And now for something post war.
To tell the truth I don't need it and it would require developing new 11" gun specificlly for it , but then Im known for taking irrational decisions.
IC The reason for it, is Schanhort's cruise. So NS needs a dedicated large raider. Armor is only needed to defeat 6" shells, and the 11" guns provide heavier firepower than the 9" at a lower cost than the 12" guns. Torpedoes are provided to sink merchants if need be. The speed is sufficient to run away from anything she can't defeat. While the misc weight includes 2 Marine platoons.
OOC I saw this one and decided it was a must have! :P
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1231&start=90&mforum=warshipprojects
Interceptor, New Switzerland Raider laid down 1910 (engine 1912)
Displacement:
12,000 t light; 12,743 t standard; 16,549 t normal; 19,594 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
590.00 ft / 590.00 ft x 72.00 ft x 27.00 ft (normal load)
179.83 m / 179.83 m x 21.95 m x 8.23 m
Armament:
8 - 11.00" / 279 mm guns (4x2 guns), 650.00lbs / 294.84kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 1 raised mount - superfiring
12 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
8 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (4x2 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.89kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 5,600 lbs / 2,540 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 130
6 - 19.7" / 500.38 mm above water torpedoes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 320.00 ft / 97.54 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 83 % of normal length
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 7.00" / 178 mm 4.00" / 102 mm 7.00" / 178 mm
- Armour deck: 2.00" / 51 mm, Conning tower: 7.00" / 178 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 60,089 shp / 44,826 Kw = 27.00 kts
Range 15,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 6,851 tons
Complement:
729 - 948
Cost:
£1.356 million / $5.426 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 715 tons, 4.3 %
Armour: 2,695 tons, 16.3 %
- Belts: 562 tons, 3.4 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 983 tons, 5.9 %
- Armour Deck: 1,052 tons, 6.4 %
- Conning Tower: 98 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 2,396 tons, 14.5 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 6,053 tons, 36.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 4,549 tons, 27.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 140 tons, 0.8 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
20,692 lbs / 9,386 Kg = 31.1 x 11.0 " / 279 mm shells or 2.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.11
Metacentric height 3.7 ft / 1.1 m
Roll period: 15.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.78
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.24
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0.505
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.19 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 24.29 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 51 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 57
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Mid (40 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Quarterdeck (25 %): 15.00 ft / 4.57 m (19.00 ft / 5.79 m before break)
- Stern: 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Average freeboard: 18.40 ft / 5.61 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 81.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 129.1 %
Waterplane Area: 28,433 Square feet or 2,641 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 124 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 137 lbs/sq ft or 671 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.55
- 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
The Bluechers Swamphen wants to build has a very good chance defeating her. Better armor, and a 9.4" that would be sufficient to deal with this ship. And they are not slower either. Nevermind that cruisers with 6" guns can sink her with end hits.
The Bluchers don't have an imunity zone vs Interceptor's guns either and Interceptor will probably hit earlier and better due to 4x2 11" vs 2x3 9.4", and at longer ranges I has better deck armor. Also I can mantain its slightly higher top speed for much longer periods of time.
The real problem with such a ships is that she is very vulnerable to older ACs, even 20cm shells could penetrate that belt at combat distances. These are the ships most likely being put on escort missions.
Also as the belt cover so little of the waterline, and is so shallow, se would be extremely vulnerable to light cruisers as well. Deck armour is not that important, 5cm is enough to stop splinters, but it can be cracked by HE shells. In fact is a gun dual with a ships such as this, shooting HE makes allot of sense.
What about Scharnhorst's cruise has caused New Switzerland to need one? From what I've read so far, Scharnhorst hasn't really done anything of strategic import...
Schanhorts has been pretty ineffective for the money, but then NS is pretty illogical. Older ACs dont have the FC to hit her at longer ranges, while she can stand back and blast them. She's a lot like the Pocket Battleships and Graf Spee did manage to hold her own against 3 cruisers at Montevideo.
The 3 cruisers left, and Graf Spee still is in Monte Video....
I won't call cutting all NS communications to the East ineffective. Your commerce will be affected by the slowing down in business communication - even the part that is maintained by foreign vessels.
Graf Spee managed to get knocked out by three cheap and weak cruisers, the type of which she was supposed to fight.
Graf Spee sunk herself after rumors of Renown of Montevideo where spread, in fact she was the least damaged of the 4 combatants and could have escaped. She was lost due to misinformation not to battle damage.
A well-armored 8" cruiser could have done better than AGS.
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on July 05, 2007, 03:51:49 PM
From what I've read so far, Scharnhorst hasn't really done anything of strategic import...
Heretic! Blasphemer! Burn him!!
;D
I think the major issue the Swiss have with S (& G) is that there's nothing in the Pacific that has a practical chance at killing them.
Scharnhorst has shown his heels to Swiss torpedo-boats, and when they
do manage to get into range, they get massacred.
