Parthian vessels 1916 onwards

[Kaiser Kirk]

Ok,
So I'm planning on laying down the escort cruiser and the 1143t fleet destroyer in 1919.0.

I also want to reconstruct the Mus-Sag Torpedo Boat carriers.
At 23 years old, they need work or scrapping.
It's tempting to reconstruct them as ...Torpedo boat carriers.  The utility of launching 48 MTBs seems high.
But...progress.

The basic hull is tubby, and without centerline weapons.
They were originally designed with their weapons in casements along the sides, and interior space for the torpedo boats, workshops and crew.

Based on waterplane, they can carry 14 aircraft

While applying the new Aviation Ship rules, I found we did not follow though on trimming the air groups on reconstructions. Should we?

Math

Baseline cost of Refurbishment : $1.4988
7.494*0.2

The value of installing turbogenerators to allow Turbine use was unclear, so upgrading the reciprocating from simple to complex seemed a better choice. However, it turns out Turbogenerators are cheaper.

Old Engine : 2,196
Old Bunker : 1,467

Before adding superstructure,
At 23.25 knots,seakeeping is 1.51, while
which can be achieved at 25,484 shp.

With the new superstructure, 2.00 is achieved, which may
be excessive seakeeping.

As the vessel is expected to operate in close support to the core of the fleet, this is viewed as acceptable speed.
The there is room to push the vessel to 24 or even 25 knots, for more expense and unclear value.

With Turbo-electric generators linked to turbines, that takes
995 tons of turbines, and 249t of turbogenerators.
That would cost 0.995+.249BP and (0.995*2 + 0.249) = $2.239

Fuel is converted from coal to oil.
1,454/2000= 0.727

Original Hull weight : 3,566
A superstructure is added ...which
changes nothing. Odd.

180mm guns are replaced,
60mm guns are removed and
90mm guns added.
This adds 89+152t = 244t.
Cost : 0.244 BP, $0.288

Airgroup :
Waterplane Area : 1696
Seaplane Carrier : /120
= 14.33
Twin Engine  Seaplanes = 110 each
14x 110 = 1540t (see below)

Functional Miscellaneous Wt
249t - Turbogenerator (paid above)
140t - Torpedo Nets
24t  -  Fire Control
25t  -  LR Radio
8t    - CO2 compressor AC
14*110 = 1540t Airgroup & Supplies, splite Above/below water

Cost : BP1.737 + $1.737

Sub totals
0.0    + $1.8735
1.224 + $2.239
0        + $0.727
0.244  + $0.488
1.737  + $1.737
total
3.29+ $7.23

Removed Equipment
12 x 60L50 QF
8x 180L40 BL
8 x TB-IV ( to be deployed somewhere)


Time :
7.5 months * .25 = 2 months + (3.29BP/2) 1.65  months = 3.65 months total.

Mus-sag, Parthian Torpedo Boat Carrier R1919 laid down 1894 (Engine 1919)

Displacement:
   7,470 t light; 7,830 t standard; 8,638 t normal; 9,285 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (464.54 ft / 459.32 ft) x 52.49 ft x (19.69 / 20.92 ft)
   (141.59 m / 140.00 m) x 16.00 m  x (6.00 / 6.38 m)

Armament:
      8 - 7.09" / 180 mm 44.0 cal guns - 187.39lbs / 85.00kg shells, 200 per gun
     Breech loading guns in casemate mounts, 1911 Model
     8 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
      8 - 3.54" / 90.0 mm 50.0 cal guns - 24.25lbs / 11.00kg shells, 200 per gun
     Anti-air guns in deck mounts, 1911 Model
     4 x 2-gun mounts on side ends, evenly spread
      4 double raised mounts
      Weight of broadside 1,693 lbs / 768 kg

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   1.97" / 50 mm   305.12 ft / 93.00 m   9.84 ft / 3.00 m
   Ends:   1.97" / 50 mm   154.17 ft / 46.99 m   8.20 ft / 2.50 m
   Upper:   1.97" / 50 mm   301.84 ft / 92.00 m   8.01 ft / 2.44 m
     Main Belt covers 102 % of normal length

