KMS Aeneas

[P3D]

L:B of 6:1 is really pushing common sense it for a 29kts design. I know, SS allows it.

Why SoDak could be built on the historical displacement, was IMHO:
- short ship and deep draught allowed lighter hull (not sure about the second, SS2 suggests it, however inaccurate that'd be, but it should still allow some weight savings given competent naval architects), deck and TDS includd in strength calculation (my assumption)
- only 27.something knots (vs. 28-30kts of European design), high-power-density machinery
- not that deep or thick main belt
- smaller diameter barbettes, relatively light guns (only 97t for a 16" gun, vs. 94t on R&JB, 110t on Littorio, turret lighter than Nelson's).

[Nobody]

Guinness, your draft values for Bismarck seemed odd to me (or I didn't understand you), so I looked them up. I found:

	displacement	draft [m]
Standard	42958 ts / 43646 t	8.70
Konstruction/normal	47253 t	9.30
full load	50585 ts / 51395 t	9.99
maximum (war load)	52328 ts / 53165 t	10.17

So the real problem is that SpingSharp2 doesn't display the maximum draft - only the normal value.
In itself 10 m draft (maximum) shouldn't be a problem, I think up to 12.5 m are reasonable (like CVNs or the Yamato)

[Carthaginian]

Guinness, your draft values for Bismarck seemed odd to me (or I didn't understand you), so I looked them up. I found:

	displacement	draft [m]
Standard	42958 ts / 43646 t	8.70
Konstruction/normal	47253 t	9.30
full load	50585 ts / 51395 t	9.99
maximum (war load)	52328 ts / 53165 t	10.17

So the real problem is that SpingSharp2 doesn't display the maximum draft - only the normal value.
In itself 10 m draft (maximum) shouldn't be a problem, I think up to 12.5 m are reasonable (like CVNs or the Yamato)

A 38' draft is perfectly fine FOR THE PACIFIC BASIN.
For the North Sea, they can make things get pretty hairy.

[Nobody]

A 38' draft is perfectly fine FOR THE PACIFIC BASIN.
For the North Sea, they can make things get pretty hairy.

Possible, though I have no clue how much 38' is.

My conclusion would be that more than 9 to 9.5 m normal draft are inadvisable for the North Sea, while ships for the Pacific may have more than 11 m normal draft.

[TexanCowboy]

About 12 m.

[Carthaginian]

A 38' draft is perfectly fine FOR THE PACIFIC BASIN.
For the North Sea, they can make things get pretty hairy.

Possible, though I have no clue how much 38' is.

My conclusion would be that more than 9 to 9.5 m normal draft are inadvisable for the North Sea, while ships for the Pacific may have more than 11 m normal draft.

Sorry... I can't stand seeing nothing but METRIC all the time, my American brain just can't cope.
Sometimes I have to inject some Imperial measurements just to retain my own sanity. :P

I tend to agree with you on the drafts... the North Sea is far too shallow for something like this to be running around on a regular basis.

[Sachmle]

So he builds it at Singapore and it stays in the NOI. I don't see a problem with it on it's face. I don't like quads, but that's a personal decision. All in all to me it seems a step backwards. de Ruyter was 2,000t lighter, same speed, had 1,470nm more range, I don't know. Knowing how the Dutch used to fight (granted Damocles isn't Korpen, nor do I expect him to be) I don't think this would fly. The extra armor is nice, but the Dutch never intended their Frigates to fight in a stand up fight. They believed in speed ,firepower, superior fire control/long range gunnery. Being faster and having the ability to shoot from farther away allowed them to fight at a greater distance, giving them an immunity zone against most other nations naval rifles. Now, people have started to catch up and they find themselves having to fight at a less advantageous position. I see the armor increase as a response to this, I do not however (even w/ their penchant for having bigger guns than the rest) see the advantages of the 40.6cm over the 38.1cm outweighing the weight penalty, at this time. I'd have expected a more 'standard' layout of 4x2x15" with ~30kts speed and 12,000nm@12/9500@14 type range with ~12" belt/CT and ~15" turret face/barbette over a ~4.5" deck. Even these 16/45(?) probably can't realistically penetrate a 4.5" deck at 'normal' battle ranges. Decks thicker than that were due to AP bombs, not shells. Even a 'burster' deck system of multiple decks (a waste of weight IMHO) shouldn't total more than 5" (3" deck at top of main belt, 1.5" deck at top of upper belt/1st deck, 0.5" weather deck.) This is all IMHO of course and Damocles can build whatever he feels like.

