I just did a comparison with SpringSharp

I just did my first comparison between Springsharp and my Warship General Design program. I wondered if this would be the case, and so it proved to be. With my program, for a given SHP, the speed was somewhat lower. I could not get a good comparison, because my program was calculating a lower normal displacement, so at the same displacement, there would have been more of a differnce. I calculated that the Ger/CB/1915A Design Study E1 would be able to make 36.346 knots at 63,151.9 tons displacement. That is with a SHP of 426,433. With Springsharp, this design could make 37 knots, with the same SHP, but at a greater displacement: 65,891 tons normal. We had almost the same range at the normal load. I calculated a range of 7,513.54 nm, while I had specified 7,500 nm in Springsharp. They were almost exactly the same. My design got better fuel efficiency, seemingly, although I used Springsharp's figure for my deep load fuel capacity: 7,481 tons. One big issue is that I calculated that too much volume would be required at the SHP/ton of machinery used by Springsharp (26.4) for the size of the ship. I would have assumed a lighter weight, higher output machinery, if I had done this independently (I hadn't run this ship before). I would have used something like 40 SHP/ton, and assumed that the machinery would have been less reliable.