Study for a cost defence ship / escort. Ships of this type would be intended for replacing aging armoured frigates as colonial flagships at distant stations in peace time. In wartime they would serve as long-range convoy escorts as their fighting capacity exceeds everything smaller then a battleship, and they are adequately protected against anything smaller then a 21cm gun.
Java, The Kingdom CDS laid down 1911 (Engine 1909)
Displacement:
6 000 t light; 6 643 t standard; 7 926 t normal; 8 952 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
275,59 ft / 275,59 ft x 68,90 ft x 19,69 ft (normal load)
84,00 m / 84,00 m x 21,00 m x 6,00 m
Armament:
4 - 13,78" / 350 mm guns (2x2 guns), 1 322,77lbs / 600,00kg shells, 1911 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
10 - 4,72" / 120 mm guns in single mounts, 52,91lbs / 24,00kg shells, 1911 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships, 4 raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 5 820 lbs / 2 640 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 147
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5,91" / 150 mm 196,85 ft / 60,00 m 13,12 ft / 4,00 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Upper: 1,97" / 50 mm 196,85 ft / 60,00 m 8,20 ft / 2,50 m
Main Belt covers 110 % of normal length
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 5,91" / 150 mm 3,94" / 100 mm 3,54" / 90 mm
2nd: 0,79" / 20 mm - -
- Armour deck: 1,77" / 45 mm, Conning tower: 3,94" / 100 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 2 shafts, 9 000 shp / 6 714 Kw = 16,60 kts
Range 10 000nm at 12,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2 309 tons
Complement:
419 - 546
Cost:
£0,872 million / $3,488 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 720 tons, 9,1 %
Armour: 1 774 tons, 22,4 %
- Belts: 839 tons, 10,6 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0 %
- Armament: 384 tons, 4,8 %
- Armour Deck: 518 tons, 6,5 %
- Conning Tower: 34 tons, 0,4 %
Machinery: 409 tons, 5,2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2 977 tons, 37,6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1 926 tons, 24,3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 120 tons, 1,5 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
8 564 lbs / 3 885 Kg = 6,5 x 13,8 " / 350 mm shells or 1,6 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,09
Metacentric height 3,4 ft / 1,0 m
Roll period: 15,8 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,89
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,14
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0,742
Length to Beam Ratio: 4,00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 16,60 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 60 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 62
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: 16,40 ft / 5,00 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 14,76 ft / 4,50 m
- Mid (50 %): 14,76 ft / 4,50 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 14,76 ft / 4,50 m
- Stern: 14,76 ft / 4,50 m
- Average freeboard: 14,90 ft / 4,54 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 88,6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 106,0 %
Waterplane Area: 15 795 Square feet or 1 467 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 94 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 141 lbs/sq ft or 688 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0,85
- Longitudinal: 4,02
- Overall: 1,00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Hello,
At first I was intrigued. But it didn't last. :'(
I hadn't really looked at the Kingdoms 'bathtubs' before. The BCs seem a bit to high on the older ones. The lack of ships boats(or access to them) won't help crew morale.
I think this design shows how weak SS can be. It really can't fit all of that and I can't believe it would have good ratings(seakeeping, gunnery, good space-where does all that oil go?).
To get an idea of what we are looking at, I copied, resized and pasted a few ships together. 2 of yours at top(your newest with 13.78" guns and your smallest). the 3rd is a peice together of both for this design. 4th the latest defiant lightBB I've been working on. Last the Arkansas monitor class(BC around .71-2x12"/35 and 4x4"). They should all be close to 1 pixel per foot.
(http://home.comcast.net/~bellerik/Navalism/nethbbs.PNG)
Quote from: blooded on March 30, 2008, 11:23:43 PM
Hello,
At first I was intrigued. But it didn't last. :'(
I hadn't really looked at the Kingdoms 'bathtubs' before. The BCs seem a bit to high on the older ones. The lack of ships boats(or access to them) won't help crew morale.
