Iberian Design Studies...

[Korpen]

This is almost the size of HMS Lion.

Well it is a 1912 design... Also I have been seeing a few larger design being put out by other people or do you think it should have more firepower for the displacement?

Michael

I for one defiantly think se need more firepower, if we compare her to the historic HMS Lion she is of the same size, have 25mm more belt but much smaller main battery, also Lion was laid down in 1909 (with 70 000shp).

But firepower is really her weak side, considering the kind of ships that are around 8x30 is not that much for a ships of over 25kton.

[The Rock Doctor]

I find the BC to be a good, balanced ship with room for substantial improvements during a mid-life refit.

Comparing her to Lion is not quite fair - this ship is over three thousand tonnes lighter at standard displacement, and she's got torpedo protection that I assume Lion lacks.  Given the lethality of torpedo attacks in the sim so far, and the apparent ability of capital ships to absorb a lot of large shell hits (e.g., Alliance/Constitution vs. Scharnhorst), I'd value the torpedo bulkhead over the difference in broadside weight.

[miketr]

Now we go the other way....  1,000 tons heavier over the base design (2,000 over the lighter design) and ten 12" guns instead of eight.

AC-1912c, Iberia Armored Cruiser laid down 1912

Displacement:
   23,287 t light; 24,820 t standard; 26,646 t normal; 28,106 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   650.00 ft / 650.00 ft x 93.00 ft x 27.50 ft (normal load)
   198.12 m / 198.12 m x 28.35 m  x 8.38 m

Armament:
      10 - 12.01" / 305 mm guns (5x2 guns), 865.70lbs / 392.68kg shells, 1912 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, majority forward, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
      12 - 5.91" / 150 mm guns in single mounts, 102.98lbs / 46.71kg shells, 1912 Model
     Breech loading guns in casemate mounts
     on side, all amidships
      8 - 2.95" / 75.0 mm guns in single mounts, 12.87lbs / 5.84kg shells, 1912 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
      8 - 1.97" / 50.0 mm guns in single mounts, 3.81lbs / 1.73kg shells, 1912 Model
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
   Weight of broadside 10,026 lbs / 4,548 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 175
   4 - 20.0" / 508 mm submerged torpedo tubes

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   10.0" / 254 mm   411.00 ft / 125.27 m   12.51 ft / 3.81 m
   Ends:   4.00" / 102 mm   239.00 ft / 72.85 m   12.51 ft / 3.81 m
   Upper:   4.00" / 102 mm   411.00 ft / 125.27 m   12.75 ft / 3.89 m
     Main Belt covers 97 % of normal length

   - Torpedo Bulkhead:
      1.50" / 38 mm   411.00 ft / 125.27 m   24.32 ft / 7.41 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   12.0" / 305 mm   10.0" / 254 mm      10.0" / 254 mm
   2nd:   4.00" / 102 mm         -               -
   3rd:   1.00" / 25 mm         -               -
   4th:   1.00" / 25 mm         -               -

   - Armour deck: 2.50" / 64 mm, Conning tower: 12.00" / 305 mm

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Geared drive, 4 shafts, 70,230 shp / 52,392 Kw = 26.00 kts
   Range 10,000nm at 10.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 3,285 tons (67% coal)

Complement:
   1,042 - 1,355

Cost:
   £2.285 million / $9.141 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 1,253 tons, 4.7 %
   Armour: 8,973 tons, 33.7 %
      - Belts: 3,590 tons, 13.5 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 555 tons, 2.1 %
      - Armament: 2,626 tons, 9.9 %
      - Armour Deck: 1,971 tons, 7.4 %
      - Conning Tower: 231 tons, 0.9 %
   Machinery: 2,982 tons, 11.2 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 9,976 tons, 37.4 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,358 tons, 12.6 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 103 tons, 0.4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     33,860 lbs / 15,358 Kg = 39.1 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 5.3 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.04
   Metacentric height 4.8 ft / 1.5 m
   Roll period: 17.8 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.63
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.21

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck
   Block coefficient: 0.561
   Length to Beam Ratio: 6.99 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 25.50 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 50 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 59
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      26.00 ft / 7.92 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   23.00 ft / 7.01 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:   20.64 ft / 6.29 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 97.2 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 155.2 %
   Waterplane Area: 42,625 Square feet or 3,960 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 106 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 167 lbs/sq ft or 816 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.97
      - Longitudinal: 1.27
      - Overall: 1.00
   Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
   Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
   Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

[Korpen]

I find the BC to be a good, balanced ship with room for substantial improvements during a mid-life refit.

