Shipbucket

JSB,

A few words of caution here; If your going to increase the number of centerline turrets from three to four, your're going to have to increase the length of the ship or run the risk of having the additional turret encroach on the available machinery space. Superfiring turrets, in their raised positions, add to topweight possibly causing stability issues. However, this may not be of great concern here owing to the reduction in the number of turrets from five to four.

bezobrazov,

I agree on the 4.7" gun thing, re: your earlier post. I was not aware that caliber did not come into general RN use until much later and I have since made the necessary adjustments. Thank you for the heads-up.

_________________
Keep well and keep drawing,

Monty

The initial fear in superfiring turrets was that one hit could disable half of a ship's armament so guns (and magazines) were spread out all over the hull. If that fear were reversed and designers feared a hit anywhere on the hull would explode near a magazine then they may have been inclined to group the turrets. Most plunging fire at Jutland fell on top of a turret (with bad results for British battlecruisers), an alternate Fisher may have foreseen this...

_________________
"All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity, but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." Thomas Edward Lawrence, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom

Ok my thoughts are..

Option 2 is the most historical I think but it (and option 1 take lots of length) and will heat up the aft powder room for Y turret ?

Option 3 gives a much shorter ship (and I think the loss of a turret saves sufficient weight and beam to make it work stability wise with the higher turrets)

I think that the super firing option is more 'interesting' to work on (so form a selfish point of view that’s probably what I’m going to carry on), but whether that’s because I have subconscious knowledge of the QE's and Nelsons and 'know' they are the future ?

JSB

Option 3 is the most interesting, and the most plausible concept. Whether the Admiralty would have put superfiring guns on such an already novel ship is open to question, but it makes a nice comparison to the South Carolinas.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

my take on option 3 what do you think ?

JSB

Very small machinery spaces. A 15 knot dreadnought just isn't going to cut it. JSB, I think you need to re-read your thread. Soz bud - that's the way I see it.

_________________
Keep well and keep drawing,

Monty

This shows my ideas for BR/TR/Mags, yes I agree its tight ( but the turbines are in a wider part of the ship ?).

My thoughts are that no wing turrets will give a wider engine rooms and more space without a wider ship ?
How much longer do you think I need to make the engines ? (and does my space diagrams make any sense or am I totally wrong and the 'middle turrets don’t fill up the ship space ie bottom diagram ?)

thanks JSB

Maybe add 30-40 feet amidships. The turbine spaces look too short, remember these are early turbines, you need a reversing set to go backwards etc.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

I have made few changes.
1) longer centre for engines (spring sharp at the bottom says I need 90m for Eng+Mags)
2) removed the 3inch guns on turrets (I don’t really like them due to ammo handling etc and I still have 22, not the 27 but then some of them where removed anyway ?)

3) Not total sure if my spring sharp is ok as it gives a smaller ship still needing more power to get 21Kn,
( 14,390 t light; 15,226 t standard; 16,650 t normal; 17,789 t full load with 25,417 shp
V real Dreadnought with 18,120 long tons (18,410 t) (normal load) 20,730 long tons (21,060 t) (deep load) with 23,000 shp). Does this mean my smaller thinner ship will be faster then 21K or can use less power ?

JSB

Dread2, GB BB laid down 1905

Displacement:
14,390 t light; 15,226 t standard; 16,650 t normal; 17,789 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(501.97 ft / 492.13 ft) x 72.00 ft x (27.00 / 28.53 ft)
(153.00 m / 150.00 m) x 21.95 m x (8.23 / 8.69 m)

Armament:
8 - 12.00" / 305 mm 45.0 cal guns - 849.99lbs / 385.55kg shells, 120 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1905 Model
4 x Twin mounts on centreline, evenly spread
2 raised mounts
8 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm 45.0 cal guns - 13.62lbs / 6.18kg shells, 300 per gun
Breech loading guns in casemate mounts, 1905 Model
8 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
8 raised mounts
14 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm 45.0 cal guns - 13.62lbs / 6.18kg shells, 300 per gun
Breech loading guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1905 Model
4 x Single mounts on centreline, evenly spread
10 x Single mounts on centreline, evenly spread
10 double raised mounts
Weight of broadside 7,100 lbs / 3,220 kg

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 11.0" / 279 mm 336.00 ft / 102.41 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: 4.00" / 102 mm 143.98 ft / 43.89 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
12.15 ft / 3.70 m Unarmoured ends
Upper: 4.00" / 102 mm 336.00 ft / 102.41 m 8.00 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 105 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead - Strengthened structural bulkheads:
2.00" / 51 mm 336.00 ft / 102.41 m 25.48 ft / 7.77 m
Beam between torpedo bulkheads 60.00 ft / 18.29 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 12.0" / 305 mm 6.00" / 152 mm 11.0" / 279 mm
2nd: 3.00" / 76 mm - 3.00" / 76 mm
3rd: 3.00" / 76 mm - 3.00" / 76 mm

- Armoured deck - single deck:
For and Aft decks: 3.00" / 76 mm
Forecastle: 0.75" / 19 mm Quarter deck: 0.75" / 19 mm

- Conning towers: Forward 11.00" / 279 mm, Aft 4.00" / 102 mm

Machinery:
Coal fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 4 shafts, 25,417 shp / 18,961 Kw = 21.00 kts
Range 6,600nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,563 tons (100% coal)

Complement:
732 - 952

Cost:
£1.475 million / $5.902 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,312 tons, 7.9 %
- Guns: 1,312 tons, 7.9 %
Armour: 6,099 tons, 36.6 %
- Belts: 2,258 tons, 13.6 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 634 tons, 3.8 %
- Armament: 1,705 tons, 10.2 %
- Armour Deck: 1,291 tons, 7.8 %
- Conning Towers: 211 tons, 1.3 %
Machinery: 2,118 tons, 12.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 4,660 tons, 28.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,260 tons, 13.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 200 tons, 1.2 %
- On freeboard deck: 100 tons
- Above deck: 100 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
17,790 lbs / 8,069 Kg = 20.6 x 12.0 " / 305 mm shells or 3.1 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.00
Metacentric height 3.0 ft / 0.9 m
Roll period: 17.4 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 63 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.99
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.26

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak,
a ram bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.609 / 0.616
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.84 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 22.18 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: -6.56 ft / -2.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 15.00 %, 23.00 ft / 7.01 m, 23.00 ft / 7.01 m
- Forward deck: 20.00 %, 23.00 ft / 7.01 m, 23.00 ft / 7.01 m
- Aft deck: 50.00 %, 13.00 ft / 3.96 m, 13.00 ft / 3.96 m
- Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 13.00 ft / 3.96 m, 13.00 ft / 3.96 m
- Average freeboard: 16.50 ft / 5.03 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 94.6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 107.8 %
Waterplane Area: 26,137 Square feet or 2,428 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 98 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 150 lbs/sq ft or 733 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.94
- Longitudinal: 1.67
- Overall: 1.00
Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Adequate accommodation and workspace room
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

A ship that is longer compared to its width is easier to push through the water.