Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

"King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art

This fascinating series is a combination of historical seafaring, swashbuckling adventure, and high technological science-fiction. Join us in a discussion!
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by runsforcelery   » Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:14 am

runsforcelery
First Space Lord

Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 11:39 am
Location: South Carolina

pokermind wrote:Hey RFC I have some questions about the Delthak IIs?

The Delthak IIs the broad side armament has 22 6" / 45s that have tubes 22.5'. OK to get across the ocean you have to bring the cannons inboard to close and seal the shutters right? Well the ships are 40' wide so the gun must cross the center to be brought inboard. They must be secured or you get a loose cannon. Thus they cannot be in line but must be staggered IE:

| | | | | | | | | | |
.| | | | | | | | | | |

So how will these heavy guns be moved and secured carriage on rails?

The 3 feet of free-board fore and aft, does this mean 3' on just the bow and three feet of the casement is under water or does the run all the free-board run all the way way around.

Poker

Also what are the 11" guns? a tail pinned mount with one in the center of the casement to fire on either side and the others in the curved ends of the casement? They can't be longer than 11" /20s and probably shorter Using a turntable mount a 11" /35 might be shoehorned in and still secured for blue water sailing.


RFC wrote:
Delthak II – class broadside ironclad gunboat

Dimensions:
Length (waterline): 160’
Length (overall): 160’
Beam: 40’
Draft (normal): 10’
Draft (full): 10’3”

Armament:
22 x 6”/45 M895 BL guns 3 x 11 x 3 (115-pound AP shell; 200/gun)
Weight of broadside (13 guns): 1,495 pounds
Weight fore or aft (3 guns): 345 pounds

Armor:
Casemate: thickness= 3”; length = 146’; height = 14’; inclined 16˚
Freeboard fore & aft: thickness=3”; length = 14’; height = 4’
Casemate roof/decks: 1”
Conning tower: 6” (no slope)

Machinery:
Coal fired boilers, double-expansion engines, direct drive, 2 shafts, 45 sdp (1,147 shp) = 14 knots (12.2 Old Earth knots)
Range 1,800nm at 9.5 knots (8.25 Old Earth knots)
Range 3,500 nm at 5.7 knots (5 Old Earth knots)
Bunker (normal): 59 tons
Bunker (max displacement): 115 tons

Complement: 158

Cost: CM 168,000

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Guns: 281 tons, 18.4 %
Armor: 286 tons, 18.7 %
Machinery: 166 tons, 10.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 448 tons, 29.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 348 tons, 22.7 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (penetrating hits to sink ship): 17 x 6”/45
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.81
Metacentric height 3.3 ft / 1.0 m
Roll period: 9.2 seconds
Steadiness as gun platform (Average = 50 %): 68 %
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.35

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low forecastle, low quarterdeck , a normal bow and a round stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.836 / 0.838
Length to Beam Ratio: 4.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 14.6 knots (12.65 Old Earth knots)s
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
- Forecastle: 10.00 %, 4.00 ft
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 10.00 ft
- Aft deck: 50.00 %, 10.00 ft
- Quarter deck: 10.00 %, 4.00 ft
- Average: 8.80 ft
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 105.1 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 91.7 %
Waterplane Area: 5,823 Square feet
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 100 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 82 lbs/sq ft
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.02
- Longitudinal: 4.66
- Overall: 1.19
Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Adequate accommodation and workspace room
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily


No, they don't need to be brought inboard. For reasons I'm not going to share at the moment. :P

And one of the reasons I thought I hadn't shared the stats on these ships is that I haven't . . . in terms of their final design. Among other things, the 11" are gone. Note that I said "among other things." About exactly what those other things are, author saith no further at this time. :)


"Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as Piglet came back from the dead.
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by AirTech   » Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:14 am

AirTech
Captain of the List

Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:37 am
Location: Deeeep South (Australia) (most of the time...)

Joat42 wrote:[quote/]


To expand on Dilandu's answer, generally speaking most larger ships has their engines mounted in the middle of the ship to avoid unnecessary longitudinal stress bending because of uneven weight loading. Big cargo haulers have their engines further back but that is compensated by the cargo they are carrying. Loading a cargo-ship takes a lot of planning and calculations as to spread the weight correctly and making sure the ship doesn't become top-heavy.

Long shafts is nothing unusual at all in ships, which is why the shafts are manufactured to exacting standards to avoid vibrations and excessive wear on the bearings.

This is also a reason why azi-pods have become more popular with new ships, since you can essentially have the engine room anywhere by optimizing the weight distribution and lessen stresses on the hull. Of course, when a ship passes a certain size it's back to the old direct coupled drive shaft because azi-pods doesn't (yet) have enough brute strength (economically speaking) to propel a larger ship effectively.


Some really big ships are being fitted with azi-pods for maneuverability (look up the Queen Mary 2). If you have propellers at all four corners you can turn the ship around in its own length (a feature used by some of the newest cruise liners to eliminate the need for tugs for docking). For a warship having distributed power systems could be a serious advantage - shaft drives are simple but a hydraulic drive system would also be possible, multiple smaller engines could be another option, permitting a standard engine in both the larger and smaller ships - the bigger ones just have more of them.
Shaft drives limit the options in this regard - you generally had one big engine per shaft, with most warships having two to five shafts, single propellers are almost never used on warships, only cargo vessels where efficiency wins over reliability and redundancy.
Boilers however need to be near the metacenter of the ship to minimize slosh when maneuvering(using water tube boilers helps with this). (Boilers are heavy too, and big boilers are very heavy, Scotch boilers especially)
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by pokermind   » Sat Oct 11, 2014 8:04 pm

pokermind
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4002
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:58 am
Location: Jerome, Idaho, USA

This post is to fill space so as not to crash the controls to the side and to keep you and the Duck Happy

six

five

four

three

two

one

Now to the next post with oversize art. Edited to lower space
Last edited by pokermind on Sat Oct 11, 2014 9:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CPO Poker Mind Image and, Mangy Fur the Smart Alick Spacecat.