The lack of boats i mostly due to the fact that i do not often bother drawing them on my scetches. :)
As the small ones are at a scale of rougly 50cm to a pixel, smller details are tricky.
And as for the funny shape of the old ones, much of that have to do with the restrictions i got when redesigning the ships i inherited (also the reason they all got a hull strenght of 1,10).
QuoteI think this design shows how weak SS can be. It really can't fit all of that and I can't believe it would have good ratings(seakeeping, gunnery, good space-where does all that oil go?).
The ship is based on a design that was discussed regarding New Zion:
http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=1008.msg7354#msg7354 (with drawing)
As can be seen, it really is not that much to fit.
Remember that seakeeping is always a relative number, a 28kts ship of 25kton is de facto a better seaboat then a 6kton, 16kts one with a seakeeping of 1,5.
QuoteTo get an idea of what we are looking at, I copied, resized and pasted a few ships together. 2 of yours at top(your newest with 13.78" guns and your smallest). the 3rd is a peice together of both for this design. 4th the latest defiant lightBB I've been working on. Last the Arkansas monitor class(BC around .71-2x12"/35 and 4x4"). They should all be close to 1 pixel per foot.
What kind of foot, Dutch, German, Bavarian, Prussian, French, Turkish, English, Russsian, Swedish, Gorilla, Spanish or Belgian? ;)
That's a pretty squat hull form. I'm inclined to think she'd be more cramped than the SS suggests.
What does she look like if you trim the BC down to 0.65 and add whatever length is necessary for the same displacement?
How much additional freeboard is needed to get rid of the "wet forward" note? Your forward turret won't be very far back of the bow, and I could see its operations being impaired by spray.
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on March 31, 2008, 07:19:20 AM
That's a pretty squat hull form. I'm inclined to think she'd be more cramped than the SS suggests.
What does she look like if you trim the BC down to 0.65 and add whatever length is necessary for the same displacement?
She will then be 10m longer and have a freeboard 1m lower. Not that keen on that tradeoff.
QuoteHow much additional freeboard is needed to get rid of the "wet forward" note? Your forward turret won't be very far back of the bow, and I could see its operations being impaired by spray.
Good point.
And it need not much at all, raising the stem by 6dm was enogh to get rid of the "wet"-note.
That's a good idea to increase the job of the coastal BB to escort.
Repulse raider or enemy cruiser.
Increase also the speed & this escort BB is able to help BB in the battleline.
Jef
Testing quickly a rapid Escort/Coastle/Battleline BB
NM7-KIRUNO class, Alt Monitor laid down 1911
Displacement:
8 009 t light; 8 500 t standard; 9 481 t normal; 10 266 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
452.76 ft / 452.76 ft x 76.77 ft x 16.32 ft (normal load)
138.00 m / 138.00 m x 23.40 m x 4.97 m
Armament:
4 - 13.78" / 350 mm guns (2x2 guns), 1 308.20lbs / 593.39kg shells, 1911 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline, evenly spread
8 - 4.72" / 120 mm guns in single mounts, 52.72lbs / 23.92kg shells, 1911 Model
Breech loading guns in casemate mounts
on side, evenly spread
4 - 1.97" / 50.0 mm guns in single mounts, 3.81lbs / 1.73kg shells, 1911 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 5 670 lbs / 2 572 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 94
2 - 17.7" / 450 mm submerged torpedo tubes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 249.34 ft / 76.00 m 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
Ends: 1.18" / 30 mm 65.62 ft / 20.00 m 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
137.80 ft / 42.00 m Unarmoured ends
Main Belt covers 85 % of normal length
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 1.97" / 50 mm 5.51" / 140 mm
2nd: 0.98" / 25 mm - -
3rd: 0.39" / 10 mm - -
- Armour deck: 1.77" / 45 mm, Conning tower: 5.91" / 150 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 19 000 shp / 14 174 Kw = 20.94 kts
Range 8 000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1 766 tons
Complement:
479 - 624
Cost:
£0.984 million / $3.934 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 709 tons, 7.5 %
Armour: 2 042 tons, 21.5 %
- Belts: 765 tons, 8.1 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 399 tons, 4.2 %
- Armour Deck: 822 tons, 8.7 %
- Conning Tower: 57 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 771 tons, 8.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 4 467 tons, 47.1 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1 472 tons, 15.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 20 tons, 0.2 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
