IJN, Post-1900

[Logi]

When I think of a ~1905 scout cruiser, I think of something like this...   [...]   ... and not of this...

My thoughts on a scout cruiser's role. I don't imagine the scout cruiser as a sole operative which naturally would either sacrifice all armament and armor for higher and higher speeds or become very heavy, i.e. a battlecruiser.

For me, the scout cruiser is the leader of a destroyer division. It scouts as a group ahead of the rest of the battlegroup. However, since it is operates in the group, it should deal with other cruisers and destroyers (i.e. other such groups).

In manner I suppose the tinclad is closer to the Scout Armored Cruiser concept that snip mentions than probably what you have in mind when you say Scout Cruiser. That would explain the differences.

As you saw in my design, I was willing to sacrifice that very expensive knots of speed both over your design and historical designs you posted for much better armament and something, better armor.

[Walter]

Not going to reply to every bit and make this post miles long...

No, I'm trying to understand why naval shipbuilders did what they did because NO-ONE is ignorant. Everybody does what is the smartest thing to do at their time so there is no talk of "they were stupid".

To me ignorant =/= stupid which is kinda how your bit comes over. I realize that I blamed the wrong people though. It should be the politicians and the higher ups in the Navies and not the shipbuilders. Nah, lets just use KISS and blame the Politicians for all that. :)

To be honest I have never understood "hindsight" accusations because I have never thought in that fashion.

I never thought like that either, but I understood the reasoning behind the 'accusations' so adapted to things so they fit in better with what is acceptable for the time period.

To design, I always go through what the design goals are (in context to what the nation, if it were real, would want). These are never influenced by hindsight because the moment I start to design, I shunt out everything like that and focus only one what has been produced in the game. For example, the only ships I have open during a design are the ships of nations which are: considered a threat or are my neighbors. Of those I also limit to only ships that have been produced not in the designing phase. But obviously you simply have my word for it, so you can disregard it as me lying or something.

Considering what you said there and looking at those ships, I really see no reason to go for such a layout. So how should I interpret that bit you typed? I really feel that that ship can't be based on what others have...

Either ways, I never accused you of hindsightis.

No, others did and that made my thinking and way of simming ships different and made me think of what is acceptable for the time period and what is not (up to a certain point; as in, if you go on and build a ship like that, then so will I; I used the same argument with my e-subs over at Wesworld (and even then they did not like it)).

Don't start this shifty deflection game.

If you look at it that way, I'm sorry to say that in my opinion it started some posts ago and I did not start it...

If you have an issue, bring it up with my front and center, I will take it straight on and I won't hold it against you.

I already brought it up at the very beginning and I really feel that there is no need to repeat it over and over and over again with every single post I post. Once is more than enough.

That's certainly true. If there were 4x2 6" and 4x2 4" cruisers in the pre 1920, there would be a great deal of evidence with what I said.

Hell, I'll accept a destroyer if I have to...

There was the British Warrior class and Minotaur class cruisers from 1903 to 1905 had the same layout as the Dreadnought. The British Topaze class from 1905 also has a similar main battery format.

??? ... I really need to borrow those eyes that you are using that tell you that those layouts are the same... cause I absolutely do not see it.

The Americans built the St Louis cruiser in 1905 (design work started in 1900) and no more protected cruisers until the Pensacola (1928). Armored cruisers stopped with the Tennessee class in 1903 and until the Omaha in 1923.

I think you mix things up here. St. Louis is a protected cruiser which you link to the Pensacola which is a heavy cruiser and the Tennessee is an armored cruiser which you link to the Omaha which is a light cruiser.

The Germans stopped protected cruiser designs long before the time in question and ended on the last armored cruiser, Blucher in 1907.

The thing is, and I think you mentioned it before, the Armored Cruisers became Battle Cruisers so while not there in a sense they were still there. Just different.

I feel that in this bit you fail to mention that, just as the armored cruisers became battle cruisers, the protected cruiser kinda became the light cruiser. In the next bit regarding Japan, you do mention "protected/light cruiser", but here you seem to completely ignore the 11 classes of light cruisers built by the germans between 1897 and 1918. As a matter of fact, I find that the Germans are quite consistent with building the protected/light cruisers between 1890 and 1918, just like Britain was.

The warshipsww2 site has the 1896 Victoria Louise class as the last protected cruiser class, but when you look at the first light cruisers listed there, the 1897 Gazelle class, the 1902 Bremen class and 1905 Königsberg class are given as having no belt armor so they are still pretty much protected cruisers in my eyes even though they are listed as light cruisers (I guess it just depends on the person and how he defines the classes). Ships of the 1907 Dresden class and later all appear to have an armored belt.

