Or at least spend half a war in the vast expanses of the Pacific looking for each other...

Quote from: The Rock Doctor on November 17, 2008, 06:27:40 AM
On names - I think Tan and I will be using Avenger for similar types of ships soon, so Enterprise isn't unique.

im leaning toward the Avengers becoming the City Class (Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, Adilade, Pheonix, Brisbane, and Darwin) it is a similar theory though on construction

Excellent news.

QuoteOr at least spend half a war in the vast expanses of the Pacific looking for each other...

Or that.  It would certainly leave them in better condition afterward.

Ironicly my Inflexible class  are built on almost the same hull length.  I elected for 6X14" in 2 tripple mounts another knot speed, more secondaries (although a lighter gun), and a Heavy (for the day) anti aircraft battery (6X2" in 3 twin mountings).  I used 1k less mass but realy im not sure which ship would be better (it reflects the difering principles used by the 2 navys I supose)

Interesting comparison. Just looking at the weights:

	Enterprise	Inflexible
Armament:	1,378 tons, 4.8 %	1,127 tons, 4.0 %
Armour:	9,036 tons, 31.5 %	8,927 tons, 31.9 %
- Belt:	3,453 tons, 12.1 %	5,249 tons, 18.8 %
- TDS:	813 tons, 2.8 %	608 tons, 2.2 %
- Armament:	2,023 tons, 7.1 %	1,210 tons, 4.3 %
- Deck:	2,504 tons, 8.7 %	1,662 tons, 5.9 %
- CT:	242 tons, 0.8 %	199 tons, 0.7 %
Machinery:	3,190 tons, 11.1 %	3,160 tons, 11.3 %
Hull, etc.	11,533 tons, 40.3 %	10,361 tons, 37.0 %
Fuel, ammo and stores:	3,105 tons, 10.8 %	3,985 tons, 14.2 %
Misc.:	408 tons, 1.4 %	425 tons, 1.5 %

Enterprise gets 2 more guns and a thicker deck while Inflexible gets an 8" upper belt, more fuel and another knot of speed. I think if anything, this indicates how much more experience Swiss designers have designing large, fast ships compared to their confederate counterparts.

All that said, the CSA designers would probably say that shipping only 6 guns on 24,000 tons wouldn't be acceptable to them. One might argue that Enterprise could use those two extra guns to find the range more quickly. It might be a race for Inflexible to get closer where her armor scheme does more good. To do that, a 1 knot advantage might not help enough.

agreed Compleatly, like I said they make an interesting Comparison.  If I deleat the upper belt I can have a 3-4" deck on the same ship (is planed for the Mark 3 if I actualy bild them)

The main difference is that if NS wants to keep up with DKB in the speed race, they need that extra knots - more important politically than tactically, though.

Quote from: P3D on November 17, 2008, 01:39:00 PM
The main difference is that if NS wants to keep up with DKB in the speed race, they need that extra knots - more important politically than tactically, though.

the speed thing is compleatly Political, although unservaceable fast ships wont be accepted anymore.

Quote from: guinness on November 17, 2008, 10:44:02 AM
Interesting comparison. Just looking at the weights:

	Enterprise	Inflexible
Armament:	1,378 tons, 4.8 %	1,127 tons, 4.0 %
Armour:	9,036 tons, 31.5 %	8,927 tons, 31.9 %
- Belt:	3,453 tons, 12.1 %	5,249 tons, 18.8 %
- TDS:	813 tons, 2.8 %	608 tons, 2.2 %
- Armament:	2,023 tons, 7.1 %	1,210 tons, 4.3 %
- Deck:	2,504 tons, 8.7 %	1,662 tons, 5.9 %
- CT:	242 tons, 0.8 %	199 tons, 0.7 %
Machinery:	3,190 tons, 11.1 %	3,160 tons, 11.3 %
Hull, etc.	11,533 tons, 40.3 %	10,361 tons, 37.0 %
Fuel, ammo and stores:	3,105 tons, 10.8 %	3,985 tons, 14.2 %
Misc.:	408 tons, 1.4 %	425 tons, 1.5 %

Enterprise gets 2 more guns and a thicker deck while Inflexible gets an 8" upper belt, more fuel and another knot of speed. I think if anything, this indicates how much more experience Swiss designers have designing large, fast ships compared to their confederate counterparts.

All that said, the CSA designers would probably say that shipping only 6 guns on 24,000 tons wouldn't be acceptable to them. One might argue that Enterprise could use those two extra guns to find the range more quickly. It might be a race for Inflexible to get closer where her armor scheme does more good. To do that, a 1 knot advantage might not help enough.