13 091 lbs / 5 938 Kg = 10.0 x 13.8 " / 350 mm shells or 2.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.26
Metacentric height 5.1 ft / 1.6 m
Roll period: 14.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.48
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.19
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.585
Length to Beam Ratio: 5.90 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 21.28 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 49 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 60
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: 21.52 ft / 6.56 m
- Forecastle (19 %): 16.80 ft / 5.12 m
- Mid (50 %): 13.52 ft / 4.12 m
- Quarterdeck (18 %): 13.52 ft / 4.12 m
- Stern: 13.52 ft / 4.12 m
- Average freeboard: 15.01 ft / 4.57 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 84.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 142.8 %
Waterplane Area: 25 068 Square feet or 2 329 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 102 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 140 lbs/sq ft or 683 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.94
- Longitudinal: 1.61
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Top view
-------------------C----C-------------
----------A--B----F--F-----B--A---------
-------------------C----C-------------
A = T2x350
B = Bridge
F = Funnel
C = 120mm in casemate
Quote from: Jefgte on March 31, 2008, 09:11:16 AM
Testing quickly a rapid Escort/Coastle/Battleline BB
NM7-KIRUNO class, Alt Monitor laid down 1911
Displacement:
8 009 t light; 8 500 t standard; 9 481 t normal; 10 266 t full load
Not a bad ship per se, but i feel that the sacrifices for the higher speed no not be worth it.
She is 30% larger, and her combat power is only equal, or in some cases worse then Java.
So while I like speed, in ships like this I do not think it is necessary, and it drives up the cost of the ship quite allot, making building more then one or two cost-prohibited.
I think the size of Jefgte's ship is more appropriate to the armament but am kinda in agreement on the speed - primarily because the ship is going to be pinned to its convoy (or whatever its charge is) and won't have so much room to manuever.
On the other hand, if you were to take Jefgte's design and reduce speed in favor of heavier deck armor, the ship would be much less vulnerable to capital ship fire from long distance.
An other thing...
Why use so heavy guns ...350mm ?
Armour is unable to counter heavy BB shell & she could 'nt maintain the distance with a classic BB.
350mm are too heavy to repulse raider or cruiser - just 8 x350shells/mn - 120mm as secondary are short again to repulse cruiser or raider
I have tested 2T280 + 8x150 - 21kts on 6500T...like you
Alborg, nav Monitor laid down 1912
Displacement:
6 134 t light; 6 500 t standard; 7 495 t normal; 8 291 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
400.26 ft / 400.26 ft x 72.18 ft x 16.07 ft (normal load)
122.00 m / 122.00 m x 22.00 m x 4.90 m
Armament:
4 - 11.02" / 280 mm guns (2x2 guns), 669.80lbs / 303.82kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 5.91" / 150 mm guns in single mounts, 102.98lbs / 46.71kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in casemate mounts
on side, evenly spread
6 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns in single mounts, 30.51lbs / 13.84kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
4 - 1.97" / 50.0 mm guns in single mounts, 3.81lbs / 1.73kg shells, 1912 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 3 701 lbs / 1 679 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 100
4 - 17.7" / 450 mm submerged torpedo tubes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 209.97 ft / 64.00 m 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
Ends: 1.97" / 50 mm 137.80 ft / 42.00 m 10.83 ft / 3.30 m
52.49 ft / 16.00 m Unarmoured ends
Main Belt covers 81 % of normal length
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 1.97" / 50 mm 5.51" / 140 mm
2nd: 1.97" / 50 mm - -
- Armour deck: 1.77" / 45 mm, Conning tower: 5.51" / 140 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 17 000 shp / 12 682 Kw = 20.92 kts
Range 10 000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1 791 tons
Complement:
402 - 523
Cost:
£0.698 million / $2.793 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 463 tons, 6.2 %
Armour: 1 810 tons, 24.2 %
- Belts: 740 tons, 9.9 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 355 tons, 4.7 %
- Armour Deck: 670 tons, 8.9 %