"Better to be hung for a hexapuma than a housecat," Com. Pang Yau-pau, ART.
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by pokermind   » Sat Oct 11, 2014 8:09 pm

pokermind
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4002
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:58 am
Location: Jerome, Idaho, USA

My latest try at the Delthak II class River Gunboats:

Image

Sorry Duck but drawing is this size. OK coal bunkers between two alleys to the stern alley has the shaft or starboard or port engine, to the bow stairs between lower and upper deck one facing forward to crew quarters one aft to the boiler rooms. Each of the six bunkers will contain a sixth of the coal load. steam launch is shown on deck I'll have to move it aft even though it will then be marred by the rigging of the crane on the short mast. Note in cut way that the mast well is above the stairway between gun deck and the octagonal pilot house.

As to guns, well RFC is not talking at this time ;)

Poker
CPO Poker Mind Image and, Mangy Fur the Smart Alick Spacecat.

"Better to be hung for a hexapuma than a housecat," Com. Pang Yau-pau, ART.
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by Captain Igloo   » Sun Oct 12, 2014 6:31 am

Captain Igloo
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 269
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 4:02 pm

pokermind wrote:My latest try at the Delthak II class River Gunboats:


Images SNIPPED


Look HERE for plans of the original USS Cairo
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by doug941   » Mon Oct 13, 2014 2:14 am

doug941
Commander

Posts: 228
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 6:21 pm

In case anyone still has questions about guns and mountings, navweaps.com has a very good collection of photos in addition to weapon stats.
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by pokermind   » Tue Oct 14, 2014 10:12 am

pokermind
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4002
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:58 am
Location: Jerome, Idaho, USA

In Safe Hold FAQ page http://www.davidweber.net/faqs/index/series:6 we find the description of the King Harold VII. David wrote, “I hadn’t looked at Triumph when I started playing with the design, because I’d forgotten that she’d ever existed (although she served in the Royal British Navy, she was actually designed and built by Vickers for the Chilean Navy and only ended up in the RN because the Brits bought her from Chile to prevent her from being sold to Russia during the Russo-Japanese War of 1904). Once I'd turned KH VIII back into a pre-dreadnought battleship from an armored cruiser, however, I decided to see if I could find a historical pre-dreadnought she compared to, and I think I found one. Bear in mind that Triumph carried her main armament in turrets rather than gunshields.” Address of Wikipedia article on her http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Triumph_%281903%29 and a photo from the article:

Image

David gives the following description of the hull:

Hull form characteristics:

Hull has raised forecastle, low quarterdeck, extended bulbous bow, & transom stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.570 / 0.324
Length to Beam Ratio: 5.65 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 28.54 knots (24.8 Old Earth knots)
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 61 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 80
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 40.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 5.00 ft / 1.52 m
Freeboard: maximum = 30’; minimum = 15’; average = 20’6”


Poker
CPO Poker Mind Image and, Mangy Fur the Smart Alick Spacecat.

"Better to be hung for a hexapuma than a housecat," Com. Pang Yau-pau, ART.
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by Dilandu   » Tue Oct 14, 2014 12:17 pm

Dilandu
Admiral

Posts: 2542
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 1:44 pm
Location: Russia

Well, they were really good for their size. They were perfect "anti-Garibaldi" for Chile.
------------------------------

Oh well, if shortening the front is what the Germans crave,
Let's shorten it to very end - the length of Fuhrer's grave.

(Red Army lyrics from 1945)
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by Guardiandashi   » Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:37 pm

Guardiandashi
Ensign

Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:21 pm

Pokermind I realize I am not a naval architect but on your king Haarahld I was wondering if it would help to shift the rear main gun a bit further back, then put the main engine room aka the steam engines just behind, or a little bit behind the rear stack, with the steam plants under and in front of the stacks. likely with a "firewall bulkhead" separating those engineering spaces.

this would in my mind have the advantages of:
putting the engines closer to the rear of the ship thus reducing the length of the propeller shafts.
keeping the steam plants and the engines compartmentalized without making the steam lines any longer than necessary
putting at least some of the propulsion systems mass in the center (mostly) of the ship

I believe they would also likely have the coal bunkers separated, and likely with asbestos liners between the bunker and boiler rooms to try to keep the coal bunkers temperature stabilized.

I also seem to remember several navies used the coal bunkers as additional "armor spaces" to protect the vitals such as the steam, engines, and powder magazines because those were typically a lot more lethal if they had a shell detonate in them.
Top
Re: "King Haarahld VI"-class, paint art
Post by pokermind   » Sat Oct 18, 2014 8:58 am

pokermind
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4002
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:58 am
Location: Jerome, Idaho, USA

Progress on Delthak II Class:

Image

Poker
CPO Poker Mind Image and, Mangy Fur the Smart Alick Spacecat.

"Better to be hung for a hexapuma than a housecat," Com. Pang Yau-pau, ART.
Top

Return to Safehold