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   1.97" / 50 mm         -               -

   - Armoured deck - single deck:
   For and Aft decks: 0.98" / 25 mm
   Forecastle: 0.79" / 20 mm  Quarter deck: 0.79" / 20 mm

   - Conning towers: Forward 1.97" / 50 mm, Aft 0.00" / 0 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 2 shafts, 25,484 shp / 19,011 Kw = 23.25 kts
   Range 6,900nm at 14.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 1,454 tons

Complement:
   447 - 582

Cost:
   £0.463 million / $1.852 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 241 tons, 2.8 %
      - Guns: 241 tons, 2.8 %
   Armour: 912 tons, 10.6 %
      - Belts: 539 tons, 6.2 %
      - Armament: 33 tons, 0.4 %
      - Armour Deck: 322 tons, 3.7 %
      - Conning Tower: 18 tons, 0.2 %
   Machinery: 905 tons, 10.5 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,517 tons, 40.7 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,169 tons, 13.5 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 1,895 tons, 21.9 %
      - Hull below water: 1,118 tons
      - Hull above water: 728 tons
      - Above deck: 49 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     19,611 lbs / 8,895 Kg = 110.2 x 7.1 " / 180 mm shells or 2.3 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.22
   Metacentric height 2.7 ft / 0.8 m
   Roll period: 13.3 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.47
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 2.00

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has low forecastle, low quarterdeck ,
     a normal bow and a cruiser stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.637 / 0.644
   Length to Beam Ratio: 8.75 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 21.43 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 52 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 25
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 12.00 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 %,  24.57 ft / 7.49 m,  24.57 ft / 7.49 m
      - Forward deck:   30.00 %,  29.53 ft / 9.00 m,  29.53 ft / 9.00 m
      - Aft deck:   35.00 %,  29.53 ft / 9.00 m,  29.53 ft / 9.00 m
      - Quarter deck:   15.00 %,  16.57 ft / 5.05 m,  16.57 ft / 5.05 m
      - Average freeboard:      26.59 ft / 8.11 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 67.6 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 229.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 18,251 Square feet or 1,696 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 162 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 95 lbs/sq ft or 466 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.94
      - Longitudinal: 5.62
      - Overall: 1.12
   Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Excellent accommodation and workspace room
   Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

[The Rock Doctor]

I could see one as a test-bed, but four conversions that're a quarter-century old, I'm not sure about. 

The scrap value of these ships and the refurb costs would probably add up to ~2/3 or more of the BP cost of a similar-sized new-build.

But setting that aside, the end-product is still a useful vessel.

[Kaiser Kirk]

I think you have a point.
I don't expect to get another 25 year out of them.
So it's not a greatly efficient concept in some ways.

I could try a version with the old engines.
The original has close to 1800 Misc wt dedicated to the Torpedo boats, extra fuel, munitions, berthing-
again why it's a candidate for conversion.
....
but I think even novice aviators could forsee the issues with heavy coal smoke
around your air ops.

So, how do embers from a stack mix with doped canvas covered wooden planes?
...with oil and gas ?

Costwise, I'm BP limited, but with $.
'Storyline' says I need operational experience with aircraft
at sea, and so I'm looking at converting these to both
serve as a stopgap, and also get 'storyline' experience.

That way no one will think my angled-deck supercarrier in 1920.0 is odd.

I'm thinking of converting 2-4 to the Seaplane carriers,
and perhaps using 1 as a Airplane carrier test bed,
and another as a rebuilt TBC after I get 1912 DD tech.  That can use the old engines.

Basically that will cost me ~19 BP / $38 but give me 4 scouting platforms - 2 main fleet, 1 Pacific, 1 Atlantic,
plus an experimental carrier.

Building new, I'd be at  45BP / $45 for the same vessels.  They would last longer.

I do not have a long term build plan, this turn I have 7 BP spare,
I am guessing I can budget that per turn going forward.

So at that rate I could convert all Six in 3 HY, and have all in service 1920.5
or build 6 new in...7 HY, and have all in service in 1922.5

[Jefgte]

1894...too old => scrap

Byzance rebuild 10 - 15 yo ships not 25 yo ship.