The Japanese had their first superfiring gun in the Kongo-class (foreign, so more institutional latency). Japanese stopped their protected/light cruiser design with the Chikuma in 1907 until the Tenryu-Kuma-Nagara-Sendai series from 1915 to 1922 (Tenryu design was finalized before laying down for a few years) and then stopped again until the Agano in 1939. The last Japanese armored/heavy cruiser was the Kasuga in 1902 until the Furutaka in 1922.

I think that the gap between the Chikuma and Tenryu is not that bad. At least not as bad compared to the gap between the St. Louis and the Omaha...

While I have no real knowledge about it and could be quite wrong about it, the second gap between the Naka Class and the Mogami class (not Agano) could have been due to limits of the WNT but that is a real wild guess.

Now it is strange the Tenryu-Kuma-Nagara-Sendai series don't have superfiring since the British C-class series of cruisers started in 1913 so Tenryu should obviously have been aware of this.

When I look at the pictures of those ships, are the aft guns not superfiring? Well, technically the are not shooting over guns thus not really superfiring, but the pics do suggest that the aft mounts are at superfiring height. Or was this done later? (seems unlikely)

If you had some information about their thought processes, that would be great. I've got nothing. In general though, most nations stopped building cruisers before their first superfiring ship so there is a lack of evidence of cruisers in general, not just superfiring cruisers.

No ideas what those people of +100 years ago were thinking. Not enough info to start assuming things and what ifs.

What I do notice that it is Japan, France and the US that have noticeable gaps in their protected/light cruiser building whereas the Germans and the British are quite consisted in building them but that all kinda makes sense to me:
- Japan is too far off from the European conflict.
- US tried to remain neutral and stay out of the European conflict.
- France is in the conflict but would probably be focusing much more on the land war than the war at sea.
- Britain being Britain (i.e. the RN is the best so should remain that way in all aspects)
- Germany seeing Britain as the threat and trying to match her.
- Austrohunga-who?

What do you mean? Can you give an example of how you would modify the KJ6000 designs (heavily even) in a way that makes mission-oriented sense? I'm not asking sarcastically by the way.

Well for one, the 200mm guns are overkill considering what you have mentioned regarding your idea of the mission. As you stated in the next post, it is operating in a group with destroyers, and it should deal with other cruisers and destroyers (i.e. other such groups). But what are those other cruisers? Most likely protected cruisers which have no or barely any belt so I would think that the 152mm would be more than enough to deal with the opponents you expect to encounter even if they become a bit more armored. I feel that with a few minor tweaks both my Enter ship name and Snip's Morgantown can do exactly the same thing and are cheaper.

The thing is I made a general statement because for larger ships you'll never run into this issue.

I feel that that is a problem. As I said, the DDs and TBs have different sim rules compared to the bigger ships so you can't use it as a general statement when it does not really apply to like 1/3 of the ships that are around.

You can get more strength by shrinking the length and increasing the freeboard, BUT (and I left this part out to generalize) only to a certain point.

Hmmm... I think that that might be true is the speed is 0 but... *goes off to do some tests*

[Logi]

If you want to, I'll be on the IRC. Talking over so many points in forum posts without the ability to quickly clarify is not ideal. Just shout my name in there, I'll notice within an half-hour and we can start talking.

[Walter]

Well, I could but I would think that the others will not be able to witness any possible 'fistfight' that might occur. :)

Looking at altering the design means starting with the design and I started with the KJ5000, but for some reason I ended up with exactly the same design and an overall hullstrength of 0.99... ???

Also for both designs you have the quarterdeck break and the forecastle break at 25%. I usually consider those areas to be empty except for some gear, light MGs or AA guns and the cats, crane and plane aft. When comparing with your drawing, the forecastle point is just left of the front of the A turret barbette and the quarterdeck point is right between X an Y turret. Using the basic 15% aft and 20% forward makes more sense considering the deck armor coverage...

Unfortunately while playing around with your two cruiser designs, I came up with a couple of designs that I kinda like myself with some minor tweaking (especially the 27 knot cruiser) so I guess I will keep them for myself. :P

[Logi]

We could always post the logs. I'll post a version after some tweaking.

[Logi]

This seems like an overgrown destroyer. It is much less cramped compared to the Kaba with seakeeping, etc.