[damocles]

Arnheim, Holland 1059 class laid down 1916

Displacement:
   36,599 t light; 38,886 t standard; 41,889 t normal; 44,291 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   746.06 ft / 738.19 ft x 114.22 ft x 32.81 ft (normal load)
   227.40 m / 225.00 m x 34.81 m  x 10.00 m

Armament:
      8 - 15.94" / 405 mm guns (2x4 guns), 2,026.91lbs / 919.39kg shells, 1916 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, evenly spread
      12 - 4.92" / 125 mm guns in single mounts, 59.59lbs / 27.03kg shells, 1916 Model
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, all amidships, 4 raised mounts - superfiring
      8 - 3.94" / 100 mm guns (4x2 guns), 30.51lbs / 13.84kg shells, 1916 Model
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, evenly spread
      32 - 0.59" / 15.0 mm guns (8x4 guns), 0.10lbs / 0.05kg shells, 1916 Model
     Machine guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread
   Weight of broadside 17,178 lbs / 7,792 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 150
   8 - 24.0" / 610 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   13.8" / 350 mm   469.16 ft / 143.00 m   13.12 ft / 4.00 m
   Ends:   Unarmoured
     Main Belt covers 98 % of normal length

   - Torpedo Bulkhead:
      1.97" / 50 mm   469.16 ft / 143.00 m   16.40 ft / 5.00 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   13.8" / 350 mm   6.89" / 175 mm      13.8" / 350 mm
   2nd:   1.97" / 50 mm   1.97" / 50 mm      1.97" / 50 mm
   3rd:   0.98" / 25 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm

   - Armour deck: 6.10" / 155 mm, Conning tower: 13.98" / 355 mm

Machinery:
   Diesel Internal combustion generators,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 135,833 shp / 101,332 Kw = 29.00 kts
   Range 12,500nm at 12.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 5,405 tons

Complement:
   1,463 - 1,903

Cost:
   £6.207 million / $24.828 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 2,147 tons, 5.1 %
   Armour: 13,125 tons, 31.3 %
      - Belts: 3,708 tons, 8.9 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 561 tons, 1.3 %
      - Armament: 1,973 tons, 4.7 %
      - Armour Deck: 6,520 tons, 15.6 %
      - Conning Tower: 363 tons, 0.9 %
   Machinery: 5,061 tons, 12.1 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 15,766 tons, 37.6 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,290 tons, 12.6 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 500 tons, 1.2 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     47,805 lbs / 21,684 Kg = 23.6 x 15.9 " / 405 mm shells or 6.9 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.12
   Metacentric height 7.6 ft / 2.3 m
   Roll period: 17.4 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.41
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.02

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck
   Block coefficient: 0.530
   Length to Beam Ratio: 6.46 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 27.17 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 69
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 15.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      29.37 ft / 8.95 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   18.69 ft / 5.70 m
      - Mid (50 %):      18.69 ft / 5.70 m
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   18.69 ft / 5.70 m
      - Stern:      18.69 ft / 5.70 m
      - Average freeboard:   19.54 ft / 5.96 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 97.6 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 128.5 %
   Waterplane Area: 57,753 Square feet or 5,365 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 102 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 205 lbs/sq ft or 1,000 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.98
      - Longitudinal: 1.35
      - Overall: 1.01
   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

500 tons
250 tons fire control
  25 tons radio
  25 tons navigation radar
  25 tons acoustics
150 tons torpedoes

Inclined armor belt, all or nothing ptotection