WesWorld

We all seemed to fairly agree on this design for the RN's needs, with 2 such ships being ordered.


G3, British Battlecruiser laid down 1921

Displacement:
37,574 t light; 39,744 t standard; 40,783 t normal; 41,450 t full load
Loading submergence 1,591 tons/feet

Dimensions:
830.00 ft x 104.00 ft x 31.80 ft (normal load)
252.98 m x 31.70 m x 9.69 m

Armament:
9 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (3 Main turrets x 3 guns, 1 superfiring turret)
Main turrets are grouped together
20 - 4.70" / 119 mm guns
12 - 1.56" / 40 mm guns
Weight of broadside 16,249 lbs / 7,370 kg

Armour:
Belt 14.00" / 356 mm, ends unarmoured
Belts cover 98 % of normal area
Main turrets 14.00" / 356 mm, 2nd gun shields 1.00" / 25 mm
Armour deck 6.00" / 152 mm, Conning tower 10.00" / 254 mm
Torpedo bulkhead 1.75" / 44 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 142,404 shp / 106,233 Kw = 30.00 kts
Range 5,000nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
1,434 - 1,865

Cost:
£9.438 million / $37.751 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 2,031 tons, 5.0 %
Armour: 14,657 tons, 35.9 %
Belts: 3,804 tons, 9.3 %, Armament: 3,304 tons, 8.1 %, Armour Deck: 6,182 tons, 15.2 %
Conning Tower: 256 tons, 0.6 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 1,111 tons, 2.7 %
Machinery: 4,904 tons, 12.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 15,982 tons, 39.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,208 tons, 7.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 6.0

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.07
Shellfire needed to sink: 38,478 lbs / 17,453 Kg = 22.8 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 5.2
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 65 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.53
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.09

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.520
Sharpness coefficient: 0.36
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 7.38
'Natural speed' for length: 28.81 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim: 59
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 96.5 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 144.3 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 100 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.00
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 201 lbs / square foot or 983 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.04
(for 19.50 ft / 5.94 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment -0.56 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00


For the USN we could have either a variant of the South Dakota or Lexington. Any prereferences?

As to the US, I'd vote for USS Lexington with 12x14"

seconded on L&S.

I'd prefer the original main arty layout on G3 with one turret aft of the command tower, apart from that I concur.

What's the RN's and USN's fleet lists look like?

cheers

Bernhard

seconded on L&S.

I'd prefer the original main arty layout on G3 with one turret aft of the command tower, apart from that I concur.

What's the RN's and USN's fleet lists look like?

cheers

Bernhard

Even when the 3rd turret is behind the bridge, i still judge the main turrets to be grouped as there is only 1 main magazine.

The fleet lists are the same as historical i think.


Adm. Kuznetsov, could you provide a design for Lexington please?

I agree, Lex and Sara would be the most likely candidates, while the G-3's have also been given the go ahead. The Brits would surely have the QE's, R's, Hood, Renown, Repulse, Tiger and several of the older 13.5" gunned BB's, which ever ones have not been handed down to Austrailia and I suppose minus the two G-3's built. Would Canada get the old Erin?
The U.S. would get the New York's as well as all the standards, the last 8 being Identical, being armed with 12x14" guns. I think the Lexingtons would replace the Arkansas/Wyoming.
I also prefer the original G-3 layout as it was the prefered design, while the Nelsons went with the "all turrets forward" design due to the increased weight restrictions of the WT. I also don't think the Brits would ditch those 6" guns for the G-3's and they also planned to have 7/8" deck armor. Seeing as the design would have come out displacing 47,000 tons they would have to shave some tonnage off. I would guess that her speed would drop though.

How's this?

USS Lexington class BC, laid down 1920

Length, 850 ft x Beam, 105.0 ft x Depth, 31.5 ft
41769 tons normal displacement (39617 tons standard)

Main battery: 12 x 14.0-inch (4 x 3; 2 superfiring)
Secondary battery: 14 x 6.0-inch
AA battery: 4 x 3.0-inch
Light battery: 4 x 0.5-inch

Weight of broadside: 18030 lbs

8 TT, 21.0"

Main belt, 6.0 inches; ends unarmored
Torpedo bulkhead, 1.0 inches
Armor deck, average 4.0 inches
C.T., 11.0 inches

Battery armor:
Main, 11.0" / secondary, 2.0" shields
AA, 1.0" shields

Maximum speed for 184278 shp = 32.00 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 10000 nm / 12 kts

Typical complement: 1461-1899


Estimated cost, $38.764 million (£9.691 million)

Remarks:

Relative extent of belt armor, 114 percent of 'typical' coverage.