KJ2600-04, Japanese Light Cruiser laid down 1904 (Engine 1905)

Displacement:
   2,570 t light; 2,687 t standard; 2,999 t normal; 3,248 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (393.70 ft / 393.70 ft) x 33.46 ft x (16.77 / 17.78 ft)
   (120.00 m / 120.00 m) x 10.20 m  x (5.11 / 5.42 m)

Armament:
      6 - 5.98" / 152 mm 45.0 cal guns - 108.07lbs / 49.02kg shells, 150 per gun
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     4 x Single mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 raised mounts - superfiring
     2 x Single mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 double raised mounts
      8 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 0.53lbs / 0.24kg shells, 1,500 per gun
     Machine guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     4 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
      Weight of broadside 653 lbs / 296 kg

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 4 shafts, 20,000 shp / 14,920 Kw = 26.00 kts
   Range 4,000nm at 10.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 561 tons (90% coal)

Complement:
   202 - 263

Cost:
   £0.335 million / $1.340 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 98 tons, 3.3 %
      - Guns: 98 tons, 3.3 %
   Machinery: 1,528 tons, 51.0 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 908 tons, 30.3 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 429 tons, 14.3 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 36 tons, 1.2 %
      - On freeboard deck: 36 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     1,094 lbs / 496 Kg = 10.2 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 0.4 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.34
   Metacentric height 1.6 ft / 0.5 m
   Roll period: 11.0 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.62
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.20

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck,
     a normal bow and a cruiser stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.475 / 0.485
   Length to Beam Ratio: 11.76 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 19.84 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 52 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   20.00 %,  14.11 ft / 4.30 m,  11.81 ft / 3.60 m
      - Forward deck:   30.00 %,  11.81 ft / 3.60 m,  11.48 ft / 3.50 m
      - Aft deck:   35.00 %,  11.48 ft / 3.50 m,  11.48 ft / 3.50 m
      - Quarter deck:   15.00 %,  11.48 ft / 3.50 m,  11.48 ft / 3.50 m
      - Average freeboard:      11.78 ft / 3.59 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 175.2 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 93.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 8,586 Square feet or 798 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 83 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 60 lbs/sq ft or 295 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.95
      - Longitudinal: 1.47
      - Overall: 1.00
   Cramped machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Adequate accommodation and workspace room
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
   Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Misc Weight - 36t:
   25t - Long Range Wireless
   9t - 3 x 1 45cm TT rotating centerline, with 2 reloads each
   2t - Spare 45cm Torpedoes

[Tanthalas]

Damn, KJ2600-04 actually looks a lot like my City Class MK-3.  I personally gave up one knot of speed for a bit more range (and used a slightly different gun layout) but over all we ended up about the same place.

[snip]

I feel that even with Underway Recoaling, 4000nm@10knt is a bit short legged for a scout cruiser. Even if its meant to work with Destroyers, it has little margin for error. What do you have to sacrifice to give her 5000nm@10knt range?

[Logi]

Lose 40t light, 2t misc weight, and 50 rounds from the 152mm battery.

5000nm@10kn here is equiv to 485nm@26kn
4000nm@10kn was equiv to     379nm@26kn

For perspective:
Ho Chi Minh City (aka Saigon, Vietnam) to Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei is ~630nm
Manila, Philippines to Hong Kong, China is ~640nm
Incheon, Seoul, Korea to Beijing, China is ~440nm
Maizuru, Japan to Vladivostok, Russia is ~480nm

KJ2600-04, Japanese Light Cruiser laid down 1904 (Engine 1905)

Displacement:
   2,530 t light; 2,630 t standard; 3,024 t normal; 3,339 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (393.70 ft / 393.70 ft) x 32.81 ft x (18.14 / 19.48 ft)
   (120.00 m / 120.00 m) x 10.00 m  x (5.53 / 5.94 m)

Armament:
      6 - 5.98" / 152 mm 45.0 cal guns - 108.07lbs / 49.02kg shells, 100 per gun
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     6 x Single mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 raised mounts - superfiring
      8 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 0.53lbs / 0.24kg shells, 1,500 per gun
     Machine guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     4 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
      Weight of broadside 653 lbs / 296 kg

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 4 shafts, 19,999 shp / 14,919 Kw = 26.00 kts
   Range 5,000nm at 10.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 710 tons (90% coal)