[The Rock Doctor]

There's nothing odd about a 1920 supercarrier as you will soon see.

I think there's sense in using one as your experimental CV test-bed, and maybe a couple as stop-gap CVS. 

[TacCovert4]

I'd tend to agree.  Take one with the original engines and make it your carrier test bed.  Add in say 100t of 'trunking' to move the funnels to the side and able to be swiveled down so the embers don't become a problem for your planes.

[Kaiser Kirk]

1894...too old => scrap

Byzance rebuild 10 - 15 yo ships not 25 yo ship.

Practically speaking, there is some merit to that.
The metallurgy and construction ability of the 1894 period was substantially different.
Those considerations....and budget...are leading me to reconsider rebuilding the Bucephalus class.

However, Reconstruction/Refurbishment are deliberately designed to replace worn things and extend their service life.
Considering ships like Schliesen (1908-1945),  General Belgrano (1934-1982) and Goeben (1911-1950/73) were in service for much longer years, it's doable.

I think somewhere there is a 25 (20?) year life written down for ships.
I would think Reconstruction / Refurbishment would add another 10-12 years to that, but no more.
That would put the rebuilt vessels in the realm of the ships above.






I did find one list of service life by type.

With my preference for complicating things, I would like to have ship usable life by Archtype.

There's a Royal Navy list on maintenance costs I found in a post while researching carrier costs.
It also has "Type Lifes"
BBs - 26yrs
Cruisers - 23.5yrs
Carriers - 20 years
DD - 22
Sub - 14   - on subs I had long ago come across '12' as their useful life.
Quite simply, on a surface warship, having minor equipment failures, or sprung seams, can be machinery in need of repair or leaks.
For subs, it may mean not returning to the surface...so 'safe' sub life was shorter.
Worse, subs took alot of expensive well trained engineers, and specialty parts, so costs were high. Not to mention torpedoes were actually pricey.
Factors like that are why the French considered a submarine-focused fleet...and decided not to.


Same source allowed me to estimate relative maintenance costs by archtype
BB : 100%
CV + Airgroup : 300%
C    :  200%
DD :  250%
SS  :  450%

[Kaiser Kirk]

I'd tend to agree.  Take one with the original engines and make it your carrier test bed.  Add in say 100t of 'trunking' to move the funnels to the side and able to be swiveled down so the embers don't become a problem for your planes.

I'm torn on that.
On the one hand you have ships like Eagle which only made 24knots, or Langley at 15.5, or even the purpose built Hermes at 25kts.
Those lightweight biplanes with their tiny wing loadings didn't really need much speed.

So I could get by with the old 19knot engines..... 
but ancient coal fired simple reciprocating...is just so dated they scream for replacement, not refurbishment.
And I really think the coal smoke and embers would be recognized as a flight/fire hazard even for an experimental carrier.

So I'll probably spring for the new engine.  The base hull can make 27kts with 1.0 seakeeping, but 25 is the limit for "good seaboat".
That's also right in the range of those early carriers, so either the 23.25 of the seaplane or 25 seems appropriate for that
experimental carrier.

[TacCovert4]

Makes sense.

Vis a Vis the 20-25 year lifespan.  This was baked in to a lot of countries via their budgeting.  The RN in particular liked to note a 20 year lifespan for ships in order to ensure that they'd have a replacement/supplementary ship being budgeted for in a reasonable amount of time.

[The Rock Doctor]

It's certainly reasonable to assume the refurb will add to the lifespan.  It's also easier to extend the life of non-frontline warships, such as an experimental carrier.  Not as much work needed to make it useful, not as much need to make it competitive.

[TacCovert4]

Agreed.  Absent a complete sea change in technology that wholly outdates the concept behind the ship, you can get at least 30 if not 40 years out of a hull.  Look at modern vessels for one.  And look at the BBs/BCs for another, you had 35 year old battleships still kicking around in 1945 and still able to provide adequate service if no longer perfectly suited to true front-line duties.  30 year old BBs and BCs were still front-line combatants in 1945 though.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Another 1894 ship I am considering refurbishing is the old Bucephalus class.
Named for famous warhorses, it was the first Parthian Armored Cruiser.
I built new guns for it in 1911-1912...but didn't do the 1913 refurb planned.

