I am slowly updating the Parthian encyclopedia to reflect the refits/refurbishments/new vessels from @1921.5 to 1927.5
So this is a good spot to quit using the 1916-1927.5 thread and start fresh.

Still tinkering with long term build ideas, but while 1927.5 introduced the Royal Nissean XV cruiser variant,
for 1928 I'll need new Battleship and AC designs, I will also need a new Diesel-Electric sloop design to take over for the PS-2.
That might be a regular navy build on a 500 ton hull, which could then be a common platform for new fleet minesweepers.

Moved from the 1916 thread.
Naming Conventions
The problems of naming things in Pahlavi...or middle Persian or ancient persian, or or ..
I have two ships named for magic swords in the Elric saga - Stormbringer and Mournblade. No idea how to make a "Parthian" translation.
I do have a 'concise Pahlavi-English' dictionary, so I an now pick out a fair number of words.
But..I want Thunder and Lightning to be the follow up battleships.
Looking at the dictionary, that seems to be :
"Thunder" - Yarranag
"Thunderclap" - Yarranidan ?  This is the osund of thunder..so clap or peal?
'Wir' - Thunderbolt ...or what I'd call lightning.
"Rozag" - "Lightning" ..Hey Lightning, cool, whats the difference between it and thunderbolt?
wirozag - "Lighting" ... note that this is a conjugated 'wir' and 'rozag' so 'Thunderbolt Lighting'... which makes me wonder what sort of lightning the rozag is...does that not come from thunderstorms? We now have three of what I'd call lightning ...argh !

Now for some vague mutterings about my battleline.
The Gilgamesh and Enki classes are outdated but are being updated to where they are tough and dangerous foes again. 
It's going to take a while to finish that....1929 I think.
The Tiamats are lacking, but still respectable, and have decent weight of fire.
They should be upgradable easily in 1930-31.
The Vazya are dangerous to any foe, and achieved my goal of 20 guns. Because...well if you can fit 5 twins, why not 5 quads?
Sadly, my idea of making a quad version of Agincourt, but with 365L50s was thwarted by the colossal size that took.
The Kaliferns have a paltry 16 guns, but the more powerful 365L50s.
So those 8 ships form the main battleline, backed by the 6 older dreadnaughts and the 6 predreadnaughts.
Those older ships would suffice against such as the Mayan Fleet, allowing the main battleline to fight the Byzantines if needed. Or Rajasthan.

The Stormbringer class was meant to either back the scouting forces and give them shelter if a Byzantine BC tried to kill them, or serve as a faster battleship against such as the Mayans - they would have matched up just fine with the largest Mayan ships, with speed to choose to engage or not.
So it's looking like 1927.5, my build list is full...that turn is almost done.
So 1928 I will need new battleships designs.
I could do a pair more of Kaliferns...it's tempting, they are a solid ship, very slow, very Parthian...
But I think the Stormbringer still fit that gap of faster than anything stronger and able to kill those faster.
The exception being (I think)  the Roman Empress Amelia...which are just finishing trials when 1927.5 rolls around.
Then there is the Ani or Ilmuhu classes I haven't put up.  They are in the 45000 ton range other folks are going to.  I don't think I'm quite ready for that. But should consider it given build times.
Throughout the game I've presumed the it would take several years ...like 3...to really "know" what the opposing vessels were.
Yes, getting Length, Beam, main & secondary batteries and belt extent should all be easily observable.
But how much weight to TDS or belt/deck thickness, those are guesses.
The combination of 30 knot speed and electric drive they wouldn't expect, so the Parthians would expect more weight on the belt and deck...not expecting 26knots to be so much slower.
Overall the feeling is that have 4 Stormbringer type ships could be useful either backing the cruiser screen, or sending to an area threatened by places like the Mayans. They could be a primary force, and the older dreadnaughts secure the basing, then be brought up when a decisive battle can be forced.
The 8x 410/45 would not bother them, the 365L50 is quite a good combo, or they can field the 390L46. But the 390 is not much better than the 365L50.
Using Logi's Ballistic tool for the 1915 shells I came up with this quite some time ago when I was deciding which guns to design.
Ironically the better ballistic shapes of later shells will increase belt but decrease deck...but the shells should take less time to target and so be more accurate as well.  Considering a long range 2% hit rate from Jutland, an 8-gun 100 AP shell ship would empty its magazine for 16 hits...which is why the Brits felt decisive range would still be in the <20km area. So while the 24km range has some potential vulnerability - this is the period Nelson had 150mm over magazines - the slight advantage of the 390 at range doesn't seem a convincing selling point.


