the Oficial NS new ship ideas thread

[Tanthalas]

I'm also considering this which is just a modified Indy

USNSS Wasp, USNS Battle Cruiser laid down 1913 (Engine 1912)

Displacement:
   17,171 t light; 18,333 t standard; 22,980 t normal; 26,698 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   665.00 ft / 650.00 ft x 77.00 ft x 32.00 ft (normal load)
   202.69 m / 198.12 m x 23.47 m  x 9.75 m

Armament:
     8 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (4x2 guns), 864.00lbs / 391.90kg shells, 1913 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, evenly spread, 1 raised mount - superfiring
     12 - 6.00" / 152 mm guns (6x2 guns), 108.00lbs / 48.99kg shells, 1913 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, all amidships
   Weight of broadside 8,208 lbs / 3,723 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
  - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   9.00" / 229 mm   325.00 ft / 99.06 m   12.00 ft / 3.66 m
   Ends:   3.00" / 76 mm   325.00 ft / 99.06 m   12.00 ft / 3.66 m
   Upper:   3.00" / 76 mm   325.00 ft / 99.06 m   8.00 ft / 2.44 m
     Main Belt covers 77 % of normal length

  - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   9.00" / 229 mm   3.00" / 76 mm      9.00" / 229 mm
   2nd:   1.00" / 25 mm   1.00" / 25 mm            -

  - Armour deck: 2.00" / 51 mm, Conning tower: 9.00" / 229 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 70,908 shp / 52,898 Kw = 27.00 kts
   Range 15,000nm at 15.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 8,365 tons

Complement:
   933 - 1,213

Cost:
   £2.028 million / $8.110 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 1,026 tons, 4.5 %
   Armour: 5,069 tons, 22.1 %
      - Belts: 2,340 tons, 10.2 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
      - Armament: 1,337 tons, 5.8 %
      - Armour Deck: 1,236 tons, 5.4 %
      - Conning Tower: 157 tons, 0.7 %
   Machinery: 2,827 tons, 12.3 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 7,949 tons, 34.6 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,809 tons, 25.3 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 300 tons, 1.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     27,052 lbs / 12,271 Kg = 31.3 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 2.9 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
   Metacentric height 3.7 ft / 1.1 m
   Roll period: 16.8 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.85
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.28

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck
   Block coefficient: 0.502
   Length to Beam Ratio: 8.44 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 25.50 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 55
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 26.56 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 space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 76.4 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 129.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 33,414 Square feet or 3,104 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 119 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 149 lbs/sq ft or 728 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.98
      - Longitudinal: 1.50
      - 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

although it still has the indys largest problems of no TB (puting one on it only gaind .5 torps) and high recoil (although its .85 vs the .88 on the Indy DF sent me) im working on fixing them up so they fit with the tech I had available (I only got the SS reports on them yesterday and actualy didnt have a slip capable of building indy as it was outlind)

[Tanthalas]

DF/Walter can either of you tell me if the NS had a Type 3 slip that wasnt listed? I ask because both of the "cruisers" that DF had me build required one, and acording to my slips list I didnt have any (which could like everything else have bene totaly out of date)

[The Rock Doctor]

There's a pair listed at Phoenix.

[Tanthalas]

ok then im safe with the one for Independance, she is in the ships section of the NS fleet now.

[Tanthalas]

yes they mount lighter guns but they also mount lighter armor, I think im the only one trying to meld armor onto my fast BBs, and as I pointed out with my Tigers Id like to mount heavier guns to (just got to develop the tech... ).  Now Korpen dont take this the wrong way, but you are a Potential enemy for me along with DKD, Maoria and Spain.  I considerd just droping an inch of Deck armor on independance and adding a TB to the class (they curently have 3" decks which is to much for the period imho) and I hope to avoid any engagements with france.

The Netherlands is defiantly a potential opponent of New Switzerland considering that relations have not normalised.

