Norseland: The Viking AU

Hel Class, Norseland Battlecruiser laid down 1916

Displacement:
46 992 t light; 49 441 t standard; 51 811 t normal; 53 707 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
887,32 ft / 875,16 ft x 108,27 ft (Bulges 114,83 ft) x 32,81 ft (normal load)
270,46 m / 266,75 m x 33,00 m (Bulges 35,00 m) x 10,00 m

Armament:
8 - 16,00" / 406 mm guns (4x2 guns), 2 048,00lbs / 928,96kg shells, 1916 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
14 - 4,00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32,00lbs / 14,51kg shells, 1916 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, all amidships
6 - 0,51" / 13,0 mm guns in single mounts, 0,07lbs / 0,03kg shells, 1916 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 16 832 lbs / 7 635 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 12,0" / 305 mm 688,97 ft / 210,00 m 25,21 ft / 7,68 m
Ends: 5,00" / 127 mm 0,50 ft / 0,15 m 23,00 ft / 7,01 m
185,69 ft / 56,60 m Unarmoured ends
Main Belt covers 121 % of normal length

- Torpedo Bulkhead and Bulges:
2,00" / 51 mm 700,00 ft / 213,36 m 10,00 ft / 3,05 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 13,0" / 330 mm 6,00" / 152 mm 13,0" / 330 mm
2nd: 1,00" / 25 mm 0,50" / 13 mm -

- Armour deck: 3,50" / 89 mm, Conning tower: 13,00" / 330 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Direct drive, 4 shafts, 165 182 shp / 123 225 Kw = 30,00 kts
Range 5 000nm at 15,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 4 266 tons

Complement:
1 716 - 2 232

Cost:
£6,993 million / $27,974 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 2 104 tons, 4,1 %
Armour: 17 394 tons, 33,6 %
- Belts: 8 570 tons, 16,5 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 518 tons, 1,0 %
- Armament: 3 636 tons, 7,0 %
- Armour Deck: 4 282 tons, 8,3 %
- Conning Tower: 389 tons, 0,8 %
Machinery: 6 154 tons, 11,9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 21 140 tons, 40,8 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 4 819 tons, 9,3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 200 tons, 0,4 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
78 494 lbs / 35 604 Kg = 38,3 x 16,0 " / 406 mm shells or 10,0 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,13
Metacentric height 7,1 ft / 2,2 m
Roll period: 18,1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 69 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,62
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,39

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak, raised quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0,550
Length to Beam Ratio: 7,62 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 29,58 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 19,10 degrees
Stern overhang: -3,28 ft / -1,00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 35,10 ft / 10,70 m
- Forecastle (25 %): 29,53 ft / 9,00 m
- Mid (50 %): 38,39 ft / 11,70 m (26,25 ft / 8,00 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (25 %): 18,37 ft / 5,60 m (18,21 ft / 5,55 m before break)
- Stern: 20,67 ft / 6,30 m
- Average freeboard: 26,87 ft / 8,19 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 87,1 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 206,2 %
Waterplane Area: 66 127 Square feet or 6 143 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 111 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 218 lbs/sq ft or 1 064 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1,02
- Longitudinal: 1,29
- Overall: 1,04
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

It looks nice (though I clearly see some heavy inspiration from Admiral-class

), but I have one, relatively small concern.
Maybe it's not a significant problem, and I guess that someone more expert should make an opinion, but I have some doubts.
You have full (from below the waterline up to the main deck) armored belt starting from much in front of the turrets and ending far behind aft turrets, and that's a lots of weight (and cost). Usually "full width" belt was "from turret to turret" and extensions towards the bow and stern were usually only on waterline (look more closely on Admiral itself or - for example - the Repulse).

How long and tall should the torpedo bulkhead be? Should I use the bulges to calculate that part?

The Hel approaches completion:

[ img ]

Is there anything I`ve missed or things that should be changed?

The jackstaff on the bow and the flag line running from bow to stern (used primarily for dressing the ship by this time) are possibly the only things I can think of right now.

_________________
"The first rule is not to lose; The second rule is not to forget the first rule"

Looks really nice, now it's more evident that you took inspiration from the Admiral class battlecruisers, and you managed also to inhert their elegance.

I have a bunch of suggestions for your springsharp report, you can cut the armour belt height by 3 meters and add that number to the anti-torpedo bulge/bulkhead, that will save weight giving you chance to increase range; also beign your ship fitted with bulges could mean she was refitted in the 30's so you could take the chance to make another SS report in wich you enter that the engine was built in the 30's (with this i mean that you upgraded also the engine when the bulges where fitted, IJN made the same with the Kongo class BC and all the battleships), that way tou should beign able to squeeze some more speed giving the newer engines, or even gain some hull strenght and space to increase range a bit more.

The ship was completed with bulges, that`s why there`s bulges on the drawing.

She looks nice to me. That Derrick crane for the boats looks a tad modern for the ship (something either lattice or cantelivered would be more natural) and I can't help but think that with the funnels so close together, it might be more efficient to trunk them together and save a little deck space. Other than those two things I really like her design. Long and sleek beats the towering designs of later ships all the time (even the Iowas and yamatos look fairly ugly, Fuso is in a class of her own here).

_________________
"The first rule is not to lose; The second rule is not to forget the first rule"

A modern refit will probably trunk the funnels into one, for now it stays as it is. Why is the crane too modern? I find more modern looking cranes on older ships.

As I stated earlier, there was to be a sister ship with some mods. Here`s a wip of the Belisknir.

As can be seen, she has a taller forecastle and will have turreted six inch guns from the Sleipnir class.
[ img ]

Shipbucket

Who is online