Potential Battlewagons of Bavaria

[Kaiser Kirk]

First- awww crud. I reposted #3 instead of including #4 for folks to look at. Bummer.
That's fixed now.

Interesting discussion, wandered off places I did not anticipate.

Oh, and sorry for the big bolded section in #2, typed [ /u] instead of [ /b] – fixed that as well.

I'll answer points raised in order of occurance.

1. Tech sources
French designs built in Bavarian yards have been small combatants and auxiliaries.
Beyond that, Iberian & Italian cruisers are well known.
In addition to the old Hapsburg base knowledge, Bavarian designers have up close knowledge of Dutch, ESC and RRC capital ship design.

Lastly specifications for frame and armor, as well as such things as attachment brackets, will have been received from the French, Iberians and Italians. 

2. Richmond treaty.
Given very little consideration. Ship sizes were the result of design parameters for that version.

Frankly the Bavarians would be shocked if the treaty foundered because they laid down a ship or two slightly over.  Would it really be worth a signatory busting the treaty because a 3rd rate power built a 42,100ton vessel or even just one of the 38,000? The Bavarians can gamble that it is not.  Though so far Bavaria's "public" stats report their ships as bigger and slower than in reality, so even a sub-Richmond design could 'seem' over.

Now, a widespread program to circumvent it...would probably cause repercussions. Bavaria can reasonable fit 1-2 BBs in a 15 year Naval cycle, nothing more.

As for Guinness's footnote – a landwar over a keel laying seems unlikely. 1 vs 1, France would decisively win...but the price to cross the Rhine and battle though the Black Forest would be stiff .

3. Minimum accepted values
Ahh there's the rub.  The Kurfurst III/De Minimus II/Mjollnir V are all near minimum standards. Mjollnir is probably the best representation of design goals on minimal tonnage.

Depending on the minimum speed, and if the secondary should be 12/15 or 18cm, vs. the question of 8 or 10 minimum main battery...or since the 33cm is smaller than most, perhaps 10-12 is the minimum ? Certainly compared to Hapsburg cacti.

4. Speed
Speed was a decided sticking point in the design parameters. I simply can't get a really fast and balanced ship with my propulsion limitations.  Failing that 22-23 knots keeps me abreast of the elder ESC units, and 25-26kts the newer. 26kts has the attractions of being faster than most existing dreadnaughts as well.



5. 18cm Secondary

The reasons for the 18cm choice was discussed in the long rambling. I think they would work...but not as well as the Bavarians expect.  So it's intended to be questionable flaw.

In this case, the intended foe ranges from volleys of HE vs. enemy Battleships, to independently smashing cruisers, to picking apart attacking DD flotillas at 18km. Further, some of the guns can be tasked with simply firing the range ladder so the opposing vessel can be constantly monitored.

ROF
The Russian 180mm/97.5kg is listed at 4 (practical) 6(max) rpm for the Mk-1-180 single, and 5 rpm for the M0-8/1-180 single open.

The RN's 7.5"/90.7kg is listed at 5-6rpm.

The German 17cm/62.8kg is listed at 5rpm

The USN Connecticut class 7"/74.8kg is listed at 4rpm

Point was made that these are likely high- agreed, most of the gunnery stats seem to be the "max" not and average or over duration.

I fully agree that after a short time- though I'd think 5 minutes +, ROF would slack by a round or two/min.  I presume loaders would work in teams with a loading tray, but the impression from reading is that guns in the 7-7.5" range were about the top end for hand working.

Rate of Train
USN 8" cruisers had issues with rate of train in close in nighttime battles in WWII.

The Hawkins 7.5" was slow to train

The Omaha's twin 6" – which weighed about what the Hawkins' 7.5" did- was I believe slow to train. Which is why I don't think all the twin 6" mounts are good ideas.

I don't think single 18cm guns would be prohibitively slow to train, they are lighter than those guns above. Further, the goal is to be shooting them at long ranges, not close in, where need is less.

