Battleship design study, Great Britain Battleship laid down 1909
Displacement:
23,511 t light; 24,366 t standard; 29,000 t normal; 32,707 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
620.00 ft / 620.00 ft x 100.00 ft x 27.70 ft (normal load)
188.98 m / 188.98 m x 30.48 m x 8.44 m
Armament:
6 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (2x3 guns), 864.00lbs / 391.90kg shells, 1909 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 6.00" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 108.00lbs / 48.99kg shells, 1909 Model
Quick firing guns in casemate mounts
on side, evenly spread, 4 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 6,048 lbs / 2,743 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 80
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 14.0" / 356 mm 410.00 ft / 124.97 m 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
Ends: 4.00" / 102 mm 210.00 ft / 64.01 m 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
Main Belt covers 102 % of normal length
- Torpedo Bulkhead:
2.00" / 51 mm 410.00 ft / 124.97 m 26.00 ft / 7.92 m
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 14.0" / 356 mm 8.00" / 203 mm 14.0" / 356 mm
2nd: 6.00" / 152 mm 6.00" / 152 mm 6.00" / 152 mm
- Armour deck: 3.50" / 89 mm, Conning tower: 14.00" / 356 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 4 shafts, 66,369 shp / 49,511 Kw = 25.00 kts
Range 7,000nm at 18.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 8,341 tons
Complement:
1,110 - 1,444
Cost:
£1.880 million / $7.521 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 756 tons, 2.6 %
Armour: 10,395 tons, 35.8 %
- Belts: 4,794 tons, 16.5 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 789 tons, 2.7 %
- Armament: 1,616 tons, 5.6 %
- Armour Deck: 2,912 tons, 10.0 %
- Conning Tower: 285 tons, 1.0 %
Machinery: 3,017 tons, 10.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 9,343 tons, 32.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,489 tons, 18.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
61,447 lbs / 27,872 Kg = 71.1 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 11.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.35
Metacentric height 8.5 ft / 2.6 m
Roll period: 14.4 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.22
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.41
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.591
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.20 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 24.90 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 51 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: -2.00 ft / -0.61 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Mid (50 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Stern: 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Average freeboard: 22.16 ft / 6.75 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 67.6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 169.8 %
Waterplane Area: 44,966 Square feet or 4,177 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 129 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 151 lbs/sq ft or 739 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.54
- 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
Amazon Ad
Monday, July 25, 2005
My friend Cliff had this concept for a lightly armed battleship
My friend Cliff liked exploring the fringes of warship design. One concept that he had was for a battleship armed with two triple 12in turrets and having relatively thick armor (in this case, 14in). I have an annotated pencil sketch for what I think may have been considered for construction starting in 1909. It could have been earlier, but I have my doubts. I don't have speed data, but with Springsharp, I found that we had underspecified the armor and had too low a freeboard. The design tends to be wet forward, according to Springsharp. This is the report:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)


No comments:
Post a Comment