I think it is natural to compare your "wasp" to Wilhelmina der Nederlanden, as they belong to the same generation and are the same size.
In a duelling situation Wilhelmina is superior both in protection and in firepower.
Wasp is better protected in a shorter rang melee-situation were large numbers of small and medium calibre hits can be expected, but Wilhelmina's armour scheme protects her allot better from some 30,5cm shells then Wasps protect her from the same number of 38cm shells...


And when will we see the springsharps of the ships in the catch-up reports? Some of us are curious. :)

I know Desertfox outlined some in his thread: http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=2390.msg25320#msg25320
But I see that they are not correct as New Switzerland lacks the tech to build them at the times indicated by Desertfox.

hope you dont mind me asking but how are you using sloped armor on a ship layed down in 1912 (its a 1912 tech isnt it) im refering to the 1912 Sloped external belts; "All or Nothing" Protective Schemes, so shouldnt we be able to use it in 1914 at the earliest?  Mind you im just going off the rules and I have bene wrong on them before.

[Desertfox]

I didn't put torpedo bulkheads on my ships, because I don't really think they help. Instead I used increased subdivisions and researched turbo-electric to further subdivide the ships.

While I did lose quite a number of ships to mines and torpedoes, not one heavy cruiser or capital ship has yet been lost to underwater damage. United States survived a torpedo hit. Alliance sank two German BCs after taking a mine hit, and Constitution has survived close to five torpedo hits. Hawaii did have to be grounded after striking a mine, but she already had accumulated damage from 4 battles. Rigel did not sink after taking 3 torpedo hits, untill her mags blew up.

[The Rock Doctor]

Hey, let's not distort things - Alliance sank a pair of twenty-year old traditional armored cruisers.  Constitution was hit by 14" torpedoes - a far cry from modern fish or mines.

[Tanthalas]

Hey, let's not distort things - Alliance sank a pair of twenty-year old traditional armored cruisers.  Constitution was hit by 14" torpedoes - a far cry from modern fish or mines.

hehehe for me its simple Torpedos = damage and if you can protect against it you do so, as to the weight of the TB my research indicates that much over 1" is well a waste (going to 2" only gains you .5 torps over 1", but 1" is the lightest effective bulkhead)

[Korpen]

hope you dont mind me asking but how are you using sloped armor on a ship layed down in 1912 (its a 1912 tech isnt it) im refering to the 1912 Sloped external belts; "All or Nothing" Protective Schemes, so shouldnt we be able to use it in 1914 at the earliest?  Mind you im just going off the rules and I have bene wrong on them before.

Without going into details (those arguments can be found if you look around) they are the reason the tech were created. So the ships got oked as a avante guard, and the tech created to take sloped armour into account.

Hawaii did have to be grounded after striking a mine, but she already had accumulated damage from 4 battles.

Actually, she was torpedoed. :P

Hey, let's not distort things - Alliance sank a pair of twenty-year old traditional armored cruisers.  Constitution was hit by 14" torpedoes - a far cry from modern fish or mines.

40-45cm torpedoes are really about the norm for the time being. So do you mean "modern" as in up-to-date in the sim or in relation to today?

[The Rock Doctor]

45 to 53 cm fish are the norm in 1913 (which is "modern" in that context) - I'm guessing the warheads are probably double that of a typical 35 cm torpedo...

[Tanthalas]

hope you dont mind me asking but how are you using sloped armor on a ship layed down in 1912 (its a 1912 tech isnt it) im refering to the 1912 Sloped external belts; "All or Nothing" Protective Schemes, so shouldnt we be able to use it in 1914 at the earliest?  Mind you im just going off the rules and I have bene wrong on them before.

Without going into details (those arguments can be found if you look around) they are the reason the tech were created. So the ships got oked as a avante guard, and the tech created to take sloped armour into account.

