GB/CL/1923, Great Britain Light Cruiser laid down 1923
Displacement:
11,257 t light; 11,664 t standard; 12,550 t normal; 13,259 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
619.03 ft / 615.00 ft x 60.00 ft x 20.00 ft (normal load)
188.68 m / 187.45 m x 18.29 m x 6.10 m
Armament:
6 - 8.00" / 203 mm guns (3x2 guns), 256.00lbs / 116.12kg shells, 1923 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, majority forward, 1 raised mount - superfiring
4 - 4.70" / 119 mm guns in single mounts, 51.91lbs / 23.55kg shells, 1923 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships
24 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (6x4 guns), 2.00lbs / 0.91kg shells, 1923 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 1,792 lbs / 813 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
4 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3.00" / 76 mm 540.00 ft / 164.59 m 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 135 % of normal length
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 3.00" / 76 mm 2.00" / 51 mm 3.00" / 76 mm
3rd: 1.00" / 25 mm - -
- Armour deck: 1.50" / 38 mm, Conning tower: 6.00" / 152 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 127,794 shp / 95,334 Kw = 34.00 kts
Range 5,400nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1,595 tons
Complement:
592 - 770
Cost:
£3.433 million / $13.731 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 224 tons, 1.8 %
Armour: 2,044 tons, 16.3 %
- Belts: 970 tons, 7.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 258 tons, 2.1 %
- Armour Deck: 746 tons, 5.9 %
- Conning Tower: 70 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 4,271 tons, 34.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 4,719 tons, 37.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,293 tons, 10.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
10,618 lbs / 4,816 Kg = 41.5 x 8.0 " / 203 mm shells or 1.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.24
Metacentric height 3.4 ft / 1.0 m
Roll period: 13.6 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 55 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.44
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.09
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.595
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.25 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 24.80 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 61 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 4.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 2.00 ft / 0.61 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 29.00 ft / 8.84 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Mid (67 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Stern: 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Average freeboard: 22.56 ft / 6.88 m
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 124.2 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 176.0 %
Waterplane Area: 26,867 Square feet or 2,496 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 101 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 105 lbs/sq ft or 511 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.57
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
This is a forum for discussion of topics relating to the Dreadnought era, prior to the ascendency of naval aviation. We will be discussing history, ship design, and naval wargaming.
Friday, November 04, 2005
I wanted a 35-knot British light cruiser for 1923
What I thought should be possible was a 35-knot British light cruiser to be laid down in 1923. If such a ship is possible, it seems that it would not be very capable, except for the speed. I settled for a 34-knot design that resembles the Aoba class, but is too large. I had to inflate the dimensions and displacement to achieve anything remotely satisfactory. This is the Springsharp report for this disappointing design (disappointing to me):
No comments:
Post a Comment