New Destroyers for Rohan in 1912

[Ithekro]

Single shaft vessels using better turbines for 20,000 shp instead of 11,500 shp of the previous two classes.  Went to 1,000 tons light to make it easy in the sim report for H2/1912 I was working on this morning.  Otherwise I was just going to make a repeat of the previous 750 tons light class with the larger engine.  The range would be small,  Would have more torpedoes, and that would be about it.

[Sachmle]

Hey Borys!!!! It FITS!!!!!!!!

[Ithekro]

What about from the top?

[Sachmle]

Rakin-frakin-galldarn. I can't do top down views for sh*t.  Anyone else wanna try?

[Sachmle]

Ok, so I had to put basins for the side 4", but meh.. It still fits.

[Borys]

I had to give you something to complain about Borys.  ;D

Too narrow? Or just not long enough?

No long enough.
Although, you could fit most of it if the TT were triples and you got rid of the one inchers.

BTW - I don't understand why you people plop down such quantities of machine guns and pom-poms on your boats.

You expect to fight at 1000-2000 yard ranges?

Borys

[Korpen]

What of this?  A fourth main gun, slightly more speed for the power, and much greater range?  Still only two triple torpedo mounts.  Also Rohan values survivability to some extent.  The first design could take 9 shells of its own size, while the Dutch vessel (if using the 4.5" guns of Rohan) would survive less (since it is scaled on a 4" shell)  The South American design can only survive 7 shells while this design can survive 8 (two full broadsides from its own class).

Bit confused by you comments about different scales, the design i posted use the same 114mm gun as the rhoarihm ship, but I maybe should have increased shell weight by 0,17kg?

The difference in survivability between the different designs is not really significant; at most the difference is something like 18%. But considering the smaller real difference it does not really matter. The way that SS estimates survivability is primarily based on space, the more space, the higher the number.

Single shaft vessels using better turbines for 20,000 shp instead of 11,500 shp of the previous two classes.  Went to 1,000 tons light to make it easy in the sim report for H2/1912 I was working on this morning.  Otherwise I was just going to make a repeat of the previous 750 tons light class with the larger engine.  The range would be small,  Would have more torpedoes, and that would be about it.

Why the insitence on single shaft propulsion , i guees you have som reason, but would be interesting to learn?


EDIT, oh, and if going for 20 000shp turbines only this might be something...

Displacement:
   990 t light; 1 015 t standard; 1 090 t normal; 1 150 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   354,33 ft / 354,33 ft x 29,53 ft x 8,89 ft (normal load)
   108,00 m / 108,00 m x 9,00 m  x 2,71 m

Armament:
      3 - 3,46" / 88,0 mm guns in single mounts, 19,84lbs / 9,00kg shells, 1912 Model
     Breech loading guns in deck mounts
     on centreline ends, majority aft, 1 raised mount aft
   Weight of broadside 60 lbs / 27 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 100
   6 - 17,7" / 450 mm above water torpedoes

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 2 shafts, 40 000 shp / 29 840 Kw = 35,80 kts
   Range 130nm at 35,00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 135 tons

Complement:
   94 - 123

Cost:
   £0,136 million / $0,544 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 8 tons, 0,7 %
   Machinery: 677 tons, 62,1 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 299 tons, 27,4 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 100 tons, 9,2 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 6 tons, 0,6 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     226 lbs / 102 Kg = 10,9 x 3,5 " / 88 mm shells or 0,2 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,56
   Metacentric height 1,7 ft / 0,5 m
   Roll period: 9,5 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 46 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,05
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 0,60
         - Average at 30,0Kts

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak
   Block coefficient: 0,410
   Length to Beam Ratio: 12,00 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 18,82 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 67 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 69
   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:      16,40 ft / 5,00 m
      - Forecastle (15 %):   16,40 ft / 5,00 m
      - Mid (35 %):      13,12 ft / 4,00 m (8,20 ft / 2,50 m aft of break)
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   8,20 ft / 2,50 m
      - Stern:      8,20 ft / 2,50 m
      - Average freeboard:   10,74 ft / 3,28 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 206,3 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 95,1 %
   Waterplane Area: 6 479 Square feet or 602 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 33 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 27 lbs/sq ft or 134 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0,50
      - Longitudinal: 0,79
      - Overall: 0,52
   Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is extremely poor
   Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
   Caution: Lacks seaworthiness - very limited seakeeping ability

[P3D]

Survivability depends on full displacement and hull strength. The survivability of DDs  is significantly underestimated (1/4th the value or so) with composite hull strength around 0.50. Decrease speed (engine shp thus weight) and then survivability shots up.

And imho single turbine in a destroyer is a bad idea. A single 3" shell could take the ship out hitting the engine compartment.

[Borys]

Ahoj!
Hmm, I somehow answered without having seen the lovely drawings.

I still have doubts ...

