WesWorld

How's this for a treaty CA?



Xanthus, Atlantis Cruiser laid down 1923

Displacement:
12,473 t light; 13,036 t standard; 14,342 t normal; 15,330 t full load
Loading submergence 799 tons/feet

Dimensions:
680.00 ft x 68.00 ft x 23.00 ft (normal load)
207.26 m x 20.73 m x 7.01 m

Armament:
10 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (4 Main turrets, 2 superfiring turrets)
8 - 5.50" / 140 mm guns
6 - 3.00" / 76 mm AA guns
12 - 1.00" / 25 mm guns
Weight of broadside 3,313 lbs / 1,503 kg
12 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 4.50" / 114 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 100 % of normal area
Main turrets 4.50" / 114 mm, 2nd gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 1.75" / 44 mm, Conning tower 3.00" / 76 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 98,730 shp / 73,653 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 12,000nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
655 - 851

Cost:
£3.626 million / $14.503 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 414 tons, 2.9 %
Armour: 2,481 tons, 17.3 %
Belts: 807 tons, 5.6 %, Armament: 731 tons, 5.1 %, Armour Deck: 905 tons, 6.3 %
Conning Tower: 38 tons, 0.3 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 3,300 tons, 23.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 6,203 tons, 43.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,869 tons, 13.0 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0.5 %

Metacentric height 3.2

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
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: 16,467 lbs / 7,469 Kg = 64.3 x 8.0 " / 203 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 1.9
(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: 0.62
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.20

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.472
Sharpness coefficient: 0.32
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8.56
'Natural speed' for length: 26.08 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 52 %
Trim: 58
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 97.8 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 140.2 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 115 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.02
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 132 lbs / square foot or 647 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.28
(for 21.00 ft / 6.40 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 4.72 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.05

Generally a good design, but with the high freeboard and the already high hull strength, it seems to me that you could do more with her - or, alternately, make her smaller.

J

She´s a good one. Twins over triples? Or two triples forward and two twins aft? The secondaries are low angle guns?

What would she look like with a higher bc of say 0,5? Personally I think a l:b ratio of 10:1 and such a low bc of 0,472 is on the edge.... It saves you much weight (i.e. power necessary for 32kn), though.

Regards,

HoOmAn

Inigo Montoya, Iberia AC laid down 1923

Displacement:
12,980 t light; 13,622 t standard; 15,436 t normal; 16,825 t full load
Loading submergence 847 tons/feet

Dimensions:
656.17 ft x 72.18 ft x 22.97 ft (normal load)
200.00 m x 22.00 m x 7.00 m

Armament:
12 - 8.27" / 210 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 3 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
8 - 5.12" / 130 mm guns (4 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
12 - 2.24" / 57 mm AA guns
12 - 0.53" / 14 mm guns
Weight of broadside 3,996 lbs / 1,812 kg
16 - 23.6" / 600 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 4.33" / 110 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 128 % of normal area
Main turrets 4.33" / 110 mm, 2nd turrets 0.98" / 25 mm
AA gun shields 0.79" / 20 mm
Armour deck 1.57" / 40 mm, Conning tower 4.33" / 110 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 0.79" / 20 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 94,417 shp / 70,435 Kw = 31.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 15.00 kts

Complement:
692 - 900

Cost:
£3.827 million / $15.310 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 499 tons, 3.2 %
Armour: 2,975 tons, 19.3 %
Belts: 1,001 tons, 6.5 %, Armament: 768 tons, 5.0 %, Armour Deck: 863 tons, 5.6 %
Conning Tower: 58 tons, 0.4 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 285 tons, 1.8 %
Machinery: 3,156 tons, 20.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 6,200 tons, 40.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,455 tons, 15.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 150 tons, 1.0 %

Metacentric height 3.5

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

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.08
Shellfire needed to sink: 10,186 lbs / 4,620 Kg = 36.0 x 8.3 " / 210 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 1.6
(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: 0.58
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.10

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.497
Sharpness coefficient: 0.34
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8.06
'Natural speed' for length: 25.62 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim: 64
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 128.3 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 115.2 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 115 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.98
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 132 lbs / square foot or 646 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.16
(for 20.01 ft / 6.10 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 3.50 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

1 funnel, gunlayout as in El Cid, built very much to look like a smaller El Cid

I have included TDS in this design, which actually reduces torpedo resistance from 2.1 to 1.6

That´s bad news, LA.

Maybe it´s better to build her without a TDS. Actually she´s a real cruiser (category a) and well below the limit(s) we talked about above which a ship should have a TDS.

