AHC/WI: Brandenburg Class Layout as the Pre-Dreadnought Standard

Driftless

Donor
Historically that was one of the issues with the A-P-Y arrangement, as the P turret magazines tended to be rather warm due to their proximately to the boilers.

I looked at the layouts of several later ships (i.e. BC's Queen Mary, Lion,etc) with mid ship turrets on the center line. Even with much longer hulls, the magazines were still shoehorned in between boilers and engine room. As you point out, that had to get a bit warm. I could also imagine concerns with hot cinders near the magazines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Glatton_(1914)

A Court of Enquiry held immediately afterwards found that the explosion had occurred in the midships 6-inch magazine situated between the boiler and engine rooms. The cause was more difficult to establish, but the Court did note that the stokers were in the habit of piling the red-hot clinker and ashes from the boilers against the bulkhead directly adjoining the magazine to cool down before they were sent up the ash ejector. The magazine was well insulated with 5 inches (13 cm) of cork, covered by wood planking .75 inches (1.9 cm) thick and provided with special cooling equipment so it was not likely that the cordite had spontaneously combusted.

The Germans were on to something with the third turret, but were too ahead of the game I think.
 
Why not something like the Satsuma class arrangement? A ship designed from the start as a semi-dreadnought with 8 inch secondaries could probably be lighter than Satsuma, which was originally planned as a dreadnought with twelve 12 inch guns.

Why not? Because the superposed turrets were trademark American designs - and you get six 8in guns firing ahead.
 

Delta Force

Banned
I looked at the layouts of several later ships (i.e. BC's Queen Mary, Lion,etc) with mid ship turrets on the center line. Even with much longer hulls, the magazines were still shoehorned in between boilers and engine room. As you point out, that had to get a bit warm. I could also imagine concerns with hot cinders near the magazines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Glatton_(1914)

The Germans were on to something with the third turret, but were too ahead of the game I think.

I think a few other ships were lost or otherwise suffered magazine problems with the P turret.

Oo, I used them as a standard layout in a story of mine once

Sounds interesting. Which story was it in?

No, HMS Prince Albert...

Four single main battery turrets, all at the same level. Commissioned a year after Roanoke.

For some reason when I looked for HMS Prince Albert earlier, I couldn't find it. I must have made a typo. The typo wasn't SMS Prinz Adalbert, I knew about that and searched for it separately.

Why not? Because the superposed turrets were trademark American designs - and you get six 8in guns firing ahead.

Since the major issue with stacked turrets from a usability perspective (as opposed to center of gravity/silhouette) was the inability to separately traverse the turrets and the differing gun calibers, I wonder if it would have been possible to simply use the same guns in both turrets? It would certainly look interesting.
 

Driftless

Donor
Since the major issue with stacked turrets from a usability perspective (as opposed to center of gravity/silhouette) was the inability to separately traverse the turrets and the differing gun calibers, I wonder if it would have been possible to simply use the same guns in both turrets? It would certainly look interesting.

From the little I've read about the two tier turrets, the theory was that the 12" & 13" guns were slow loading, so parking the faster firing 8" on top wasn't anticipated to be a handicap. Actual performance wasn't so successful - it proved to be an evolutionary dead end. As you say, the two story turret could not be aimed separately, and I believe they used a common hoist for shells and propellant, which sounds a bit challenging by itself. If they used the same size gun in both tiers, wouldn't the loading time for the upper tier be even longer?

The center of gravity issue - was that because the two story turrets were not counterbalanced, at least for the Kearsarge & Kentucky? Would training the turret broadside and the subsequent shift in weight of the barrels cant the ship over a bit, or were there other problems?

Were there any single tier 3 or 4 gun turrets in that era?

Back to the Brandenburgs: SMS_Viribus_Unitis had written earlier that the mix in calibers was due to the long L40 becoming available later, which I took to mean that the additional barrel length was not an issue on the bow and stern for turrets "A" & "Y". However, the upgraded longer gun length couldn't be accomodated for the "P" turret, with the hull & superstructure format being set.

IF they were going to go with six 28cm L40 guns AND maintain the same hull length and superstructure format, I think they might be stuck with a pair of single gun wing turrets, or casemate guns (which could have marginal use in a seaway) What terminology was used to indicate position for wing turrets?

By-the-way; I've always found the Brandenburgs to be handsome looking ships too.
 
Last edited:

Delta Force

Banned
From the little I've read about the two tier turrets, the theory was that the 12" & 13" guns were slow loading, so parking the faster firing 8" on top wasn't anticipated to be a handicap. Actual performance wasn't so successful - it proved to be an evolutionary dead end. As you say, the two story turret could not be aimed separately, and I believe they used a common hoist for shells and propellant, which sounds a bit challenging by itself. If they used the same size gun in both tiers, wouldn't the loading time for the upper tier be even longer?

It probably depends on why it took longer for the upper turrets to load. If it's simply due to the distances involved, heavier guns would have a lessened disadvantage, because they take longer to load anyways.

The center of gravity issue - was that because the two story turrets were not counterbalanced, at least for the Kearsarge & Kentucky? Would training the turret broadside and the subsequent shift in weight of the barrels cant the ship over a bit, or were there other problems?

Ships want to keep their metacentric height within a certain range, and having turrets and other weight located high above the deck raises the center of gravity and lowers stability. Warships closer to the modern era usually encounter issues with metacentric height when mounting radar and sensor arrays, which can be quite heavy and mounted quite high.

Were there any single tier 3 or 4 gun turrets in that era?

The Italian dreadnought Dante Alighieri was the first battleship designed with a triple turret (~1909), but the Austro-Hungarian Tegetthoff class dreadnought Viribus Unitus of the was the first battleship to enter service with a triple turret, which used a turret originally designed by Skoda for the Imperial Russian Gangut class dreadnoughts. The French Normandie class was the first designed with quadruple turrets (~1912), but none were completed as a battleship (Béarn was completed as an aircraft carrier). In 1937 the French Dunkerque class became the first battleship with a quadruple turret.

Back to the Brandenburgs: SMS_Viribus_Unitis had written earlier that the mix in calibers was due to the long L40 becoming available later, which I took to mean that the additional barrel length was not an issue on the bow and stern for turrets "A" & "Y". However, the upgraded longer gun length couldn't be accomodated for the "P" turret, with the hull & superstructure format being set.

Turrets A and Y had more room for a longer length gun, as turret P would need at least 55 inches of additional clearance to enable it to fully rotate with the same clearance as before in a single direction, or 110 inches total in additional clearance.

IF they were going to go with six 28cm L40 guns AND maintain the same hull length and superstructure format, I think they might be stuck with a pair of single gun wing turrets, or casemate guns (which could have marginal use in a seaway) What terminology was used to indicate position for wing turrets?

This is a diagram of the turret designations on HMS Dreadnought:

Dreadnought%20Gun%20Positions.jpg


Here are some diagrams for the turret designations used in the Imperial German Navy (they didn't give special labels for fore, center, and aft locations):

tech-062_turrets.jpg


By-the-way; I've always found the Brandenburgs to be handsome looking ships too.

Many of the earlier ships have a certain charm to them.
 
Top