engaging lighter capital ships at long range, the ships do not have the 'slow easy roll' or excellent sea boat ratings.

Smaller bore guns give you more room for sea keeping qualities, but less smash. Averages of qualities. [Shrug] First you cripple them with gunfire, then you sink them with torpedoes. 1930 era surface ship tactics are technology limit driven in the west-even in WW. Those aren't MY tactics, but then I have "some" technical experience and I know what would work-even in WW.

Quoted

The 10" guns should not be an issue, there are several folks using them and then the NPC gun makers of Skoda, plenty of places to obtain them.

I am not a believer in dozens of calibers or types of weapons.

Based on 1930's tech:

For AAA I tend to favor 75/50 or 125/50 mm DP semi-automatics. Both exist. Both match the time engagement parameters [that is the hemisphere of space as a time function of a crossing engagement] of the naval aircraft I'm likely to face. With semi-automatics- I need to be able to put six shells per gun pair close, so I need 15 seconds. That is 10,000 -> 100 meters slant at 725 K/h relative IAS. I seriously doubt that a bullet stream of less than 500 rpm from a quad mount will match the performance at HALF the expected slant engagement range. That gives me 1/4 the PK in a ship versus aircraft engagement if I use a Bofors. As I wrote elsewhere, anything less than 5000 meters slant performance by 1935 was virtually useless. You could demonstrate this mathematically; if anyone had bothered to simulate it. Had to wait for battle experience to prove it.

For SMASH purposes I think in terms of artillery mobility kills. Once you kill his ability to move, he's torpedo target practice. Lots of shells will shred him at medium battle ranges. Unfortunately to get through all that armor you need M*A/2V. So in this case you match the artillery to the target set.

Raiders tend to be armored against cruiser guns, and have guns designed to smash cruisers; so my theoretical armored cruiser carries just enough guns to smash the expected raider's armor as well as enough armor to resist raider guns. The barrels are the minimum number and bore size to do the job at 10,000-18,000 meters. The armor is also designed with that in mind.

This is a poor man's armored cruiser after all.

For cruisers I tend to favor 155mm-175mm ram-assisted semi-automatics. I think more of the 155mms as they are the largest practical semi-fixed round using 1930's shell design. Bag charges drastically reduce rate of fire. Brass rounds don't. I want a lot of shells in the air, so I can smother him with plunging fire at range. Of course; if his deck armor is thick enough, then he can get through the storm of shell to engage in a flat trajectory duel-not my favorite type of 1930s naval warfare; as short ranges and big slow-firing guns mean a First Guadalcanal. Even in those cases, I favor rapid-fire guns, that can shred optics, radars, and pierce superstructure, kill personnel, and smash steering and communications control. The point is that I want him blind and maneuver crippled before I am, so that I can run for it, or finish him off.

Once again, however, MY tactics are not typical WW tactics.

Quoted

I do note that you are using a very heavily tapered hull with a BC of 0.38-39, which normally causes some on the boards to object.

Well Springsharp is a dull ax. Try to average a fast armored cruiser on a 15000 ton hull. You will quickly see why the Scharnhorst was a 34,000 ton monster with barely 50% more smash than I've generated here.

H.

KMS Scharnhorst had a speed of 33 knots maximum.

HMS Duke of York?

28.5 knots maximum.

Scharnhorst was mobility killed by DoYs large caliber guns at North Cape and then scuttled when British destroyers closed on her to finish her off with torpedoes .

Speed advantage was irrelevant.
________________________________

KMS Graf Spee had a maximum speed of 28.5 knots.

HMS Exeter had a maximum speed of 30.5 knots under burden.

HMS Achilles and Ajax were both 32 knot Leanders-superb light cruiser designs.

All three British cruisers were savagely mauled at River Plate. Exeter so badly she had to retire, while the British rushed to bring up a replacement.

Langsdorf, the goof, allowed a British bluff to hoodwink him into scuttling. Both Leanders would have tried, but they were so shot up, that Ajax and Achilles would have gone down, if Graf Spee had sought to finish the fight.

