WesWorld

If it's not balanced, what would you adjust? Overall displacement is not an option...

Battleship, laid down 1927

Length, 690 ft x Beam, 104.0 ft x Depth, 30.0 ft
33215 tons normal displacement (31532 tons standard)

Main battery: 9 x 14.5-inch (3 x 3; 1 superfiring)
Secondary battery: 18 x 4.9-inch (9 x 2)
AA battery: 8 x 1.4-inch
Light battery: 8 x 0.6-inch

Weight of broadside: 14789 lbs

Main belt, 14.0 inches; ends unarmored
Torpedo bulkhead, 1.0 inches
Armor deck, average 4.3 inches
C.T., 14.0 inches

Battery armor:
Main, 14.0" / secondary, 3.0"
AA, 1.0" shields / light guns, 1.0" shields

Maximum speed for 95052 shp = 27.29 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 10000 nm / 12 kts

Typical complement: 1230-1599


Estimated cost, $43.784 million (£10.946 million)

Remarks:

Relative extent of belt armor, 92 percent of 'typical' coverage.

Ship is roomy, with superior accommodation and working space.


Distribution of weights:
Percent
normal
displacement:

Armament ......................... 1849 tons = 6 pct
Armor, total ..................... 11140 tons = 34 pct

Belt 3040 tons = 9 pct
Torpedo bulkhead 498 tons = 1 pct
Deck 3734 tons = 11 pct
C.T. 313 tons = 1 pct
Armament 3555 tons = 11 pct

Machinery ........................ 3000 tons = 9 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 13446 tons = 40 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 3580 tons = 11 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 200 tons = 1 pct
-----
33215 tons = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 5.8 ft

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 29635 tons
Standard displacement: 31532 tons
Normal service: 33215 tons
Full load: 34428 tons

Loading submergence 1357 tons/foot

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.05

Shellfire needed to sink: 33618 lbs = 22.1 x 14.5-inch shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.8
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 60 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.51

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.05

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.54
Sharpness coefficient: 0.39
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 6.57
'Natural speed' for length = 26.3 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 51 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 91 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 143 percent


Displacement factor: 104 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.98
(Structure weight per square
foot of hull surface: 203 lbs)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.31
(for 19.5 ft average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +0.2 ft)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.01

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


[Machine-readable parameters: Spring Style v. 1.2.1]

690.00 x 104.00 x 30.00; 19.50 -- Dimensions
0.54 -- Block coefficient
1927 -- Year laid down
27.29 / 10000 / 12.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
200 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
9 x 14.50; 3; 1 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
18 x 4.90; 9 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
8 x 1.40 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
8 x 0.60 -- Fourth (light) battery
0 -- No torpedo armament
++++++++++
14.00 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 1.00; 92 -- Belt armor; relative extent
4.25 / 14.00 -- Deck / CT
14.00 / 3.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 -- Battery armor


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Its not to shabby but my only consern would be the torpedo defence, but for 1927 its very realistic. I would also tend to ditch the CT armor but that is a personal preferance. Its a very nice design and I wouldn't mind one of these baby's in my fleet. Very well balanced.

How does she stack up against the ANS Melampus? I'd say shes better by a hair, but very close considering Melampus out weighs her but is 7 years older.

Melampus/Theseus, Atlantis battleship laid down 1920

Displacement:
36,886 t light; 38,958 t standard; 42,131 t normal; 44,501 t full load
Loading submergence 1,618 tons/feet

Dimensions:
726.00 ft x 104.00 ft x 30.00 ft (normal load)
221.28 m x 31.70 m x 9.14 m

Armament:
8 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 2 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
14 - 5.50" / 140 mm guns
6 - 3.00" / 76 mm AA guns
12 - 1.00" / 25 mm guns
Weight of broadside 14,752 lbs / 6,691 kg

Armour:
Belt 14.00" / 356 mm, upper belt 9.00" / 229 mm, end belts 3.00" / 76 mm
Belts cover 85 % of normal area
Main turrets 15.00" / 381 mm, 2nd gun shields 3.00" / 76 mm
AA gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 5.50" / 140 mm, Conning tower 12.00" / 305 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 2.00" / 51 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 95,205 shp / 71,023 Kw = 26.15 kts
Range 15,000nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
1,470 - 1,911