Magazines and engineering spaces are cramped, with poor
watertight subdivision.

Roomy upper decks; superior accommodation and working space.


Distribution of weights:
Percent
normal
displacement:

Armament ......................... 2254 tons = 5 pct
Armor, total ..................... 10725 tons = 26 pct

Belt 1948 tons = 5 pct
Torpedo bulkhead 644 tons = 2 pct
Deck 4261 tons = 10 pct
C.T. 287 tons = 1 pct
Armament 3585 tons = 9 pct

Machinery ........................ 6443 tons = 15 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 17807 tons = 43 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 4490 tons = 11 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 50 tons = 0 pct
-----
41769 tons = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 6.5 ft

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 37279 tons
Standard displacement: 39617 tons
Normal service: 41769 tons
Full load: 43323 tons

Loading submergence 1645 tons/foot

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


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.11

Shellfire needed to sink: 31742 lbs = 23.1 x 14.0-inch shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 3.9
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

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

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.56

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.00

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


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.52
Sharpness coefficient: 0.36
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 7.50
'Natural speed' for length = 29.2 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: 114 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 155 percent


Displacement factor: 101 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.00
(Structure weight per square
foot of hull surface: 213 lbs)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.02
(for 22.0 ft average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment +1.8 ft)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.01

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


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

850.00 x 105.00 x 31.50; 22.00 -- Dimensions
0.52 -- Block coefficient
1920 -- Year laid down
32.00 / 10000 / 12.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
50 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
12 x 14.00; 4; 2 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
14 x 6.00; 0 -- Secondary battery; turrets
Gun-shields
:
4 x 3.00 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
4 x 0.50 -- Fourth (light) battery
8 / 0 / 21.00 -- TT / submerged / size
++++++++++
6.00 / 0.00 / 0.00 / 1.00; 114 -- Belt armor; relative extent
4.00 / 11.00 -- Deck / CT
11.00 / 2.00 / 1.00 / 0.00 -- Battery armor


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

I've always thought that if the U.S. was able to build two Lexingtons that they would hammer in additional armor into the designs, a 6" belt is simply scary!

Yes, a 6" belt is awfully thin, but it is my understanding that they were considered expendable in a fleet action. The expectation was to open the engagement at long range, hence the relatively thick deck. But once the enemy had been brought to action, I don't think they were expected to survive very long.

*shudder* Jackie Fisher would have been proud ...

If the Americans thought that design fit into their thinking, then fine, though it's not for me personally.

On the other hand, I would not want to have those British BCs bothering me...

[Edit: Seems like it does not do the tabs correctly so I'll have to redo it a bit to make it a bit more acceptable than it is now]
[Edit2: attempt number 2]

We have the next Royal Navy capital ships (Dreadnought and later; info used from Jane’s and Warship1.com):

Battleships:

Royal Sovereign Class
Royal Sovereign-----1911 => Transferred to USSR 1944, returned 1949, sold for scrap 1949
Royal Oak-----------1911 => Sunk 1939
Resolution----------1913 => Sold for scrap 1948
Ramillies-----------1913 => Sold for scrap 1948
Revenge-------------1913 => Sold for scarp 1948

Queen Elizabeth Class
Queen Elizabeth-----1912 => Decommissioned 1946, sold for scrap 1948
Warsprite-----------1912 => Scrapped 1947-1956
Valiant-------------1913 => Decommissioned 1945, sold for scrap 1948
Barham--------------1913 => Sunk 1941
Malaya--------------1913 => Decommissioned 1945, sold for scrap 1948