Speed here? Irrelevant.

________________________

HMS Glorious was criminally mishandled. No air patrols or horizon watch for one thing. Scharnhorst was lucky in her shooting early in that she hit Glorious in the engine room. Mobility kill.

The other incident where aircraft carriers [18 knot jeep carriers versus 27 knot Japanese battleships] were ambushed by faster surface ships showed it wasn't speed but maneuverability which mattered-that and aggressive destroyer tactics.

H.

Quoted

Prior to that she had many successes. Heavy weather and lack of destroyer escorts with the range and seakeeping needed was a larger factor in her demise.[u/]

Notice the underlined. That was far more common than one supposes in the real world. Roiled water is an absolute physical constraint that limits speed. When you are off the North Cape-nobody goes faster than twenty five knots-or your hull is stove in.

Quoted

Her speed was enough to elude HMS Renown and catch a surprised HMS Glorious. Ironically enough Renown had the superior guns which scored only 2 hits. Additional speed would have likely ensured more hits by Renown.

Better fire control would have ensured the more hits., HMS Renown's shooting was famously remarkably bad-even by British standards, throughout her service career, just like USS Washington's and USS West Virginia's shooting was always remarkably good in a fleet that prided itself on its gunnery skills.

Quoted

The more relevant point with regards to the Graf Spee was that she was mission-killed by three light cruisers and even if Langsdorf had ignored the bluff the Graf Spee would have had an even tougher go in the second battle with a fresh heavy cruiser in the fight having sustained damage and servere depletion of ammunition.

HMS Exeter was technically a "short" heavy cruiser.

The replacement hadn't shown up yet for over a day, giving Langsdorf the smash odds he needed to gun and run. Wouldn't have done him a bit of good to run though; as the dstiller/filters he needed to process his heavy oil and skim it from the seawater ballast into a form his diesel engines could use, were wrecked. That is why Langsdorf simply didn't run. 16 hours at 27 knots? His was a mobility kill-since his designed technology failed him. The German designers failed to put the Graf Spee's fuel cleaner under armor along with the rest of the engine plant. HMS Exeter was lucky enough to hit it. HMS Exeter, for her part, was left in a near sinking condition with all but her after main turret shot out. She was lucky to survive at all.

Ajax and Achilles were riddled and had their own problems.

The rest of the damage to Graf Spee was irrelevant and minor beside that fuel cleaner hit which couldn't be repaired. Langsdorf had enough ammunition. He just couldn't get home, so he scuttled.

H.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin

Quoted

Originally posted by howard

Quoted

Prior to that she had many successes. Heavy weather and lack of destroyer escorts with the range and seakeeping needed was a larger factor in her demise.[u/]

Notice the underlined. That was far more common than one supposes in the real world. Roiled water is an absolute physical constraint that limits speed. When you are off the North Cape-nobody goes faster than twenty five knots-or your hull is stove in.

..and yet British DD's were there to do the damage to slow her down for DOY's guns to finnish the job she couldn't have done alone. Germany's DD's were absent due to their range and seakeeping.

Ah you begin to see what kinds of tactics I would emphasize which is why individual ship speed is NOT that important.

Quoted

Quoted

Originally posted by howard
Better fire control would have ensured the more hits., HMS Renown's shooting was famously remarkably bad-even by British standards, throughout her service career, just like USS Washington's and USS West Virginia's shooting was always remarkably good in a fleet that prided itself on its gunnery skills.

Quoted

Washington was newer, while West Virginia had twice as many guns as Renown, she did well considering she had the bare minimum effective number of guns on a capital unit.

Disagree. if it takes five salvoes to straddle the target speed track, your gunnery is not only poor-its awful. Renown's gunnery was awful. A fall of 6 shells straddling means one to two hits out of the salvo. A fall of 12 means 2-5 hits depending on shell dispersal in trajectory . With her twins, Renown [u] should have shot far tighter groupings than West Virginia. her 15s were ballistically far superior as to stable trajectory than the WV's. Nevertheless, the Surigao Strait action shjows why the US shooting standard was three salvoes to straddle and hit. Shooting engagements were very brief-again why ship speed doesn't matter, fire control solution does.