Engagement Range
One of the strong points in favor- to me- is range.
At least with the older blunt nosed (0.7) shells I've modeled the Bavarians were using, range falls off quickly... though you get interesting deck penetrations as a result.

As outlined above, the 18cm can fire to the limits of Fire Control and torpedo ranges.
The 18cm will deliver a larger shell to a longer range with more energy and terminal effects faster than the 15cm.  Any hits will be substantially more effective in stopping a DD.

Some of the ships listed have 15cm or 12cm secondaries, most the 18cm.  Those vessels with huge #s of secondary guns mix casemented weapons and deck mount& hoists.

6. Range
It's not that the Bavarians need more than 8,000nm range.
It's that they want 6500nm on coal alone.
Usually they are 66% coal fired- which is a substantial weight cost.
9900nm x 66% = 6600nm

As for steaming speed- 14kts is my standard, rather not use 12.
As a practical matter, faster cruising speeds narrows the window a Sub must be in to gain position.

[Borys]

My feeling has always been for sustained rate of fire anything over 25kg/55 lbs for shell and powder is heavy and maintaining ROF is extremely hard back breaking labor.  So 12.7cm/5" guns in L50/54 are about the upper end.   

I adopted the 4,5" (114mm) fiftypounder for expressely this reason. The biggest thing used on destroyers. Combined case+shell
The 5,3" (135mm) gun - seventyfivepounder - is used as casematte secondary on larger ships for shooting at enemy destroyers. Separate case+shell
The 6" (152mm) gun - onehunderedponder - is used in single mounts or as casematte secondary.
Separate shell + case or bag (I'm not sure myself :)

All the above are manually trained and loaded.

The 7,5" (190mm) twohunderedpounder - twin turret&barbette on ACs.  Some mechanical assist to loading.


Borys

[Kaiser Kirk]

I've developed 12cm guns for the DDs and 15cm for my small cruisers. Those are available, and appear on some of the designs. They don't quite have the range or punch I want.

I'll point out that the ROF listed for 7" range guns by 4 different navies is remarkably similar. Only the data Navweaps lists for the Russian 18cm single notes a different maximum and practical.  If the practical 4rpm is valid for sustained, and the 6 is for burst, I'd take that.

[Sachmle]

I guess for comparisons sake what would be the "Total Steel in Air"(TSiA) for the batteries to compare. Seems 7-8 15cm guns can easily fit in the broadside of any BB, figure 5-6 18cm guns since they're larger. So the question becomes, at the practical sustained RoF, which set up puts more TSiA. Granted the 18cm will outrange the 15cm by quite a lot, but if you're only putting 1 shell in the air every 15sec per mount what are the % of hitting at those ranges outside the 15cm range?

[Kaiser Kirk]

Good question.

RN 6"/45 on the QEs was rated 5-7 rpm lobbing 45.36kg @30to an 17.1km range.
USN 6"/47 on the Eiries was rated 5-8 rpm lobbing 47.6kg @30 to an 18.1km range.
KM 15cm/45 on HSF were rated 5-7 rpm lobbing 45.3kg @27 to an 16.8km range.
Swede 15.2cm/50 were rated 3-4rpm and lobbed 46kg @ 30 to an 13.7km range.
IJN 15cm/50 were rated 10rpm theoretical, 5-6rpm practical, and lobbed 45.36kg @ 30 to a 19.5km range.

So most of these guns manage 5-7 rpm with an ave of 46kg.
Let's say 7 for first 5 minutes, 5 after that.
So say a 15 minute combat

8 guns x 7 x 5 = 280   x 46kg    = 12880kg
8 guns x 5 x 10 = 400 x 46kg   = 18400kg
         Total   = 31,280kg

Say 5 % hits = 14 rounds and 20 rounds for 644kg and 920kg.

So for the 18cm lets say 5 for the first 5, then 4 after that. Considering the Russian 6 max, 4 effective, acceptable.

8 guns x 5 x 5 =  200 x 85kg  =  17000kg
8 guns x 4 x 10 = 320 x 85kg  =  27200kg

Say 5% hits as well = 10 rounds and 16 rounds for 850kg and 1360kghat

Basically 50% more damage.