I need to stress, these aren't intended to be 'correct' but 'close'... I didn't want to fine tune it when others could not, but they are close enough to model relative power and ability.

390L46 869kg 765MV
	10	14	18	24
B	386	313	257	196
D	18	38	68	138
365L50  780kg  800MV
	10	14	18	24
B	439	358	295	227
D	16.5	35.1	63	127

So there are 3 basic variants of this ship.

1) is this one. "Stormbringer IIK" ....much the same look as the Stormbringers, but with 365L50s rather than L45s,
more belt armor, and the Kalifern's deck armor pattern , both backed by magazine armor.
This of course retains the 3 & 2 gun turret arrangement so beloved by Rocky...hmm beloved may not be the right phrase.

2) Stormbringer II G has 12 x 365L50 in 3 x 4-gun turrets. This drops the belt to 350 and deck to 135.
That may be the best choice. Excellent fire power while retaining good armor and what the Parthians think is speed.

3) Stormbringer II H  has 8x 390L46 in 4 2-gun turrets. This keeps the armor of the IIK but does drop the range at 16knots to 8k from 10k.
That's not seen as horrible. 

The Parthians do realize that other nations would respect them more with 390s vs 365s, but they really don't mind being a little underestimated...and generally feel 10x365 is probably 'better' than 8x390.  Very similar penetration, 25% better chance to hit.  The 12 x 365 is tempting...if only because..well more guns and still decent armor. Any of the 3 should be able to take on the current BCs decently, allowing them to back up the scouting cruisers,  and still stand in the line of battle if called on.

Quote
Yarranag & Wirozag, Parthian Battleship laid down 1928

Displacement:
   38,000 t light; 40,691 t standard; 44,104 t normal; 46,834 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (623.16 ft / 616.80 ft) x 111.55 ft (Bulges 121.39 ft) x (31.33 / 33.13 ft)
   (189.94 m / 188.00 m) x 34.00 m (Bulges 37.00 m)  x (9.55 / 10.10 m)

Armament:
      10 - 14.37" / 365 mm 50.0 cal guns - 1,719.61lbs / 780.00kg shells, 160 per gun
     Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1928 Model
     2 x 3-gun mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
     2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 raised mounts
      16 - 5.12" / 130 mm 50.0 cal guns - 70.55lbs / 32.00kg shells, 230 per gun
     Quick firing guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1928 Model
     8 x 2-gun mounts on sides, evenly spread
      16 - 3.54" / 90.0 mm 54.0 cal guns - 24.25lbs / 11.00kg shells, 500 per gun
     Anti-air guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1928 Model
     6 x 2-gun mounts on sides, evenly spread
      6 raised mounts
     2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 double raised mounts
      8 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 6.61lbs / 3.00kg shells, 800 per gun
     Anti-air guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1928 Model
     4 x 2-gun mounts on side ends, evenly spread
      4 double raised mounts
      16 - 0.59" / 15.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 0.11lbs / 0.05kg shells, 5,000 per gun
     Machine guns in deck mounts, 1928 Model
     8 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
      8 double raised mounts
      Weight of broadside 18,768 lbs / 8,513 kg

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   15.0" / 380 mm   400.92 ft / 122.20 m   16.44 ft / 5.01 m
   Ends:   1.57" / 40 mm   215.85 ft / 65.79 m   16.44 ft / 5.01 m
     Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length
     Main Belt inclined -12.00 degrees (positive = in)

