Re: SDN World 3 Country Claiming
Posted: 2009-10-22 02:03pm
Excellent.
Wilkens, consider my bitterness quashed.![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
Wilkens, consider my bitterness quashed.
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/
note that 50 tons for spotting planes, intended to represent two aircraft and the crap needed to support them (I assume 25 tons per aircraft). I suggest that anyone who wants to put spotting planes on their ships should be required to account for them in using misc. weight.HMS Sahisahy, Magagascar Battleship laid down 1925
Displacement:
28,325 t light; 30,000 t standard; 31,063 t normal; 31,914 t full load
Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(583.98 ft / 574.97 ft) x 100.00 ft x (29.00 / 29.68 ft)
(178.00 m / 175.25 m) x 30.48 m x (8.84 / 9.05 m)
Armament:
8 - 15.75" / 400 mm 45.0 cal guns - 2,237.69lbs / 1,015.00kg shells, 90 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1925 Model
2 x 3-gun mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread
1 x 2-gun mount on centreline forward
1 raised mount
12 - 5.51" / 140 mm 50.0 cal guns - 83.78lbs / 38.00kg shells, 200 per gun
Quick firing guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1925 Model
6 x Twin mounts on sides, evenly spread
6 - 4.33" / 110 mm 45.0 cal guns - 39.68lbs / 18.00kg shells, 350 per gun
Dual purpose guns in deck and hoist mounts, 1925 Model
6 x Single mounts on centreline, evenly spread
6 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 19,145 lbs / 8,684 kg
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 14.2" / 360 mm 344.49 ft / 105.00 m 14.76 ft / 4.50 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 92 % of normal length
Main Belt inclined 10.00 degrees (positive = in)
- Torpedo Bulkhead - Additional damage containing bulkheads:
1.97" / 50 mm 344.49 ft / 105.00 m 27.50 ft / 8.38 m
Beam between torpedo bulkheads 74.97 ft / 22.85 m
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 17.7" / 450 mm 9.84" / 250 mm 16.1" / 410 mm
2nd: 1.97" / 50 mm 1.97" / 50 mm 1.97" / 50 mm
3rd: 1.97" / 50 mm - 1.97" / 50 mm
- Armoured deck - multiple decks:
For and Aft decks: 6.50" / 165 mm
- Conning towers: Forward 16.14" / 410 mm, Aft 0.00" / 0 mm
Machinery:
Coal and oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 57,501 shp / 42,896 Kw = 23.50 kts
Range 5,400nm at 12.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1,914 tons (33% coal)
Complement:
1,169 - 1,520
Cost:
£9.377 million / $37.506 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 3,460 tons, 11.1 %
- Guns: 3,460 tons, 11.1 %
Armour: 11,840 tons, 38.1 %
- Belts: 3,293 tons, 10.6 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 690 tons, 2.2 %
- Armament: 3,386 tons, 10.9 %
- Armour Deck: 4,128 tons, 13.3 %
- Conning Tower: 344 tons, 1.1 %
Machinery: 1,925 tons, 6.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 11,050 tons, 35.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,738 tons, 8.8 %
Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 0.2 %
- On freeboard deck: 50 tons
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
43,035 lbs / 19,520 Kg = 22.0 x 15.7 " / 400 mm shells or 7.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
Metacentric height 6.0 ft / 1.8 m
Roll period: 17.1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 59 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.81
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.03
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak,
a normal bow and a round stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.652 / 0.655
Length to Beam Ratio: 5.75 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23.98 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 57
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 14.68 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.00 ft / 0.91 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 21.00 %, 22.97 ft / 7.00 m, 21.00 ft / 6.40 m
- Forward deck: 50.00 %, 21.00 ft / 6.40 m, 21.00 ft / 6.40 m
- Aft deck: 10.00 %, 11.02 ft / 3.36 m, 11.02 ft / 3.36 m
- Quarter deck: 19.00 %, 11.02 ft / 3.36 m, 11.02 ft / 3.36 m
- Average freeboard: 18.27 ft / 5.57 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 89.9 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 139.0 %
Waterplane Area: 44,126 Square feet or 4,099 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 100 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 216 lbs/sq ft or 1,052 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.94
- Longitudinal: 1.68
- Overall: 1.00
Adequate machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Excellent accommodation and workspace room
Note: 50 tons misc. for aircraft installation
I think we can work out a Treaty Port/Pondicherry-like agreement. Since The borders of Shepidtan/the Grand Dominion are such as they are, I no longer consider handing off Sri Lanka or Southern India.Mr Bean wrote:Ok extreme delay here sorry everyone.