Plus, that damage is more impactive.

A GTB-1916 class DD has a survivability of 115kg. While a Z-10 takes 146kg and a Le Fantastique 237kg.
So a single 15cm round is 40% dam on the GTB-1916, 31.5% on a Z-10, and 19.4% on a Le Fantastique. I think more than one 15cm hit may be needed.

A single 18cm round is 74%, 58% and 36% respectively. I don't think more than one 18cm hit is needed, expect perhaps on the Le Fantastique.

Space per side : Generally, I was thinking a single 7" can fit where a single 6" can. Even length overall isn't that much greater, much less width. 7.5"/45 is 349" oa, 6"/45 is 279" oa, 50" or 4.2feet less- which can be explained by the additional barrel, not breech.
The physical dimensions are not that much greater.  Most of these vessels figure 8 per side, Where totals are >16, single mount & hoists are generally used on deck. The ships are similar to HMS Erin, just much wider , and most missing "Q" mount for more deck space.

[TexanCowboy]

3. Minimum accepted values
Ahh there's the rub.  The Kurfurst III/De Minimus II/Mjollnir V are all near minimum standards. Mjollnir is probably the best representation of design goals on minimal tonnage.

Depending on the minimum speed, and if the secondary should be 12/15 or 18cm, vs. the question of 8 or 10 minimum main battery...or since the 33cm is smaller than most, perhaps 10-12 is the minimum ? Certainly compared to Hapsburg cacti.

Compared to recent Hapsburg designs, that is. The majority of the current ships are about the same level, 8x13.5'', but without the speed present on the faster ships......that being said, the Agincourt clone is an exception.

That being said, I am in favor of the Dragoon. It heavily mirrors the GC Avenger, which means I get copyright fees ;), and it seems to be the most logical when considering operating together with the Netherlands and Baltic fleets.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Dragoon was included in the 3 sample ships posted (I've gone back and edited them into the page 4 post) because it was probably the best balanced fast design.

Knocks on Dragoon would be the UB is thin- though adequate against 6" at longer ranges. The Mainbelt is short, from -2.5m and raising to the 1st deck above WL, but not the 2nd deck.

The Seakeeping is merely adequate- which may mean the speed is not always available, and longer range shooting may suffer should she be operating outside the Med. I might be able to tinker with it for better results. Heck I should see what taking it up to 30,000 does.

And of course "only" 15cm secondaries, but thats part of the ongoing 18cm/15cm discussion I'm finding interesting. I really am inclined to believe the ability to reliably one-shot larger DDs at the edge of Torpedo ranges is probably "worth" any fall down in ROF. Not to mention the extension of usable penetration bands against CLs.

Overall, probably closer related to the OTL Mackensen in concept, but Hapsburg/Prussian/ESC ships were the ones looked at. Not GC.   FDG being closer to HMS Erin, and Wotan to IJN Hyunga.

But here's the thing - Wotan is 25% larger than Dragoon, with 50% more armanent, a taller belt, better UB, and 26kts. Tempting.

[TexanCowboy]

You could always try an odd mixed battery attempt. 8x33 cm, 8-12x18 cm in wing turrets, and 12-14x15 mm in casemates.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Actually, with the range bands, having the 15cm on deck and the 18cm in casements makes more sense. Considering fire control would be centralized, the mixing of shell sizes may not be as bad an issue as when seperate guns/batteries fired on shell splashes.

Still, just did some more work on the 18/15 issue.

Thinking a bit more, another look 18cm vs. 15cm.

Imagine a DD charging at 33 knots.
While the DD can launch from far out, Torpedo hit %s drop dramatically, so lets say it wants to get to 8,000 yards.

18cm with 0.7form shells can engage at 19,138yds for deck mounts, 16,404yrds for casement.

15cm with 0.7form shells can engage at 16,404yds for deck mounts, 13,670yds for casement.

Probably the first several volleys will be ranging shots 30 sec apart.
So say the first minute are simply 2 volleys for either.
Then Rapid fire for up to 5 min 5 vs 7, then practical rate of say 3 for 18cm and 5 for 15cm.

