Orange Capital Ships - Old Thread

[Korpen]

Shooting without spotting might not be the best idea, as you can not correct for he fall. AFAIK.

One can, but it is tricky. The more normal thing to do is to go to rapid fire (shell fire before the one before have landed) as long as the target is straddled (with continuous corrections), and when it is judged that it is no longer straddle one stops rapid fire to get better spotting/correction until one get on the target again.

True, but how much spotting by splashes are you going to be doing for a gun you are firing at less than 5 degrees elevation? Even at 8000 yds, the 5"/51 is shooting at 4.2 degrees elevation with a 7.2 degree angle of fall (all per navweaps). Seems to me that spotting might still be less important there than with main armament calibers, right?

It is true that spotting is usually less important for secondaries, as they often fulfil the function of close in defence, at 50hm the flight time is usually less then a full boats length, even for 30kts DDs.


But the reason I went for all12cm gun on my ships have been noted, I can get almost twice as many 12cm guns for the same weight as I could get 15cm guns. 16 12cm gun or 8 15cm felt like an easy choice.
The fact that about every ship i am building now and its grandmother is armed with them also helps matters along... :)

[Borys]

However, a 12cm gun is close to useless against almost any sort of armour.

Borys

[Guinness]

However, a 12cm gun is close to useless against almost any sort of armour.

Borys

Probably true. Do capital ship secondaries really need to be effective against an armored opponent though?

This though is the reason why cruisers usually don't carry 12cm guns, which I think reinforces my idea that Cruiser primary armament and capital ship secondary armament necessarily has different requirements.

[Korpen]

However, a 12cm gun is close to useless against almost any sort of armour.

Borys

Well, a CPC/SAP from a 12cm gun could defeat 75mm armour out to about 6.5km. But granted that cruiser armour is likely to withstand hits in most situations over 5-6km. However that is still longer then torpedo attack range, and that is what the secondaries are for, preventing torpedo attacks for succeeding. 

[P3D]

One should get about the same shell weight on target for the given amount of armament weight at the same ROF. Another issue is space. One 6" mount does not take twice as much space than an 5" mount - then adding armor evens out some of the weight difference.
Now add spotting difficulties for these light shells - more pronounced for 5" than for 6".

ToF tables from NavWeaps.

5"/51 Time of flight for MV = 3,150 fps (960 mps)
   1,000 yards (910 m):  1.0 seconds
   5,000 yards (4,570 m):  6.2 seconds
   10,000 yards (9,140 m):   17.0 seconds
   16,000 yards (14,630 m):  36.3 seconds
   18,800 yards (17,190 m):  47.8 seconds

Time of flight for AAC projectile with MV = 2,500 fps (762 mps) (5"/38):
   5,000 yards (4,570 m):  8.0 seconds
   10,000 yards (9,140 m):  22.0 seconds
   15,000 yards (13,720 m):  43.0 seconds
   17,270 yards (15,790 m):  68.8 seconds

UK 6" shell 112lbs MV = 2,700 fps (823 mps)
  5,000 yards (4,570 m):  6.6 seconds
   10,000 yards (9,140 m): 15.9 seconds
   15,000 yards (13,720 m):  29.4 seconds
   20,000 yards (18,290 m):  47.2 seconds
   24,500 yards (22,400 m):  71.4 seconds

Time of flight for AP Shell (US 8"/55 260lbs) with MV = 2,800 fps (853 mps)
6,000 yards (5,490 m):  7.3 seconds
   10,000 yards (9,140 m): 13.4 seconds
   20,000 yards (18,290 m):  35.2 seconds
   30,000 yards (27,430 m):  70.6 seconds

[The Rock Doctor]

To each their own.  I like large numbers of 5.5", so I just make sure the hull is large enough to accommodate them. 

[Borys]

However, a 12cm gun is close to useless against almost any sort of armour.

Borys

Well, a CPC/SAP from a 12cm gun could defeat 75mm armour out to about 6.5km. But granted that cruiser armour is likely to withstand hits in most situations over 5-6km. However that is still longer then torpedo attack range, and that is what the secondaries are for, preventing torpedo attacks for succeeding. 

Too optimistic - the figures I see on Navweapons say 6500 YARDS, not metres, and Non Cemented armour at perpedicular impact. So I'd guess that at such range 2 inches of better armour wold be enough.
I'm with guiness here - the 5,3" is for battleship secondaries, or for small fleet cruisers. Trade cruisers need the 6" guns to fight armoured adversaries.

Borys

[Korpen]

Too optimistic - the figures I see on Navweapons say 6500 YARDS, not metres, and Non Cemented armour at perpedicular impact. So I'd guess that at such range 2 inches of better armour wold be enough.

Different guns, I used my own 12/50 with 28kg SAP shells (or the IRL Russian 12/50), which have about 18% more muzzle energy.  At 6,5 km the difference in impact energy is close to 50% greater for the L50 gun.

[Desertfox]

What if the attacker happens to be a well armored cruiser? There where several cases in the last war of cruisers conducting torpedo attacks including a sucesful one against a German battleship. Personally I prefer a mix of 6" and 4" guns. Hit 'em early, hit 'em, hard, and keep on hitting them. A 6" shell might be enough to stop a destroyer, a 5" well...

[P3D]

My next battleships that will be built will deserve their a new thread, this one got large enough. Some design studies would still go here.

A study on what could be done with all those nasty destroyer and cruiser flotillas during daylight. A scout cruiser with four quad 9.2" and capable of 31kts. The large size itself (similar tonnage to a battleship) warrants some TDS. Armor is AoN, to keep <9,2" shells out of the vitals.