Ok I am reviewing my PM's and will make my selections for colonies know. However a question. What would something like Hong-Kong cost me? I want to play a Britain that's on a much sharper decline then historically accurate due to mismanagement. Instead of India being under firm control and all those island colonies I'm looking at a Britian forced to scale back it's Imperial ambitions. Perhaps to the point that only Hong-Kong like agreements and settlements remain remain except for one or two colonies(Has anyone claimed Cuba or the New Zeland?). If Shep and Lonestar are willing for example could we work something out like that were Britain maintains a toehold on some small city to serve as harbor and coaling station for the British fleet with no control over the country proper?
How many Hong Kong's could 1 point buy me? 2 points, 3 points?
That'd be France. Erm, what would a reasonable contribution be? Historical economics aren't my strong point.Ryan Thunder wrote: Baernistan (I forget the name)
Also, for the sake of number-crunching, how much are you folks going to contribute?
Code: Select all
CSS Vengeance, Columbian battlecruiser laid down 1920
Displacement:
25 511 t light; 28 066 t standard; 30 000 t normal; 31 547 t full load
Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(656.17 ft / 623.36 ft) x 98.43 ft (Bulges 131.23 ft) x (32.81 / 34.25 ft)
(200.00 m / 190.00 m) x 30.00 m (Bulges 40.00 m) x (10.00 / 10.44 m)
Armament:
4 - 15.75" / 400 mm 45.0 cal guns - 1 969.41lbs / 893.31kg shells, 200 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1920 Model
2 x 2 row twin mounts on centreline, forward evenly spread
8 - 9.84" / 250 mm 45.0 cal guns - 480.81lbs / 218.09kg shells, 500 per gun
Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1920 Model
4 x Twin mounts on sides, aft evenly spread
8 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm 40.0 cal guns - 1.87lbs / 0.85kg shells, 1 000 per gun
Anti-air guns in deck mounts, 1920 Model
4 x Twin mounts on sides, forward evenly spread
8 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm 60.0 cal guns - 0.27lbs / 0.12kg shells, 2 000 per gun
Machine guns in deck mounts, 1920 Model
8 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 11 741 lbs / 5 326 kg
Main DC/AS Mortars
6 - 330.69 lbs / 150.00 kg Depth Charges + 20 reloads - 3.838 t total
in Stern depth charge racks
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 9.84" / 250 mm 374.02 ft / 114.00 m 11.91 ft / 3.63 m
Ends: 3.94" / 100 mm 249.31 ft / 75.99 m 11.91 ft / 3.63 m
Upper: 3.94" / 100 mm 374.02 ft / 114.00 m 8.01 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 92 % of normal length
- Torpedo Bulkhead - Strengthened structural bulkheads:
1.97" / 50 mm 374.02 ft / 114.00 m 22.83 ft / 6.96 m
Beam between torpedo bulkheads 65.62 ft / 20.00 m
- Hull Bulges:
1.97" / 50 mm 164.04 ft / 50.00 m 6.56 ft / 2.00 m
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 3.94" / 100 mm 3.94" / 100 mm 3.94" / 100 mm
2nd: 1.97" / 50 mm 1.97" / 50 mm 1.97" / 50 mm
- Armoured deck - single deck:
For and Aft decks: 3.94" / 100 mm
Forecastle: 3.94" / 100 mm Quarter deck: 3.94" / 100 mm
- Conning towers: Forward 1.97" / 50 mm, Aft 1.97" / 50 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 27 523 shp / 20 532 Kw = 20.00 kts
Range 7 000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 3 482 tons
Complement:
1 139 - 1 481
Cost:
£5.017 million / $20.070 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 2 431 tons, 8.1 %
- Guns: 2 426 tons, 8.1 %
- Weapons: 5 tons, 0.0 %
Armour: 7 097 tons, 23.7 %
- Belts: 2 870 tons, 9.6 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 622 tons, 2.1 %
- Bulges: 78 tons, 0.3 %
- Armament: 689 tons, 2.3 %
- Armour Deck: 2 755 tons, 9.2 %
- Conning Towers: 82 tons, 0.3 %
Machinery: 962 tons, 3.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 15 022 tons, 50.1 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 4 489 tons, 15.0 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
66 248 lbs / 30 049 Kg = 33.9 x 15.7 " / 400 mm shells or 15.6 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.64
Metacentric height 11.1 ft / 3.4 m
Roll period: 16.5 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 81 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.16
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.62
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck,
a normal bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.391 / 0.394
Length to Beam Ratio: 4.75 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 24.97 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 37 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 32.81 ft / 10.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 28.18 ft / 8.59 m, 23.06 ft / 7.03 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 23.06 ft / 7.03 m, 17.95 ft / 5.47 m
- Aft deck: 30.00 %, 17.95 ft / 5.47 m, 17.95 ft / 5.47 m
- Quarter deck: 20.00 %, 17.95 ft / 5.47 m, 17.95 ft / 5.47 m
- Average freeboard: 20.15 ft / 6.14 m
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 73.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 120.7 %
Waterplane Area: 37 543 Square feet or 3 488 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 154 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 290 lbs/sq ft or 1 417 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.38
- Longitudinal: 3.06
- Overall: 1.49
Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Excellent accommodation and workspace room
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather
Thanas wrote:wow, just four gun barrels in two turrets? That is seriously asking to get you ass kicked.
