removed

I think I found the problem. I made the crane shorter and moved the two landing boats closer.

Willamina Class Destroyer

[ img ]

1943 refit

Willamina, Antaran destroyer laid down 1943

Displacement:
2 444 t light; 2 527 t standard; 2 785 t normal; 2 992 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(406,83 ft / 403,54 ft) x 40,19 ft x (13,12 / 13,82 ft)
(124,00 m / 123,00 m) x 12,25 m x (4,00 / 4,21 m)

Armament:
8 - 5,00" / 127 mm 40,0 cal guns - 59,90lbs / 27,17kg shells, 100 per gun
Dual purpose guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1943 Model
2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline, aft deck aft
1 raised mount aft - superfiring
2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline, forward deck forward
1 raised mount - superfiring
Weight of broadside 479 lbs / 217 kg
Main Torpedoes
8 - 21,0" / 533 mm, 30,00 ft / 9,14 m torpedoes - 1,986 t each, 15,891 t total
In 2 sets of deck mounted centre rotating tubes
Main DC/AS Mortars
50 - 250,00 lbs / 113,40 kg Depth Charges + 2 reloads - 5,804 t total
in Stern depth charge racks

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 1,00" / 25 mm 1,00" / 25 mm 1,00" / 25 mm

- Protected deck - single deck:
For and Aft decks: 0,75" / 19 mm
Forecastle: 0,75" / 19 mm Quarter deck: 0,75" / 19 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 69 243 shp / 51 655 Kw = 35,50 kts
Range 4 800nm at 15,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 465 tons

Complement:
191 - 249

Cost:
£2,197 million / $8,787 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 171 tons, 6,1%
- Guns: 132 tons, 4,7%
- Weapons: 39 tons, 1,4%
Armour: 202 tons, 7,3%
- Armament: 57 tons, 2,1%
- Armour Deck: 145 tons, 5,2%
Machinery: 1 496 tons, 53,7%
Hull, fittings & equipment: 575 tons, 20,6%
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 341 tons, 12,2%
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0,0%

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
440 lbs / 200 Kg = 7,0 x 5,0 " / 127 mm shells or 0,2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,00
Metacentric height 1,3 ft / 0,4 m
Roll period: 15,0 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 57 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,52
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 0,62

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has raised forecastle,
a normal bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0,458 / 0,467
Length to Beam Ratio: 10,04 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 20,09 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 69 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 92
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 10,00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0,00 ft / 0,00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 40,00%, 18,64 ft / 5,68 m, 18,64 ft / 5,68 m
- Forward deck: 20,00%, 11,15 ft / 3,40 m, 11,15 ft / 3,40 m
- Aft deck: 25,00%, 11,15 ft / 3,40 m, 11,15 ft / 3,40 m
- Quarter deck: 15,00%, 11,15 ft / 3,40 m, 11,15 ft / 3,40 m
- Average freeboard: 14,15 ft / 4,31 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 186,4%
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 88,0%
Waterplane Area: 10 414 Square feet or 967 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 67%
Structure weight / hull surface area: 38 lbs/sq ft or 185 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0,48
- Longitudinal: 0,84
- Overall: 0,50

The Willamina class destroyers were designed as an improved version of the Shannon class. This class was under development whilst Shannon class destroyers were still being built to replace losses suffered after the Japanese surprise attack in 1940. Construction had begun in late 1940 and all ships were finished and launched weeks before the country had fallen to Japanese forces

These destroyers had slightly less artillery firepower than the Shannon class, but an improved AA armament, and more armor protection. They were notably faster and had good sea keeping ability.

Ships in class - Launch date - Fate

Willamina - 1941 - Sold to Chinese navy 1952
Jasmine - 1941 - Sold to Chinese navy 1952
Kinley - 1941 - Sunk by surface fire 1945
Brooks - 1941 - Sold to Chinese navy 1952
Isabella - 1941 - Scrapped 1954
Felix - 1941 - Sunk by submarine 1945

I like to second Thiel on his basic critique. You've evidently mastered the drawing style. Bravo! That's great. What you've no firm grasp of yet, is how a ship actually functions, and, as Thiel rightly points out, the functioning of the many individual components that constitute a fully operable ship.
Having said that, I like to point out that that crane of yours is a sorry piece of dismal machinery: it won't be strong enough in any sense to lift those heavy boats (yes, they will be heavy by their sheer volume!) Its boom is too fragile; the lifting cables and their connections way too flimsy. Have you even looked at other cranes; I mean RL cranes as drawn here at SB, and tried in your mind to figure out how they might have operated? If not, please do that and redesign your crane. You don't need to lift it outright from something else; you can still design your own crane - once you understand its function and capabilities, as well as its limitations.

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

Short answer: Nope, since you've still not studied other heavy-duty crane designs! (This is obviously your AU, so it's entirely up to you to keep or ditch, to redesign or leave as is etc. But you have asked for feedback, and that's what we've given...)

Well thanks for the feed back, but I don't really have time to steady boat cranes. I also don't find boat cranes even remotely interesting.

But anyways I have a new destroyer up. I think this one looks a lot better than the others.

This might help, it's an American Crosley-class APD. The crane at the stern should be acceptable.
The midship setup is also interestin for boat stowage.

other examples:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... r_1940.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... -82%29.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... t_1942.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... c1944.jpeg

In case anyone didn't notice, I submitted another destroyer, on the same page as this one.

TristanAlting it is not about how many drawings you do it is about getting one right before you do the next one.

Yes - you do need to study up on all bits of equipment that go on ships. If you want your drawings to get a gold star from the other members in SB, then you need to get your drawings right.

You are getting better all the time, but the details let your drawings down.

The crane debate is very simple. You have 4 sets of boats from beside the forefunnel to the rear of the accommodation block. How do you launch and retrieve all of these boats? Your crane is not long enough to reach the two sets of boats forward or aft. I hope your face is now red. With a bit of homework, you may have got the answer right. Do some study and see what you can come up with. You can not expect the rest of us to tell you all of the answers.

The biggest problem you have is where Antara is. Once Japan takes over Antara in early 1942, all building stops. Any ships that survive the invasion would retreat to either US ports or Australian ports. These ships you are posting as being completed in 1943 just will not exist.

The other drawing is ok, it does not seem to have any basic problems.

Shipbucket

Who is online