WesWorld

With the recent loss of the Copenhagen, the Admiralty has decided to bring forward the building of the first Danish battleship of the modern era, the "Tyr" design.

However with a build time of almost 3 years, it will be 1928 before she enters service, and this will leave the Navy with a considerable loss in ability, even given the Copenhagen's age, for those years.

The idea has been mooted that the Navy acquire a vessel that will act as a stop-gap until "Tyr" enters service, and enquires are being made as to the disposition of the vessels taken as reparation or awaiting disposal from the vanquished nations after WW1.

It should be noted that former Austro-Hungarian dreadnought Tegetthoff is still anchored in Venice. She was sold for scrapping nearly a year and a half ago but since then, the commercial firm employed has gone into liquidation. Now no one is quite sure who actually 'owns' Tegetthoff. In the mean time, she continues to rust(95%)

Jyllands-Posten April 10th 1924

Upon hearing of the disposition of Teggethof, the Danish Naval Attache in Rome is making enquiries with the liquidator of the scrapping company.

Negotiations are at any early stage, but he remains hopefull.

Are you sure you want that? Those former austrian BBs are rated among the poorest of their kind - dispite their relatively impressive main armament.

The Tegetthoff Class weren't that bad. They were heavily armed and armoured but a bit slow at around 20.5knts. The worst thing was the absolute lack of a TDS which some Italian sailors made the most of.

Those Austrian ships (BTW is it Tegetthof-class or Viribis Unitis-class? I've seen both...) for some reason are extremely attractive to me. No idea why...

(back in-character Even if the ship is a dog, you can always yank off the turrets and use 'em to build another ship or two (perhaps a 3-turret BC and a monitor?).

Lack of TDS, lack of stability, material of inferior quality resulting in problematic corrosion (even though they aren´t that old), lack of speed, inferior internal subdivision (even by british standards, don´t even try to compare that to german standards), inferior protection (280mm on belt and barbets is hardly suffice to keep heavy shells outside her hull or away from her ammo), cramped and problematic triple mounts, lack of range...
I guess this could go on for some time. Just ask the warships1 BBvs.BB board and you´ll get some interesting answers. :o)

Nevertheless, they were capital warships and as such a political statement that had to be taken into consideration. However, by 1920er standards they are inferior and too cramped. Their lack of space and stability reserve won´t allow much modernisation. :o/

If you can get them for nil take them, scrap them and use the material and guns for something more useful.

Just my opinion of course...

HoOmAn

...edited....

SMS Tegetthof, Austro-Hungarian battleship, laid down 1910

Length, 496 ft x Beam, 89.5 ft x Depth, 26.8 ft
20008 tons normal displacement (18876 tons standard)

Main battery: 12 x 12.00-inch / 305mm (4 x 3; 2 superfiring)
Secondary battery: 12 x 5.90-inch / 150mm
QF battery: 12 x 3.46-inch / 88mm
Light battery: 2 x 1.85-inch / 47mm

Weight of broadside: 11855 lbs

4 TT, 20.8" (submerged)

Main belt, 11.0 inches; bow and stern, 4.8 inches
Upper belt, 7.8 inches
Armor deck, average 1.8 inches
C.T., 11.8 inches

Battery armor:
Main, 11.0" / secondary, 6.8"


Maximum speed for 25010 shp = 20.21 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 6100 nm / 10 kts

Typical complement: 841-1093


Estimated cost, $8.064 million (£2.016 million)

Remarks:

Magazines and engineering spaces are roomy, with superior
watertight subdivision.

Main deck secondary guns subject to being washed down
in a seaway.


Distribution of weights:
Percent
normal
displacement:

Armament ......................... 1482 tons = 7 pct
Armor, total ..................... 6950 tons = 35 pct

Belt 3007 tons = 15 pct
Deck 1009 tons = 5 pct
C.T. 187 tons = 1 pct
Armament 2747 tons = 14 pct

Machinery ........................ 1137 tons = 6 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 7920 tons = 40 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 2519 tons = 13 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 0 tons = 0 pct
-----
20008 tons = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 4.3 ft

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 17488 tons
Standard displacement: 18876 tons
Normal service: 20008 tons
Full load: 20833 tons

Loading submergence 890 tons/foot

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


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.01

Shellfire needed to sink: 21842 lbs = 25.3 x 12.0-inch shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 2.8
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 57 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.64