Although it's true some light ships are absurdly long, it's really the length and beam of your slipway(/dry dock) that determines how big of a ship you can build, and which costs to increase. It's doesn't cost any more for infrastructure to build a ship that has an increased block coefficient to gain tonnage. Of course, at some point you can't increase it any further, and need to build a bigger ship. The exact length could be fudged a bit, but the point is that the physical size of the slip the ship would be constructed on is a limit that plagued a number of nation's build programs.Norseman wrote:Erm no... some light ships were absurdly long, being very long helps you in terms of handling speed well. I think that the 20kt limit is fairly apt, everything below that is too small for our notice, everything beyond that is probably going to be in the 30kt+ range.Beowulf wrote:I'd suggest a length limit rather than a "capital ship". Maybe something like 400-450 ft?
Sure, the waterline beam isn't... add in the 33 foot wide bulges though. Accounting for those makes it one of the beamiest pre-WWII warships, if not the beamiest.Thanas wrote:I am not sure that it is too beamy, the relationship of beam to length seems to be the same as in Von der Tann.
The water reclamation system is the critical component and I'm not sure that in 1925 the tech exists to adequately re-purpose it. So here is Ryan's dilemna:Ma Deuce wrote:It is possible for Panama to support bigger locks. In 1939 US began construction on a third set of locks that would have been 1200 feet long by 140 feet wide, intended to accommodate a new generation of warships including the Montana Class battleships. This of course was canceled on the US entry into WWII and never resumed. The reason the canal is near capacity today is because of the sheer volume of traffic going through it, not the size of the locks. However, the third locks project has recently been resurrected, building upon the abandoned US excavations. The new locks are to be 1400 x 180 feet (not to mention 60 feet deep, to accommodate newer mega-containerships), and are intended to have a lockwater reclamation system to ease their burden on the water supply.Didn't Wilkens say that changing lock size would be impossible with tech due to the water simply not being there?
Suriname is open, but Bali, Flores, and Sulawesi are claimed by Klavo's Indonesia-Malaya so you should talk to him.Karmic Knight wrote:Would anyone mind me picking up the Dutch South American territories, Bali, Flores, and Sulawesi?
Really, I thought he stopped his southern island claims at Java. If he did not, I will just give up those claims entirely, my idea was that the DEIC retreated to those islands after being kicked out of Klavo's Indonesian islands.Steve wrote:Suriname is open, but Bali, Flores, and Sulawesi are claimed by Klavo's Indonesia-Malaya so you should talk to him.
Don't know, do you have Microsoft .Net Framework though? Version 2.0 or 3.0 is needed.Master_Baerne wrote:Hey, does Springsharp work for Vista? It seems not to.
Try Win 7? Both V2.1 and v3.0b3 work for me.Master_Baerne wrote:Hey, does Springsharp work for Vista? It seems not to.
They all work fine for me in Vista.Beowulf wrote:Try Win 7? Both V2.1 and v3.0b3 work for me.Master_Baerne wrote:Hey, does Springsharp work for Vista? It seems not to.
I see, thanks for the info. Probably should have asked about Bolivia and Paraguay as well but that may be a bit much and seeing as they're sort of landlocked and away from my other holding in the region that could be difficult what with having to go through Argentina to reach the latterKarmic Knight wrote:Peru has not been claimed to my knowledge, and Chile is part of Raj's Chile/Argentina combination.