Firanji ships 1917-

[P3D]

I love the fact that everyone is sticking 40mm AA guns on their ships... Quite possibly the worst AA weapon currently available.

The previous player was researching it (40mm gun), that's why. However, he was researching it without having the appropriate tech, so unfortunately I might have to do with more effective stuff instead - and revisit that report.

[Sachmle]

The previous player was researching it (40mm gun), that's why. However, he was researching it without having the appropriate tech, so unfortunately I might have to do with more effective stuff instead - and revisit that report.

Make sure you're using the correct/current AA tech list when you tweek it

Anti-aircraft Guns and Directors

1903 (-1):  Machine gun caliber weapons aimed by hand and eye. Field guns firing non-AA specific ammunition.
1910 (0):  Purpose designed weapons and ammunition, including hand adjusted timed-fused shells for larger calibers, and tracers in machine guns and autocannon.
1918 (+1): Improved timed fuses. AA fire plans. Central post AA fire control.
1926 (+2): Improved ammunition supply for automatic weapons. Early AA fire control tables. Dual Purpose guns.
1936 (+3): Mature AA fire control. Radar guided AA fire control. Proximity fuses for guns larger than 75mm.

Not the old one Hooper was using

Anti-aircraft gun and altitudes
1900:  Baseline (0): High angle anti-ballon guns or machine guns (up to 1 pounders) = 1,000 feet - starting point for everyone.  High-angle anti-balloon guns are perfect for that role.
1908:  Advanced (+1): High angle anti-air guns (20-40mm) = 5,000 feet
1914:  Cutting Edge (+3): High angle artillery (40-80mm) = 15,000 feet
1925:  Futuristic (+5): High altitude artillery (80mm+) = 30,000 feet

[Carthaginian]

Against airships you'd probably need some 3" guns.
Using the 5.5" guns turns them into "dual purpose" guns, and that tech isn't available yet.

Distant airships are large enough target that they could be hit by low-angle weapons. It needs only an altitude guesstimate and extra firing tables - not really accurate, and the 20-30 degree max gun elevation indeed limits usefulness, but for horizontal movements regular Fire Control could be used. Granted, VERY limited engagement envelope, so an airship could easily fly outside of it.

Ok, you're talking about engaging airships that are 5-10 miles distant and at very low altitudes.
That I can see... but like you, I don't think it'd work too well.

[P3D]

Firanj have two obsolete Ghub-class coastal battleships, refit long overdue.

http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=4158.msg47685#msg47685

The 10"/46 guns are not that bad, however. The ships are scrapped, main gun turrets and belt armor are refurbished/reused to build an armored cruiser. As a note, the Harvey-pattern armor is ~20% less effective compared to the improved Krupp types.

The 600mm TTs are placeholder right now - Firenj will be planning to purchase such torpedoes in 1920.
Powerplant same as on the smaller fast battleship, and should look pretty much like the other - so adversaries could not tell it easily apart from the battleship.

Calculations:
Main armament weight 477t, armor 426t. 0.9BP and $1.8, reconstructed (-0.09BP, -$0.18)
Reused belt armor - 2142t, BP and $2.142
6" guns, moved to coastal artillery: 320t
Scrap value (after these removed): 2.39 BP and $
Vanguarding-refit: 2.95 BP and $3.924

Cost: $10.17, 11.14BP

Firanj AC,   laid down 1918 (Engine 1916)

Displacement:
   15,844 t light; 16,480 t standard; 17,890 t normal; 19,018 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   557.74 ft / 557.74 ft x 82.02 ft x 26.25 ft (normal load)
   170.00 m / 170.00 m x 25.00 m  x 8.00 m

Armament:
     8 - 9.84" / 250 mm guns (4x2 guns), 476.75lbs / 216.25kg shells, 1918 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
     12 - 5.51" / 140 mm guns (6x2 guns), 83.72lbs / 37.98kg shells, 1918 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, all amidships, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
     12 - 0.49" / 12.5 mm guns in single mounts, 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1918 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread
   Weight of broadside 4,819 lbs / 2,186 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 100
   8 - 23.6" / 600 mm submerged torpedo tubes

Armour:
  - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   9.06" / 230 mm   433.07 ft / 132.00 m   9.84 ft / 3.00 m
   Ends:   5.91" / 150 mm   124.67 ft / 38.00 m   7.87 ft / 2.40 m
   Upper:   5.91" / 150 mm   118.11 ft / 36.00 m   7.87 ft / 2.40 m
     Main Belt covers 119 % of normal length

