Re: SDN World 3 Ship Design Thread
Posted: 2009-11-26 05:28pm
Why do you always mount all your guns on foredeck? Why not go for Centerline ends with distribution of fore and aft?
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
The second battery, perhaps. I put the main guns superfiring forward because it means I can project the most firepower while presenting the smallest profile to return fire. In theory, anyway.Steve wrote:Why do you always mount all your guns on foredeck? Why not go for Centerline ends with distribution of fore and aft?
Okay.Thanas wrote:Ryan, putting all guns forward is really bad for cruisers. For battleships, there might be a good reason, but otherwise I honestly wouldn't use it.
I suppose its the weight of the broadside that's important as opposed to the calibre of the individual shells?I am also not sure if, on high speed ships, you might not be better served with more faster-firing guns of slower caliber.
You also increase the probability of landing hits with more guns firing. Fast ships means (large) cruisers in most cases, and those fight mostly against other cruisers or destroyers. A 10-12'' shell will kill a (normal) cruiser performing a torpedo attack just as well as a 16'' shell most of the time, but a ship will be able to carry way more 12'' than 16''. It also works the other way, a faster ship will have to maneuver to evade due to its lack of armour, ruining its chances for precise firing. More guns will increase the probability to hit anything again, even for if each shell shell weighs less. It's better to land an e.g. 21cm shell out of eight fired than missing with heavier 35cm guns because you carry only four of them.Ryan Thunder wrote:I suppose its the weight of the broadside that's important as opposed to the calibre of the individual shells?Thanas wrote: [...]I am also not sure if, on high speed ships, you might not be better served with more faster-firing guns of slower caliber.
PRA Prophet, People's Republic of Afghanistan Converted Fisher laid down 1901 (Engine 1910)
Barbette ship
Displacement:
899 t light; 979 t standard; 985 t normal; 989 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
108.27 ft / 108.27 ft x 26.25 ft x 13.12 ft (normal load)
33.00 m / 33.00 m x 8.00 m x 4.00 m
Armament:
2 - 6.00" / 152 mm guns (1x2 guns), 108.00lbs / 48.99kg shells, 1901 Model
Muzzle loading guns in open barbette
on centreline, all raised guns
4 - 0.43" / 11.0 mm guns in single mounts, 0.04lbs / 0.02kg shells, 1920 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 216 lbs / 98 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 500
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3.00" / 76 mm 30.00 ft / 9.14 m 6.15 ft / 1.87 m
Ends: 2.00" / 51 mm 10.00 ft / 3.05 m 4.15 ft / 1.26 m
68.27 ft / 20.81 m Unarmoured ends
Upper: 2.00" / 51 mm 45.00 ft / 13.72 m 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Main Belt covers 43 % of normal length
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: - - 3.00" / 76 mm
2nd: 1.00" / 25 mm - -
Machinery:
Petrol Internal combustion motors,
Hydraulic drive, 3 shafts, 542 shp / 404 Kw = 10.27 kts
Range 50nm at 8.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 10 tons
Complement:
87 - 114
Cost:
£0.057 million / $0.229 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 27 tons, 2.7 %
Armour: 65 tons, 6.6 %
- Belts: 40 tons, 4.1 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 25 tons, 2.6 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 22 tons, 2.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 784 tons, 79.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 85 tons, 8.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
2,512 lbs / 1,140 Kg = 23.3 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 1.8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.25
Metacentric height 1.0 ft / 0.3 m
Roll period: 11.0 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 20 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.33
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 0.37
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.924
Length to Beam Ratio: 4.13 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 10.41 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 63 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 21
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: 11.45 ft / 3.49 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 7.28 ft / 2.22 m
- Mid (50 %): 7.28 ft / 2.22 m
- Quarterdeck (25 %): 7.28 ft / 2.22 m
- Stern: 7.28 ft / 2.22 m
- Average freeboard: 7.62 ft / 2.32 m
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 34.6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 43.7 %
Waterplane Area: 2,743 Square feet or 255 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 302 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 186 lbs/sq ft or 909 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 3.56
- Longitudinal: 23.91
- Overall: 4.31
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is extremely poor
Ship has quick, lively roll, not a steady gun platform
Caution: Lacks seaworthiness - very limited seakeeping ability
7 guns is really pushing it in my opinion.Steve wrote:That's my conundrum with Defiant: do I keep the 9 16"/50s firing 2,400 pound shells or do I upgrade to 7 18"/45s firing 3,000 pound shells?