Complement:
   203 - 265

Cost:
   £0.335 million / $1.338 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 98 tons, 3.2 %
      - Guns: 98 tons, 3.2 %
   Machinery: 1,535 tons, 50.8 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 863 tons, 28.5 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 494 tons, 16.3 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 34 tons, 1.1 %
      - On freeboard deck: 34 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     1,090 lbs / 494 Kg = 10.2 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 0.4 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.39
   Metacentric height 1.7 ft / 0.5 m
   Roll period: 10.7 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.45
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.20

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck,
     a normal bow and a cruiser stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.452 / 0.464
   Length to Beam Ratio: 12.00 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 19.84 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 51 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   20.00 %,  13.78 ft / 4.20 m,  11.48 ft / 3.50 m
      - Forward deck:   30.00 %,  11.48 ft / 3.50 m,  10.83 ft / 3.30 m
      - Aft deck:   35.00 %,  10.83 ft / 3.30 m,  10.83 ft / 3.30 m
      - Quarter deck:   15.00 %,  10.83 ft / 3.30 m,  10.83 ft / 3.30 m
      - Average freeboard:      11.24 ft / 3.43 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 173.9 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 85.0 %
   Waterplane Area: 8,250 Square feet or 766 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 83 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 59 lbs/sq ft or 286 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.95
      - Longitudinal: 1.46
      - Overall: 1.00
   Cramped machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Cramped accommodation and workspace room
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
   Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

Misc Weight - 34t:
   25t - Long Range Wireless
   9t - 3 x 1 45cm TT rotating centerline with 2 reloads

[Tanthalas]

with some tweaking you can get to around 8K@10 with a top end of 25 knots, which is more or less what I am intending

[Logi]

If I drop half a knot, I can get much better seakeeping qualities.

Some conning tower armor and gun shield armor is gained as well as 1 extra 152mm gun, but light tonnage increases by 270t.

KJ2600-04B, Japanese Light Cruiser laid down 1904 (Engine 1905)

Displacement:
   2,800 t light; 2,955 t standard; 3,374 t normal; 3,709 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (393.70 ft / 393.70 ft) x 33.79 ft x (19.03 / 20.39 ft)
   (120.00 m / 120.00 m) x 10.30 m  x (5.80 / 6.22 m)

Armament:
      7 - 5.98" / 152 mm 45.0 cal guns - 108.07lbs / 49.02kg shells, 200 per gun
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     5 x Single mounts on centreline, evenly spread
      2 raised mounts
     2 x Single mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 double raised mounts
      8 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 0.53lbs / 0.24kg shells, 1,500 per gun
     Machine guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     4 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
      Weight of broadside 761 lbs / 345 kg

Armour:
   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   0.98" / 25 mm         -               -

   - Conning towers: Forward 2.95" / 75 mm, Aft 0.00" / 0 mm

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 4 shafts, 19,992 shp / 14,914 Kw = 25.50 kts
   Range 5,000nm at 10.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 753 tons (90% coal)

Complement:
   220 - 287

Cost:
   £0.358 million / $1.432 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 114 tons, 3.4 %
      - Guns: 114 tons, 3.4 %
   Armour: 34 tons, 1.0 %
      - Armament: 19 tons, 0.6 %
      - Conning Tower: 14 tons, 0.4 %
   Machinery: 1,599 tons, 47.4 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 1,018 tons, 30.2 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 574 tons, 17.0 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 36 tons, 1.1 %
      - On freeboard deck: 36 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     1,387 lbs / 629 Kg = 12.9 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 0.4 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.34
   Metacentric height 1.7 ft / 0.5 m
   Roll period: 11.0 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.69
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.51

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck,
     a normal bow and a cruiser stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.466 / 0.478
   Length to Beam Ratio: 11.65 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 19.84 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 51 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 47
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   20.00 %,  15.09 ft / 4.60 m,  13.12 ft / 4.00 m
      - Forward deck:   30.00 %,  13.12 ft / 4.00 m,  12.80 ft / 3.90 m
      - Aft deck:   35.00 %,  12.80 ft / 3.90 m,  12.80 ft / 3.90 m
      - Quarter deck:   15.00 %,  12.80 ft / 3.90 m,  12.80 ft / 3.90 m
      - Average freeboard:      13.07 ft / 3.98 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 164.8 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 95.9 %
   Waterplane Area: 8,604 Square feet or 799 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 91 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 62 lbs/sq ft or 302 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.92
      - Longitudinal: 2.01
      - Overall: 1.00
   Cramped machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Adequate accommodation and workspace room
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
   Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Misc Weight - 34t:
   25t - Long Range Wireless
   9t - 3 x 1 45cm TT rotating centerline with 2 reloads
   2t - 2 x 45cm spare Torpedoes