Age is a consideration, and unlike the seaplane carriers, this would be a combatant.
Sometimes having the ship there is more important than having the best ship there.
A refurbished vessel can kill protected cruisers, keep away from most larger Byzantine vessels in service.

Anyhow, at 4 BP/Each, the concept is attractive to me,
but curious if others think it's just a waste.

While it can not beat a new 9000 ton vessel...
Basically, for 4BP, the ship can likely defeat any surface ship that costs 4...or 6 BP new.

Refurbishing all 4 would take 16 BP and $40 - not cheap, and they actually have significant scrap value.
But if I was going to build new, it would likely be one of my 12-13,000ton 'Light Armored Cruiser' designs, which are more capable.
But 4 of those would cost 52 BP and $52.

Cost :
Refurbishment : 20% 8.993 = $1.7986
Guns : 794t :  0.794 BP   $1.588
Engine : 2403t : 2.403 BP  $4.806
Bunker : 2186t : $1.093
Functional Misc Wt : 860t : 0.86 BP $0.86
Total : 4.057 BP , $10.15

Time : 8.8+9=17.8 *.25 =  4.456 +2= 6.456mo

Buchephalus R1920, Parthia Armored Cruiser laid down 1894 (Engine 1920)

Displacement:
   8,824 t light; 9,427 t standard; 10,708 t normal; 11,732 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (488.85 ft / 482.28 ft) x 59.06 ft x (24.28 / 26.10 ft)
   (149.00 m / 147.00 m) x 18.00 m  x (7.40 / 7.95 m)

Armament:
      4 - 9.06" / 230 mm 44.0 cal guns - 385.81lbs / 175.00kg shells, 138 per gun
     Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1899 Model
     2 x Twin mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      12 - 6.50" / 165 mm 43.0 cal guns - 143.30lbs / 65.00kg shells, 250 per gun
     Quick firing guns in casemate mounts, 1899 Model
     12 x Single mounts on side ends, evenly spread
      8 hull mounts in casemates- Limited use in heavy seas
      8 - 3.54" / 90.0 mm 50.0 cal guns - 24.25lbs / 11.00kg shells, 300 per gun
     Anti-air guns in deck mounts, 1904 Model
     4 x 2-gun mounts on side ends, evenly spread
      4 double raised mounts
      Weight of broadside 3,457 lbs / 1,568 kg

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   4.72" / 120 mm   356.89 ft / 108.78 m   10.47 ft / 3.19 m
   Ends:   Unarmoured
   Upper:   3.94" / 100 mm   356.89 ft / 108.78 m   8.20 ft / 2.50 m
     Main Belt covers 114 % of normal length

   - Hull void:
      0.00" / 0 mm     0.00 ft / 0.00 m   0.00 ft / 0.00 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   5.51" / 140 mm   3.94" / 100 mm      4.72" / 120 mm
   2nd:   3.94" / 100 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm

   - Protected deck - single deck:
   For and Aft decks: 1.18" / 30 mm
   Forecastle: 1.18" / 30 mm  Quarter deck: 1.18" / 30 mm

   - Conning towers: Forward 3.94" / 100 mm, Aft 0.00" / 0 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 58,595 shp / 43,712 Kw = 28.00 kts
   Range 7,400nm at 16.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 2,305 tons

Complement:
   526 - 684

Cost:
   £0.812 million / $3.249 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 618 tons, 5.8 %
      - Guns: 618 tons, 5.8 %
   Armour: 2,033 tons, 19.0 %
      - Belts: 1,194 tons, 11.2 %
      - Armament: 363 tons, 3.4 %
      - Armour Deck: 435 tons, 4.1 %
      - Conning Tower: 41 tons, 0.4 %
   Machinery: 2,049 tons, 19.1 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,164 tons, 29.5 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,884 tons, 17.6 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 960 tons, 9.0 %
      - Hull below water: 696 tons
      - Hull void weights: 100 tons
      - On freeboard deck: 77 tons
      - Above deck: 87 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     12,607 lbs / 5,719 Kg = 34.0 x 9.1 " / 230 mm shells or 1.7 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.28
   Metacentric height 3.5 ft / 1.1 m
   Roll period: 13.2 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 50 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.47
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 0.99

