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