[Logi]

Drop from 152mm to 140mm, replaced 25mm MGs with 50mm/45 gun.
Displacement dropped by 100t, range by 500nm, speed increased by 0.27kn

KJ2600-04C, Japanese Light Cruiser laid down 1904 (Engine 1905)

Displacement:
   2,700 t light; 2,833 t standard; 3,206 t normal; 3,505 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (393.70 ft / 393.70 ft) x 34.12 ft x (19.69 / 20.93 ft)
   (120.00 m / 120.00 m) x 10.40 m  x (6.00 / 6.38 m)

Armament:
      7 - 5.51" / 140 mm 50.0 cal guns - 83.78lbs / 38.00kg shells, 200 per gun
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     5 x Single mounts on centreline, evenly spread
      2 raised mounts
     2 x Single mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 double raised mounts
      4 - 1.97" / 50.0 mm 45.0 cal guns - 3.86lbs / 1.75kg shells, 400 per gun
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     4 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
      Weight of broadside 602 lbs / 273 kg

Armour:
   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   0.20" / 5 mm         -               -
   4th:   0.20" / 5 mm         -               -

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 4 shafts, 20,000 shp / 14,920 Kw = 25.77 kts
   Range 4,500nm at 10.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 672 tons (90% coal)

Complement:
   212 - 276

Cost:
   £0.348 million / $1.393 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 122 tons, 3.8 %
      - Guns: 122 tons, 3.8 %
   Armour: 5 tons, 0.2 %
      - Armament: 5 tons, 0.2 %
   Machinery: 1,574 tons, 49.1 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 965 tons, 30.1 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 506 tons, 15.8 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 34 tons, 1.1 %
      - On freeboard deck: 34 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     1,277 lbs / 579 Kg = 15.3 x 5.5 " / 140 mm shells or 0.4 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.40
   Metacentric height 1.8 ft / 0.5 m
   Roll period: 10.7 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.51
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.51

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck,
     a normal bow and a cruiser stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.424 / 0.436
   Length to Beam Ratio: 11.54 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 19.84 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 50 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 47
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   20.00 %,  13.45 ft / 4.10 m,  12.63 ft / 3.85 m
      - Forward deck:   30.00 %,  12.63 ft / 3.85 m,  12.63 ft / 3.85 m
      - Aft deck:   35.00 %,  12.63 ft / 3.85 m,  12.63 ft / 3.85 m
      - Quarter deck:   15.00 %,  12.63 ft / 3.85 m,  12.63 ft / 3.85 m
      - Average freeboard:      12.70 ft / 3.87 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 169.5 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 95.3 %
   Waterplane Area: 8,401 Square feet or 780 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 88 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 61 lbs/sq ft or 298 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.92
      - Longitudinal: 2.01
      - Overall: 1.00
   Cramped machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Adequate accommodation and workspace room
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
   Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Misc Weight - 34t:
   25t - Long Range Wireless
   9t - 3 x 1 45cm TT rotating centerline with 2 reloads

[Kaiser Kirk]

I'm a little concerned about 4 shafts being crammed in a space 10.4m wide.
at the very least there would be a fair bit of mutual interference, 
plus you're talking about the prop diameter being 2.5m at max, unless they are staggered along the hull, in which case they could be a decent size.
But, I've also seen references to ships not being wide enough for multiple props.

Lastly, I can't think of a class of warship that small with that many props, especially not repeated.
Doing some digging for period light cruisers.
The 1918 Tatsuta had 3 shafts on 12m, the Omahas had 4 shafts, but a beam of ~17m. The 1913 Arethusa class is also 120m, but wider at 12m and 2/3 the draft at 4.11m and frustratingly most web sources omit shafts, finally found one which said 2 shafts.

Ah Ha-  in your favor, the German 1907 Dresden did have 4 shafts, while Emden had two,  at a beam I would also have found curiously low...13.5m. Granted, that is 27% wider than your vessel, but it is at least close. Plus, she was followed by the Kolberg class, also with 4 shafts, on a 14m beam.

Overall, it appears this design is rather pushed-which is your choice-  your Beam is narrow, draft deeper, and L:B ratio higher than period vessels. Perhaps you plan on emulating the proud tradition of the interwar IJN and rapidly refit new warships to strengthen them ?

[Logi]

Oh right, that was an oversight. Let's pretend it's just a 2-prop for now. Only the shift from 2 to 1 prop and visa-versa influences the structural strength anyways.