  - Torpedo Bulkhead:
      1.38" / 35 mm   433.07 ft / 132.00 m   32.81 ft / 10.00 m

  - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   9.06" / 230 mm   5.91" / 150 mm      5.91" / 150 mm
   2nd:   3.94" / 100 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      2.95" / 75 mm

  - Armour deck: 1.97" / 50 mm, Conning tower: 7.87" / 200 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Geared drive, 4 shafts, 80,425 shp / 59,997 Kw = 28.30 kts
   Range 10,000nm at 12.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 2,538 tons

Complement:
   773 - 1,005

Cost:
   £2.960 million / $11.841 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 602 tons, 3.4 %
   Armour: 5,223 tons, 29.2 %
      - Belts: 2,155 tons, 12.0 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 724 tons, 4.0 %
      - Armament: 1,096 tons, 6.1 %
      - Armour Deck: 1,132 tons, 6.3 %
      - Conning Tower: 116 tons, 0.6 %
   Machinery: 2,996 tons, 16.7 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 6,622 tons, 37.0 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,046 tons, 11.4 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 400 tons, 2.2 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     21,740 lbs / 9,861 Kg = 45.6 x 9.8 " / 250 mm shells or 3.4 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.14
   Metacentric height 4.7 ft / 1.4 m
   Roll period: 15.8 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.45
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.07

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck
   Block coefficient: 0.521
   Length to Beam Ratio: 6.80 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 23.62 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 47
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      27.89 ft / 8.50 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   23.62 ft / 7.20 m
      - Mid (50 %):      20.67 ft / 6.30 m
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   20.67 ft / 6.30 m
      - Stern:      21.65 ft / 6.60 m
      - Average freeboard:   22.12 ft / 6.74 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 119.0 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 163.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 31,088 Square feet or 2,888 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 109 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 142 lbs/sq ft or 693 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.93
      - Longitudinal: 1.78
      - Overall: 1.00
   Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
   Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

[ctwaterman]

Nice Large AC or Small BC... I like the ship and the reuse of parts to get what you need.

[Ithekro]

Question...how does one reuse an armored belt from a different ship?

[miketr]

HMS Renown had her 6" belt removed and replaced with the 9" belt from Chilean battleship Almirante Cochrane.  Renown's 6" belt was then turned into an upper belt.

[P3D]

Question...how does one reuse an armored belt from a different ship?

Simply. Armored belt is made of huge slabs, in this case 3m high, 230mm thick and ~2m long. Remove it from attachment bolts. Place it on new armor belt with attachment bolts at the right place.

Making it look like the battleship means drawing is done pretty fast.

[Guinness]

Was Almirante Cochrane's belt ever actually hung on the ship?

[P3D]

This TB project started to create a squadron leader boat for the existing 39 torpedo boats, with increased communication facilities, and some depth charges. After correcting deficiencies of the Kolay class boat (forecastle problems) they are based on, they become 100t heavier for no apparent performance increase - nevertheless, 6-7 will be built.

Note: edited to replace with a ~100t lighter design

Firanj DD,   laid down 1918 (Engine 1916)

Displacement:
   530 t light; 550 t standard; 607 t normal; 653 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   229.66 ft / 229.66 ft x 22.97 ft x 9.84 ft (normal load)
   70.00 m / 70.00 m x 7.00 m  x 3.00 m

Armament:
      2 - 4.13" / 105 mm guns in single mounts, 35.32lbs / 16.02kg shells, 1918 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on centreline ends, evenly spread
      4 - 0.49" / 12.5 mm guns in single mounts, 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1918 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts
     on side, all amidships
   Weight of broadside 71 lbs / 32 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 200
   4 - 23.6" / 600 mm above water torpedoes

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Geared drive, 2 shafts, 17,262 shp / 12,878 Kw = 30.00 kts
   Range 3,000nm at 12.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 103 tons

Complement:
   60 - 79

Cost:
   £0.139 million / $0.556 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 9 tons, 1.5 %
   Machinery: 311 tons, 51.3 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 180 tons, 29.6 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 77 tons, 12.7 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 30 tons, 4.9 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     142 lbs / 64 Kg = 4.0 x 4.1 " / 105 mm shells or 0.2 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.09
   Metacentric height 0.6 ft / 0.2 m
   Roll period: 12.0 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 44 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.38
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 0.68

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak
   Block coefficient: 0.409
   Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 15.15 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 71 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 56
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      17.22 ft / 5.25 m
      - Forecastle (15 %):   16.40 ft / 5.00 m
      - Mid (30 %):      16.40 ft / 5.00 m (8.20 ft / 2.50 m aft of break)
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   8.20 ft / 2.50 m
      - Stern:      8.20 ft / 2.50 m
      - Average freeboard:   10.71 ft / 3.27 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 182.3 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 35.0 %
   Waterplane Area: 3,265 Square feet or 303 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 44 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 25 lbs/sq ft or 122 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.50
      - Longitudinal: 2.80
      - Overall: 0.59
   Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
   Room for accommodation and workspaces is extremely poor
   Caution: Lacks seaworthiness - very limited seakeeping ability

[Ithekro]

That is a good question...since armor is generally shaped onto the hull of a vessel when installed, and what became HMS Eagle I doubt had her belt fitted, thus the plates could be shaped to Renown.

