A little something from my old web site. It doesn't take into account the tendency for balsa to close up a hole, or the tearing effect larger shot can have on various wood consistencies. Purely mathematical, hypothetical and largely rubbish when viewed from some standpoints. Area of shot as pertaining to broadsides at maximum rate of fire. ______________________________________________________________________ The area of a 7/32" round is .3434", and that of a 1/4", .3925". The area of 12 7/32" rounds comes to 4.12", and that of 9 ¼", 3.53". In 24 seconds, the 7/32" ship will deliver 12 X 4 rounds with an area of 16.48". In the same period of time, the 1/4" ship will deliver 9 X 3 rounds with an area of 10.59". The 7/32" ship has a broadside area 155% that of the other. With one triple turret out of action, the 7/32" damage delivered is 12.36", or 116% that of the 1/4" ship. While it is true that water will flow faster through a 1/4" hole, the tendency here is obvious. The 7/32" ship armed with 12 barrels is clearly at an advantage. California’s secondary armament of 8 .177" cannons per side is capable of delivering 26.67" per 24 second period. Together with main armaments, BB-44 would be able to deliver 43.15", or 180% of a Bismarck armed with 8 1/4", 4 .177" secondaries and 3 1/4" torpedoes per side (23.92"). ________________________________________________________________________
Nowadays a 13' turning diameter isn't great, but ships have come a long way in the last fifteen years. I'd always wanted to test my VU against the Big H, but for some reason we kept on getting put on the same team. He's also lucky the Allies never had more than one effective torpedo-boat at a time. That said, there is no REplacement for DISplacement. The Big H could take on any other single ship and walk away from the encounter. It would take a coordinated team effort to sink it. That, or multiple pump failures... USS California is a great dreadnought. Lots of "firepower density", ie tons of guns in a small area. Good luck with it
H-39 also has the advantage of 3 pump outlets in WWCC so the active one takes a tremendous amount of damage and I have yet to see it take the plunge to davy jones.
13' isn't considered very good any more? What kind of tech has dealt with that? I thought it was pretty good for a ship to turn in twice its length from a dead stop. I'm a little concerned about BB44's single rudder and how to get the best out of it. I think a rounded leading edge will help keep water flowing over it, as opposed to braking into turbulence with a blade type. But I won't know till I test things. Kotori87, what are you running?
Jstod, yeah, having 3 pumps set up to come on in cascade pattern was great. I always had a good feel of just how much damage I had. The feedback was very useful. It'll take at least two good wagons to sink an H-39, and I don't think BB44 will be one of them - doesn't have the speed. But, she'll make a good killer for convoys and put the hurt on someone trying to stay with her.
Probably the biggest change has been in weight distribution. In 2004, I ran my rookie ship (DKM Scharnhorst) side-by-side with a Gneisenau. I could turn in a 6-foot diameter, the Gneisenau could only manage a 12-foot circle. The biggest single change was weight distribution. When I refit the old Scharnhorst I'd bought, I stripped out all the little trimming weights at the bow and stern, and concentrated all the heavy objects (co2, batteries, ballast, etc) in the center section of the ship. This significantly reduced the ship's turning moment (rotational inertia), allowing it to turn much faster. Many more skippers are paying attention to weight distribution nowadays, along with other details like rudder shape, prop pitch and thrust angles, etc. If your California is anything like the other California I've seen, it'll turn just fine with an airfoil-shaped rudder and good range of motion. My most recent Big Gun ship was a Viribus Unitis, which I battled up until 2011 when I enlisted. It's a short, tightly-packed porcupine of guns, that literally pivots around its bow when it turns. Very fun to run but unforgiving of mistakes due to its low displacement.
Thanks for the info Kotori. I did something similar with H-39. Most everything was in the center of the ship, including the motors, which were just ahead of the aft turrets. Enlisted? Which branch, MOS?
Against my better advice, Kotori and Gascan both followed in the footsteps of myself and The Other Jeff L and became submarine nuclear operators (Electricians, even, famous for being the snarkiest and best-looking nukes there are).
I have a buddy who was a nuke weaps techie on a boomer. He still has a slightly green glow about him. :>
That recruiter tried to trick me into the nuke route. Fooled him and went gas turbine on the Spruance's. Same pay and accelerated advancement PLUS more fresh air and shore leave!
Ah, but you miss out on the $175/mon nuke pay, the scaled-to-sub-time sub pay, and later, the $525/month nuke supervisory pay Right before I got out, I was a single E6 making like 55-60k/year pllus re-enlistment bonuses received If I could have a couple of lifetimes of functional service, I'd love to try different MOSes and different platforms, just to see what its like. Surface engineering, gunner's mate, Bos'un's mate, some kind of air crew. Alas, no such luck. Maybe in the next life I can check it out.