The Type 7 and Type 7U destroyers are 10.2m with 2-props but they're late period ships and also significantly lighter. Going along the Russian ships though, the Novik (1911) was a 3-prop on 9.5m beam. Also, Novik (1900) aka Suzuya was 12.2m wide with a 3-prop. The following Izumrud-class cruiser was the same.

I don't believe the L:B ratio is particularly out of line along I do design ships with deeper drafts than normal. I did consider running the proud IJN tradition but this was not the design I intended it for.

[Logi]

I intended this as a follow-on. The reduction in speed and thus increase in displacement allowed a much more comfortable hull.

Kirk's design reminded me about the existence of mines so I decided to allocate some weight there as well.

KJ4200 - Tenryu, Japanese Light Cruiser laid down 1904 (Engine 1905)

Displacement:
   4,160 t light; 4,360 t standard; 4,812 t normal; 5,174 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (393.70 ft / 393.70 ft) x 46.59 ft x (20.34 / 21.42 ft)
   (120.00 m / 120.00 m) x 14.20 m  x (6.20 / 6.53 m)

Armament:
      4 - 7.87" / 200 mm 45.0 cal guns - 242.51lbs / 110.00kg shells, 100 per gun
     Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1904 Model
     2 x Twin mounts on centreline, evenly spread
      5 - 5.51" / 140 mm 55.0 cal guns - 83.78lbs / 38.00kg shells, 200 per gun
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     3 x Single mounts on centreline, evenly spread
      2 raised mounts
     2 x Single mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 raised mounts
      4 - 1.97" / 50.0 mm 45.0 cal guns - 3.86lbs / 1.75kg shells, 400 per gun
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     4 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
      Weight of broadside 1,404 lbs / 637 kg

Armour:
   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   7.87" / 200 mm   1.50" / 38 mm      1.97" / 50 mm
   2nd:   0.51" / 13 mm         -               -
   4th:   0.51" / 13 mm         -               -

   - Protected deck - single deck:
   For and Aft decks: 1.97" / 50 mm
   Forecastle: 1.97" / 50 mm  Quarter deck: 1.97" / 50 mm

Machinery:
   Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 4 shafts, 19,981 shp / 14,906 Kw = 24.00 kts
   Range 4,500nm at 10.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 813 tons (90% coal)

Complement:
   288 - 375

Cost:
   £0.495 million / $1.982 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 319 tons, 6.6 %
      - Guns: 319 tons, 6.6 %
   Armour: 532 tons, 11.1 %
      - Armament: 102 tons, 2.1 %
      - Armour Deck: 430 tons, 8.9 %
   Machinery: 1,646 tons, 34.2 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 1,599 tons, 33.2 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 652 tons, 13.5 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 63 tons, 1.3 %
      - Hull above water: 6 tons
      - On freeboard deck: 57 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     3,139 lbs / 1,424 Kg = 12.9 x 7.9 " / 200 mm shells or 0.7 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.25
   Metacentric height 2.4 ft / 0.7 m
   Roll period: 12.7 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.70
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.51

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck,
     a normal bow and a cruiser stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.451 / 0.461
   Length to Beam Ratio: 8.45 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 19.84 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 52 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 47
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   20.00 %,  18.37 ft / 5.60 m,  16.08 ft / 4.90 m
      - Forward deck:   30.00 %,  16.08 ft / 4.90 m,  15.75 ft / 4.80 m
      - Aft deck:   35.00 %,  15.75 ft / 4.80 m,  15.75 ft / 4.80 m
      - Quarter deck:   15.00 %,  15.75 ft / 4.80 m,  15.75 ft / 4.80 m
      - Average freeboard:      16.05 ft / 4.89 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 133.8 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 122.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 11,713 Square feet or 1,088 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 96 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 85 lbs/sq ft or 416 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.90
      - Longitudinal: 2.48
      - Overall: 1.00
   Cramped machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Excellent accommodation and workspace room
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
   Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Misc Weight - 57t:

On Freeboard Deck - 51t:
   25t - Long Range Wireless
   6t - 2 x 1 45cm TT rotating side (embedded in superstructure) with 2 reloads
   20t - Fantail as minedeck with 20 mines

Hull Above Water - 6t:
   6t - 2 x 1 45cm TT rotating side (embedded in hull) with 2 reloads

Waterplane coefficient is 0.639 and 14.2m is more than the Etna by far and should be enough to fit 20cm (7.87") twins in AY.