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak,
     a ram bow and a cruiser stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.542 / 0.552
   Length to Beam Ratio: 8.17 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 21.96 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 59 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): -15.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: -6.56 ft / -2.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   13.00 %,  24.57 ft / 7.49 m,  21.95 ft / 6.69 m
      - Forward deck:   27.00 %,  21.95 ft / 6.69 m,  21.95 ft / 6.69 m
      - Aft deck:   47.00 %,  13.75 ft / 4.19 m,  13.75 ft / 4.19 m
      - Quarter deck:   13.00 %,  13.75 ft / 4.19 m,  13.75 ft / 4.19 m
      - Average freeboard:      17.16 ft / 5.23 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 90.4 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 119.6 %
   Waterplane Area: 19,728 Square feet or 1,833 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 117 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 110 lbs/sq ft or 538 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.93
      - Longitudinal: 1.85
      - Overall: 1.00
   Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Adequate accommodation and workspace room
   Poor seaboat, wet and uncomfortable, reduced performance in heavy weather

Considered for 1920 Refurbishment.
Planned in 1913, it kept being delayed.
However the 230L44 guns developed then are still
available.

T2 240L40 : 200t
T2 230L44 : 200t

Old Engines : 3114
Old Bunker : 2189
Old Main Mag : 118g

Armanent
New guns : 413t w armor. Barbette armor unchanged.
New main mag : 118g
New 2nd guns : 301t
- adding a new set of deck level casements
in superstructure
80t Old casement armor retained, +41t new armor for new deck-level casements
New 3rd guns 90AA : 39t

Engines
New Turbines : 28kts : 2403t + 602 turbogen
New bunker 7000nm @ 16kts : 2186ts

Trim : unchanged.



Misc Wt :
50t  Reserve wt

62t   FC
25t   LR Radio

  9t   CO2 Compressor AC
18t   2TT3 21" amidships
50t  2x Kite Balloon


36t  2 sets torpedo reloads
147 Torpedo Nets
513 Turbogenerators

[Kaiser Kirk]

So this refurbishment costs about the same as the last one.

Again, the Parthians are basically looking at this as a 'cost' of ~4.5BP,
and ship that can operate in support of more modern ones, or fill a provincial station.

I'd rather replace it with one of the CDBBs I've put up from time to time,
but those cost 16-19BP.... I may still build one, but I don't see even starting it for several years,
so it won't actually be in service until the mid1920s. 
I want something to plug that gap.

Apparently the BP I spent on Land Points and Deployment points is not useful in naval combat :)

The old corned powder 345L35 guns hurl a hefty shell, at miserably low velocity.

In 1911 the Parthians had completed 2 generations of gun research. Newer weapons could withstand much higher internal pressures and did not belch clouds of smoke. designed a new gun that could be used in the Rohk class and also upgrade the Tortoise class's guns. The improved velocity meant the 300L41.5 was a better penetrator than the preceeding guns.


345L35 Twin : 313t
300L41.5 : 262t


refurb :
old main magazine : 265 / 181
old engine : 1878
old bunker : 1735

Refurbishment base cost : 2.2798


Armanent and Machinery
New Main Guns : 524
New Secondary Guns : 302
New AA Guns : 78
New Sentry MGs : 1
New Engine : 774
----
1.679bp, $3.358


New Bunker : 1728
-----
1728/2000 = $0.864

New Turret Armor : 217
New AA shields : 1
Replace Armor decks with 35mm Upper deck, 80mm main armor deck : 1.696
----
1.914 , $1.914

Functional Misc Wt : 750t
0.750 BP,  $0.750

Total : 4.343 BP, $ 9.166

92t - FC
25t - LR Radio

25t - Hulesmeyer device
25t - War Tuba
25t - Additional Night fighting
50t - 2x Kite Balloons
125t - Flag Bridge