Further more I can´t but notice how comparable XANTHUS and EL CID are. Looks like you guys had similar ideas. Well, EL CID is some 600ts heavier but while similarly armored she trades a knot of speed for two more guns (of a slightly larger caliber).

Regards,

HoOmAn

Eerrrmmm no. El Cid is nearly 10,000t larger than Xanthus. She also mounts 12x240mm and has a 230mm armour belt.

None of these designs is as well armoured as Zara. Most of them are armoured to the same scale as Bolzano but with less speed and more guns.

I misread the cruisers name LA posted....

So read Inigo Montoya instead of EL CID...

I don't recall seeing either the Bolzano or Zara designs. Inigo Montoya seems to be different from the design I've seen.

Zara , Italian Cruiser laid down 1929

Displacement:
11,142 t light; 11,600 t standard; 12,802 t normal; 13,712 t full load
Loading submergence 689 tons/feet

Dimensions:
598.90 ft x 67.62 ft x 24.00 ft (normal load)
182.54 m x 20.61 m x 7.32 m

Armament:
8 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 2 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
12 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns
6 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
12 - 0.79" / 20 mm guns
Weight of broadside 2,430 lbs / 1,102 kg
6 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 5.91" / 150 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 95 % of normal area
Main turrets 4.72" / 120 mm
Armour deck 2.76" / 70 mm, Conning tower 2.76" / 70 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 97,706 shp / 72,888 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 4,000nm at 20.00 kts

Complement:
601 - 782

Cost:
£4.261 million / $17.043 million


MM Bolzano , Italian Cruiser laid down 1932

Displacement:
10,905 t light; 11,358 t standard; 12,496 t normal; 13,356 t full load
Loading submergence 687 tons/feet

Dimensions:
639.76 ft x 65.62 ft x 23.95 ft (normal load)
195.00 m x 20.00 m x 7.30 m

Armament:
8 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 2 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
12 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns
6 - 1.57" / 40 mm AA guns
16 - 0.79" / 20 mm guns
Weight of broadside 2,431 lbs / 1,103 kg
8 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 3.94" / 100 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 109 % of normal area
Main turrets 3.94" / 100 mm
Armour deck 1.97" / 50 mm, Conning tower 2.76" / 70 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 116,668 shp / 87,034 Kw = 34.00 kts
Range 4,000nm at 20.00 kts

Complement:
590 - 768

Cost:
£5.086 million / $20.345 million

Well Zara and Bolzano seem to have 6 and 9 years on thier side, they should be better then 1923 designs!

Yes but they are both a lot smaller. Also technology doesn't seem to greatly improve between 1920 and 1930.

Heres another design:


Xanthus, Atlantis Cruiser laid down 1923

Displacement:
10,454 t light; 10,972 t standard; 11,959 t normal; 12,701 t full load
Loading submergence 737 tons/feet

Dimensions:
668.00 ft x 62.00 ft x 20.50 ft (normal load)
203.61 m x 18.90 m x 6.25 m

Armament:
10 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (4 Main turrets, 2 superfiring turrets)
8 - 5.50" / 140 mm guns
8 - 3.00" / 76 mm AA guns
12 - 1.00" / 25 mm guns
Weight of broadside 3,340 lbs / 1,515 kg
12 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 4.25" / 108 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 100 % of normal area
Main turrets 4.00" / 102 mm, 2nd gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 1.75" / 44 mm, Conning tower 3.00" / 76 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 78,513 shp / 58,571 Kw = 31.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
571 - 743

Cost:
£3.153 million / $12.613 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 417 tons, 3.5 %
Armour: 2,182 tons, 18.2 %
Belts: 710 tons, 5.9 %, Armament: 604 tons, 5.1 %, Armour Deck: 835 tons, 7.0 %
Conning Tower: 34 tons, 0.3 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 2,624 tons, 21.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,230 tons, 43.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,505 tons, 12.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 2.6

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
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: 13,085 lbs / 5,935 Kg = 51.1 x 8.0 " / 203 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 1.7
(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: 0.77
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.11

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.493
Sharpness coefficient: 0.32
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8.93
'Natural speed' for length: 25.85 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 50 %
Trim: 63
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 98.4 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 123.9 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 111 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.04
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 125 lbs / square foot or 612 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.01
(for 18.00 ft / 5.49 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 2.31 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.02

like this? In terestingly the torpedo resistance hasn't goen up that much - but the shell resistance ...