While the rest of his operations after Palau haven't, perhaps, been of significant significance*, the psychological effects - partuculary of completely getting away with bombarding the Swiss Home Islands! - are going to cast a long shadow over the Swiss.
* - This sentence purchased and paid for by the Department of Redundancy Department.
My remark about graf Spee still stands. Even if she was undamaged, the result of the misinformation would have brought the same result.
In effect, the wireless was mightier than the gun.
I've never seen an action were the Spee survives if the British press the attack. At least one British Cruiser, maybe two get sunk, but the Spee doesn't leave. There are just too many targets for the Spee to handle effectively.
N-verse Scharnhorst has a slightly better chance, as she have more turrets, better armor, and plently of secondaries that would likely be effective against a light cruiser. But even then, her chances aren't that good.
Swampy, S has been very lucky, a wrong move and she would already be underwater. There is something in the Pacific that can kill her.
BTW I have not lost a single Torpedo Boat to her guns, someone has, I havent. ;)
Mainly because your Turbina commanders are smart enough to back off under a hail of fire.
If Scharnhorst has been effective at disrupting Swiss trade, I'd expect to see some impact on the Swiss budget in 1908.
I'd be curious to know what the Swiss battlecruisers are up to, as I've not even seen them named in a battle report so far.
QuoteMainly because your Turbina commanders are smart enough to back off under a hail of fire.
Unlike some of my other commanders. *grumble, grumble*
Rocky, if you only knew how close those BCs have come to battle, it's scary.
QuoteHeretic! Blasphemer! Burn him!!
The Holy Iron Chain Knights would glady help you out with that. :)
QuoteThere is something in the Pacific that can kill her.
Yes, I have seen it and it is mine! Mine!!!!! ;D
(Remember March 20, 1901?
http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=459.0 )
QuoteMainly because your Turbina commanders are smart enough to back off under a hail of fire.
More likely way before that (and not because they were smart)...
The infamous
Sir Robin Maneuver. :D
The Brave New Swiss ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
They bravely turned their tails and fled.
Yes, brave New Swiss, they turned about
And gallantly they chickened out.
Bravely taking to their feet
They beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, the New Swiss!;D
lyrics taken from http://www.stmoroky.com/sirrobin/song.htm
Quote from: Walter on July 06, 2007, 07:53:28 AM
QuoteThere is something in the Pacific that can kill her.
Yes, I have seen it and it is mine! Mine!!!!! ;D
(Remember March 20, 1901?
http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=459.0 )
(And don't forget this either:
http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=457.0 ) ;D
Couldn't find that bit right away. I wasn't sure how to look for it with the search option.
Arrgh...speak up, I can't hear you!
I said...
Couldn't find that bit right away!!! I wasn't sure how to look for it with the search option!!!
That's better.
AAAAAAAAAAAAh; my eyes My EYES
Getting back on topic,
Different version, fits in Type 2 Dock, 10" instead of 11", full armor belt, less deck armor, coal and oil fired (coal bunkers behind belt), 600 tons lighter. For an extra 1,000 tons I can fit in 11" guns, but then I would have to develop them increasing the overall cost.
As for the Pocket Battleships, they have been much malingned, but one of them the Admiral Scheer holds the All Time Record for Tonnage Sunk by a Surface Warship.
Interceptor, New Switzerland Raider laid down 1912
Displacement:
11,400 t light; 12,025 t standard; 16,432 t normal; 19,957 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
557.00 ft / 557.00 ft x 70.00 ft x 29.50 ft (normal load)
169.77 m / 169.77 m x 21.34 m x 8.99 m
Armament:
8 - 10.00" / 254 mm guns (4x2 guns), 500.00lbs / 226.80kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 1 raised mount - superfiring
14 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
8 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (4x2 guns), 2.00lbs / 0.91kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 4,464 lbs / 2,025 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 116
6 - 19.7" / 500.38 mm above water torpedoes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 557.00 ft / 169.77 m 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 154 % of normal length
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 7.00" / 178 mm 4.00" / 102 mm 7.00" / 178 mm
- Armour deck: 1.57" / 40 mm, Conning tower: 7.00" / 178 mm
Machinery:
Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 61,222 shp / 45,672 Kw = 27.00 kts
Range 15,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 7,933 tons (50% coal)
Complement:
725 - 943
Cost:
£1.226 million / $4.903 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 558 tons, 3.4 %
Armour: 2,718 tons, 16.5 %
- Belts: 989 tons, 6.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 877 tons, 5.3 %
- Armour Deck: 755 tons, 4.6 %
- Conning Tower: 97 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 2,557 tons, 15.6 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,417 tons, 33.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,031 tons, 30.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 150 tons, 0.9 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
20,635 lbs / 9,360 Kg = 41.3 x 10.0 " / 254 mm shells or 2.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.11
Metacentric height 3.5 ft / 1.1 m
Roll period: 15.6 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.68
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.21
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0.500
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.96 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23.60 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 59
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Mid (40 %): 19.00 ft / 5.79 m
- Quarterdeck (25 %): 15.00 ft / 4.57 m (19.00 ft / 5.79 m before break)
- Stern: 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Average freeboard: 18.40 ft / 5.61 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 77.8 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 117.6 %
Waterplane Area: 25,978 Square feet or 2,413 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 132 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 129 lbs/sq ft or 631 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.94
- Longitudinal: 1.80
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily
Hi DesertFox,
After much Panzerschiff studies, I think that 280mm guns are too heavy for a 12000T cruiser raider (Panzerschiff)
I agree with your choice, 254 or 260mm are enought & you can increase the protection & /or the speed.