11t - CO2 compressor AC
25t - Additional Fire Suppression
5t - Paravanes

108t - Torpedo Nets
194t - TurboGenerators
25t - Additional Pumps
15t - Enhanced Hydrophones

Tortoise, Parthia Predreadnaught laid down 1897 (Engine 1920)

Displacement:
   11,371 t light; 12,129 t standard; 13,090 t normal; 13,858 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
   (360.89 ft / 354.33 ft) x 85.30 ft x (24.61 / 25.80 ft)
   (110.00 m / 108.00 m) x 26.00 m  x (7.50 / 7.87 m)

Armament:
      4 - 11.81" / 300 mm 41.5 cal guns - 870.83lbs / 395.00kg shells, 137 per gun
     Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1889 Model
     2 x Twin mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      12 - 7.09" / 180 mm 44.0 cal guns - 187.39lbs / 85.00kg shells, 145 per gun
     Breech loading guns in casemate mounts, 1911 Model
     10 x Single mounts on sides, forward evenly spread
      4 hull mounts in casemates- Limited use in all but light seas
     2 x Single mounts on sides, aft deck centre
      2 hull mounts in casemates- Limited use in all but light seas
      12 - 3.54" / 90.0 mm 50.0 cal guns - 24.25lbs / 11.00kg shells, 300 per gun
     Anti-air guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1911 Model
     2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 raised mounts - superfiring
     4 x 2-gun mounts on side ends, evenly spread
      16 - 0.59" / 15.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 0.11lbs / 0.05kg shells, 1,500 per gun
     Machine guns in deck mounts, 1897 Model
     4 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
      4 double raised mounts
      Weight of broadside 6,025 lbs / 2,733 kg

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   12.6" / 320 mm   212.60 ft / 64.80 m   9.84 ft / 3.00 m
   Ends:   3.94" / 100 mm   141.70 ft / 43.19 m   9.84 ft / 3.00 m
   Upper:   8.27" / 210 mm   212.60 ft / 64.80 m   8.20 ft / 2.50 m
     Main Belt covers 92 % of normal length

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   12.8" / 325 mm   6.50" / 165 mm      12.6" / 320 mm
   2nd:   8.27" / 210 mm   0.98" / 25 mm      0.98" / 25 mm
   3rd:   0.24" / 6 mm         -               -

   - Protected deck - multiple decks:
   For and Aft decks: 4.53" / 115 mm
   Forecastle: 1.38" / 35 mm  Quarter deck: 3.15" / 80 mm

   - Conning towers: Forward 12.60" / 320 mm, Aft 0.00" / 0 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 22,133 shp / 16,511 Kw = 20.00 kts
   Range 6,100nm at 14.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 1,728 tons

Complement:
   611 - 795

Cost:
   £0.907 million / $3.626 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 912 tons, 7.0 %
      - Guns: 912 tons, 7.0 %
   Armour: 4,956 tons, 37.9 %
      - Belts: 2,184 tons, 16.7 %
      - Armament: 925 tons, 7.1 %
      - Armour Deck: 1,696 tons, 13.0 %
      - Conning Tower: 151 tons, 1.2 %
   Machinery: 774 tons, 5.9 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,980 tons, 30.4 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,718 tons, 13.1 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 750 tons, 5.7 %
      - Hull below water: 342 tons
      - Hull above water: 41 tons
      - On freeboard deck: 250 tons
      - Above deck: 117 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     26,139 lbs / 11,857 Kg = 31.7 x 11.8 " / 300 mm shells or 4.1 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.49
   Metacentric height 7.8 ft / 2.4 m
   Roll period: 12.8 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 53 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.22
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.05