Which means the deck/casement mix can be useful if only to have the deck guns fire the initial ranging shots.

Table presumes 4 deck, 16 casement guns, 5% acc at range, 10% at <75% range

Minute	range	18cm hits	15cm hits
1	19,138	0.2	n/a
1.3	17,837	0.2	n/a
1.6	16,536	2	n/a
2	15,235	2	0.2
2.3	13,934	2	2
2.6	12,633	3	2
3	11,332	3	5
3.3	10,031	3	5
3.6	8,730	3	5
--	Totals	18.8	18.8

Results ... Well the burst rate of the guns covered most of the engagement range, making the long term fall down of the 18cm not so much the issue.  I expected the 18cm would have more hits than happened due to the longer range at higher %, but I do think the hits would be more conclusive. With 1-2x15cm hits needed depending on DD and luck, but generally 1x18cm should wreck the DD.

[ctwaterman]

hmmm interesting comparisons... but at longer range you would be firing less shells if you wanted to adjust for firecontrol....

Its and interesting proposition because the 127mm and under guns need to wait a few minuets before opening fire and the 180mm guns could alreday be ranging at 1 to 2 rounds per min and then jump to 6 when a straddle was first achieved.

Its a valid point and without hindsight we dont know what outcome would be the best.

[Kaiser Kirk]

The results weren't quite as I expected.

That slower ROF at long range is represented by the 4-gun ranging volleys with the 0.2 hits line.   Actually I see I only did 1 ranging volley for the 15cm, not two as intended, accidentally favoring it. For the 18cm I only allowed for 2 ranging volleys and more might be needed. However both the 15cm and 18cm sets of guns have to go through the same sequence so it should not matter greatly in the comparison.

Overall, I thought the DD would close slower, so the additional range would have a greater effect- which didn't happen. Also the short closing time meant that you never got beyond the first 5 minutes where ROF might start to slack, and so the 15cm lost some of it's advantage, being able to rapid fire for fewer volleys.  

The flip side of that is that a longer combat at range might involve shell flight times such that neither the 15cm nor the 18cm would be firing at max, rather volleys every 20-30secs, and the additional ROF of the 15cm could be lost entirely.

Setting Accuracy at 5/10% against DDs gave me pause, but if I halve it, with 9 hits... it favors the larger shell as I'm more inclined towards 9 18cm hits capacity to stop onrushing DDs/CLs than 9 15cm hits.

Still, overall the lack of a definitive result either way makes me inclined to persist in utilizing the oversized secondary.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Well the home computer is back up and running, so I can use Springsharp again.

Votes / Comments on the various vessels ran as follows :

Dragoon and De Minimus
De Minimus I or Lillehammer for me... while I would vote for Ritter
Could I suggest, KK, the standard BB speed - 21-22kts -
 I vote for Wotan

Looks like 22kts is the minimum speed, so start there. Seems 66% is the average coal % so I'd go with that. Even in support of your Leipzig partners range isn't a big concern, 6500-7500@~12kts should do. For armor I'd go 35cm belt, 15cm UB, 10cm deck, and 5cm TDS (+). Then fit in 10x33cm and 8x9cm and as many 15cm secondaries as there is room for. I'm guessing it should come in between 28,000 and 30,000 tons.

One of the designs with 8-10 13" guns, and 4,7-5,9" guns. 26 knots is enough.
I don't like the 7,1" secondaries.

Main guns are generally 8-10 in number

The 18cm secondaries I've looked into further, and they may indeed be a folly, but they pencil out well and lacking combat experience thats what I'll go with.

So speeds advocated range from 21, 22, 26, 27, 28.25, but generally the 26-28.25 bracket.

Sizes were generally for the <35,000 ton vessels, typically <30,000

So -
<35,000
26kts
8-10 x 33cm
16-28 x 18cm
8-12 x 9cm
35cm MB
15cm UB
10cm AD
5cm TD(+)

The desired weaponry, armor and speed tends to push the size up. Ships like Dragoon had light 120mm secondaries short belts and not (+) in an effort to keep displacement down. Overall the armanent and armor requirements on top of the speed result in larger vessels.