The question is...how do you beat out the shape of an old Battleship to fit the plates on a new one that I assume is larger and would have a different shape to the hull (since the hull is not straight).

Basically everyone I've asked about it says you can't just take the armor off one ship and put it on another because of the shape of the armor, the ware the armor goes through in service, and the damage it might get when you try to take it off the ship.

I am however attempting to find instances where someone removed the armor on a ship and later put the same armor back on (rather than using new armor, or just replacing it with a bulge as they did on the Essex class carriers), such as if a vessel was demiliarized or something but then brought back into service and had its armor put back on.  It sounds unlikely but some treaties are weird.

[miketr]

Hiei was disarmed under the London Naval Treaty and had her Armor Belt Removed and later restored.

Checking my "All the Worlds Battleships:1906 to the Present" the phrase used is "removed from Almirante Cochrane"  It looks like she was on the ways for 17 months when her construction was halted in September 1914.

I have actually done some work with metal forming in my days in collage.  Was a summer job in a sheet metal shop.  The max thickness I ever personally worked was 5 gauge, or about 0.2 inch.  The simple fact of the mater is once you bend metal you can't unbend it, not with just a metal press, you could heat it to unbend it but you then trash any face hardening / tempering it had. 

Now bending that 0.2 inch stuff was a royal pain in the you know what even with a 10,000 lb pneumatic press, I don't even want to think about how the heck you would bend stuff 9" think.  I am going to take a WAG here and say the answer is you form the hull to provide shape and the armor plates are straight.  Anyone ever notice that most armor has various thickness of wood behind them?  That sounds like its there as attachment points and to act as shims to provide ship / form to hull when dealing with exterior armor belt.

[P3D]

We are revisiting the same topic. The only image I can hunt down shows tapered rectangular slabs of rolled plate without bending, and this one makes sense from engineering point.

There is no reason why to bend a armor plate that would be put on the belt. The variable curvature would make it PITA and expensive tooling, in order not to have a few mm/cm unevenness/gaps between the plates. About the gap between the armor plate and the hull backing, that's what teak and concrete is for.

The way to make curved armor plates was steam drop forge (educated guess only) for barbettes and some turrets, but that is single tooling for any given single radius, unless the one which require a separate die for every single armor plate to perfectly follow the theoretical hull lines.

More so as the FH plates would be deformed further during the cementing process.

That is a good question...since armor is generally shaped onto the hull of a vessel when installed, and what became HMS Eagle I doubt had her belt fitted, thus the plates could be shaped to Renown.

The question is...how do you beat out the shape of an old Battleship to fit the plates on a new one that I assume is larger and would have a different shape to the hull (since the hull is not straight).

Basically everyone I've asked about it says you can't just take the armor off one ship and put it on another because of the shape of the armor, the ware the armor goes through in service, and the damage it might get when you try to take it off the ship.

I am however attempting to find instances where someone removed the armor on a ship and later put the same armor back on (rather than using new armor, or just replacing it with a bulge as they did on the Essex class carriers), such as if a vessel was demiliarized or something but then brought back into service and had its armor put back on.  It sounds unlikely but some treaties are weird.

[P3D]

No the question is, what to do with an oversized CDS that was originally a VTE-engined supercruiser?
http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=4158.msg46250#msg46250

As a cruiser it is worthless, as a CDS too large and vulnerable to torpedoes. Gutting it out for a complete rebuild is unaffordable (over 8BP). So IMHO the best thing is a minimal conversion to oil firing, installing FC and relegate to CDS role.

We could argue for a limited raiding role - but the ship would be outfought by smaller newer ships (only 4 main guns and limited ammo). Or convoy protection.

[Ithekro]

Aside from the lack of a single turret she fits right in with the majority of the country's battleship line (the armor isn't even all that different).  She need a basic refit and no much else.  Perhaps an expansion of her magazine with the conversion to oil.

With a small navy one uses what one has.