Cost:
£7.814 million / $31.256 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,844 tons, 4.4 %
Armour: 16,069 tons, 38.1 %
Belts: 4,462 tons, 10.6 %, Armament: 4,483 tons, 10.6 %, Armour Deck: 5,762 tons, 13.7 %
Conning Tower: 315 tons, 0.7 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 1,048 tons, 2.5 %
Machinery: 3,329 tons, 7.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 15,494 tons, 36.8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,245 tons, 12.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 150 tons, 0.4 %

Metacentric height 5.7

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

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.03
Shellfire needed to sink: 54,826 lbs / 24,869 Kg = 32.5 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 8.1
(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: 0.64
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.30

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.651
Sharpness coefficient: 0.43
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.38
'Natural speed' for length: 26.94 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 50 %
Trim: 54
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 75.1 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 176.1 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 112 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.98
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 195 lbs / square foot or 954 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.32
(for 24.00 ft / 7.32 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 3.81 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.01

Other specs are quite equal, but Melampus is a better sea boat and can take a lot more damage:


Shellfire needed to sink: 54,826 lbs / 24,869 Kg = 32.5 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells

Torpedoes needed to sink: 8.1


As opposed to:

Shellfire needed to sink: 33618 lbs = 22.1 x 14.5-inch shells

Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.8

hmm. Portugal holds up quite nicely against that I think ..

Portugal, Iberia BB laid down 1915

Displacement:
30,382 t light; 32,543 t standard; 34,074 t normal; 35,163 t full load
Loading submergence 1,460 tons/feet

Dimensions:
649.61 ft x 104.99 ft x 26.90 ft (normal load)
198.00 m x 32.00 m x 8.20 m

Armament:
12 - 13.78" / 350 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 3 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
12 - 6.69" / 170 mm guns
Secondary guns mounted low & subject to being washed down in a seaway
8 - 3.94" / 100 mm AA guns
4 - 2.24" / 57 mm guns
Weight of broadside 17,764 lbs / 8,058 kg
5 - 18.9" / 480 mm submerged torpedo tubes

Armour:
Belt 14.17" / 360 mm, upper belt 7.09" / 180 mm, end belts 4.72" / 120 mm
Belts cover 74 % of normal area
Main turrets 14.17" / 360 mm, 2nd casemates 7.87" / 200 mm
AA gun shields 0.98" / 25 mm
Armour deck 3.74" / 95 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 3 shafts, 58,389 shp / 43,558 Kw = 23.50 kts
Range 10,000nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
1,253 - 1,630

Cost:
£4.710 million / $18.840 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 2,220 tons, 6.5 %
Armour: 11,812 tons, 34.7 %
Belts: 3,497 tons, 10.3 %, Armament: 4,780 tons, 14.0 %, Armour Deck: 3,536 tons, 10.4 %
Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 2,212 tons, 6.5 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 14,137 tons, 41.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,693 tons, 10.8 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 5.4

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

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.01
Shellfire needed to sink: 44,175 lbs / 20,037 Kg = 33.8 x 13.8 " / 350 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.1
(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: 0.74
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.23

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.650
Sharpness coefficient: 0.44
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 6.13
'Natural speed' for length: 25.49 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim: 58
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 73.9 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 165.7 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 100 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.96
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 207 lbs / square foot or 1,012 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.39
(for 21.33 ft / 6.50 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 1.97 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

I think the Melampus being 6000/7000 tons heavier than the other two designs should be able to take more punishment but the El Pais and Indian design for their size pack quite a punch none the less. being of lesser size you'd be able to build more of em.

PORTUGAL can hardly compare to the other two designs due to her low speed. A difference of 4 knots can not be ignored. It offers a great strategical advantage allowing to cover a much larger area and is also of some help when it comes to a gun fight (tactical situation). With a 4kn difference the faster ship can easily decide when and how if forced to fight.

The costs necessary to get those 4kn are really big but still the indian ship (being also much newer) doesn´t compare too bad when it comes down to armor. She only lacks in gunfire compared to a 12 gun broadside but given that she surely uses a more modern gun I have no doubt the real difference in firepower is much smaller.

So of the three ships posted here and knowing that the indian ship cannot be build heavier I´d take the indian ship. I think the Doctor got the maximum out of her displcement.....

Cheers,

HoOmAn