| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4622 |
Page 3 of 6 |
| Author: | smurf [ October 28th, 2014, 5:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
Better late than never? I've not been active re ships for quite a while, but saw Hood's pre-Leander by accident using Google Images and took a look, as there are some things I never found re these designs and I hoped Hood had. The base source is ADM 1/9283 '6-in gun cruiser designs 1929', but Keith McBride's article in Warship 1997-1998 pp 167 – 181 has three diagrams credited to 'PRO' that don't appear to be in it. They are full page but captioned at 1/16in = 1ft - originals about 32in. Design 1 (see above); Design 3 with 4x2 6in, which led to Leander, and the 1929 design on the way, which looked more like Leander, but with a somewhat slimmer funnel. I never found them nor Designs 2,4 and 5 So: Designs 1 and 2 are listed in the ADM with "single mounts for 5 or 6 guns”. McBride puts Design 1 with 5x6in, and Design 2 with 6x5.5in. The 5.5in was soon abandoned, as RN standardized on the 6in for cruisers and capital ship secondaries in designs for the 1930 London conference. What I was hoping for from Hood was a drawing showing where the 6th 5.5 would have gone. The early designs, set at 6000 tons (exactly on King-Hall's dividing line between light (fleet) cruisers and trade protection cruisers) were intended at that stage to replace the C and D classes, with use on the trade routes only in emergency. They were the smallest that could carry the desired armament and protection at 30 knots. That needed 60,000shp, to be provided by three County Design Y turbine sets (of which Exeter had four). The intention was to use 3 screws, which it was thought gave best subdivision aft. But the designs with turrets aft needed the centreline space for turret trunks, handling rooms and magazines, so had to have 4 screws. Designs 1,2, and 5 had three screws. This can be seen on the original Warship drawing of design 1, which is a bit clearer than the copy posted. Design 5 had two twin 6in forward, and its two single 6in aft – sorry, Hood. The next design stage was to standardize the armour schemes for the 5 designs. That pushed displacement for some up to about 6300tons, but rather more space was needed for the 60,000 hp turbines and it was decided 6500tons would give a better ship. Then the 1929 financial crash led to the cancellation of the two better protected Counties, and the Leander design was pushed up to 72,000shp for 32knots (from lighter machinery) and more range to be more useful on the trade routes, that needing 7000tons. Leander actually completed at 7300tons, but improved welding techniques allowed her sisters to be near to the designed 7000. |
|
| Author: | Hood [ October 29th, 2014, 8:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
Thanks for the information Smurf. I was working from the post on Warship Discussion and would have very much valued your advice at the time I drew these. I knew it was the best of a bad job at the time, but with this new information I will certainly make some changes to these drawings. All but design 1 is pure guesswork on my part and its good to have some information to refine these. |
|
| Author: | smurf [ October 29th, 2014, 6:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
My pleasure. I'm only sorry that the drawings in Warship 1997 are rather faint on a grey background, and don't reproduce clearly. I think your 'pure guesswork' is far too modest! It is IMHO quite reasonable to work on the basis that the five designs were closely related, and to bear in mind the end result, which was Leander, and less directly, Arethusa. For those who haven't seen it, the drawing of Design 3 in Warship is very well and accurately rendered by your Design C. Spot on! That leads me to believe that your Design D with 3x2 6in would also be accurate, while altering Design E in the light of knowledge about screws and gun layout shouldn't be too difficult. [For my own amusement/enlightenment, I simply cut the stern off your Design A aft of the funnel and superimposed it on your Design D. It satisfied me, but you might want to make some detailed adjustments.] That leaves the 'mystery' of the 6x5.5in Design 2. I can offer a suggestion, which might save you some work! In 1929 there was another series of small cruiser designs. I discussed them in Warship 2011 with drawings by John Jordan based on the tiny official ones and written descriptions. The smallest was Fleet Scout E, 3500tons, 38knots. The original sketch design had 6x5.5in with single mounts a,x,y at forecastle deck level, z at quarterdeck level, and two side by side 'superimposed' above a in sided b positions, like the forecastle guns in the old Birmingham subgroup of the WWI Towns. Design E was not wholly liked, and revised with some protection and 5x6in guns with a single centreline 6in in b position above a. From the side, apart from the size of the gun mounts, the appearance was identical. That would also be true of what I think the most likely gun layout for a 6x5.5in Design 2 Pre-Leander; sided guns just ahead of the bridge as in Design 1, where each would have quite good arcs of fire forward - much better than the centreline 6in of Design 1. But I've never seen drawing or description to confirm or deny, and I was wrong some years ago when I stuck my neck out with my [very logical!?] suggestion for sided turrets like Juneau for the Fiji 5.25in versions with 7 or 8 twin turrets. They were either sided on the forecastle (7) or all centreline (8)! (Incidentally, there are a lot of small RN cruiser designs in that article between 1929 and 1939 that Shipbucket might enjoy, few of them at all well-known. For example, the two original alternative layouts for the Tribal class, with five twin 4.7in, are known only from very simple sketches. "Damnable Folly" Warship 34, p130-147, 2011 if any of you want a library to borrow it.) |
|
| Author: | Krakatoa [ October 29th, 2014, 7:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
That is very interesting information Smurf, Some time in the next few weeks, (not sure whether pre or post house shift) I will be starting on the Inter-war RN DD's, so never-weres of that time would be very nice to add to the series. |
|
| Author: | Hood [ October 30th, 2014, 8:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
Thanks Smurf, I must admit I'm pleased, but also a bit surprised, that my guesswork was accurate! I had assumed that all the designs would more or less be very similar, especially as they were sketch outlines. I think your suggestions regarding Design 2 make logical sense. Given the rather retrograde step of shielded mounts for some of these designs (we did discuss this over at Warships) it might not be so far fetched to assume other outdated features such as sided guns made a reappearance in these designs. Once I've finished my Royal Soveregins, I'll certainly revisit these drawings and make these changes. |
|
| Author: | seeker36340 [ October 31st, 2014, 5:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
Fine drawings, but the design is as ugly as boiled sin. It's nice to see this chapter in the evolution of RN light cruise design. |
|
| Author: | smurf [ October 31st, 2014, 7:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
Yes, not very handsome. It's hard to believe that they led directly to the Amphion/Perth trio, in my view one of the best-looking class of warships ever. But Sir Arthur Johns succeeded Sir William Berry in 1930. Perhaps that had something to do with it, though I don't think the cruiser design section changed. |
|
| Author: | Hood [ November 1st, 2014, 12:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
Smurf, Here are the revised drawings, I hope like these. Feel free to add any further suggestions for improvements. I've fixed the shafts, renewed the 4in gun mounts, renewed the turrets, added a new catapult, changed the DCT, added bilge keels and changed the underwater shading. Design 5 has been revised too. I hope you like the end results. These are ugly ships but I like them, there is always something interesting about these intergenerational never-weres. ![[ img ]](http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c275/hangar/CLDesign11929.png~original) ![[ img ]](http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c275/hangar/CLDesign21929.png~original) ![[ img ]](http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c275/hangar/CLDesign31929.png~original) ![[ img ]](http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c275/hangar/CLDesign41929.png~original) ![[ img ]](http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c275/hangar/CLDesign51929.png~original)
|
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ November 1st, 2014, 12:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
hood, could you draw/sketch a few cross sections of these ships? I have trouble reading the hull shading right now, if it is how I read it, it is an hull shape I have never seen before 
|
|
| Author: | Hood [ November 1st, 2014, 1:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1929 Pre-Leander Class Light Cruisers |
Shading fixed, gone back to basic shading for these ships. |
|
| Page 3 of 6 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|