Your Nation's Warships, Batch 3

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

So I'm messing around with an interwar BC design based on the RN K3 battlecruiser with 3x3 18' gonnes, only using roughly equivalent USN weapons and turbo-electric drive. For all the springsharp gurus (I'm using Springsharp 3.0) is there any way to get the program to not give you a "Poor seaboat, wet and uncomfortable, reduced performance in heavy weather" warning when designing a BC or fast BB? Despite playing with the draft and freeboard for a while I can't seem to get a ship which ins't either unstable or a poor seaboat, kinda annoying.

ISV Hydra, Arcaenia Battlecruiser laid down 1921

Displacement:
54,244 t light; 57,366 t standard; 59,335 t normal; 60,910 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(896.54 ft / 885.83 ft) x 108.27 ft x (36.09 / 36.84 ft)
(273.27 m / 270.00 m) x 33.00 m x (11.00 / 11.23 m)

Armament:
9 - 18.00" / 457 mm 48.0 cal guns - 3,399.99lbs / 1,542.21kg shells, 100 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1921 Model
3 x 3-gun mounts on centreline ends, majority forward
1 raised mount - superfiring
16 - 6.00" / 152 mm 53.0 cal guns - 105.01lbs / 47.63kg shells, 200 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1921 Model
8 x 2-gun mounts on sides, evenly spread
2 raised mounts
8 - 5.00" / 127 mm 25.0 cal guns - 55.01lbs / 24.95kg shells, 200 per gun
Anti-air guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1921 Model
8 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
8 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 32,720 lbs / 14,842 kg
Main Torpedoes
6 - 21.0" / 533 mm, 24.00 ft / 7.32 m torpedoes - 1.543 t each, 9.261 t total
In 2 sets of deck mounted side rotating tubes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 14.0" / 356 mm 637.80 ft / 194.40 m 12.50 ft / 3.81 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 111 % of normal length
Main Belt inclined 20.00 degrees (positive = in)

- Torpedo Bulkhead - Strengthened structural bulkheads:
4.00" / 102 mm 637.80 ft / 194.40 m 33.86 ft / 10.32 m
Beam between torpedo bulkheads 88.58 ft / 27.00 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 17.0" / 432 mm 9.00" / 229 mm 14.0" / 356 mm
2nd: 4.00" / 102 mm 2.00" / 51 mm 2.00" / 51 mm
3rd: 0.50" / 13 mm - -

- Armoured deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 8.00" / 203 mm

- Conning towers: Forward 9.00" / 229 mm, Aft 0.00" / 0 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 230,001 shp / 171,581 Kw = 33.08 kts
Range 9,651nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 3,544 tons

Complement:
1,900 - 2,471

Cost:
£15.194 million / $60.777 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 6,212 tons, 10.5 %
- Guns: 6,194 tons, 10.4 %
- Weapons: 19 tons, 0.0 %
Armour: 21,736 tons, 36.6 %
- Belts: 4,648 tons, 7.8 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 3,196 tons, 5.4 %
- Armament: 4,258 tons, 7.2 %
- Armour Deck: 9,340 tons, 15.7 %
- Conning Tower: 295 tons, 0.5 %
Machinery: 7,920 tons, 13.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 18,375 tons, 31.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5,091 tons, 8.6 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
58,131 lbs / 26,368 Kg = 19.9 x 18.0 " / 457 mm shells or 7.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.02
Metacentric height 5.8 ft / 1.8 m
Roll period: 18.8 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 48 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.97
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 0.75

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck,
an extended bulbous bow and large transom stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.600 / 0.603
Length to Beam Ratio: 8.18 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 34.14 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 54 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 60
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 17.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 4.40 ft / 1.34 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 14.00 %, 20.67 ft / 6.30 m, 20.67 ft / 6.30 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 20.67 ft / 6.30 m, 20.67 ft / 6.30 m
- Aft deck: 42.00 %, 20.67 ft / 6.30 m, 20.67 ft / 6.30 m
- Quarter deck: 14.00 %, 20.67 ft / 6.30 m, 20.67 ft / 6.30 m
- Average freeboard: 20.67 ft / 6.30 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 108.4 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 150.3 %
Waterplane Area: 73,106 Square feet or 6,792 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 90 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 245 lbs/sq ft or 1,196 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.99
- Longitudinal: 1.03
- Overall: 1.00
Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Excellent accommodation and workspace room
Poor seaboat, wet and uncomfortable, reduced performance in heavy weather