Iron Duke Class
Benbow--------------1912 => Decommissioned 1929, sold for scrap 1932
Emperor of India----1912 => Decommissioned 1929, sunk as target 1931, raised and scrapped 1932
Iron Duke-----------1912 => Decommissioned 1929, training ship 1931, depot ship 1939, sold for scrap 1946
Marlborough---------1912 => Decommissioned 1929, sold for scrap 1932

Canada--------------1911 => Returned to Chile 1920
Eagle---------------1913 => Finished as carrier

Erin----------------1911 => Decommissioned 1919, scrapped 1924

Agincourt-----------1911 => Decommissioned 1919, recommissioned 1921, decommissioned 1921, sold for scrap 1922

King George V Class
King George V-------1911 => Decommissioned 1919, scrapped 1927
Centurion-----------1911 => Decommissioned 1924, target ship 1928, recommissioned 1942
Ajax----------------1911 => Decommissioned 1925, scrapped 1927
Audacious-----------1911 => Mined 1914

Orion Class
Orion---------------1909 => Decommissioned 1921, scrapped 1924
Tunderer------------1910 => Decommissioned 1921, scrapped 1927
Monarch-------------1910 => Decommissioned 1921, target ship 1922, sunk 1925
Conqueror-----------1910 => Decommissioned 1921, scrapped 1922

Colossus Class
Colossus------------1909 => Decommissioned 1919, scrapped 1925
Hercules------------1909 => Decommissioned 1919, scrapped 1922

Neptune-------------1909 => Decommissioned 1919, scrapped 1924

St. Vincent Class
St. Vincent---------1907 => Decommissioned 1919, scrapped 1922
Collingwood---------1908 => Decommissioned 1919, scrapped 1922
Vanguard------------1908 => Internal explosion 1917

Bellerophon Class
Bellerophon---------1906 => gunnery training ship 1919, sold for scrap 1921 under Washington Naval Treaty
Temeraire-----------1907 => Decommissioned 1919, sold for scrap 1921 under Washington Naval Treaty
Superb--------------1907 => Decommissioned 1919, sold for scrap 1921 under Washington Naval Treaty

Dreadnought---------1905 => Decommissioned 1918, scrapped 1922

Battle Cruisers:

Admiral Class
Hood----------------1916 => Sunk 1941
Rodney--------------1916 => Suspended 1917, cancelled 1918, scrapped on the slip
Howe----------------1916 => Suspended 1917, cancelled 1918, scrapped on the slip
Anson---------------1917 => Suspended 1917, cancelled 1918, scrapped on the slip

Furious-------------1915 => Completed 1917 as seaplane carrier, rebuilt with full flight deck 1922-1925

Courageous Class
Courageous----------1915 => Decommissioned 1921, converted to carrier 1924-1928
Glorious------------1915 => Decommissioned 1921, converted to carrier 1924-1930

Renown Class
Repulse-------------1914 => Sunk 1941
Renown--------------1914 => sold for scrap 1948

Queen Mary----------1911 => Blown up by gunfire 1916
Tiger---------------1912 => Decommissioned 1931, sold for scrap 1932

Lion Class
Lion----------------1909 => Sold for scrap 1924
Princess Royal------1910 => Sold for scrap 1922

Indefatigable Type
Indefatigable-------1909 => Blown up by gunfire 1916
New Zealand---------1910 => “Failed Connection. We're sorry. Your request failed to connect to our servers. We may be experiencing technical difficulties and suggest that you try again later.” :-(


Invincible Class
Invincible----------1906 => Blown up by gunfire 1916
Inflexible----------1906 => Decommissioned 1920, sold for scrap 1922
Indomitable---------1906 => Decommissioned 1920, sold for scrap 1922

================================================================
1/1/1921 RN ship status in the Wesworld:

Battleships:

Royal Sovereign Class
Royal Sovereign-----1911 => active
Royal Oak-----------1911 => active
Resolution----------1913 => active
Ramillies-----------1913 => active
Revenge-------------1913 => active

Queen Elizabeth Class
Queen Elizabeth-----1912 => active
Warsprite-----------1912 => active
Valiant-------------1913 => active
Barham--------------1913 => active
Malaya--------------1913 => active

Iron Duke Class
Benbow--------------1912 => active
Emperor of India----1912 => active
Iron Duke-----------1912 => Australian Navy
Marlborough---------1912 => active

Canada--------------1911 => Returned to Chile 1920
Eagle---------------1913 => Finished as carrier

Erin----------------1911 => Sold to Canada??