Overall, I can manage heavily gunned & armored, but 22-23 knt vessels <30,000,  but I loose that when I start pushing the speed up. Between the engine tech and the need for coal, speed is very costly.

Of the vessels posted, the following come pretty close. 





Wotan
35,490t
12x33cm, 24x18cm, 12x9cm
35cm MB, 12cm UP, 100cm D, 4cm TDS (+)
26kts, 66%, 9990nm

Wotan is posted on the first page of this thread

Stalwart
34,690t
8x330mm, 16x180mm, 12x90mm
350mm MB, 75mm UB, 98mm Deck, 50mm TDS (+)
26.25 knts, 66% coal, 9900nm range

These are at 26 knots, have the (+) TDS, and good weaponry. Wotan uses more tricks to allow the heavier armament.

Stalwart, Bavaria Battleship laid down 1920 (Engine 1916)

Displacement:
   34,690 t light; 36,701 t standard; 40,701 t normal; 43,902 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   719.33 ft / 708.66 ft x 101.21 ft x 30.84 ft (normal load)
   219.25 m / 216.00 m x 30.85 m  x 9.40 m

Armament:
      8 - 12.99" / 330 mm guns (4x2 guns), 1,322.77lbs / 600.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
      16 - 7.09" / 180 mm guns in single mounts, 187.39lbs / 85.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in casemate mounts
     on side, evenly spread
     16 guns in hull casemates - Limited use in heavy seas
      12 - 3.54" / 90.0 mm guns in single mounts, 22.24lbs / 10.09kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side ends, evenly spread, 4 raised mounts - superfiring
      8 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns in single mounts, 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread
   Weight of broadside 13,860 lbs / 6,287 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 150
   5 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm submerged torpedo tubes

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   13.8" / 350 mm   395.01 ft / 120.40 m   18.83 ft / 5.74 m
   Ends:   2.95" / 75 mm   313.62 ft / 95.59 m   18.83 ft / 5.74 m
   Upper:   2.95" / 75 mm   395.01 ft / 120.40 m   8.01 ft / 2.44 m
     Main Belt covers 86 % of normal length

   - Torpedo Bulkhead:
      1.97" / 50 mm   395.01 ft / 120.40 m   38.94 ft / 11.87 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   15.7" / 400 mm   9.84" / 250 mm      13.8" / 350 mm
   2nd:   2.95" / 75 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   3rd:   0.98" / 25 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   4th:   0.39" / 10 mm         -               -

   - Armour deck: 3.86" / 98 mm, Conning tower: 13.78" / 350 mm

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 94,746 shp / 70,680 Kw = 26.25 kts
   Range 9,900nm at 14.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 7,200 tons (66% coal)

Complement:
   1,432 - 1,862

Cost:
   £7.065 million / $28.262 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 1,487 tons, 3.7 %
   Armour: 14,321 tons, 35.2 %
      - Belts: 5,668 tons, 13.9 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 1,120 tons, 2.8 %
      - Armament: 3,281 tons, 8.1 %
      - Armour Deck: 3,900 tons, 9.6 %
      - Conning Tower: 351 tons, 0.9 %
   Machinery: 3,755 tons, 9.2 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 14,026 tons, 34.5 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 6,011 tons, 14.8 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 1,100 tons, 2.7 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     66,083 lbs / 29,975 Kg = 60.3 x 13.0 " / 330 mm shells or 10.3 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.12
   Metacentric height 6.3 ft / 1.9 m
   Roll period: 16.9 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.68
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.40

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak
   Block coefficient: 0.644
   Length to Beam Ratio: 7.00 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 26.62 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 50 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: -6.56 ft / -2.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      29.30 ft / 8.93 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   28.61 ft / 8.72 m
      - Mid (65 %):      28.61 ft / 8.72 m (18.64 ft / 5.68 m aft of break)
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   18.64 ft / 5.68 m
      - Stern:      18.64 ft / 5.68 m
      - Average freeboard:   25.17 ft / 7.67 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 80.2 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 185.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 54,645 Square feet or 5,077 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 117 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 181 lbs/sq ft or 883 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.96
      - Longitudinal: 1.46
      - 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

Stalwart III
35.000
10x330mm, 20x180mm, 8x90mm
350mm MB, 150mm UB, 110mm Deck, 50mm TDS (+)
24.25 knts, 66% coal, 9970nm range

Trading a bit of speed for 20% more firepower.