Jef
Hello,
I always liked the 'Pocket' BBs. Clever idea. For the purpose 8" would have probably sufficed.
Too bad SS can't cope with Diesel Engine advantages and disadvantages(ie no difference- same goes for Electric/Geared Propulsion)
Quote from: Desertfox on July 08, 2007, 06:23:47 PM
As for the Pocket Battleships, they have been much malingned, but one of them the Admiral Scheer holds the All Time Record for Tonnage Sunk by a Surface Warship.
Which arguably could also had been achieved with handworked deck 15cm guns :)
Borys
Actually not as Scheer did run into an AMC, and you can't beat an AMC with a single 6" gun.
Reviving an old topic, here is the updated version:
Mainly more speed.
Interceptor, New Switzerland Raider laid down 1916
Displacement:
12,700 t light; 13,311 t standard; 16,543 t normal; 19,129 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
557.00 ft / 557.00 ft x 70.00 ft x 29.70 ft (normal load)
169.77 m / 169.77 m x 21.34 m x 9.05 m
Armament:
8 - 10.00" / 254 mm guns (4x2 guns), 500.00lbs / 226.80kg shells, 1916 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 1 raised mount - superfiring
14 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1916 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
8 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (4x2 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.88kg shells, 1916 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 4,464 lbs / 2,025 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 110
6 - 19.7" / 500.38 mm above water torpedoes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 557.00 ft / 169.77 m 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 154 % of normal length
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 7.00" / 178 mm 4.00" / 102 mm 7.00" / 178 mm
- Armour deck: 1.70" / 43 mm, Conning tower: 7.00" / 178 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 94,064 shp / 70,171 Kw = 30.00 kts
Range 15,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 5,818 tons
Complement:
729 - 948
Cost:
£2.297 million / $9.189 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 558 tons, 3.4 %
Armour: 2,841 tons, 17.2 %
- Belts: 989 tons, 6.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 937 tons, 5.7 %
- Armour Deck: 817 tons, 4.9 %
- Conning Tower: 98 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 3,505 tons, 21.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,656 tons, 34.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,843 tons, 23.2 %
Miscellaneous weights: 140 tons, 0.8 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
17,826 lbs / 8,086 Kg = 35.7 x 10.0 " / 254 mm shells or 1.9 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.13
Metacentric height 3.7 ft / 1.1 m
Roll period: 15.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 51 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.63
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.00
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0.500
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.96 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23.60 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 51
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 27.00 ft / 8.23 m
- Forecastle (25 %): 21.00 ft / 6.40 m
- Mid (40 %): 21.00 ft / 6.40 m
- Quarterdeck (25 %): 15.00 ft / 4.57 m (21.00 ft / 6.40 m before break)
- Stern: 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Average freeboard: 20.10 ft / 6.13 m
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 95.4 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 129.2 %
Waterplane Area: 25,978 Square feet or 2,413 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 114 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 132 lbs/sq ft or 644 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.92
- Longitudinal: 1.95
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Rough idea of how she would look (and the ship that inspired this idea):
(http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/5401/1021798el2.jpg)
That is one of Jeftg's many awesome models.
I like her Foxy,
However she is an updated all or nothing design just a bit lighter and faster then the 2 Italian AC 1913 designs which are currently in the water. Using the 1912 Engine Tech I could only squeeze 27+ Knots out of slightly less then 14K ton hull. Both have 8 x 10" guns.
I think she need at least 1,5-2m higher main belt as there is a difference of more then 1m between normal and full load, this will result in parts of the main belt becoming submerged if running at high speed.
I also find the lack of fire control worrying.
Alos, if following the model, should not two turrets be raised?
That's agressive. Then, what about the Swiss isn't. :D
How say " terrific " in Swiss language ?
QuoteI also find the lack of fire control worrying.
QuoteMiscellaneous weights: 140 tons, 0.8 %
Maybe the fire control exist. Orthey are the munitions stores ?
Quote from: ciders on August 26, 2009, 04:07:50 AM
How say " terrific " in Swiss language ?
QuoteI also find the lack of fire control worrying.
QuoteMiscellaneous weights: 140 tons, 0.8 %
Maybe the fire control exist. Orthey are the munitions stores ?
The FC weigth 250 tons for barbarette mounts, so the ship is at least 110 tons short to get the FC she needs.
OK. So no fire control. For an " interceptor ", who must firing quick and precisely... That can raise ( big ) problem.