Agincourt-----------1911 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped

King George V Class
King George V-------1911 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped
Centurion-----------1911 => Australian Navy
Ajax----------------1911 => Australian Navy

Orion Class
Orion---------------1909 => To be decommissioned, to be scrapped
Tunderer------------1910 => To be decommissioned, to be scrapped
Monarch-------------1910 => To be decommissioned, to be converted to target ship
Conqueror-----------1910 => To be decommissioned, to be scrapped

Colossus Class
Colossus------------1909 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped
Hercules------------1909 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped

Neptune-------------1909 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped

St. Vincent Class
St. Vincent---------1907 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped
Collingwood---------1908 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped

Bellerophon Class
Bellerophon---------1906 => Gunnery training ship 1919, to be scrapped
Temeraire-----------1907 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped
Superb--------------1907 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped

Dreadnought---------1905 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped

Battle Cruisers:

Admiral Class
Hood----------------1916 => Active

Courageous Class
Courageous----------1915 => To be decommissioned (later to be converted to carrier)
Glorious------------1915 => To be decommissioned (later to be converted to carrier)

Renown Class
Repulse-------------1914 => Active
Renown--------------1914 => Active

Tiger---------------1912 => Active

Lion Class
Lion----------------1909 => To be scrapped
Princess Royal------1910 => To be scrapped

Indefatigable Type
New Zealand---------1910 => ?

Invincible Class
Inflexible----------1906 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped
Indomitable---------1906 => Decommissioned, to be scrapped

Using the list in this thread gives us (at this moment) the next ships for the RN:

Royal Sovereign ......................................... 25,750
Royal Oak ............................................... 25,750
Revenge ................................................. 25,750
Resolution .............................................. 25,750
Ramilies ................................................ 25,750
Malaya .................................................. 27,500
Valiant ................................................. 27,500
Barham .................................................. 27,500
Queen Elizabeth ......................................... 27,500
Warsprite ............................................... 27,500
Benbow .................................................. 25,000
Emperor of India ........................................ 25,000
Marlborough ............................................. 25,000
Hood .................................................... 41,200
Renown .................................................. 26,500
Repulse ................................................. 26,500
Tiger ................................................... 28,500
17 ships of the 30 allowed, 463,950 tons of the 600,000 tons allowed (136,050 tons left)

With 17 ships, would they retain another ship and build two G-3 ships, or build three G-3 ship?

Walter

No I can't see 3 G-3 type ships being completed. I think retaining Lion and Princess Royal would be more likely. That gives the RN its full 21 ships and tonnage to spare.


Adm. Kuznetsov's Lexington looks fairly good. Historically a 7" belt was to be used, but 1/2 the boilers were to be unprotected.

Quoted

That gives the RN its full 21 ships and tonnage to spare.

Might be wrong, but I do think that the treaty gives the RN 20 ships and 600,000 tons.

Walter

Given what happened to Queen Mary, I don't think the Brits would be that excited about retaining Princess Royal or Lion.

Yes you are correct. 20 ships and 600,000t. WHY on earth does the USN have more ships allowed than the RN? This simply doesn't make sense. The RN of history was much stronger than the USN. The USN of our history is weaker from sticking to the 14" gun. The USN didn't achieve true parity with the RN until 1942/43.

Quoted

WHY on earth does the USN have more ships allowed than the RN?

Better ask the man who gave us this treaty. :-)

Since we have decided that the USN will complete Lexington and Saratoga, I assume that they still convert two of the four remaining Lexington class ships to Carriers. Which ones?

Walter

Lion and Princess Royal aren't that bad really.

Just pick 2 out of the remaining 4. Ranger and one other.

I think it was assumed that Britain without South Africa, India and Australia would not be in need of anything bigger.

As I recall, the original treaty gave them parity with the US too, so it's not greatly different in that respect.

In the begining we figured that Britain would be weaker due to Austrailia and South Africa being independant, and havein Iberia, Nordmark and Atlantis as nabours.