   - Torpedo Bulkhead - Additional damage containing bulkheads:
      2.24" / 57 mm   400.92 ft / 122.20 m   36.19 ft / 11.03 m
   Beam between torpedo bulkheads 75.46 ft / 23.00 m

   - Hull Bulges:
      0.35" / 9 mm   400.92 ft / 122.20 m   23.13 ft / 7.05 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   16.7" / 425 mm   7.87" / 200 mm      13.8" / 350 mm
   2nd:   1.97" / 50 mm   1.38" / 35 mm      1.57" / 40 mm
   3rd:   0.98" / 25 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   4th:   0.24" / 6 mm         -               -
   5th:   0.12" / 3 mm         -               -

   - Armoured deck - single deck:
   For and Aft decks: 5.70" / 145 mm
   Forecastle: 1.57" / 40 mm  Quarter deck: 5.51" / 140 mm

   - Conning towers: Forward 13.78" / 350 mm, Aft 2.95" / 75 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Geared drive, 4 shafts, 107,138 shp / 79,925 Kw = 26.00 kts
   Range 8,718nm at 16.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 6,143 tons

Complement:
   1,521 - 1,978

Cost:
   £13.734 million / $54.935 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 4,086 tons, 9.3 %
      - Guns: 4,086 tons, 9.3 %
   Armour: 15,452 tons, 35.0 %
      - Belts: 4,645 tons, 10.5 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 1,205 tons, 2.7 %
      - Bulges: 122 tons, 0.3 %
      - Armament: 3,770 tons, 8.5 %
      - Armour Deck: 5,261 tons, 11.9 %
      - Conning Towers: 450 tons, 1.0 %
   Machinery: 3,336 tons, 7.6 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 13,826 tons, 31.3 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 6,104 tons, 13.8 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 1,301 tons, 2.9 %
      - Hull below water: 361 tons
      - Bulge void weights: 200 tons
      - Hull above water: 76 tons
      - On freeboard deck: 70 tons
      - Above deck: 594 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     66,174 lbs / 30,016 Kg = 44.6 x 14.4 " / 365 mm shells or 12.3 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.13
   Metacentric height 7.4 ft / 2.3 m
   Roll period: 18.7 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.53
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.00

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak,
     a ram bow and a round stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.658 / 0.661
   Length to Beam Ratio: 5.08 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 24.84 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 70
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 13.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: -3.28 ft / -1.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   20.00 %,  27.56 ft / 8.40 m,  26.57 ft / 8.10 m
      - Forward deck:   50.00 %,  26.57 ft / 8.10 m,  25.59 ft / 7.80 m
      - Aft deck:   15.00 %,  17.39 ft / 5.30 m,  17.39 ft / 5.30 m
      - Quarter deck:   15.00 %,  17.39 ft / 5.30 m,  18.04 ft / 5.50 m
      - Average freeboard:      23.70 ft / 7.22 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 95.7 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 160.1 %
   Waterplane Area: 53,094 Square feet or 4,933 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 109 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 215 lbs/sq ft or 1,049 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.94
      - Longitudinal: 1.79
      - Overall: 1.00
   Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Excellent accommodation and workspace room
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

"Thunder" - Yarranag
"Thunderclap" - Yarranidan
'Wir' - Thunderbolt
"Rozag" - "Lightning" -
wirozag - "Lighting"

Meant to operate with the Stormbringer/Mournblade vessels, or stand in line of battle, it is given heavy armor and sufficient speed to exceed the Byzantine line, and many battlewagons.

The high cruise speed and good range at that speed is meant to allow operations backing the cruiser screen.

Tonnage is kept at 38000 tons to allow a reasonable building time, and to keep tonnage in reason.

The reality of the newest Roman vessels combination of full dreadnaught ability with cruiser speed has not been understood at the time it is laid down.  Still, the armor is heavier and the guns are quite respectable, so they could win those fights too.