[Taihei Tengoku]

TT's nuclear submarines, a rough sketch:

G-100: Whale-shaped submarine, commissioned 1978. About 4000t submerged, 27kts, 210m operating depth, powered by PWR. 4x 533mm 1x 650mm torpedo tubes. Somewhat anachronistic, about to be retired.
G-200: Teardrop shape (Thresher), commissioned 1988. 3700t, 35kts, 250m operating depth, powered by LFR. 4x 533mm 2x 650mm tubes. NS-60 test run for high-strength steel pressure vessels. Waiting on G-305 so it can leave in peace.
G-201: G-200 modified for NS-80 (HY-114), commissioned 1992. 38kts, 400m operating depth. Intermediate NS-80 model.
G-202: G-201 construction modified for hybrid NS-80/NS-110 (HY-156), commissioned 1998. 41kts, 600m operating depth. Experimental NS-80/NS-110 sandwich pressure hull.
G-300 to 304+: Teardrop shape (Soryu), commissioned 2009-. 4200t, 44kts, 900m test depth, LFR-IEP. 6x 650mm tubes. Production NS-110 steel and unified design with (much slower) AIP SSK counterpart.

[New Visayan Islands]

You know, ever since I started imagining what a Westernized variant of the Renhai would look like, I've been wondering if it would just be more effective to make some unholy hybrid of the Tico and the Sejeong vice Renhai.

[The Akasha Colony]

You know, ever since I started imagining what a Westernized variant of the Renhai would look like, I've been wondering if it would just be more effective to make some unholy hybrid of the Tico and the Sejeong vice Renhai.

NATO reporting names are not italicized.

A "westernized" Type 055 that hews very closely to the original mold would just be a fatter Flight III Burke.

I have no idea what a "hybrid" of a Ticonderoga and a Sejong would look like given that they are very similar in size and performance anyway. You would basically just get Atago if you add the command facilities that Ticonderoga has, and Ticonderoga itself if you add the command facilities, extra director, and a bit more room in the CIC. If you adopted a newer radar than SPY-1 and SPG-62 (like SPY-6), you could eliminate the director differences entirely.

[New Visayan Islands]

You know, ever since I started imagining what a Westernized variant of the Renhai would look like, I've been wondering if it would just be more effective to make some unholy hybrid of the Tico and the Sejeong vice Renhai.

NATO reporting names are not italicized.

A "westernized" Type 055 that hews very closely to the original mold would just be a fatter Flight III Burke.

I have no idea what a "hybrid" of a Ticonderoga and a Sejong would look like given that they are very similar in size and performance anyway. You would basically just get Atago if you add the command facilities that Ticonderoga has, and Ticonderoga itself if you add the command facilities, extra director, and a bit more room in the CIC. If you adopted a newer radar than SPY-1 and SPG-62 (like SPY-6), you could eliminate the director differences entirely.

So basically, I'm better off with a modernized Tico?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

NATO reporting names are not italicized.

A "westernized" Type 055 that hews very closely to the original mold would just be a fatter Flight III Burke.

I have no idea what a "hybrid" of a Ticonderoga and a Sejong would look like given that they are very similar in size and performance anyway. You would basically just get Atago if you add the command facilities that Ticonderoga has, and Ticonderoga itself if you add the command facilities, extra director, and a bit more room in the CIC. If you adopted a newer radar than SPY-1 and SPG-62 (like SPY-6), you could eliminate the director differences entirely.

So basically, I'm better off with a modernized Tico?

You'd be better off with a 25,000 ton CGN.

[Ormata]

Right, so. Weird shit time.

It's a Fallout universe and I own North/South Carolina, population 611k. I have two ironclads, CSS-Virginia style, and two brigs, along with eight lightly armed Caravel-type gunboats.

Where do you recommend I go in terms of warship development and production, for the next step in designs?

[Taihei Tengoku]

[Tierra Prime]

Right, so. Weird shit time.

It's a Fallout universe and I own North/South Carolina, population 611k. I have two ironclads, CSS-Virginia style, and two brigs, along with eight lightly armed Caravel-type gunboats.

Where do you recommend I go in terms of warship development and production, for the next step in designs?

Are these oil powered? If they are, I don't think they'll be feasible in a Fallout-inspired setting. If they are fusion powered, that works. I terms of what warships are likely to exist in a Fallout universe, as the US military was largely deployed abroad when the bombs hit, you may be able to salvage warships which returned home and were abandoned when their crews realised the US was gone. Maybe a few destroyers and corvettes. You probably won't be able to produce new missiles, but you may be able to make use of any military satellites which are still functional. You'll have the guns, some missiles, and basic radar at least. Considering it's unlikely you will face anything requiring a harpoon to destroy, you'd probably be better off removing the missiles and replacing the cells with troop compartments or gun magazines. You'd then have a troop ship which is capable of providing fire support.

[The Earth Systems Alliance]

Well our favourite vessel is the Everest-class Dreadnought


but we also make some Defiant class ships


and generally most of UFP's vessels

[Ormata]

Are these oil powered? If they are, I don't think they'll be feasible in a Fallout-inspired setting. If they are fusion powered, that works. I terms of what warships are likely to exist in a Fallout universe, as the US military was largely deployed abroad when the bombs hit, you may be able to salvage warships which returned home and were abandoned when their crews realised the US was gone. Maybe a few destroyers and corvettes. You probably won't be able to produce new missiles, but you may be able to make use of any military satellites which are still functional. You'll have the guns, some missiles, and basic radar at least. Considering it's unlikely you will face anything requiring a harpoon to destroy, you'd probably be better off removing the missiles and replacing the cells with troop compartments or gun magazines. You'd then have a troop ship which is capable of providing fire support.

Coal-powered and sail, my guy. We don't have enough oil to feed warships, and as far as fusion is concerned we still need to work on the great joys of learning how to make shit not murder other shit. As far as Pre-War warships, unfortunately we don't have the range or scale to move vessels out far enough to reach any sort of deployed abroad warships that were abandoned, and likely these vessels are crewed by other factions and as such would constitute threats. My question is centered on locally producing warships, as though will be far easier to replace, build-up in numbers, and maintain than anything Pre-War.

(Image)

That...is very interesting, gotta admit. The turreted design would be a helluva thing to have, as well as the amount of small, light caliber guns that can be mounted on the vessel. I like it. Thank you!

[Taihei Tengoku]

The next evolution over "broadside ironclad" is "turret battleship"

be sure to throw in a naval ram

[Ormata]

The next evolution over "broadside ironclad" is "turret battleship"

be sure to throw in a naval ram

Oh, always. Naval ram is good when others are still using age of sail stuff and especially good for psychological warfare.

[New Korongo]

After the first Korongolese-built battleship entered service in 1901, the Royal Naval Service ordered a second pair of domestic warships. Concerns regarding metal fatigue and locally produced Krupp armour delayed construction. Despite these issues, the two ships were commissioned as Sebu and Mebangy-Huro in late 1904. Like all Korongolese battleships, they were named after provinces. Both ships were assigned to the First Battleship Flotilla, relegating Mebangy-Ityan and Ibra-Aned to the less prestigious Second Battleship Flotilla. Sebu and Mebangy-Huro saw extensive service during the First Korongolese Civil War as sea-based artillery batteries. However, they were not deployed to Europe when New Korongo became involved in the First World War. Sebu was decommissioned in late 1919. Mebangy-Huro would have left service in the same year if an Austro-Hungarian torpedo had not sunk a Korongolese dreadnought. Both vessels were scrapped under the Washington Naval Treaty.

Sebu and Mebangy-Huro were broadly similar to the preceding Lana-Hasar class. Their main armament consisted of four 12” (305 mm) Mark IX guns in two turrets and twelve 6” (152 mm) Mark VII guns in casemate mounts. Anti-torpedo boat protection was provided by a mix of small-calibre guns. The two ships re-introduced the enclosed mast-mounted gun positions which had been indicative of earlier French-designed ships in Korongolese service. They were also slightly longer Lana-Hasar class. The most prominent difference between the two classes was the arrangement of the 6” and 3” battery. Instead of being placed within the hull, they were housed in a large rectangular superstructure. The ultimate aim was to increase deck space and improve the ability of the fore and aft 6” guns to fire along the length of the ship. However, this resulted in a poor distribution of weight and the design was abandoned in later Korongolese battleships.

[New Vihenia]

making hopefully a proper large multipurpose missile-destroyer.



her helipad is able to accommodate 2 Blackhawk like chopper or equivalent (merlin). or 1 V-22/Mi-17 or Ch-53 class helicopter. Hangar


Missile armaments are like 6 "large" VLS that can accommodate large missile (a high performance Gorgon/Sprint like ABM) or 4 P-100 Oniks/Yakhont AsHM. 40 "universal-medium sized" VLS that can accomodate most types of our standard naval missiles. and some 100 VLS for air defense.

[Theodosiya]

making hopefully a proper large multipurpose missile-destroyer.

(Image)

her helipad is able to accommodate 2 Blackhawk like chopper or equivalent (merlin). or 1 V-22/Mi-17 or Ch-53 class helicopter. Hangar
(Image)

Missile armaments are like 6 "large" VLS that can accommodate large missile (a high performance Gorgon/Sprint like ABM) or 4 P-100 Oniks/Yakhont AsHM. 40 "universal-medium sized" VLS that can accomodate most types of our standard naval missiles. and some 100 VLS for air defense.

4 Oniks? Like OWA? Shouldn't Destroyers have more of them? OWA is just an old rusty Van Speijk Frigate after all.

This sorta got me thinking to make multipurpose Corvette (With emphasize on ASW work), Frigate (On Air Defence) and Destroyer (On ASuW), even though it would only be lines of words here...

Corvette
Weaponry
1x Bofors 57mm
4x NSM or MM40 B3 Exocet or RBS-15 or Harpoon Block II+ER
16x cell VLS, either Mk41 or Sylver (8x A-50, 4 A-70)
1x Denel 35mm DPG or Rheinmetall Oerlikon Millenium Gun, stern
1x RIM-116 RAM, bow
2x Mk32 SVT
2x 30mm DS30M Mark 2
4x M2A1

Sensors
Terma SCANTER 6000


Okay, WIP. Tell me what's missing and I'll look. Corvette size and weight are yet to be determined.

[The Akasha Colony]

4 Oniks? Like OWA? Shouldn't Destroyers have more of them? OWA is just an old rusty Van Speijk Frigate after all.

I believe he means four per cell rather than a single Sprint-class missile. Which would be a total of 24 Oniks-size missiles.

[New Chilokver]

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/List_of_active_G ... Navy_ships

Could I have some advice regarding the composition of my navy, or maybe regarding the individual ships (the ones I've fleshed out with stats anyway)? Thanks.

[Spirit of Hope]

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/List_of_active_Grand_Chilokveri_Navy_ships

Could I have some advice regarding the composition of my navy, or maybe regarding the individual ships (the ones I've fleshed out with stats anyway)? Thanks.

I feel like you have a very high number of Hydrographic research ships and icebreakers in comparison to your fleet size. The US only has 3-4 icebreakers and 4 hydrographic ships and it's fleet is much larger than yours.

Also what is a "nuclear fleet submarine?" I assume it is a ballistic missile submarine but the name is a little vague.

[The Akasha Colony]

I feel like you have a very high number of Hydrographic research ships and icebreakers in comparison to your fleet size. The US only has 3-4 icebreakers and 4 hydrographic ships and it's fleet is much larger than yours.

TBF, it is pretty much universally acknowledged that the US is very short on icebreakers and should have around twice as many as it actually has, especially since one of its two largest icebreakers is permanently out of commission (but hasn't yet been struck from the register). The Coast Guard has recently been pushing to replace its current fleet with six new icebreakers.

But it's ultimately a matter of geography and expected area of operations. If you're Brazil or something and not determined to play world cop, you probably don't need any icebreakers. But if you're like the US and have far-northern territory and are engaged in an extended geopolitical competition with another northern power (Russia), you'll need a decent number of them.

[New Chilokver]

Also what is a "nuclear fleet submarine?" I assume it is a ballistic missile submarine but the name is a little vague.

Oh woops. That was from back when I was running a more Russian style navy- nuclear fleet submarine was my designation for an SSBN loaded with anti ship ballistic missiles.

[Rupudska]

The next evolution over "broadside ironclad" is "turret battleship"

be sure to throw in a naval ram

Oh, always. Naval ram is good when others are still using age of sail stuff and especially good for psychological warfare.

>not putting rams even on modern ships

It's like you don't even want that sweet sweet Legitimate Strategy ramming damage

[Blodrike]

Are PT nations welcome here?

[Taihei Tengoku]

Are PT nations welcome here?

Same rules as MT ones: as long as it's interesting

[New Chilokver]

Is there any particular reason both the US and Russia have moved towards smaller SSBNs carrying less missiles?