You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

1

Tuesday, November 8th 2005, 3:33pm

Torpedo Bulkheads

Is there a rule of thumb on how broad the ship should be before a torpedo bulkhead can be usefully added? If so, should that rule of thumb be added to the Design Rules for Gentlemen?

2

Tuesday, November 8th 2005, 3:45pm

I've seen it suggested that it's pointless or impractical if the ship's beam is less than ~75-80 feet. The smallest vessel I'm contemplating it for is a carrier in the 16,000 t range, primarily because I'm working with a short and beamy design rather than a long and lean design.

I don't think this is something I'd want to have solidified as a rule, though, provided the presence or absence of the TBS is accounted for in any situation that is gamed or scripted out.

3

Tuesday, November 8th 2005, 4:58pm

The rule of thumb is not to use a TBS on a beam less than 80' (~25m).

Also, I remember determining that a bulge (if you take that route) should be roughly 14% of the non-bulged beam. (I.E. a ship with 80' beam inside bulges would be 91.2' outside them.)

4

Tuesday, November 8th 2005, 5:25pm

Should this be put in the Design Rules for Gentlemen so new players don't have to ask the question?

The 14% rule makes sense if you're using the bulge as an anti-torpedo defence, less so if that's not it's purpose.

Oh, well, so much for that torpedo bulkhead on my CAs. A pity, but so be it.

5

Tuesday, November 8th 2005, 5:39pm

Emphasis on 'rule of thumb', I believe. One could put a torpedo bulkhead on a cruiser, but it doesn't tend to do much good. If your hullform suits it, I'd say to go ahead.

RLBH

6

Tuesday, November 8th 2005, 5:52pm

<chuckle> For those of us who are not naval architects by trade, what sort of a hull-form would be suitable?

7

Tuesday, November 8th 2005, 6:08pm

One that is as beamy and full as possible. Both of which have negative effects on other cruiser qualities.

8

Tuesday, November 8th 2005, 11:43pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
<chuckle> For those of us who are not naval architects by trade, what sort of a hull-form would be suitable?


What Red Admiral said.

You don't seriously think I'm in that business. No, I'm a humble pool attendant and student, I'm afraid.

RLBH