An All-or-Nothing Design
A followup design to the Stormbringers,
it mimics the armor of the Kaliferns,
with 6 less barrels and 6 more knots of speed.


Freeboard is meant to echo HMS Tiger, with "X"
being at the rear of the forecastle, superimposed over "Y".


Deck Guns
Deck guns are echloned outwards, like on Iowa,
allowing 4 to bear ahead (8 guns), or 4 on each side.
The  90m AA are above them.

Main Belt Armor 
This embraces "all or nothing", but only has 1 deck level unprotected aft and 2 forward.
The main armor deck caps the belt at 1.5m.

Outsloped Wedge shaped Belt
Belt
1) Figure adjusted height for wedge
2) figure  additional belt height for outsloping


Step 1
The bet covers from 2m to -3m.
The lower portion of the belt tapers.
The upper 2.5m is a uniform 350mm, extending 0.5m below WL.
the lower 2.5m tapers from 350mm down to 230mm.
The bulge extends from the lower edge of the belt to the keel.
The TDS rises behind the belt and seals to the armor deck, adding
57mm behind it.

Mathwise that means there are 3 sections.
               |        | 
               |        |  A ) Upper, 2800mm (2.8m) x 380mm
                \  |    |   
                  \|    |  C) Lower back , 2500 (2.5m) x 230mm
B) Wedge 1/2B x H :
B = 2.5m = 2500
H = 380-230 = 160

A) = 1,064,000
B) = 200,000
C) = 575,000

SubTotal : 1,839,000
Modeled as average 380mm thickness = /380
Total : 4839.4736= 4.84m
 

Belt is  outsloped by 15%.
Step 2 Outsloping
Overall it is 4.84m high. which is "A" or adjacent

COS 15 = A/H
H* Cos 15 = A
H = A/Cos 15

Which gives 5.0107 or 5.01 as the height.


Deck Armor
Deck Armored is modeled as two parts
A 40/140/140 main armored deck : 5177 tons
and a 50mm box around the magazines : 150 tons
Which is a total of 5327tons

To model that, the deck thickness is shown as
40/ 144.7 /140
Which weighs 55327t

Which means vertical is a 140mm deck with a 50mm splinter box over the magazines.

Like most 'all or nothing' the Forecastle and Quarterdeck sections
are set up as protective decks.

TDS
Raised to the underside of the Armor deck at 1.5m above waterline.

TDS :  Bulge ||9mm mild hull||, 1m liquid ||9mm mild||, 1m void ||9mm armor||, 1m liquid || armored (2x19=38mm)||,1.5m  Dam control/ flooding ||(9mm mild)||
Depth : 1.5m exterior, 3m interior to main bulkhead, 1.5m to second bulkhead. Total :6m, 57mm STS steel


290t Reserve Wt

AD
409t  Fire Control
25t    LR Radio
25t    Searchlight Tower (NF)
25t    Hulesmeyer prox detector
10t    SR Radui
100t  Admirals Quarters


5t : Paravanes
25t +5t : Fighter/Scout floatplane + Gunpowder Cat
25t +5t : Fighter/Scout floatplane + Gunpowder Cat
10t : Hanger
5t : Fire Ext for hanger.

HAW
38t Additional fire suppresion
38t CO2 Air conditioning

HBW
100t : Fleet command center
38t   Extra pumps
188t torpedo nets
15t   Enhanced Hydrophones
15t : (5+10) 5t double wall tank5t s 10t AVGAS+Aviation supplies
5t : Fire ext for Avgas.


Decks
+7.8   Weather Deck
+5.3  Weather deck
+2.8 Armor Deck 135mm , top of TDS.
+.03 3rd Deck
-2.2  2nd Deck
          -2.5 bottom main belt 
-4.7  1st Deck
-8.2   Engineering
-9.23 Double Bottom

Having spent time trying to name Indian ships twenty years ago, before online translation was too far advanced, I can sympathize with your current troubles.  Sometimes you just have to assume the language has evolved to fit your best guess in these sims.