Ok I can buy that, only problem I see with it is that we have no method of accounting for sloped armor in SS2 (atleast that is I cant find one) so what are we assuming 10" is equivilant to in non sloped armor? im mostly curious for Comparison Purposes. (also that im working on another idea lol)

[Tanthalas]

the 8X12" BC I am thinking about building, it would serve as a bridge up to my bigger ships

USNSS Monarch, USNS Battle Cruiser laid down 1913 (Engine 1912)

Displacement:
   23,200 t light; 24,380 t standard; 27,378 t normal; 29,776 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   703.00 ft / 689.00 ft x 95.00 ft x 31.00 ft (normal load)
   214.27 m / 210.01 m x 28.96 m  x 9.45 m

Armament:
      8 - 12.00" / 305 mm guns (4x2 guns), 864.00lbs / 391.90kg shells, 1913 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
      16 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1913 Model
     Quick firing guns in casemate mounts
     on side, all amidships
      2 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns (1x2 guns), 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1913 Model
     Quick firing guns in a deck mount with hoist
     on centreline aft
      10 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns in single mounts, 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1913 Model
     Machine guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread
   Weight of broadside 7,452 lbs / 3,380 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   12.0" / 305 mm   414.00 ft / 126.19 m   16.00 ft / 4.88 m
   Ends:   4.00" / 102 mm   275.00 ft / 83.82 m   12.00 ft / 3.66 m
   Upper:   6.00" / 152 mm   414.00 ft / 126.19 m   12.00 ft / 3.66 m
     Main Belt covers 92 % of normal length

   - Torpedo Bulkhead:
      1.80" / 46 mm   414.00 ft / 126.19 m   25.90 ft / 7.89 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   12.0" / 305 mm   5.00" / 127 mm      11.0" / 279 mm
   2nd:   6.00" / 152 mm         -               -
   3rd:   1.00" / 25 mm         -               -
   4th:   1.00" / 25 mm         -               -

   - Armour deck: 1.50" / 38 mm, Conning tower: 11.00" / 279 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 77,783 shp / 58,026 Kw = 27.00 kts
   Range 10,000nm at 14.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 5,397 tons

Complement:
   1,063 - 1,383

Cost:
   £2.213 million / $8.852 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 931 tons, 3.4 %
   Armour: 9,152 tons, 33.4 %
      - Belts: 5,242 tons, 19.1 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 714 tons, 2.6 %
      - Armament: 1,800 tons, 6.6 %
      - Armour Deck: 1,181 tons, 4.3 %
      - Conning Tower: 215 tons, 0.8 %
   Machinery: 3,101 tons, 11.3 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 9,665 tons, 35.3 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 4,178 tons, 15.3 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 350 tons, 1.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     40,215 lbs / 18,241 Kg = 46.5 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 6.9 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
   Metacentric height 5.5 ft / 1.7 m
   Roll period: 16.9 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.39
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.21

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak
   Block coefficient: 0.472
   Length to Beam Ratio: 7.25 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 26.25 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 47 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 26.56 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 %):   20.00 ft / 6.10 m
      - Mid (70 %):      20.00 ft / 6.10 m (13.00 ft / 3.96 m aft of break)
      - Quarterdeck (20 %):   13.00 ft / 3.96 m
      - Stern:      13.00 ft / 3.96 m
      - Average freeboard:   18.22 ft / 5.55 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 82.7 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 143.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 42,544 Square feet or 3,953 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 118 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 161 lbs/sq ft or 784 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.97
      - Longitudinal: 1.23
      - 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

250 ton FC
25 Ton Wireless
25 Ton Flag Facilities
50 tons "Radar"

[P3D]

In 1913 NS should lay down 14" gunned ships, IMHO.

[The Rock Doctor]

The deck armor makes me cringe...

[Tanthalas]

The deck armor makes me cringe...

1.5 inches isnt out of line with what they were carying otl... Bayern had 1.5-2" deck armor depending on what source you look at the period british BCs had 1-1.5" decks, so I took the average of 1.5" (just like I always have on my BBs/BCs).  I'm trying to not let what I know happend OTL sway me from building ships that would be historicly acurate for the period. :'(

Belive me id love to build alaskas ^.^