Stalwart III, Bavaria, Battleship,  laid down 1920 (Engine 1916)

Displacement:
   35,000 t light; 37,006 t standard; 41,142 t normal; 44,451 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   721.54 ft / 715.22 ft x 101.21 ft x 30.84 ft (normal load)
   219.92 m / 218.00 m x 30.85 m  x 9.40 m

Armament:
      10 - 12.99" / 330 mm guns (5x2 guns), 1,322.77lbs / 600.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, majority forward, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
      12 - 7.09" / 180 mm guns in single mounts, 187.39lbs / 85.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in casemate mounts
     on side, evenly spread
     12 guns in hull casemates - Limited use in heavy seas
      8 - 7.09" / 180 mm guns in single mounts, 187.39lbs / 85.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side ends, evenly spread, 4 raised mounts - superfiring
      8 - 3.54" / 90.0 mm guns in single mounts, 22.05lbs / 10.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
      8 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns in single mounts, 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1920 Model
     Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
   Weight of broadside 17,164 lbs / 7,786 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 120
   5 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm submerged torpedo tubes

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   13.8" / 350 mm   395.01 ft / 120.40 m   18.83 ft / 5.74 m
   Ends:   2.95" / 75 mm   320.18 ft / 97.59 m   18.83 ft / 5.74 m
   Upper:   5.91" / 150 mm   395.01 ft / 120.40 m   8.01 ft / 2.44 m
     Main Belt covers 85 % of normal length

   - Torpedo Bulkhead:
      1.97" / 50 mm   395.01 ft / 120.40 m   38.94 ft / 11.87 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   15.7" / 400 mm   9.84" / 250 mm      13.8" / 350 mm
   2nd:   5.91" / 150 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   3rd:   0.98" / 25 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   4th:   0.39" / 10 mm         -               -

   - Armour deck: 4.33" / 110 mm, Conning tower: 13.78" / 350 mm

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 69,920 shp / 52,160 Kw = 24.25 kts
   Range 10,176nm at 14.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 7,445 tons (66% coal)

Complement:
   1,443 - 1,877

Cost:
   £7.464 million / $29.857 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 1,839 tons, 4.5 %
   Armour: 15,571 tons, 37.8 %
      - Belts: 6,105 tons, 14.8 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 1,120 tons, 2.7 %
      - Armament: 3,569 tons, 8.7 %
      - Armour Deck: 4,423 tons, 10.7 %
      - Conning Tower: 354 tons, 0.9 %
   Machinery: 2,771 tons, 6.7 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 13,518 tons, 32.9 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 6,142 tons, 14.9 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 1,300 tons, 3.2 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     59,069 lbs / 26,793 Kg = 53.9 x 13.0 " / 330 mm shells or 10.0 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
   Metacentric height 6.1 ft / 1.9 m
   Roll period: 17.3 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.62
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.30

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has raised forecastle
   Block coefficient: 0.645
   Length to Beam Ratio: 7.07 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 26.74 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 46 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 54
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 15.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: -6.56 ft / -2.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      23.56 ft / 7.18 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   21.92 ft / 6.68 m (18.64 ft / 5.68 m aft of break)
      - Mid (65 %):      18.64 ft / 5.68 m
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   18.64 ft / 5.68 m
      - Stern:      21.92 ft / 6.68 m
      - Average freeboard:   19.67 ft / 6.00 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 77.6 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 135.8 %
   Waterplane Area: 55,201 Square feet or 5,128 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 111 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 181 lbs/sq ft or 882 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.99
      - Longitudinal: 1.10
      - 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

Tiw
34.800
8x330mm, 28x180mm, 8x90mm
350mm MB, 150mm UB, 110mm Deck, 50mm TDS (+)
24.00 knts, 66% coal, 9966nm range

Then last, but not least, an attempt towards a heavily survivable battleship, rated for up to 13 torpedo hits.