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.19

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


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.59
Sharpness coefficient: 0.44
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 5.59
'Natural speed' for length = 22.3 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 48 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 79 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 113 percent


Displacement factor: 95 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.94
(Structure weight per square
foot of hull surface: 185 lbs)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.72
(for 16.0 ft average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment -1.4 ft)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.00

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


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

495.75 x 89.50 x 26.75; 16.00 -- Dimensions
0.59 -- Block coefficient
1910 -- Year laid down
20.21 / 6100 / 10.00; Turbine, coal fired -- Speed / radius / cruise
0 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
12 x 12.00; 4; 2 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
12 x 5.90; 0 -- Secondary battery; turrets
Main deck battery
:
12 x 3.46 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
:
2 x 1.85 -- Fourth (light) battery
4 / 4 / 20.80 -- TT / submerged / size
++++++++++
11.00 / 4.75 / 7.75 / 0.00; 100 -- Belt armor; relative extent
1.75 / 11.75 -- Deck / CT
11.00 / 6.75 / 0.00 / 0.00 -- Battery armor


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

My sims are a little different.

The Tegethoff QF guns were 88mm, AFAIK, but there are some reports of them being 70mm guns. There were 12 of them.

HoOmAn, I think the Tegethoffs(or Viribus Unitis; I also don't know which is the correct name for the class), were quite good, given their size. They were too small to be anything but cramped. Had they had another 2,000 tons, they would be much better.

All in all, I prefer them to the Minas Gerais class(OK, they were older ships).

Thanks; I've modified the sim above.

And here's one possible upgraded version.

Tegetthof, rebuilt 1940

Length, 496 ft x Beam, 89.5 ft x Depth, 26.8 ft
20008 tons normal displacement (19100 tons standard)

Main battery: 12 x 12.00-inch / 305mm (4 x 3; 2 superfiring)
Secondary battery: 12 x 5.10-inch / 130mm (6 x 2)
AA battery: 12 x 1.57-inch / 40mm
Light battery: 4 x 0.78-inch / 20mm

Weight of broadside: 11188 lbs

Main belt, 11.0 inches; ends unarmored
Upper belt, 7.8 inches
Armor deck, average 3.0 inches
C.T., 3.0 inches

Battery armor:
Main, 11.0" / secondary, 2.0"
AA, 0.5" shields

Maximum speed for 30014 shp = 21.18 knots
Approximate cruising radius, 12500 nm / 10 kts

Typical complement: 841-1093


Estimated cost, $45.815 million (£11.454 million)

Remarks:

Magazines and engineering spaces are roomy, with superior
watertight subdivision.


Distribution of weights:
Percent
normal
displacement:

Armament ......................... 1399 tons = 7 pct
Armor, total ..................... 7102 tons = 35 pct

Belt 2661 tons = 13 pct
Deck 1729 tons = 9 pct
C.T. 48 tons = 0 pct
Armament 2663 tons = 13 pct

Machinery ........................ 803 tons = 4 pct
Hull and fittings; equipment ..... 8415 tons = 42 pct
Fuel, ammunition, stores ......... 2240 tons = 11 pct
Miscellaneous weights ............ 50 tons = 0 pct
-----
20008 tons = 100 pct

Estimated metacentric height, 4.3 ft

Displacement summary:

Light ship: 17768 tons
Standard displacement: 19100 tons
Normal service: 20008 tons
Full load: 20653 tons

Loading submergence 890 tons/foot

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


Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:

Relative margin of stability: 1.01

Shellfire needed to sink: 25345 lbs = 29.3 x 12.0-inch shells
(Approximates weight of penetrating
shell hits needed to sink ship,
not counting critical hits)

Torpedoes needed to sink: 3.5
(Approximates number of 'typical'
torpedo hits needed to sink ship)

Relative steadiness as gun platform, 55 percent
(50 percent is 'average')

Relative rocking effect from firing to beam, 0.60

Relative quality as a seaboat: 1.14

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


Hull form characteristics:

Block coefficient: 0.59
Sharpness coefficient: 0.44
Hull speed coefficient 'M' = 5.59
'Natural speed' for length = 22.3 knots
Power going to wave formation
at top speed: 50 percent


Estimated hull characteristics and strength:

Relative underwater volume absorbed by
magazines and engineering spaces: 68 percent

