Ger/CB/1905, Germany Battle Cruiser laid down 1905 (Engine 1917) Displacement: 19,249 t light; 20,064 t standard; 22,000 t normal; 23,549 t full load Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught 562.00 ft / 560.00 ft x 94.00 ft x 26.00 ft (normal load) 171.30 m / 170.69 m x 28.65 m x 7.92 m Armament: 8 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (4x2 guns), 864.00lbs / 391.90kg shells, 1905 Model Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes) on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring 12 - 6.00" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 108.00lbs / 48.99kg shells, 1905 Model Quick firing guns in casemate mounts on side, all amidships Weight of broadside 8,208 lbs / 3,723 kg Shells per gun, main battery: 80 Armour: - Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg) Main: 10.0" / 254 mm 370.00 ft / 112.78 m 9.00 ft / 2.74 m Ends: Unarmoured Upper: 8.00" / 203 mm 370.00 ft / 112.78 m 8.00 ft / 2.44 m Main Belt covers 102 % of normal length - Torpedo Bulkhead: 3.00" / 76 mm 370.00 ft / 112.78 m 25.00 ft / 7.62 m - Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max) Main: 8.00" / 203 mm 6.00" / 152 mm 10.0" / 254 mm 2nd: 6.00" / 152 mm 6.00" / 152 mm 6.00" / 152 mm - Armour deck: 3.00" / 76 mm, Conning tower: 10.00" / 254 mm Machinery: Oil fired boilers, steam turbines, Direct drive, 4 shafts, 67,543 shp / 50,387 Kw = 26.00 kts Range 7,500nm at 15.00 kts Bunker at max displacement = 3,485 tons Complement: 903 - 1,174 Cost: £1.882 million / $7.529 million Distribution of weights at normal displacement: Armament: 1,026 tons, 4.7 % Armour: 7,623 tons, 34.6 % - Belts: 2,496 tons, 11.3 % - Torpedo bulkhead: 1,027 tons, 4.7 % - Armament: 1,868 tons, 8.5 % - Armour Deck: 2,063 tons, 9.4 % - Conning Tower: 169 tons, 0.8 % Machinery: 2,476 tons, 11.3 % Hull, fittings & equipment: 8,125 tons, 36.9 % Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,751 tons, 12.5 % Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 % Overall survivability and seakeeping ability: Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 32,035 lbs / 14,531 Kg = 37.1 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 6.0 torpedoes Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.18 Metacentric height 6.2 ft / 1.9 m Roll period: 15.8 seconds Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 52 % - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.38 Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.05 Hull form characteristics: Hull has a flush deck Block coefficient: 0.563 Length to Beam Ratio: 5.96 : 1 'Natural speed' for length: 23.66 kts Power going to wave formation at top speed: 56 % 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: 26.00 ft / 7.92 m - Forecastle (20 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m - Mid (50 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m - Quarterdeck (15 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m - Stern: 19.00 ft / 5.79 m - Average freeboard: 19.56 ft / 5.96 m Ship tends to be wet forward Ship space, strength and comments: Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 91.0 % - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 149.0 % Waterplane Area: 37,174 Square feet or 3,454 Square metres Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 106 % Structure weight / hull surface area: 160 lbs/sq ft or 783 Kg/sq metre Hull strength (Relative): - Cross-sectional: 0.95 - Longitudinal: 1.64 - Overall: 1.00 Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Amazon Ad
Thursday, June 01, 2006
The Ger/CB/1905 (Flush-Decked) did not work as well
I followed the Ger/CB/1905 specification and drawing as closely as I could, but the ship cannot achieve the desired speed of 27 knots. 67,543 SHP is required to just reach 26 knots, much less 27 knots. This is based on a drawing that is similar in concept to the Ger/BB/1905 flush-decked battleship. I had to adjust the draft and displacement to achieve adequate strength. The seakeeping is not as good, due to the power required to reach even 26 knots. The hull weight is about 500 tons more than I had hoped for in my original design. This is the Springsharp report:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment