The Socialist Republic of Sieran

Well here is a new addition, the V4. Took the V2, upped the range to 8,000nm and had a look at what I could adjust to allow her to be a balanced design. I thinned the deck armour by 10mm (now 100mm instead of 110mm), Main belt shortened to the minimum (removing 10m overhang which now somehow has improved survivability), reduced the height of the torpedo bulkhead but extended its length to match the main belt, hullform adjusted slightly freeboard wise to better position the main guns and switched the armour deck coverage from multiple decks to armoured box.

The end result is a higher seakeeping ship at the same cost and range as the original V1 design with slightly thinned but better distributed armour giving improved survivability (up from 50 to 55 equal sized shells). Whilst torpedo resistance is still fairly low, the updated hull design has an additional 2t of buoyancy flotation which should certainly be useful in conflict.
Still haven't decided on the ideal arrangement for the main turrets. Either majority forward or majority aft is the options. I originally had it majority forward with the superfiring turret forward to improve firepower head on however with reconsideration I'm leaning more towards the superfiring gun aft with the lower turret on the quarterdeck. This keeps the ships weight lower down and reducing top weight (which is oh so vital in the North Pacific and Bering Sea). Additionally it might give a nice profile to the ships. Anybody have solid information on which layout is more efficient?

Anyway, here is the V4;

Code: Select all

C3 V4, Sieran Cruiser Killer laid down 1935

Displacement:
	15,611 t light; 16,451 t standard; 17,854 t normal; 18,976 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
	(660.39 ft / 649.61 ft) x 76.77 ft x (28.87 / 30.12 ft)
	(201.29 m / 198.00 m) x 23.40 m  x (8.80 / 9.18 m)

Armament:
      9 - 9.45" / 240 mm 50.0 cal guns - 446.52lbs / 202.54kg shells, 100 per gun
	  Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1935 Model
	  3 x Triple mounts on centreline ends, majority aft
		1 raised mount aft - superfiring
      16 - 4.72" / 120 mm 45.0 cal guns - 53.18lbs / 24.12kg shells, 320 per gun
	  Dual purpose guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1935 Model
	  8 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
		4 raised mounts
      16 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm 39.0 cal guns - 1.85lbs / 0.84kg shells, 2,500 per gun
	  Anti-air guns in deck mounts, 1935 Model
	  4 x Quad mounts on sides, evenly spread
		2 raised mounts
      24 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm 50.0 cal guns - 0.51lbs / 0.23kg shells, 10,000 per gun
	  Anti-air guns in deck mounts, 1935 Model
	  12 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
		4 raised mounts
      Weight of broadside 4,911 lbs / 2,228 kg

Armour:
   - Belts:		Width (max)	Length (avg)		Height (avg)
	Main:	6.69" / 170 mm	426.51 ft / 130.00 m	9.84 ft / 3.00 m
	Ends:	Unarmoured
	  Main Belt covers 101 % of normal length

   - Torpedo Bulkhead - Additional damage containing bulkheads:
		1.97" / 50 mm	426.51 ft / 130.00 m	13.12 ft / 4.00 m
	Beam between torpedo bulkheads 65.62 ft / 20.00 m

   - Gun armour:	Face (max)	Other gunhouse (avg)	Barbette/hoist (max)
	Main:	9.06" / 230 mm	5.91" / 150 mm		7.09" / 180 mm
	2nd:	0.79" / 20 mm	      -			      -

   - Box over machinery & magazines:
	3.94" / 100 mm

   - Conning towers: Forward 5.91" / 150 mm, Aft 0.00" / 0 mm

Machinery:
	Oil fired boilers, steam turbines, 
	Electric motors, 2 shafts, 115,271 shp / 85,992 Kw = 32.00 kts
	Range 8,000nm at 15.00 kts
	Bunker at max displacement = 2,525 tons

Complement:
	771 - 1,003

Cost:
	£7.671 million / $30.684 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
	Armament: 1,198 tons, 6.7 %
	   - Guns: 1,198 tons, 6.7 %
	Armour: 4,412 tons, 24.7 %
	   - Belts: 1,166 tons, 6.5 %
	   - Torpedo bulkhead: 408 tons, 2.3 %
	   - Armament: 910 tons, 5.1 %
	   - Armour Deck: 1,842 tons, 10.3 %
	   - Conning Tower: 87 tons, 0.5 %
	Machinery: 3,275 tons, 18.3 %
	Hull, fittings & equipment: 6,726 tons, 37.7 %
	Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,243 tons, 12.6 %
	Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
	Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
	  23,209 lbs / 10,527 Kg = 55.0 x 9.4 " / 240 mm shells or 3.3 torpedoes
	Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.12
	Metacentric height 4.2 ft / 1.3 m
	Roll period: 15.8 seconds
	Steadiness	- As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 55 %
			- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.60
	Seaboat quality  (Average = 1.00): 1.12

Hull form characteristics:
	Hull has low quarterdeck ,
	  a normal bow and a cruiser stern
	Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.434 / 0.442
	Length to Beam Ratio: 8.46 : 1
	'Natural speed' for length: 25.49 kts
	Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
	Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 49
	Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 12.00 degrees
	Stern overhang: 4.92 ft / 1.50 m
	Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
				Fore end,	 Aft end
	   - Forecastle:	23.00 %,  27.56 ft / 8.40 m,  24.61 ft / 7.50 m
	   - Forward deck:	25.00 %,  24.61 ft / 7.50 m,  21.65 ft / 6.60 m
	   - Aft deck:	27.00 %,  21.65 ft / 6.60 m,  21.65 ft / 6.60 m
	   - Quarter deck:	25.00 %,  14.44 ft / 4.40 m,  14.44 ft / 4.40 m
	   - Average freeboard:		21.17 ft / 6.45 m
	Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
	Space	- Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 101.0 %
		- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 173.5 %
	Waterplane Area: 31,411 Square feet or 2,918 Square metres
	Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 113 %
	Structure weight / hull surface area: 146 lbs/sq ft or 713 Kg/sq metre
	Hull strength (Relative):
		- Cross-sectional: 0.94
		- Longitudinal: 1.71
		- Overall: 1.00
	Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
	Excellent accommodation and workspace room

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

While I think majority forward looks more attractive(

), for this ship I'd say majority aft.
Since it's not that much bigger than it's opponents it's good if it can keep the distance and still maintain firing angles for as much of it's guns as possible. At long range the Japanese 8" shells won't penetrate the armour belt, another point in favour of keeping a long distance. And if fleeing, you can always bring more guns to bear.

That was actually one of the reasons I was thinking. Sure her 32 knots doesn't allow her to outrun her cruiser opposition however in foul weather the C3 is more likely to maintain speed than the lightly built Japanese ships that risk capsize or structural damage in equal conditions. Part of the strategy also sees her covering the destroyers and any available light cruisers so range would be critical if it can be maintained.

Her armour is still capable of stopping the 8in shells of the IJN ships and could even withstand the Deutchland and Scharnhorst class ships 11in shells under certain conditions if she ever confronted either.

Another reason why I've been favouring the aft guns is that in most sea conditions they would not be subjected to the same kind of breaking waves and spray that the forward guns have to contend with. Especially as the ships are according to springsharp still wet forward. Given the lack of operational (instead of trial) radar fitted to the ships until late 1942, the need to rely on optics sees the requirement to keep spray off the equipment.

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

Turns out that reloading the file in Springsharp of the V4 gave me more to work with than before (I've had this bug before) where when I saved it it was balanced at 1.0 but after reloading the file it comes out at 1.20. I used the extra space to increase range to the current 14,000nm.

Been playing around with the ship drawing tool on wesworld and the springsharp draught looked more like a battleship than a cruiser. Changing the draught to a more realistic level in springsharp causes the design to fail and re-setting it to the previous draught sees the failure remain so I'm not sure what bug is what there.
I have an idea that it might be because the program is trying to define the ship as a battleship rather than a cruiser so it might not be entirely reliable in that area.

But anyway, here is a rough design for how I'm thinking the C3s will look;

First with the draught as per springsharp;

[ img ]

And here with slightly reduced draught that looks more realistic for a cruiser (if you ask me);

[ img ]

Which is better? Also the guns do look strange because the cruiser sized triple looks 6in sized on the program and these are the next triples up. The actual 240mm/9.45" guns would be somewhat smaller but not by too much.

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

The glitch is that the compositre strength value is corrupted when you close and open the file. Open the file in springsharp, and rewriting a value(even to the exact same), and you'll oftenmost be down to the correct CS.

You're probably right about the drought, but decreasing it will lower the CS, forcing a higher deplacement, making the ship more expensive, worsen seakeeping, etc.

Well here is something different, the first 'hydroplane' to fly in Sieran in 1913 and the first heavier than air flying machine to be allocated to the navy, the Isayev 3 Vodoem;

[ img ]

Still writing up a brief history for these. Drawing was based initially on Eswubes Morane-Saulnier "L" with parasol replaced with biplane wings, propeller changed and the undercarriage replaced by early floats.

The IS-3 was primarily used as a test aircraft to trial the usability of a heavier than air machine in the fleet as a scout. The pilot would have to communicate with ships crews via trailing signal flags. The aircraft and the procedure proved impractical in service, the aircraft having rather limited payload and range and struggled to take off on any sea state beyond a lake calm and instead the SRN would until the early 20s primarily make the use of lighter-than-air craft such as blimps for its reconnaissance and survey needs.

Isayev itself would later go on to provide not only components for these airships but would in the 30s and 40s become a primary supplier of dedicated role naval aircraft for the SRN, eventually superseding the use of converted land aircraft in this role.

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

_________________
Worklist

"If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done." ~Ludwig Wittgenstein

Here is something I've been meaning to finish off for a while now, the S.S Ravenstvo;

[ img ]

With Sieran gaining its independence in 1905, one of the first avenues seen by the new Government as a way to promote the nation abroad was through the construction and launch of two liners to serve the Anadyr-Anchorage-Vancouver route in Summer and Anadyr-Anchorage-San Francisco route in Winter. Sieran lacked skilled draughtsman in the construction of large vessels so Artemy Shagin was tasked with vessels well beyond his traditional skills of producing steam yachts.

The result of this was the Ravenstvo (Equality) and Svoboda (Liberty). The two vessels were almost identical apart from Svoboda being constructed with a blunt bow instead of the traditional clipper bow found on the Ravenstvo. Each ship was 154m (505.5ft) long and had a registered gross tonnage of 7,500. Unusually for liners at the time, the two new ships were built as single class only vessels with accommodation for up to 1,250 passengers and crew. Their interiors were fairly spartan compared to other liners of their day but they were the first of the new Sieranian ships to be fitted with electric lighting throughout along with electric heating.
The machinery of the ships comprised of 9 double ended boilers divided into three boiler rooms via coal bunkers producing the steam for the two triple expansion reciprocating steam engines of 11,000shp. This resulted in a maximum speed of 18.5 knots though 16 knots was the best average that the two liners managed in service conditions.

Laid down in November 1905 and entering service in June 1907, the ships were a demonstration of the new nations shipbuilding capability. The fact that most of the construction had been completed using larger than average labor forces seems to have eluded the Government for later ships using more typical labor force sizes were subject to criticism for their lengthy build times.
The ships themselves proved not as popular as the Government had hoped. The ships were outwardly old fashioned in appearance and they lacked many of the modern amenities of the other liners around the world at the time. The ships did however provide valuable experience for Artemy Shagin in large vessel design and construction and he later went on to design the more successful liners that succeeded these vessels.

An image of Svoboda will be coming soon, stay tuned!

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

That is a very beautiful ship. Great work!

_________________
Salide - Denton - The Interrealms

I am not very active on the forums anymore, but work is still being done on my AUs. Visit the Salidan Altiverse Page on the SB Wiki for more information. All current work is being done on Google Docs.
If anyone wishes for their nations to interact with the countries of the Salidan Altiverse, please send me a PM, after which we can further discuss through email.

Shipbucket

Who is online