I'm interested how do you move about the ship - do you walk over the TTs? Suck in your tummy and slide between the TTs and the railing?
:)

Borys

[Borys]

Ahoj!
Or then again, maybe it can be done?

http://www.wunderwaffe.narod.ru/Magazine/MK/2003_06/Draw/06.jpg

Hwever, full load is 1700 tonnes, and the size is
Lenght     102,5m
Length (Waterline):        97,0 m
Beam:        10,0 m
Draft:        3,22 m

BTW - you can use two funnels, as your ship is oil fired.
And the T-22 aka Elbing class are my favourite WWII ships. Not a waste of steel like the Narvik class.
A pity I can't find such a detailed upper view of the WWI GTB 1913 classes.
Borys

[Sachmle]

I twiddled with the design a little.  2' wider, 2 stacks instead of 3, moved the boats under the mid-deck, put the TTs up high ala USS Fletcher, and cut them to 2 triples. Of course if the high TTs don't work for you, you could always switch spots with the boats.



Export,  Destroyer laid down 1912

Displacement:
   1,000 t light; 1,040 t standard; 1,208 t normal; 1,342 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
   320.00 ft / 317.00 ft x 30.00 ft x 9.00 ft (normal load)
   97.54 m / 96.62 m x 9.14 m  x 2.74 m

Armament:
      2 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1912 Model
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts
     on centreline ends, evenly spread
      2 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1912 Model
     Quick firing guns in deck mounts
     on side, all amidships
      4 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns in single mounts, 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1912 Model
     Machine guns in deck mounts
     on centreline, evenly spread, all raised mounts
   Weight of broadside 130 lbs / 59 kg
   Shells per gun, main battery: 200
   6 - 18.0" / 457.2 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
   - Gun armour:   Face (max)   Other gunhouse (avg)   Barbette/hoist (max)
   Main:   1.00" / 25 mm         -               -
   2nd:   1.00" / 25 mm         -               -

Machinery:
   Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
   Direct drive, 2 shafts, 23,094 shp / 17,228 Kw = 30.00 kts
   Range 2,980nm at 15.00 kts
   Bunker at max displacement = 302 tons

Complement:
   102 - 133

Cost:
   £0.136 million / $0.542 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
   Armament: 16 tons, 1.3 %
   Armour: 9 tons, 0.7 %
      - Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
      - Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
      - Armament: 9 tons, 0.7 %
      - Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
      - Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
   Machinery: 621 tons, 51.4 %
   Hull, fittings & equipment: 304 tons, 25.1 %
   Fuel, ammunition & stores: 208 tons, 17.3 %
   Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 4.1 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
   Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
     338 lbs / 153 Kg = 10.6 x 4.0 " / 102 mm shells or 0.2 torpedoes
   Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.41
   Metacentric height 1.5 ft / 0.5 m
   Roll period: 10.3 seconds
   Steadiness   - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
         - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.14
   Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.04

Hull form characteristics:
   Hull has rise forward of midbreak
   Block coefficient: 0.494
   Length to Beam Ratio: 10.57 : 1
   'Natural speed' for length: 17.80 kts
   Power going to wave formation at top speed: 66 %
   Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 67
   Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): -10.00 degrees
   Stern overhang: 3.00 ft / 0.91 m
   Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
      - Stem:      19.00 ft / 5.79 m
      - Forecastle (20 %):   16.00 ft / 4.88 m
      - Mid (50 %):      16.00 ft / 4.88 m (9.00 ft / 2.74 m aft of break)
      - Quarterdeck (15 %):   9.00 ft / 2.74 m
      - Stern:      9.00 ft / 2.74 m
      - Average freeboard:   12.74 ft / 3.88 m
   Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
   Space   - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 181.2 %
      - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 98.0 %
   Waterplane Area: 6,302 Square feet or 585 Square metres
   Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 60 %
   Structure weight / hull surface area: 26 lbs/sq ft or 127 Kg/sq metre
   Hull strength (Relative):
      - Cross-sectional: 0.50
      - Longitudinal: 1.35
      - Overall: 0.55
   Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
   Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
   Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

[Borys]

Ahoj!
Cute.
Although, as a fan of the GTB1913, I'd eliminate the wing guns, putting a gun a platform above the TTs.

Borys

[Ithekro]

Maximize your broadside.

[Ithekro]

Still working on the native design.  As to why single shaft?  I don't know.  Style?  Fits the previous design conventions just with a larger engine.  Rohan is not sold on the concept of torpedo craft, but anti-torpedo craft that could also engage light cruisers in a pinch is a must.  Thus the use of the 4.5 inch rather than the 3 inch.  The 1.5 inch were an efter though in case of torpedo boats (or aircraft).  Might remove most of them, or see if I have access to a 3 inch AA gun (doubtful), and just mount one of those with the 4.5 inch guns against surface targets.  They have not been specifically designed to engage submarines, since that concept is still rather new to Rohan.  That may change during the design phase, as she's got lots of extra weight available.

[Korpen]

Still working on the native design.  As to why single shaft?  I don't know.  Style?  Fits the previous design conventions just with a larger engine.  Rohan is not sold on the concept of torpedo craft, but anti-torpedo craft that could also engage light cruisers in a pinch is a must.  Thus the use of the 4.5 inch rather than the 3 inch.  The 1.5 inch were an efter though in case of torpedo boats (or aircraft).  Might remove most of them, or see if I have access to a 3 inch AA gun (doubtful), and just mount one of those with the 4.5 inch guns against surface targets.  They have not been specifically designed to engage submarines, since that concept is still rather new to Rohan.  That may change during the design phase, as she's got lots of extra weight available.

So when do we get to see the final design? :)
It sounds like the Rhoan view of DDs is very similar to the Netherlands (the reason for 5x12cm on Dutch DDs).