Quoted

Quoted

Originally posted by howard
HMS Exeter was technically a "short" heavy cruiser.

Which is why only 2 of her kind were built.

That may have been a mistake. Six inch gun cruisers [Leanders] make more sense.

Quoted

Quoted

Originally posted by howard

Quoted

The replacement hadn't shown up yet for over a day, giving Langsdorf the smash odds he needed to gun and run. Wouldn't have done him a bit of good to run though; as the dstiller/filters he needed to process his heavy oil and skim it from the seawater ballast into a form his diesel engines could use, were wrecked. That is why Langsdorf simply didn't run. 16 hours at 27 knots? His was a mobility kill-since his designed technology failed him. The German designers failed to put the Graf Spee's fuel cleaner under armor along with the rest of the engine plant. HMS Exeter was lucky enough to hit it. HMS Exeter, for her part, was left in a near sinking condition with all but her after main turret shot out. She was lucky to survive at all.

Ajax and Achilles were riddled and had their own problems.

The rest of the damage to Graf Spee was irrelevant and minor beside that fuel cleaner hit which couldn't be repaired. Langsdorf had enough ammunition. He just couldn't get home, so he scuttled.

H.

Which was effectively a mission kill by three inferior foes.

Respectfully disagree. One lucky hit in a design flaw is the exception in this case that proves the rule. That and the fact that: Langsdorf fought a horrible battle-unnecessarily splitting his main armament when he should have kept on Exeter and killed her. The Leander's weren't piercing his Graf Spee's belts-though they made a shambles of his superstructure.

He should have used his 5.9s on the Leanders and weaved on his track to alternate secondary batteries . That is why they were there, and why his ship had her tight turning circle.

Ces't la goof.
---------------------------------------------------
Article on shooting-USS Maryland.

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-079.htm

Notice the times and the speed tracks?

Three minutes flat.With shell trajectory times of 20 seconds or less, once you get within 25000 yards. and your ship is only doing 27 knots or about 16 yards a second? 180 seconds or six salvoes on your Japanese speed track-how far have you traveled? 2880 yards? Long enough for the Maryland- a 20 knot battleship if there ever was one to clobber Yamashiro six hits out of four full salvoes.

H.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
IMHO.

If I sent out commerce raiders, I'd make big, fast, weatherly destroyers, raiding groups with cheap carriers, and merchant raiders. Raiders, after all, should be expendable. Capital ships are not expendable.

If you don't use your sea-power, you lose your sea-power. The Germans lost WW I because they were afraid to fight the naval war to its finish. The ships they designed were too short ranged to be sure, but their gunnery was good: at the time their ship designs were sufficient for the North Sea, and the British had the worst cadre of officers to ever serve the Royal Navy with the exception of John Jellicoe who saved them at Jutland.

The Germans would never get a better chance than early 1917 to use the Riskflotte, with the British led by inept incompetents like Beatty, a severe fuel shortage, and the trained manpower crisis.

The Grand Fleet was ripe for plucking.

Combine the U-boat war with another debacle like Jutland and its game over, Royal Navy.

A draw would be a German victory.

What you recommend, a modified version of the Z-Plan-won't work because by 1935, the concept of convoy ought to be holy writ for every first class navy.

Capital ships are meant to be used when needed-especially when raiding like a bombardment run against an airfield.

Guadalcanal would have been a Japanese victory if Yamamoto had risked all of the Kongos. The US didn't have the units to stop them at the time. Two at a time, the USN could handle. Four? Not possible at the time. Besides there is safety in numbers. Four Kongos at First and Second Guadalcanal means many lost American ships.

I always thought the Japanese went for half measures because they didn't have the fuel to sortie the full squadrons they should have tried for their speed runs down the Slot.

H.