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has a flush deck,
     a ram bow and a cruiser stern
   Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.616 / 0.622
   Length to Beam Ratio: 4.15 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 18.82 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 61 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): -15.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: -6.56 ft / -2.00 m
   Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
            Fore end,    Aft end
      - Forecastle:   20.00 %,  17.95 ft / 5.47 m,  16.31 ft / 4.97 m
      - Forward deck:   20.00 %,  16.31 ft / 4.97 m,  14.67 ft / 4.47 m
      - Aft deck:   40.00 %,  14.67 ft / 4.47 m,  14.67 ft / 4.47 m
      - Quarter deck:   20.00 %,  14.67 ft / 4.47 m,  16.31 ft / 4.97 m
      - Average freeboard:      15.45 ft / 4.71 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 52.9 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 104.5 %
   Waterplane Area: 22,438 Square feet or 2,085 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 118 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 148 lbs/sq ft or 723 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.97
      - Longitudinal: 3.17
      - Overall: 1.09
   Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
   Adequate accommodation and workspace room

[The Rock Doctor]

The cruiser...well, yeah, it would be a handful for any light cruiser, and many of those don't do more than 28 knots at this time.  I wonder if you'd be able to replace the twin 9" with triple 165s and whether that might be effective - would give a large, uniform anti-cruiser battery.

The PD is okay.

Think you're looking at the same basic question the rest of us are - where would you deploy these, what would they be facing?  If it's Jef's various reconstructions or NPC colonial hardware, it might be good value for money.

[Kaiser Kirk]

The cruiser...well, yeah, it would be a handful for any light cruiser, and many of those don't do more than 28 knots at this time.  I wonder if you'd be able to replace the twin 9" with triple 165s and whether that might be effective - would give a large, uniform anti-cruiser battery.

I hadn't considered that all.
I have the time.
... looks like I could actually fit a 4G 165mm.

The downside is with 165mm I need to be under ~11km to start punching holes in the belt of small cruisers - most folks run 75-100mm belts.
But Byzantine cruisers have those big 191mm guns, which could start hurting my ship at roughly the same range.
So I'd rather be able to hurt them from farther out.

While the 230mm can punch a hole out to...not sure, looks like 16-18km.
4 guns on a twin is not ideal. I would hope that the 165mm could be tasked with creating the range ladder for the 12-16.5km shots, allowing the 230
to fire for effect.

Fire Control note : In Seekrieg There's "Local RF" vs "Top Spot" / "DCT" for various fire control systems. They change in effectiveness over time.
So if you can't spot, you get less effective fire control.  So enough guns to spot = good.
There's also a mild penalty for multiple ships at the same target - that's what I apply for mixed main battery ships.
But the result should be better than no spotting bonus.


I figure it's fair to "peek" at ships that have been in service for 2-3 years.
So Jeftge's 1913 C5 class's 27knots would be roughly known. It might be 28, probably not 26...
So 28knots puts me in the right speed range, but no great superiority/inferiority.

The PD is okay.

Think you're looking at the same basic question the rest of us are - where would you deploy these, what would they be facing?  If it's Jef's various reconstructions or NPC colonial hardware, it might be good value for money.

Jefgte has specifically come up with some vessels that lessen the effectiveness of  Tortoise and Rohk (War Chariot) but they are few. The 9000tonner Fox was showing
off isn't built, and Parthia knows nothing about... but had sufficiently less armor that the two vessels may be vulnerable at about the same range. The NPCs, this would be a tough nut
and so good storyline reason for them not to "take advantage of Parthia being occupied elsewhere".

The primary use is expected to be to relieve 'First Line' units in the rear areas.  So hopefully what they would face would be units the foe is willing to risk far from repair bases.
The 300mm may not hit much, but can penetrate smaller cruisers out to the horizon 18km, and larger ones under ~14km, and a hit may be all it takes. Further, the splinter
size is enough for a upperhull hit to penetrate the armored decks and still wreck engines.

I need to check the ranges on the 180mm, but at max 22deg on casement, I think they should be able to serve to create the range ladder out to 18km,
so the 300mm could simply fire for effect. Not perfect but should help spotting in most cases.

Alternately they may be tied to close defense of an amphibious force
or, with the speed boosted to Parthian-standard 20knots, they could attach to the rear of the battleline late in a war,
While they don't have a TDS, the much much smaller engine means they have alot of internal room to seal off compartments for damage control/counterflooding,
so an 11,000 ton vessel that takes up to 4 torpedoes :)