You are not logged in.

1

Thursday, October 14th 2004, 7:01pm

Improved E class 1923

7500t light cruisers, 4 laid down in 1923, just a small step ahead the E class.

HMS Drake
HMS Cochrane
HMS Pellew
HMS Howard



The aircraft aboard are a pair of Fairey IIId, the standard seaplane for the RN of that time. No hangar, stored in the deck.



Improved E Class, British Light Cruiser laid down 1923

Displacement:
7.231 t light; 7.500 t standard; 8.700 t normal; 9.626 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
550,19 ft / 540,00 ft x 56,00 ft x 19,00 ft (normal load)
167,70 m / 164,59 m x 17,07 m x 5,79 m

Armament:
8 - 6,00" / 152 mm guns (4x2 guns), 108,00lbs / 48,99kg shells, 1923 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
6 - 4,00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32,00lbs / 14,51kg shells, 1923 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships
8 - 1,57" / 40,0 mm guns (2x4 guns), 1,95lbs / 0,88kg shells, 1923 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on centreline, all aft
8 - 0,79" / 20,0 mm guns (4x2 guns), 0,24lbs / 0,11kg shells, 1923 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships
Weight of broadside 1.074 lbs / 487 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
16 - 21,0" / 533,4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3,00" / 76 mm 415,00 ft / 126,49 m 10,00 ft / 3,05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 118 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 3,50" / 89 mm - -
2nd: 1,00" / 25 mm - -
3rd: 1,00" / 25 mm - -
4th: 0,50" / 13 mm - -

- Armour deck: 1,00" / 25 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 82.336 shp / 61.423 Kw = 32,00 kts
Range 9.520nm at 15,00 kts (Bunkerage = 2.162 tons)

Complement:
449 - 585

Cost:
£2,185 million / $8,740 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 134 tons, 1,5 %
Armour: 972 tons, 11,2 %
- Belts: 507 tons, 5,8 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0 %
- Armament: 94 tons, 1,1 %
- Armour Deck: 370 tons, 4,3 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0,0 %
Machinery: 2.752 tons, 31,6 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3.298 tons, 37,9 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1.469 tons, 16,9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 75 tons, 0,9 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
9.046 lbs / 4.103 Kg = 83,8 x 6,0 " / 152 mm shells or 1,2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,29
Metacentric height 3,3 ft / 1,0 m
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 61 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,38
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,23

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0,530
Length to Beam Ratio: 9,64 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23,24 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 60 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20,00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0,00 ft / 0,00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 28,00 ft / 8,53 m
- Forecastle (30 %): 22,00 ft / 6,71 m
- Mid (50 %): 22,00 ft / 6,71 m
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 14,00 ft / 4,27 m (22,00 ft / 6,71 m before break)
- Stern: 14,00 ft / 4,27 m
- Average freeboard: 21,12 ft / 6,44 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 115,6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 118,7 %
Waterplane Area: 20.018 Square feet or 1.860 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 114 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 93 lbs/sq ft or 455 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0,93
- Longitudinal: 1,90
- Overall: 1,00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily

2

Thursday, October 14th 2004, 9:03pm

The main guns are in double mounts, but aren't in turrets?

3

Thursday, October 14th 2004, 9:19pm

Quoted

The main guns are in double mounts, but aren't in turrets?


Yep, open mounts, this is still an evolutionary step in the CL development I´ve planned. I think full turrets are still a few years away (Think of conservative minds in the design boureau).

4

Thursday, October 21st 2004, 6:08pm

Updated

HoOmAn

Keeper of the Sacred Block Coefficient

  • Send private message

5

Thursday, October 21st 2004, 6:17pm

Cool! ;o)

6

Thursday, October 21st 2004, 8:08pm

Thanks Hooman, glad you like her.

7

Thursday, October 21st 2004, 9:46pm

Ditta eer ditto on the Cool bit!

8

Thursday, October 21st 2004, 9:55pm

I don't like the look of the 6" gun shields. Either side or plan views.

HoOmAn

Keeper of the Sacred Block Coefficient

  • Send private message

9

Friday, October 22nd 2004, 10:01am

You don´t like them? Well....

Those 6" twin shields are the same as on the spanish CL PRINCIPE ALFONSO.

In fact she´s much like MIGUEL DE CERVANTES, a sistership to PRINVIPE ALFONSO.

On PRINCIPE ALFONSO A and E mount were singles while another twin mount was installed amidship (C position). Her sistership got different mounts forward and aft and traded the twin amidship against a crane and a catapult.

The whole class (including also ALMIRANTE CEVERA) came to live due to a cooperation ebtween spanish navy yard El Ferrol and british yards. The design was an improved E-class designed by Sir Phillip Watts who also designed the Es.

Am I right, Gravina?

HoOmAn

10

Friday, October 22nd 2004, 12:12pm

You´re right Hooman, at least that was the general idea.

When I was looking for data about RN I noticed that I had plenty of 4000-5000t cruisers but I only had a handful of bigger cls, so I though that the next logical step would be to repeat the E class but in an improved version.

So, how to improve the Es?, the first thing to do was to put the single mounts into double, allowing a better broadside, also improving the AA guns, light and heavy and keeping most of the other good features the E class had (the Es were quite a nice class).

This was not going to be a new design, just fast follow on, the RN wanted to have them as soon as posible. The result was a class very similar to the Spanish one, thought the spanish ships had a different gun layout and had no planes (the crane and the catapult Hooman mentions was only installed in one ship, in the late 30s- early 40s, and was never fully operative).

As for the look of the shields, it was not fully intentional, but yes, they resemble a lot to the ones of the spanish cruisers. These boxy shields were quite common among RN ships of that time.