Just for comparison, the similar sized Dutch ships:
Wilhelmina
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 1 795 tons, 6,2 %
   Armour: 8 582 tons, 29,7 %
      - Belts: 3 656 tons, 12,7 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 746 tons, 2,6 %
      - Armament: 1 705 tons, 5,9 %
      - Armour Deck: 2 275 tons, 7,9 %
      - Conning Tower: 200 tons, 0,7 %
   Machinery: 3 190 tons, 11,0 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 11 232 tons, 38,9 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3 740 tons, 12,9 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 350 tons, 1,2 %

Less armour, allot more guns (or larger).

The other new CSA design for 1914 is a new 3rd Class Cruiser, the Chattanooga class: Started as a further development of the Murfreesboro and Charlotte class ships, the Chattanoogas were stretched and their machinery spaces rearranged to make use of half of the Enterprise class machinery plant, giving a useful top speed increase of 2 knots. In addition, the increase of 550 tons (light) over the Charlottes yielded a 20% increase in range, and eventually a 6th 5.5" gun was worked in (albeit by abandoning superfiring forward for a sided arrangement).

Three ships were laid down in 1914, with an expected three more to come in the future.


(Click to view full resolution image)

CSS Chattanooga, CSA  Cruiser laid down 1914 (Engine 1912)

Displacement:
   4,050 t light; 4,202 t standard; 4,671 t normal; 5,045 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   446.00 ft / 435.00 ft x 38.75 ft x 18.83 ft (normal load)
   135.94 m / 132.59 m x 11.81 m  x 5.74 m

Armament:
      1 - 5.50" / 140 mm guns in single mounts, 75.00lbs / 34.02kg shells, 1914 Model
     Breech loading gun in a deck mount with hoist
     on centreline forward
      2 - 5.50" / 140 mm guns in single mounts, 75.00lbs / 34.02kg shells, 1914 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, all forward
      3 - 5.50" / 140 mm guns in single mounts, 75.00lbs / 34.02kg shells, 1914 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on centreline, all aft, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
      2 - 1.58" / 40.0 mm guns in single mounts, 2.00lbs / 0.91kg shells, 1914 Model
     Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread
      8 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns (4x2 guns), 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1914 Model
     Machine guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
   Weight of broadside 458 lbs / 208 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 200
   4 - 20.0" / 508 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   2.75" / 70 mm   354.00 ft / 107.90 m   11.50 ft / 3.51 m
   Ends:   Unarmoured
     Main Belt covers 125 % of normal length

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   1.00" / 25 mm   0.50" / 13 mm      1.50" / 38 mm
   2nd:   1.00" / 25 mm   0.50" / 13 mm      1.50" / 38 mm
   3rd:   1.00" / 25 mm   0.50" / 13 mm      1.50" / 38 mm

   - Armour deck: 1.00" / 25 mm, Conning tower: 3.00" / 76 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 2 shafts, 40,000 shp / 29,840 Kw = 29.00 kts
   Range 6,200nm at 12.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 843 tons

Complement:
   282 - 367

Cost:
   £0.532 million / $2.129 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 63 tons, 1.4 %
   Armour: 696 tons, 14.9 %
      - Belts: 448 tons, 9.6 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
      - Armament: 19 tons, 0.4 %
      - Armour Deck: 211 tons, 4.5 %
      - Conning Tower: 18 tons, 0.4 %
   Machinery: 1,595 tons, 34.1 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 1,542 tons, 33.0 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 621 tons, 13.3 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 153 tons, 3.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     3,163 lbs / 1,435 Kg = 38.0 x 5.5 " / 140 mm shells or 0.7 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
   Metacentric height 1.4 ft / 0.4 m
   Roll period: 13.5 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 73 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.52
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.24

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak
   Block coefficient: 0.515
   Length to Beam Ratio: 11.23 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 20.86 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 59
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 24.63 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      24.00 ft / 7.32 m
      - Forecastle (15 %):   21.00 ft / 6.40 m
      - Mid (35 %):      20.50 ft / 6.25 m (12.50 ft / 3.81 m aft of break)
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   12.50 ft / 3.81 m
      - Stern:      12.50 ft / 3.81 m
      - Average freeboard:   15.61 ft / 4.76 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 125.2 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 97.3 %
   Waterplane Area: 11,386 Square feet or 1,058 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 103 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 69 lbs/sq ft or 335 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.92
      - Longitudinal: 2.03
      - Overall: 1.00
   Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
   Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
   Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Misc Weights:
100t: Fire Control
25t: Long Range Marconi
4t: 4 Torpedoes
24t: Reserve

Range at 10 knots: 9150 nm
Range at 15 knots: 3725 nm
Range at 25 knots: 977 nm
Range at top speed: 625 nm or 21.55 hours


*OOC: Special thanks to Borys for posting this: http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=3064.msg32830#msg32830, which inspired much of the look of this ship.

Nice drawing
Well balanced Cruiser


;)

Nice - something the KKK could build :)
Borys