The 365/50 would certainly be an effective gun. 

It's a very capable design.  I might like slightly better seakeeping on her.

Not sure why I'm quoted as loving the mixed 2/3 gun arrangement, as I've never gone and actually built one...though they are fun to play with.

Quote from: The Rock Doctor on August 09, 2023, 10:33:42 AM
Not sure why I'm quoted as loving the mixed 2/3 gun arrangement, as I've never gone and actually built one...though they are fun to play with.

Actually I believe you've said the opposite, I probably should have italicized that text.

Whoops, never mind me, then..

Anyhow - on Seakeeping - good discussion matter on break...
Yeah, break...

that's an issue I go back and forth on.
The 'slow and easy roll' is another one I am unsure of the value.

If the vessel is to be reliant on speed to catch or escape, I do place a higher priority on seakeeping.
That might matter here as the Stormbringer and Thunderclap classes are more likely to be in a detached 2 or 4 ship squadron.

So...what does seakeeping DO?
I think...folks can correct me - it allows a ship to keep maximum speed in adverse sea states.
As a "wargaming" thing, I've been wondering how to do it if folks are willing to fight in a storm, and came up with the idea of wave height > freeboard = problem,
with seakeeping bonuses pushing up the effective freeboard by 20% and 50% respectively. Poor seakeeping would drop it of course.

BUT...one can get better seakeeping by just going a little slower. Which would reflect the need to slow down.

So...for that marginal use, how worth it is it to pay tonnage for that bonus seakeeping?
For a cruiser that's hoping to run away...more important.
For my battleships... a little less important.

Good weather with cruisers or detached, I'll be able to make full speed. As good visibility also means a longer observation range, the search radius and area expands, making it the most probable encounter time.

Good weather while working with my battleline - will be going slow to match, seakeeping will be fine.

Bad weather....you meet one of my battleships at night, in sea fog, hazy conditions, or just in bad weather, all with shorter sight lines, then who can punch holes in the other, and how fast, might be the decisive matter, and that waterline belt thickness might be the decisive thing, and I look pretty good there. While I try to have enough deck armor that it's not attractive to pick a long range dual either.

Then there's the other matter. Say I pay for good seakeeping so my (hypothetical) 30knt BB can run around and chase down things.
Given how things have progressed, 6-10 years from the time it's laid down, there will be faster ships. Seakeeping won't matter as much.

Anyhow, it's an issue I've gone back and forth on. All my early ships had great seakeeping,
partly because they were slow, and partly because I thought it would have value, and also how I do deckheights.
As time goes on, ships I thought would be fast...aren't, and my views on having high seakeeping to "keep" that max speed
have changed somewhat.

The slow and easy roll is to me allowing more accurate long range shooting, but diminishes your stability to obtain.
I don't like being below 1.10 stability, as I want a reserve. You'll find some ships at 1.08 or 1.09...tradeoffs.

Seakeeping – exploring Rocky's observation

Some tinkering indicates that if I raise the freeboard to a flat 8.7m, kicking up to 8.9 at the bow,
or 8.4 ramping up to 9.9, I can reach 1.2 seakeeping.
This also gains about 1 torpedo in damage absorption.

The opportunity cost seems to be I will need to find ~1300 tons somewhere to shave.

So increase displacement?
Well, the draft is as deep as I want to go, the length just fits in my largest common dock..
I could go wider, but that means both more deck armor and ...poorer seakeeping.
So would increasing the BC.

Plus that would push the light displacement to 39,300...before the extra deck armor to cover it and the even more forecastle to keep the seakeeping...probably wind up in the 40k range.

I'd like to keep displacement under 39,000  for a 48month build time,
the 38,000 means the if I finish construction in-dock, I can clear it before the next HY,
but that's of marginal use, as I tend to finish them 'afloat'.

Simply increasing displacement won't work then.

So..shaving armor. 1300 tons. ..about 8%. 

Not worth it.