Inigo Montoya, Iberia AC laid down 1923

Displacement:
12,952 t light; 13,589 t standard; 15,215 t normal; 16,455 t full load
Loading submergence 847 tons/feet

Dimensions:
656.17 ft x 72.18 ft x 22.64 ft (normal load)
200.00 m x 22.00 m x 6.90 m

Armament:
12 - 8.27" / 210 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 3 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
8 - 5.12" / 130 mm guns (4 2nd turrets x 2 guns)
12 - 2.24" / 57 mm AA guns
12 - 0.53" / 14 mm guns
Weight of broadside 3,996 lbs / 1,812 kg
16 - 23.6" / 600 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 4.53" / 115 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 103 % of normal area
Main turrets 4.53" / 115 mm, 2nd turrets 0.98" / 25 mm
AA gun shields 0.79" / 20 mm
Armour deck 1.57" / 40 mm, Conning tower 4.53" / 115 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 106,278 shp / 79,284 Kw = 32.00 kts
Range 9,000nm at 15.00 kts

Complement:
684 - 890

Cost:
£3.986 million / $15.944 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 499 tons, 3.3 %
Armour: 2,558 tons, 16.8 %
Belts: 835 tons, 5.5 %, Armament: 799 tons, 5.3 %, Armour Deck: 863 tons, 5.7 %
Conning Tower: 60 tons, 0.4 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 3,552 tons, 23.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 6,193 tons, 40.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,263 tons, 14.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 150 tons, 1.0 %

Metacentric height 3.4

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

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.05
Shellfire needed to sink: 15,659 lbs / 7,103 Kg = 55.4 x 8.3 " / 210 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 1.8
(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: 0.60
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.04

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.497
Sharpness coefficient: 0.34
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 8.10
'Natural speed' for length: 25.62 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 55 %
Trim: 67
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 102.4 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 116.5 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 110 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.98
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 133 lbs / square foot or 647 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.20
(for 20.01 ft / 6.10 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 3.54 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

1 funnel, gunlayout as in El Cid, built very much to look like a smaller El Cid

What is this a design show off? How about some imput on the designs I posted.

Fear not! I will not be competing in a "design-off" with you, Wes, though I have some odd German concepts on the shelf.

The latest version of Xanthus:

-The length:width ratio is on the high side. A 10:1 or less will give you a sturdier hull.

-The hull strength and extent of armor would probably let you add a bit more speed to the hull.

-The secondary and light batteries are appropriate, but I'd give them a bit more protection.

-Why only 3" on the CT? I know Atlantis doesn't care for CT armor on its battleships, but a 3" CT is vulnerable to all sorts of nasty destroyer guns that a cruiser will have to face.

-Four triple torpedo mounts? I'd scale it back to two mounts, as this ship's primary weapons are her gun battery.

-Have you considered a 3x3 main battery? Dropping a superfiring turret would probably let you tack on a good amount of protection or speed.

J

I second the Doc in what he said. Try a different length to beam ratio. Maybe just turn things around and make it 189m length and 20,3m beam or something. You´ll need more power to achieve 31kn, that´s for sure, but I´m pretty sure you´ll gain enough hull strength. You could also increase bc a little bit. I´ve seen LA is also using a bc a tid bit below 0,5 for his large cruiser much like you but he has a l:b ratio below 10:1 and personally I expect a higher bc to offer better results (hull volume) for such a vessel. Could be wrong, though.

If you don´t change dimensions I think you should increase freeboard and make use of the hull strength left. A CT of 3" is overkill for splinterprotection and still not enough to offer decent protection against everything larger than 13cm. Ask LA about it, we both discussed that in length and maybe he has saved the calculations somewhere. Having so many TTs is personal taste so if you like them - keep them. You´ll have to face Iberian cruisers after all and those all have those nasty 600mm TTs as it seems. Good to have something similar around.

Regards,

HoOmAn

that discussion should sit in my log at home - I'll dig it out.

Sorry Wes, don't mean to do this, but as you are on the topic....

Having looked at your design (nice, btw!) I was thinking that HEL was a bit shallower in the water at 21' compared to your 23' on this design.

So, i tried to increase HEL's draught by 2' and she came out a little LIGHTER with a lower freeboard but the same sea-keeping , and a lower BC!!
I thought that if you increased the draught, hence increasing the volume of water displaced, that the BC would go up!
Am I doing something wrong here???

HELP!!!

No...you're not doing anything wrong. No disrespect intended, but do you understand how BC works?