Comparing her to Lion is not quite fair - this ship is over three thousand tonnes lighter at standard displacement, and she's got torpedo protection that I assume Lion lacks.  Given the lethality of torpedo attacks in the sim so far, and the apparent ability of capital ships to absorb a lot of large shell hits (e.g., Alliance/Constitution vs. Scharnhorst), I'd value the torpedo bulkhead over the difference in broadside weight.

Ok, i have not seen anything on line that say anything either way on torpedo bulkheads, will keep looking.
But as for size, Lion was only around 600tons (Normal) heavier then the first BC posted, at least acording to the numbers i have seen (26250).
But then are often confusion around the numbers used.

[Korpen]

Now we go the other way....  1,000 tons heavier over the base design (2,000 over the lighter design) and ten 12" guns instead of eight.

AC-1912c, Iberia Armored Cruiser laid down 1912

More guns, me like! :)

Now she at least got a clear advantage over older BBs (up to 6 30cm guns and around 30 armour) that she can expect to meet in secondary theatres.

[miketr]

I find the BC to be a good, balanced ship with room for substantial improvements during a mid-life refit.

Comparing her to Lion is not quite fair - this ship is over three thousand tonnes lighter at standard displacement, and she's got torpedo protection that I assume Lion lacks.  Given the lethality of torpedo attacks in the sim so far, and the apparent ability of capital ships to absorb a lot of large shell hits (e.g., Alliance/Constitution vs. Scharnhorst), I'd value the torpedo bulkhead over the difference in broadside weight.

Ok, i have not seen anything on line that say anything either way on torpedo bulkheads, will keep looking.
But as for size, Lion was only around 600tons (Normal) heavier then the first BC posted, at least acording to the numbers i have seen (26250).
But then are often confusion around the numbers used.

The following is from, All the World's Battleships 1906 to present.

HMS Lion 26,270 load and 29,680 deep load
AC-1912A 25,677 normal and 27,215 maximum

"The worst error, however, was to provide armour protection only against 11in shellfire, and only in limited areas.  The vast hull was total vulnerable to 12in shells, and in some places the side armor could be piereced by 11 in as well."

Basicly in every metric my AC design has better armor than HMS Lion did, thicker and more of it.  Lions turrets are really under protected compared to this design, 9" face vs. 12" face.  Also Lion suffered from the Fischer maddness with respect to secondaries, a hoard of 4" QF's.

The book said nothing about torpedo protection.

Michael

[miketr]

Now we go the other way....  1,000 tons heavier over the base design (2,000 over the lighter design) and ten 12" guns instead of eight.

AC-1912c, Iberia Armored Cruiser laid down 1912

More guns, me like! :)

Now she at least got a clear advantage over older BBs (up to 6 30cm guns and around 30 armour) that she can expect to meet in secondary theatres.

Glad your happy...  ;)

Michael

[Borys]

Ahoj!
How are the three fore turrets arranged?
Pyramid?
Low-Low-High?

And you can really, really go down to 100 shells per 12" gun ...

Borys

[miketr]

Ahoj!
How are the three fore turrets arranged?
Pyramid?
Low-Low-High?

And you can really, really go down to 100 shells per 12" gun ...

Borys

SS defaulted to majority forward I see...  It would be 2 forward and 3 aft to avoid the the power plant being split by a mag.  Perhaps a midships turret but I don't like what that does to the internals....

I am going to keep the high number of shells, a number of ships have run out of ammo in the last war.

Michael

[Borys]

Ahoj!
Poor logisitics. Mine included.
100 shells is some 2 hours of firing.

Borys

[P3D]

Coastal bombardment helps a lot in emptying magazines.
The SKB ships that run out of ammo had a marginal shell capacity and small-caliber high-RoF guns.

[miketr]

I have been working on a picture for BC....  There just wasn't the foot print for 12 150mm with the 5th 12" main gun turret.  Also I reduced the ammount of main gun ammo to 125...  So between the two it cleared up some strength to allow for 8 below main deck casements in addition to 10 main deck level casements.



Thoughts?

Michael

[Borys]

Ahoj!
I believe you can extend the superstructure to envelope the barbettes, thus gaining space for one or two more casemattes on each side.

And then I would would group the remaining 2 or 3 lower level casemattes aft.
Two story casemattes look SO XIXth century ....

Borys

[P3D]

Just there isn't any space for all the machinery you need. Less than 200'.
I'd suggest:
- move all aft turrets further aft
- either turn Q turret so the guns point fore, and closer to X
- or have a bit larger distance between Q and X for turbine rooms

Or make A and Y turrets triple.

Either way, your barbette diameter (35') would be on the large side even for a triple turret. A twin 12" should have  28'-30' OD.

[miketr]

I thought about something like that, I could do it with the B turret but not Q and thats not enough space.  I think there too close together as is, I think its only 4 feet of seperation between casements right now.

Michael