However, what if I reduce speed?
24 knots still gives a 3 knot advantage over the Byzantine battleline,
gives 1.2 seakeeping with a slightly shorter fore deck,
allows range to increase +900nm
and reduces displacement to 37,000
While freeing up +0.2comp hull I could invest in more guns or armor.

...but then it can't keep up with the Stormbringer class
Actually 26 is the bottom end of the range I'm trying for, 27-28 would be better.
But back to tonnage issues.

Save weight by introducing quintuple turrets?

Quote from: The Rock Doctor on August 09, 2023, 07:10:16 PM
Save weight by introducing quintuple turrets?

That actually would work.
I could raise the freeboard to 8.3m, have 5-gun turrets fore/aft and have an extra 0.3 comp hull.

BUT...

I confess to really disliking the mental look.
I don't even like the looks of 4-gun, I just promised myself that I'd explore them this time.
The idea of an Agincourt with 7 x 5-gun though....hmmmm

No, don't succumb to the temptation !

It's just a few minutes in Springsharp, what harm could it do?

Quote from: The Rock Doctor on August 09, 2023, 07:37:45 PM
It's just a few minutes in Springsharp, what harm could it do?

In my longest - 235m dock,
a 7x5 design, featuring 35 x 365L50s,

at a depth of 9.5m, and a beam of 50(!)m, with a freighter like BC of 0.7...

Kinda works.
The armor s a little weaker than I want, but in line with what other players are featuring.

But even at ~71,000 tons, I don't have the comp hull for secondaries/AA/ or misc wieght.
So either sacrifice more armor, or find a way to inflate the ship even more.

Plus...I can buy 2 more Kalifern class for about the same, and get 32 guns but better armor and two ships
instead...and they will fit in docks across the Empire.

The last one was the 'K' version, this is the 'M'.

The primary feature is the lovely 3+2 / 2 +3 arrangement is gone,
and I embrace 4-gun arrays to feature 3x 4 = 12 x 365L50s.
A respectable offensive punch, 3/4 of the Kalifern, tied to what I think is a useful speed.
The tradeoff reduces the armor slightly, though it is still heavier than I think most navies.

On all three versions being shown, the cruise speed is 16knts, which I am trying to make standard for my screening forces while the battleline keeps 14knts.

It has a very good range, allowing it to operate far from bases, or spend a great deal of time on station,
or operate at high speeds for long periods.

Quote
Stormbringer II M, Parthian Battleship laid down 1928

Displacement:
   38,000 t light; 40,671 t standard; 44,745 t normal; 48,004 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (623.12 ft / 616.80 ft) x 114.83 ft (Bulges 124.67 ft) x (31.33 / 33.43 ft)
   (189.93 m / 188.00 m) x 35.00 m (Bulges 38.00 m)  x (9.55 / 10.19 m)

Armament:
      12 - 14.37" / 365 mm 50.0 cal guns - 1,719.61lbs / 780.00kg shells, 134 per gun
     Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1928 Model
     3 x 4-gun mounts on centreline ends, majority forward
      1 raised mount - superfiring
      16 - 5.12" / 130 mm 50.0 cal guns - 70.55lbs / 32.00kg shells, 230 per gun
     Quick firing guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1928 Model
     8 x 2-gun mounts on sides, evenly spread
      10 - 3.54" / 90.0 mm 50.0 cal guns - 24.25lbs / 11.00kg shells, 500 per gun
     Anti-air guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1928 Model
     6 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
      6 raised mounts
     2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 double raised mounts
      8 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 6.61lbs / 3.00kg shells, 800 per gun
     Anti-air guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1928 Model
     4 x 2-gun mounts on side ends, evenly spread
      4 double raised mounts
      16 - 0.59" / 15.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 0.11lbs / 0.05kg shells, 5,000 per gun
     Machine guns in deck mounts, 1928 Model
     8 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
      8 double raised mounts
      Weight of broadside 22,061 lbs / 10,007 kg