- Conning Tower: 45 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 678 tons, 9.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3 163 tons, 42.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1 361 tons, 18.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 20 tons, 0.3 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
11 237 lbs / 5 097 Kg = 16.8 x 11.0 " / 280 mm shells or 2.1 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.29
Metacentric height 4.9 ft / 1.5 m
Roll period: 13.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.36
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.17
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.565
Length to Beam Ratio: 5.55 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 20.01 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 52 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 60
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: 21.98 ft / 6.70 m
- Forecastle (18 %): 17.39 ft / 5.30 m
- Mid (30 %): 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Quarterdeck (17 %): 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Stern: 14.11 ft / 4.30 m
- Average freeboard: 15.23 ft / 4.64 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 80.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 139.6 %
Waterplane Area: 20 448 Square feet or 1 900 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 109 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 118 lbs/sq ft or 578 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.93
- Longitudinal: 1.86
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
-------------------------------------
It is certainly possible to have:
2T2x254 +10x180 - 21kts for 6500T
Jef
I'll assume the Dutch want to use there newer larger guns with there proven fire control for longer ranged engagements. Well longer ranged than the 11 inch guns anyway (though the difference is likely mininal with visual spotting).
Quote from: Ithekro on March 31, 2008, 05:01:14 PM
I'll assume the Dutch want to use there newer larger guns with there proven fire control for longer ranged engagements. Well longer ranged than the 11 inch guns anyway (though the difference is likely mininal with visual spotting).
Not after the range as much as the stopping power. A 28cm shell is unlikley to be effective against most larger ships here (as most ships here carry allot more armour then historically), at least at anything but very short range.
Quote from: Jefgte on March 31, 2008, 04:35:44 PM
An other thing...
Why use so heavy guns ...350mm ?
Armour is unable to counter heavy BB shell & she could 'nt maintain the distance with a classic BB.
350mm are too heavy to repulse raider or cruiser - just 8 x350shells/mn - 120mm as secondary are short again to repulse cruiser or raider
The size of the guns is dictated by the need to be able to hurt enemy battleships, a 28cm gun (of which i got none) is simply not capable to hurt ships with 30cm of armour at distances over 8-9km, while a 35cm gun is dangerous up to any range to any ship (almost). This is important as they will never be able to set range against an enemy, so one wants to minimize the risk of the opponent engaging from a range were ones own guns is unlikley to hurt him.
Another advantage of the larger shells is that it allows one to fire SAP against medium armoured targets (such as cruisers), resulting in almost twice the payload.
While the 12cm might lack a bit of power in this employment, it is pretty much my standard secondary / destroyer gun, so i prefere to keep that one. Also it is a decent compromise gun, as it got more range and power then a 10cm gun, while allowing more guns and higer ROF then 15cm gun allow.
Quote
I have tested 2T280 + 8x150 - 21kts on 6500T...like you
Alborg, nav Monitor laid down 1912
Displacement:
6 134 t light; 6 500 t standard; 7 495 t normal; 8 291 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
400.26 ft / 400.26 ft x 72.18 ft x 16.07 ft (normal load)
122.00 m / 122.00 m x 22.00 m x 4.90 m
Armament:
4 - 11.02" / 280 mm guns (2x2 guns), 669.80lbs / 303.82kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 5.91" / 150 mm guns in single mounts, 102.98lbs / 46.71kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in casemate mounts
on side, evenly spread
6 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns in single mounts, 30.51lbs / 13.84kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
4 - 1.97" / 50.0 mm guns in single mounts, 3.81lbs / 1.73kg shells, 1912 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 3 701 lbs / 1 679 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 100
4 - 17.7" / 450 mm submerged torpedo tubes
Very close to a clone of the Sweden-Class :)
Ok for the big guns ( I like big guns ;)
16.6kts is a poor tactical speed.