As a note, with 5000t extra the ship can be armored against 14" shells (13" belt, barbettes and 3" deck).
As a comparison ship with 8-9x9.2" and thinner armor can be done on ~13-15000t. The 13000t one (armored against 6" only, with 8 guns) might be squeezed in a lvl 2 drydock.

Orange SC study laid down 1916

Displacement:
   22,500 t light; 24,004 t standard; 25,830 t normal; 27,291 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   720.29 ft / 715.00 ft x 89.00 ft x 28.00 ft (normal load)
   219.54 m / 217.93 m x 27.13 m  x 8.53 m

Armament:
      16 - 9.20" / 234 mm guns (4x4 guns), 389.34lbs / 176.60kg shells, 1916 Model
     Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
     on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
      20 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns (10x2 guns), 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1916 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, all amidships
      4 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns in single mounts, 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1916 Model
     Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts with hoists
     on side, evenly spread
      4 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns in single mounts, 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1916 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread
      8 - 0.36" / 9.2 mm guns in single mounts, 0.02lbs / 0.01kg shells, 1916 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts
     on side, evenly spread
   Weight of broadside 6,926 lbs / 3,141 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 250
   16 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
   - Belts:      Width (max)   Length (avg)      Height (avg)
   Main:   7.00" / 178 mm   540.00 ft / 164.59 m   14.00 ft / 4.27 m
   Ends:   Unarmoured
     Main Belt covers 116 % of normal length

   - Torpedo Bulkhead:
      1.50" / 38 mm   540.00 ft / 164.59 m   27.00 ft / 8.23 m

   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   9.00" / 229 mm   4.00" / 102 mm      7.00" / 178 mm
   2nd:   2.00" / 51 mm   1.00" / 25 mm      1.00" / 25 mm
   3rd:         -            -         1.00" / 25 mm

   - Armour deck: 2.50" / 64 mm, Conning tower: 7.00" / 178 mm

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Electric motors, 4 shafts, 127,950 shp / 95,451 Kw = 31.00 kts
   Range 10,000nm at 12.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 3,288 tons

Complement:
   1,018 - 1,324

Cost:
   £3.571 million / $14.283 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 866 tons, 3.4 %
   Armour: 6,441 tons, 24.9 %
      - Belts: 2,187 tons, 8.5 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 809 tons, 3.1 %
      - Armament: 1,339 tons, 5.2 %
      - Armour Deck: 1,974 tons, 7.6 %
      - Conning Tower: 132 tons, 0.5 %
   Machinery: 4,767 tons, 18.5 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 10,026 tons, 38.8 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,330 tons, 12.9 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 400 tons, 1.5 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     31,941 lbs / 14,488 Kg = 82.0 x 9.2 " / 234 mm shells or 4.4 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.11
   Metacentric height 5.1 ft / 1.6 m
   Roll period: 16.5 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.58
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.20

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak
   Block coefficient: 0.507
   Length to Beam Ratio: 8.03 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 26.74 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 58
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 10.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      30.00 ft / 9.14 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   26.00 ft / 7.92 m
      - Mid (65 %):      26.00 ft / 7.92 m (18.00 ft / 5.49 m aft of break)
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   18.00 ft / 5.49 m
      - Stern:      18.00 ft / 5.49 m
      - Average freeboard:   23.52 ft / 7.17 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 115.5 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 155.4 %
   Waterplane Area: 42,686 Square feet or 3,966 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 111 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 157 lbs/sq ft or 769 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.96
      - Longitudinal: 1.37
      - Overall: 1.00
   Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
   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 Rock Doctor]

Well, she'd be a problem for the small fry - what if they're accompanied by something larger?

Oh, and what can you do if you exclude the TDS?

[P3D]

Back to the 8x15" ship. It might be the only ship class using that caliber, as the 16" gun will be developed in two years. Should I modify the design for 12x13.5" with minimal weight changes?

Rocky: the TDS-less version of the same 16x9.2" cruiser would have ~20600t light displacement, 2000t savings overall.

[Guinness]

Back to the 8x15" ship. It might be the only ship class using that caliber, as the 16" gun will be developed in two years. Should I modify the design for 12x13.5" with minimal weight changes?

15" armed ships are a problem for me too. I'd originally wanted to lay down a pair in 1914, and I know a few others have done so, but if it were me now, I'd build the 13.5" armed ship too, if you are already developing a 16" gun.

For me though, I think my future capital ships (after the just laid down BC/AC/Fast BB thing) will probably be 15"/2000 pound armed for a while. I'm not sure when I'd want to switch to something between 16" and 18" after that.

I think that if you waited and built a 16" armed ship as soon as you could, you'd probably be out ahead of everyone else. For now, a 12x13.5" armed ship would still likely be the most powerful thing afloat when it enters service.

[Korpen]

I think that if you waited and built a 16" armed ship as soon as you could, you'd probably be out ahead of everyone else.

No so certain about that, the difference in power at the muzzle between a 406mm/40 and a 38/45 are only about 3,5%.  In fact, the ability to penetrate belt armour is worse for the larger gun, while its deck penetration is marginally better. No major difference in either case however.

[P3D]

That marginally better deck penetration is like 1500-3000 yards decreased IZ for the same armor. Being able to penetrate 3" deck armor at 13.1ky, 3.5" at 17.3 and 4" at 19.9 is something to consider (2500lbs @ 2290fps). For 15"/45 with 2000lbs shell the corresponding values are 15.8, 20 and 22.8.

I have to make the penetration tables for the different 15"+ guns - I will do that for the next generation of shells.