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   13.8" / 350 mm   400.92 ft / 122.20 m   15.42 ft / 4.70 m
   Ends:   1.38" / 35 mm   215.85 ft / 65.79 m   15.42 ft / 4.70 m
     Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length
     Main Belt inclined -12.00 degrees (positive = in)

   - Torpedo Bulkhead - Additional damage containing bulkheads:
      2.24" / 57 mm   400.92 ft / 122.20 m   34.94 ft / 10.65 m
   Beam between torpedo bulkheads 82.02 ft / 25.00 m

   - Hull Bulges:
      0.35" / 9 mm   400.92 ft / 122.20 m   19.85 ft / 6.05 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   16.5" / 420 mm   7.09" / 180 mm      13.0" / 330 mm
   2nd:   1.97" / 50 mm   1.38" / 35 mm      1.57" / 40 mm
   3rd:   0.98" / 25 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   4th:   0.24" / 6 mm         -               -
   5th:   0.12" / 3 mm         -               -

   - Armoured deck - single deck:
   For and Aft decks: 5.44" / 138 mm
   Forecastle: 1.38" / 35 mm  Quarter deck: 5.31" / 135 mm

   - Conning towers: Forward 13.78" / 350 mm, Aft 1.57" / 40 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Geared drive, 4 shafts, 108,306 shp / 80,796 Kw = 26.00 kts
   Range 10,412nm at 16.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 7,334 tons

Complement:
   1,537 - 1,999

Cost:
   £14.922 million / $59.687 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 4,749 tons, 10.6 %
      - Guns: 4,749 tons, 10.6 %
   Armour: 14,033 tons, 31.4 %
      - Belts: 4,020 tons, 9.0 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 1,163 tons, 2.6 %
      - Bulges: 104 tons, 0.2 %
      - Armament: 3,197 tons, 7.1 %
      - Armour Deck: 5,132 tons, 11.5 %
      - Conning Towers: 417 tons, 0.9 %
   Machinery: 3,372 tons, 7.5 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 14,528 tons, 32.5 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 6,745 tons, 15.1 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 1,317 tons, 2.9 %
      - Hull below water: 361 tons
      - Bulge void weights: 150 tons
      - Hull above water: 76 tons
      - On freeboard deck: 70 tons
      - Above deck: 660 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     62,784 lbs / 28,478 Kg = 42.3 x 14.4 " / 365 mm shells or 11.3 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.18
   Metacentric height 8.3 ft / 2.5 m
   Roll period: 18.1 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.52
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.01

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck,
     a ram bow and a round stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.650 / 0.653
   Length to Beam Ratio: 4.95 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 24.84 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 70
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 13.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: -3.28 ft / -1.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   20.00 %,  27.40 ft / 8.35 m,  24.93 ft / 7.60 m
      - Forward deck:   38.00 %,  24.93 ft / 7.60 m,  22.47 ft / 6.85 m
      - Aft deck:   27.00 %,  22.47 ft / 6.85 m,  22.47 ft / 6.85 m
      - Quarter deck:   15.00 %,  22.47 ft / 6.85 m,  23.95 ft / 7.30 m
      - Average freeboard:      23.74 ft / 7.24 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 97.4 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 155.9 %
   Waterplane Area: 54,257 Square feet or 5,041 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 106 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 226 lbs/sq ft or 1,102 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.93
      - Longitudinal: 1.93
      - Overall: 1.00
   Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Excellent accommodation and workspace room
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

Meant to operate with the Stormbringer vessels, or stand in line of battle, it is given heavy armor and sufficient speed to exceed the Byzantine line, and many battlewagons.

The high cruise speed and good range at that speed is meant to allow operations backing the cruiser screen.

Tonnage is kept at 38000 tons to allow a reasonable building time, and to keep tonnage in reason.

This does mean that the number of barrels is restricted to a paltry 12,

The reality of the newest Roman vessels combination of full dreadnaught ability with cruiser speed has not been understood at the time it is laid down.