Tiw, Bavaria Battleship laid down 1920 (Engine 1916)

Displacement:
   34,791 t light; 36,825 t standard; 40,931 t normal; 44,215 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   716.51 ft / 702.10 ft x 114.83 ft x 26.25 ft (normal load)
   218.39 m / 214.00 m x 35.00 m  x 8.00 m

Armament:
      8 - 12.99" / 330 mm guns (4x2 guns), 1,322.77lbs / 600.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
      16 - 7.09" / 180 mm guns in single mounts, 187.39lbs / 85.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in casemate mounts
     on side, evenly spread
     16 guns in hull casemates - Limited use in heavy seas
      12 - 7.09" / 180 mm guns in single mounts, 187.39lbs / 85.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side ends, evenly spread, 4 raised mounts - superfiring
      8 - 3.54" / 90.0 mm guns in single mounts, 22.05lbs / 10.00kg shells, 1920 Model
     Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
      8 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns in single mounts, 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1920 Model
     Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
   Weight of broadside 16,018 lbs / 7,266 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 130
   5 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm submerged torpedo tubes

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   13.8" / 350 mm   456.36 ft / 139.10 m   14.93 ft / 4.55 m
   Ends:   2.95" / 75 mm   245.70 ft / 74.89 m   14.93 ft / 4.55 m
   Upper:   5.91" / 150 mm   456.36 ft / 139.10 m   8.01 ft / 2.44 m
     Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length

   - Torpedo Bulkhead:
      1.97" / 50 mm   456.36 ft / 139.10 m   32.12 ft / 9.79 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   15.7" / 400 mm   10.2" / 260 mm      13.0" / 330 mm
   2nd:   5.91" / 150 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   3rd:   2.95" / 75 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   4th:   0.98" / 25 mm         -               -
   5th:   0.39" / 10 mm         -               -

   - Armour deck: 4.33" / 110 mm, Conning tower: 13.78" / 350 mm

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 70,740 shp / 52,772 Kw = 24.00 kts
   Range 9,966nm at 14.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 7,391 tons (60% coal)

Complement:
   1,438 - 1,870

Cost:
   £7.262 million / $29.046 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 1,743 tons, 4.3 %
   Armour: 15,082 tons, 36.8 %
      - Belts: 5,506 tons, 13.5 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 1,068 tons, 2.6 %
      - Armament: 3,084 tons, 7.5 %
      - Armour Deck: 5,071 tons, 12.4 %
      - Conning Tower: 353 tons, 0.9 %
   Machinery: 2,788 tons, 6.8 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 14,179 tons, 34.6 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 6,139 tons, 15.0 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 1,000 tons, 2.4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     68,762 lbs / 31,190 Kg = 62.7 x 13.0 " / 330 mm shells or 12.9 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.24
   Metacentric height 9.1 ft / 2.8 m
   Roll period: 16.0 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.34
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.20

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has raised forecastle, rise forward of midbreak
   Block coefficient: 0.677
   Length to Beam Ratio: 6.11 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 26.50 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 47 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 15.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      29.30 ft / 8.93 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   24.38 ft / 7.43 m (22.74 ft / 6.93 m aft of break)
      - Mid (52 %):      22.74 ft / 6.93 m (14.73 ft / 4.49 m aft of break)
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   14.73 ft / 4.49 m
      - Stern:      16.37 ft / 4.99 m
      - Average freeboard:   19.74 ft / 6.02 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 72.9 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 156.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 63,298 Square feet or 5,881 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 115 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 180 lbs/sq ft or 876 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.99
      - Longitudinal: 1.05
      - 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

[mentat]

  I still think Wotan - very strong firepower, good protection + survivability, good speed - a nice powerful BB ....