At the last few battles, I’ve noticed some single rudder ships that turned pretty well. They were short beamy ships. Chatting with other captains at the events confirmed that short ships with wide beams turn better. Hmm … that got me thinking. So short and fat is better? Wonder what ships fit that category … So I imported the MWC Shiplist into Excel, added an extra column, and did up a quick calculating function to give me a length to beam ratio for all the ships on the list. After sorting the list by the ratio, some interesting stats appeared. Note that I did not include the Monitor class ships. Best Length to Beam Ratio: USS Florida(bulged) DN, 20.3% Second Best Length to Beam Ratio: USS Mississippi/Kilkis PDN, 20.2% Third Best Length to Beam Ratio: Evstafi PDN, 19.6% Best Axis Length to Beam Ratio: Westfalen DN, 18.6% (#6 on list) The Westfalen is also the first 3 shaft and the first twin rudder ship on the list Of the Top 10, 7 are Dreadnoughts and 3 are Pre-dreadnoughts. All three PDNs were ranked #2 - 4. The first non-DN or PDN to show up on the list: Provincien CAE (Netherlands), 16.5% (#37 on list) Beamiest Battleship: USS South Dakota BB, 15.9% (#50 on list) Beamiest Battle Cruiser: Yavuz BC (Turkey), 15.9% (#51 on list) Some popular ships in the hobby: Bismarck BB, 14.4% (#99) North Carolina BB, 14.8% (#87) Yamato BB, 14.8% (#86) Nagato(bulged) DN, 15.4% (#72) West Virginia DN, 18.3% (#10) Von Der Tann BC, 15.5% (#71) Scharnhorst BC, 13% (#148) Iron Duke DN, 14.4% (#96) Invincible BC, 13.9% (#115) Deutschland CA, 11.5% (#216) Gloire CL, 9.7% (#404) So does this actually mean anything? Yes and no. Many other factors play into a ships turning ability. But if someone was looking for a place to start for a turn and burn slugger, the length to beam ratio might be a place to start.
I like it! Maybe the reinvigorated Evstafi will turn well I have done much study and theory-to-practice on my rudder design and positioning.
I'm not so sure it's worthless information at all. Thanks for gathering all of that data together! Of course, I wonder how rotating turrets, such as we have in Big Gun, factor in. Rob
Nice work. I think that the rudder layout will have some effect. Twin rudders probably do a lot to counter the effects of having a leaner hull form. I am probably stating the obvious though. :|
LOL! I Guess I had that coming! But seriously, I suppose I should have said: I wonder how you would go about factoring in the effect rotating turrets have in balancing a longer, narrower hull against a shorter, stouter hull with fixed guns. There would, I think, be a compensating effect, but I'm not sure how one would go about measuring it. Rob
You are very on to something. In kayaking, there are 2 main types of boats: river boats and sea boats. River boats are shorter and have a higher beam ratio for maneuverability, whereas sea boats are long and slender for speed and better tracking (going in a straight line). The shortest boats are called play boats or rodeo boats. They are not really for designed for doing anything but being maneuverable. Here is an example of what a very skilled user can do with a play boat: www.youtube.com/watch
This isn't surprising. Someone in the hobby developed a rating system called the Combat Effectiveness Factor (CEF). A key part of it is a maneuverability factor in which length and beam are major variables. Though not perfect, it is a pretty good method to make general comparisons between ships. I used this system to select my two latest ships, the Baden and Queen Elizabeth classes. They come out as the most combat effective Axis and Allied vessels within my transport restrictions.