Deck Guns
Deck guns are echloned outwards, like on Iowa,
allowing 4 to bear ahead (8 guns), or 4 on each side.
The  90m AA are above them.

Main Belt Armor 
This embraces "all or nothing", but only has 1 deck level unprotected aft and 2 forward.
The main armor deck caps the belt at 1.5m.

Outsloped Wedge shaped Belt
Belt
1) Figure adjusted height for wedge
2) figure  additional belt height for outsloping


Step 1
The bet covers from 2m to -3m.
The lower portion of the belt tapers.
The upper 2.5m is a uniform 350mm, extending 0.5m below WL.
the lower 2.5m tapers from 350mm down to 230mm.
The bulge extends from the lower edge of the belt to the keel.
The TDS rises behind the belt and seals to the armor deck, adding
57mm behind it.

Mathwise that means there are 3 sections.
               |        | 
               |        |  A ) Upper, 2500mm (2.5m) x 380mm
                \  |    |   
                  \|    |  C) Lower back , 2500 (2.5m) x 230mm
B) Wedge 1/2B x H :
B = 2.5m = 2500
H = 380-230 = 160

A) = 950,000
B) = 200,000
C) = 575,000

SubTotal : 1,725,000
Modeled as average 380mm thickness = /380
Total : 4539.4736= 4.54m
 

Belt is  outsloped by 15%.
Step 2 Outsloping
Overall it is 4.54m high. which is "A" or adjacent

COS 15 = A/H
H* Cos 15 = A
H = A/Cos 15

Which gives 4.70015 or 4.70 as the height.


Deck Armor
Deck Armored is modeled as two parts
A 35/135/135 main armored deck : 4979 tons
and a 35mm box around the magazines : 104 tons
TOTAL : 5083

To model that, the deck thickness is shown as
35/ 138.7 /135
Which weighs 5085t

Which means vertical is a 140mm deck with a 50mm splinter box over the magazines.

Like most 'all or nothing' the Forecastle and Quarterdeck sections
are set up as protective decks.

TDS
Raised to the underside of the Armor deck at 1.5m above waterline.

TDS :  Bulge ||9mm mild hull||, 1m liquid ||9mm mild||, 1m void ||9mm armor||, 1m liquid || armored (2x19=38mm)||,1.5m  Dam control/ flooding ||(9mm mild)||
Depth : 1.5m exterior, 3m interior to main bulkhead, 1.5m to second bulkhead. Total :6m, 57mm STS steel


150t Reserve Wt

AD
475t  Fire Control
25t    LR Radio
25t    Searchlight Tower (NF)
25t    Hulesmeyer prox detector
10t    SR Radio
100t  Admirals Quarters


5t : Paravanes
25t +5t : Fighter/Scout floatplane + Gunpowder Cat
25t +5t : Fighter/Scout floatplane + Gunpowder Cat
10t : Hanger
5t : Fire Ext for hanger.

HAW
38t Additional fire suppresion
38t CO2 Air conditioning

HBW
100t : Fleet command center
38t   Extra pumps
188t torpedo nets
15t   Enhanced Hydrophones
15t : (5+10) 5t double wall tank5t s 10t AVGAS+Aviation supplies
5t : Fire ext for Avgas.


Decks
+6.85   Weather Deck
+4.35  Weather deck
+1.5 Armor Deck 135mm , top of TDS.
-1.2   3rd Deck
          -2.5 bottom main belt 
-3.2  2nd Deck
-5.7  1st Deck
-8.2   Engineering
-9.16 Double Bottom

The next version up for consideration will be the "H" which evaluated the 390L46 in this role.

Quote from: The Rock Doctor on August 09, 2023, 07:10:16 PM
Save weight by introducing quintuple turrets?

Oh, yes.   Definitely exploring this idea.  Quintuple 240s.  Or maybe quintuple 280s.  Take the speed up to 35kts.

Quintuple 130mm. 

One mounting per destroyer.

If going above 2 guns was possible for full size M&H, I would.  Moving this up to General Discussions.