The good speed is probably 21kts & 18kts is the minimum correct tatical speed.
That depend also the speed of your battle Squadron & the probable enemy speed.
Jef ;)
Quote from: Jefgte on April 01, 2008, 02:44:23 AM
Ok for the big guns ( I like big guns ;)
Your are not the only one who prefere to mount the largest guns...
Quote16.6kts is a poor tactical speed.
The good speed is probably 21kts & 18kts is the minimum correct tatical speed.
That depend also the speed of your battle Squadron & the probable enemy speed.
Jef ;)
I basically have two battle squadrons, with speeds of 21 and 25 kts.
But I do not see these ships as serving with the main portion of the fleet. The core squadron with the most modern armoured frigates and battleships will serve as a fire brigade to be deployed were needed. This ship I see as functioning primarily as station ships in my minor colonial positions; Africa, Caribbean and the south Atlantic. While I agree that 16kts is poor tactical speed, I cannot afford to make them larger then 6kton (lights), armour cannot really be thinner, or it will fail to protect against guns in the 15-20cm range, and as discussed above, I am unwilling to reduce firepower. This leaves speed as the capability I feel the ships can best afford to do without. 16kts puts the ship in the same speed bracket as my old pre-dreads, as well as most of my gunboats, minesweepers and other costal warships.
Korpen wrote:
"...16kts puts the ship in the same speed bracket as my old pre-dreads, as well as most of my gunboats, minesweepers and other costal warships..."
Ok, I understand, this ship is not alone but can serve with a pre-dreads Squadron & Gunboats.
With 350mm guns, I don't like to fight against your pre-dreads Squadron :-\
Jef ;)
It will not fit... It will not fit.... It will not fit....
There... I have had My 'will not fit' Fit TM
The reason I mentioned ships boats is that in the case of your latest dred, anywhere they are placed will interfere with the firing arcs of the main guns. You would need some sort of flying bridge/deck to handle those items. Not to mention that the forward wing turret does not have the clearance needed to fire to the opposite side already.
The reason I threw the arkansas monitor in was to show what .7ish BCs will look like(similar to your King Leopold I class- with a less fine bow. Very slabsided. I have been messing with arkansas(among others) to try and get 2 twin 12" guns. It is around this size, and IMO pushing it(with 6x 4" secondaries).
It is so overcrowded that any hit is going to take out something important or several somethings, if not lead to direct catastrophe. She is shorter than most new destroyers. The turrets/guns make up 50% of her length, the superstructure should be about the same.
I can post it on the other discussion boards If you like, to see what they would say.
That being said, I love the idea and cost, I have been searching for the minimum size for a twin 14", if this is allowed, you can expect the UNK to purchase plans and build 20 of them. ;)
Quote from: blooded on April 01, 2008, 09:19:31 AM
It will not fit... It will not fit.... It will not fit....
There... I have had My 'will not fit' Fit TM
The reason I mentioned ships boats is that in the case of your latest dred, anywhere they are placed will interfere with the firing arcs of the main guns. You would need some sort of flying bridge/deck to handle those items. Not to mention that the forward wing turret does not have the clearance needed to fire to the opposite side already.
It clears the aft funnel, not by a lot, but it pass.
(http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/9868/rotationuj5.png)
Boat arrangement can be similar to the Kaiser class.
QuoteThe reason I threw the arkansas monitor in was to show what .7ish BCs will look like(similar to your King Leopold I class- with a less fine bow. Very slabsided. I have been messing with arkansas(among others) to try and get 2 twin 12" guns. It is around this size, and IMO pushing it(with 6x 4" secondaries).
It is so overcrowded that any hit is going to take out something important or several somethings, if not lead to direct catastrophe. She is shorter than most new destroyers. The turrets/guns make up 50% of her length, the superstructure should be about the same.