Relative accommodation and working space: 113 percent


Displacement factor: 100 percent
(Displacement relative to loading factors)


Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.02
(Structure weight per square
foot of hull surface: 197 lbs)

Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.97
(for 16.0 ft average freeboard;
freeboard adjustment -1.4 ft)

Relative composite hull strength: 1.08

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


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

495.75 x 89.50 x 26.75; 16.00 -- Dimensions
0.59 -- Block coefficient
1940 -- Year laid down
21.18 / 12500 / 10.00; Oil-fired turbine or equivalent -- Speed / radius / cruise
50 tons -- Miscellaneous weights
++++++++++
12 x 12.00; 4; 2 -- Main battery; turrets; superfiring
:
12 x 5.10; 6 -- Secondary battery; turrets
:
12 x 1.57 -- Tertiary (QF/AA) battery
Gun-shields
:
4 x 0.78 -- Fourth (light) battery
0 -- No torpedo armament
++++++++++
11.00 / 0.00 / 7.75 / 0.00; 100 -- Belt armor; relative extent
3.00 / 3.00 -- Deck / CT
11.00 / 2.00 / 0.50 / 0.00 -- Battery armor


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

The Danish plan for Teggethoff was always to use her in a limited capacity, mostly in the Baltic, partly as a training vessel, but primarily to help protect Copenhagen. She is a short term fix, and will be de-commissioned as soon as the first Tyr unit is in service, as KDM Copenhagen would have been had she not had a run in with a stray mine!

I just hope the cadets don't find another mine!!!

OOC, I was thinking, as teggethoff was due to be scrapped, would it be fair to pay for her at her scrap value?

P.S. Does anyone have a major problem with my plans as laid out here?

I have no problems with it.

Thank you Sir.
1 down, many to go!!!

No problems here, as long as she never visits Siam.

If she does, there's no telling what FINK might try...

BTW I'd pay for her at about 5% over scrap value - profit must be made, you understand.

Quoted

Originally posted by Swamphen
BTW I'd pay for her at about 5% over scrap value - profit must be made, you understand.

But as the compay has gone bust, the liquidator will be looking to get money any way he can to cover the company's outstanding debts, therefore a bargain might be had!!


2 down, many still to go!!

Here's one with a touch less freeboard and a bit more stablity:

SKuKMS Tegetthof, Dual Monarchy Battleship laid down 1910

Displacement:
17,548 t light; 18,937 t standard; 20,055 t normal; 20,869 t full load
Loading submergence 891 tons/feet

Dimensions:
496.00 ft x 89.50 ft x 26.80 ft (normal load)
151.18 m x 27.28 m x 8.17 m

Armament:
12 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 3 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
12 - 5.90" / 150 mm guns
Secondary guns mounted low & subject to being washed down in a seaway
12 - 3.46" / 88 mm QF guns
2 - 1.85" / 47 mm guns
Weight of broadside 11,855 lbs / 5,377 kg
4 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
Belt 11.00" / 279 mm, upper belt 7.80" / 198 mm, end belts 4.80" / 122 mm
Belts cover 100 % of normal area
Main turrets 11.00" / 279 mm, 2nd casemates 6.80" / 173 mm
Armour deck 1.80" / 46 mm, Conning tower 11.80" / 300 mm

Machinery:
Coal fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 4 shafts, 26,458 shp / 19,738 Kw = 20.50 kts
Range 6,000nm at 10.00 kts

Complement:
842 - 1,095

Cost:
£2.027 million / $8.109 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,482 tons, 7.4 %
Armour: 6,934 tons, 34.6 %
Belts: 3,018 tons, 15.0 %, Armament: 2,690 tons, 13.4 %, Armour Deck: 1,038 tons, 5.2 %
Conning Tower: 188 tons, 0.9 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 1,203 tons, 6.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 7,929 tons, 39.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,507 tons, 12.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 4.6

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

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.05
Shellfire needed to sink: 22,533 lbs / 10,221 Kg = 26.1 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 3.0
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 50 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.57
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.12

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.590
Sharpness coefficient: 0.44
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 5.58
'Natural speed' for length: 22.27 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim: 44
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 76.8 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 102.5 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 95 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 0.96
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 186 lbs / square foot or 910 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.69
(for 15.50 ft / 4.72 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment -1.90 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.01

Quoted

4 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Those should be underwater tubes, and 533.0 mm.