As it is I've altered Sovereign to have 9 18"/45s and not 12 16"/50s. Was about to do this without altering her tonnage, as I forbade myself from doing that as the entire run has already been launched.
PSS Titan, Portugal Battleship laid down 1926
Displacement:
50,609 t light; 53,605 t standard; 56,044 t normal; 57,996 t full load
Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(816.15 ft / 787.40 ft) x 114.83 ft x (37.73 / 38.79 ft)
(248.76 m / 240.00 m) x 35.00 m x (11.50 / 11.82 m)
Armament:
9 - 18.00" / 457 mm 52.0 cal guns - 3,500.00lbs / 1,587.57kg shells, 90 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1926 Model
2 x Triple mounts on centreline, forward evenly spread
1 raised mount
1 x Triple mount on centreline, aft deck centre
20 - 6.00" / 152 mm 50.0 cal guns - 114.33lbs / 51.86kg shells, 200 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1926 Model
10 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
12 - 4.00" / 102 mm 50.0 cal guns - 33.88lbs / 15.37kg shells, 200 per gun
Quick firing guns in deck mounts, 1926 Model
6 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
6 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 34,193 lbs / 15,510 kg
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 14.0" / 356 mm 483.39 ft / 147.34 m 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
Ends: 5.00" / 127 mm 304.01 ft / 92.66 m 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
Upper: 5.00" / 127 mm 413.39 ft / 126.00 m 12.07 ft / 3.68 m
Main Belt covers 94 % of normal length
- Torpedo Bulkhead:
4.00" / 102 mm 413.39 ft / 126.00 m 34.52 ft / 10.52 m
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 14.0" / 356 mm 12.0" / 305 mm 14.0" / 356 mm
2nd: 2.00" / 51 mm 2.00" / 51 mm 2.00" / 51 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm -
- Armoured deck - multiple decks: 7.00" / 178 mm For and Aft decks
Forecastle: 5.00" / 127 mm Quarter deck: 5.00" / 127 mm
- Conning towers: Forward 12.00" / 305 mm, Aft 0.00" / 0 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 4 shafts, 77,173 shp / 57,571 Kw = 24.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 4,392 tons
Complement:
1,820 - 2,367
Cost:
£18.642 million / $74.566 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 5,668 tons, 10.1 %
Armour: 21,574 tons, 38.5 %
- Belts: 6,903 tons, 12.3 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 2,112 tons, 3.8 %
- Armament: 4,304 tons, 7.7 %
- Armour Deck: 7,876 tons, 14.1 %
- Conning Tower: 379 tons, 0.7 %
Machinery: 2,470 tons, 4.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 20,897 tons, 37.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,435 tons, 9.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
70,085 lbs / 31,790 Kg = 24.0 x 18.0 " / 457 mm shells or 12.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.04
Metacentric height 6.6 ft / 2.0 m
Roll period: 18.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 75 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.98
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.35
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has raised forecastle,
a normal bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.575 / 0.579
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.86 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 28.06 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 42 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 56
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 10.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 32.81 ft / 10.00 m, 29.53 ft / 9.00 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 19.69 ft / 6.00 m, 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Aft deck: 30.00 %, 19.69 ft / 6.00 m, 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Quarter deck: 20.00 %, 19.69 ft / 6.00 m, 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Average freeboard: 21.92 ft / 6.68 m
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 81.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 133.0 %
Waterplane Area: 64,599 Square feet or 6,001 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 97 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 252 lbs/sq ft or 1,229 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.96
- Longitudinal: 1.55
- 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
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily
Can I assume that my designs were acceptable?Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:That's a rather thin belt... never mind the rather thin turret armor as well.
Well, that ship certainly won't stop a 18" round from its own guns, if that is what you mean.Norseman wrote:Can I assume that my designs were acceptable?Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:That's a rather thin belt... never mind the rather thin turret armor as well.
I probably missed it. Where is it?Norseman wrote:What I meant was that no one really commented on the battleship designs that I posted, I think they are fairly competent even if they aren't perfect, but I'm not sure.
Right here kind of big for being missedFingolfin_Noldor wrote:I probably missed it. Where is it?Norseman wrote:What I meant was that no one really commented on the battleship designs that I posted, I think they are fairly competent even if they aren't perfect, but I'm not sure.