The turrets and guns does not take up 50% of her deckspace, each barbarette is only about 10m wide/long. She is very compact, that i happily admit, but going by the ark drawing, I see no real problems deckspace wise.
QuoteThat being said, I love the idea and cost, I have been searching for the minimum size for a twin 14", if this is allowed, you can expect the UNK to purchase plans and build 20 of them. ;)
Do you mean minimum of the ship, or of the turrets themself?
Quote from: Korpen on April 01, 2008, 09:57:26 AM
(http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/9868/rotationuj5.png)
Oh, no!!!!!! Pac-man is attacking the Dutch Navy!!!!!!!! :D ;D :D ;D
Well his is related to Swiss.
Hello again,
Pac attack.. lol. You are correct on the turret, it will apparently squeek by.
The turrets with guns should be in the 70'-75' range. x2= 140-150' thus approximately 50% of her 275' length.
I was searching for the minimum tonnage necessary for a ship to be combat effective with two twin 14" turrets. 12Ktons seemed a realistic limit. This design cut that in half, though its armor is not as high as I would like. Its slow but quite suitable for its intended purpose. My congrats, your ability at using Springsharp is far better than mine.
Anyway... I will refrain from further comment on other players vessels. It seems pointless. I will rely on others with more experience to comment if they so choose.
Quote from: blooded on April 01, 2008, 01:24:26 PM
Hello again,
Pac attack.. lol. You are correct on the turret, it will apparently squeek by.
The turrets with guns should be in the 70'-75' range. x2= 140-150' thus approximately 50% of her 275' length.
70-75 foot, that is around 25m? Sure if one counts the barrels, then yes they are almost that long. But the barrels do not really eat up any space either above or below the deck. I have a feeling i am missing you point here?
QuoteI was searching for the minimum tonnage necessary for a ship to be combat effective with two twin 14" turrets. 12Ktons seemed a realistic limit. This design cut that in half, though its armor is not as high as I would like. Its slow but quite suitable for its intended purpose. My congrats, your ability at using Springsharp is far better than mine.
My design is a highly specialised ship; in fact it is basically a pair of turrets with a ship built around them. :)
12kton is more realistic if one is looking for a more well balanced ship.
QuoteAnyway... I will refrain from further comment on other players vessels. It seems pointless. I will rely on others with more experience to comment if they so choose.
I really hope you reconsider that comment. While I might sound defensive, I truly appriciate the feedback. I might not agree with the comment all the time, I do enjoy defending my design choices. In fact the harsher the criticism, the more i enjoy it! :)
So please, do not stop, it is not pointless! (even if your view is discharged, it is taken under carfull consideration)
Hello,
Thanks Korpen, but I should probably keep my mouth zipped. My History with Naval Forces is Limited and relatively short. My interests have always been land and Air forces, especially WW2 with a focus on the Russian Front. It was not until 'War in the Pacific' came out(Matrix Games-4 or so years ago?) that I really started enjoying the study of Naval vessels.
I just don't know enough about Naval construction to write with authority. I know it doesn't 'feel' right but I can't justify it well enough. I am learning- Norman Friedmans books are fantastic- I wish I could locate his cruiser or DD books. My Father has the CV book and I am wearing out the Library copy of the BB book. Unfortunately they are only on US Vessels. Any others to recommend?
When we get into the later(1930) Tanks and Aircraft(or better yet Logistics) I'll do better. Hopefully you folks will have educated me on the Naval aspect by then.
I agree with Korpen - keep questioning. Even if your knowledge is limited, you can gain knowledge (or at least, opinions) from those who answer your questions.
Quote from: Korpen on March 30, 2008, 04:47:09 PM
Java, The Kingdom CDS laid down 1911 (Engine 1909)
Displacement:
6 000 t light; 6 643 t standard; 7 926 t normal; 8 952 t full load
Quoting myself, that is a first...
This design is for sale to interested countries for the bargain sum of only €4,5.
Guns and engines will be supplied with the drawings, so add only steel to get a CDB of your own! (The cost to complete the ship would then be 4,9 BP and 3,8€)