Alternate warships of nations

Norfolk, United States Light Heavy Cruiser laid down 1925

Displacement:
9,621 t light; 10,230 t standard; 11,951 t normal; 13,327 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
604.27 ft / 600.00 ft x 60.00 ft (Bulges 65.00 ft) x 25.00 ft (normal load)
184.18 m / 182.88 m x 18.29 m (Bulges 19.81 m) x 7.62 m

Armament:
12 - 7.44" / 189 mm guns (4x3 guns), 205.92lbs / 93.40kg shells, 1925 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts - superfiring
8 - 5.38" / 137 mm guns in single mounts, 77.86lbs / 35.32kg shells, 1925 Model
Breech loading guns in Coles/Ericsson turrets
on centreline, evenly spread, all raised mounts
6 - 3.00" / 76.2 mm guns in single mounts, 13.50lbs / 6.12kg shells, 1925 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on centreline, evenly spread, all raised mounts
12 - 0.79" / 20.1 mm guns in single mounts, 0.25lbs / 0.11kg shells, 1925 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 3,178 lbs / 1,441 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 200

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3.50" / 89 mm 320.00 ft / 97.54 m 10.30 ft / 3.14 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Upper: 0.50" / 13 mm 390.00 ft / 118.87 m 8.00 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 82 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces

- Torpedo Bulkhead and Bulges:
1.00" / 25 mm 390.00 ft / 118.87 m 14.56 ft / 4.44 m

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 2.00" / 51 mm - 1.50" / 38 mm
2nd: 1.00" / 25 mm - -

- Armour deck: 2.00" / 51 mm, Conning tower: 2.00" / 51 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 70,904 shp / 52,895 Kw = 30.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 16.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 3,098 tons

Complement:
570 - 742

Cost:
£3.249 million / $12.996 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 397 tons, 3.3 %
Armour: 1,967 tons, 16.5 %
- Belts: 559 tons, 4.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 210 tons, 1.8 %
- Armament: 340 tons, 2.8 %
- Armour Deck: 836 tons, 7.0 %
- Conning Tower: 23 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 2,302 tons, 19.3 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 4,925 tons, 41.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2,329 tons, 19.5 %
Miscellaneous weights: 30 tons, 0.3 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
13,499 lbs / 6,123 Kg = 65.6 x 7.4 " / 189 mm shells or 2.2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.02
Metacentric height 2.4 ft / 0.7 m
Roll period: 17.5 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 80 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.94
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.23

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise aft of midbreak, raised quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0.429
Length to Beam Ratio: 9.23 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 24.49 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 51 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 65
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 9.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 26.94 ft / 8.21 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 20.15 ft / 6.14 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.15 ft / 5.23 m (20.15 ft / 6.14 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 18.15 ft / 5.53 m (17.15 ft / 5.23 m before break)
- Stern: 18.15 ft / 5.53 m
- Average freeboard: 19.42 ft / 5.92 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 134.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 140.8 %
Waterplane Area: 22,590 Square feet or 2,099 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 122 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 125 lbs/sq ft or 611 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.96
- Longitudinal: 1.52
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily



The USS Norfolk was a testbed for the navy.

In 1925, Congress officially released funds for 2 heavy cruiser designs after the Hobbs report revealed the tragic nature of the Heavy cruisers in the WNT era.

While originally the USN was going to go for a 3 X 8 inch gun design (Northampton Design) for both, Senator Douglas Renton who was a close associate to several gun manufacturers talked to then Admiral Whitby about a 12 X 7/44 inch.

Whitby was interested and set Rear Admiral Morrison to investigate this possibility.

Morrison discovered the characteristics of the new 7" 44 were impressive and the turret design was already drawn up by the design board when they dropped a bombshell.

The designer of the turret had also found a way to auto load shells.

Morrison informed his brother admirals whose shock led quickly to suspicion and they charged him with investigating the design.

Admiral Morrison was on the verge of ordering a autoloader and 7 inch turret for testing on a older vessel when rumors from Japan led to a war scare causing Congress to push the design through untested.

The Norfolk and Northampton were completed within two years with proponents of both ships crowing over every one of their strengths while downplaying weaknesses.

The navy though was not impressed with Northampton but the cheapness of the ship compared to the larger Norfolk and its tested guns and workable turrets.

The Norfolk tested well with her autoloader seeming to work well when her captain, Captain Richard Appleton requested permission to test the guns in various weathers and climes until destruction.

Admiral Whitby accepted this proposal and the Norfolk headed into the Caribbean and Pacific where a terrifying fact became obvious.

The guns autoloaders, while impressive, were not capable to taking heat and humidity without four times the matinence of a conventional gun system which would be proven when gas from the system burst through a pipe and filled the turret nearly killing all the gunners.

Appleton praised the system and its idea but demanded the autoloader be removed from the Norfolk for, in his own words to, "-the well being of every American Sailor in the service."

Senator Renton and his supporters came down on Appleton nearly sinking his career until Admiral Whitby, age 84, demanded the removal immediately and then retired leaving the unblemished Morrison as his successor.

Morrison, to keep the peace and to bring forth ideas he had, asked the company to design a autoloader for a 5" 38 caliber autoloader that could work in all weathers and climes and to continue work on the 7 inch cannon.

This quieted down the controversy, Morrison would then show the Navy he supported them by making the able Captain Appleton his aide and remove the autoloader.

The Norfolk herself would see little service in the Great Pacific War as she was ordered to perform convoy raiding in the Mediterranean after the sinking and capture of Leviathan and the George Washington.

In 1934 she received an improved autoloader variant that shockingly to all involved worked on her 7 inch guns along with her 5 inch guns. Though not as fast as hoped, the fact they worked well in weathers including arctic and summer weather with less matinence needed impressed many. By this time though the newer 8 inch cannon shells and death of Senator Renton had caused any further work to seize.

At Yap she would be part of a cruiser squadron with Northampton and her sisters where her guns proved their magic as they overwhelmed a trio of light cruisers seeking to torpedo the squadron.

Though damaged heavily, the Norfolk survived the battle with 2 battle stars for her service.

However, her fate had been sealed and on August 14th, 1936 the gallant and impressive vessel docked after her last voyage to the scrapyard.

By June 1937, the ship would not exist.
 
Surcouf is analagous to a modern cruise-missile armed submarine. Both are armed for a land attack mission but Surcouf was premature.
To be more accurate Surcouf was designed during the interwar era when unrestricted submarine warfare wasn't legal and thus sticking some heavy cruiser scale guns on a sub for commerce raiding was actually a viable idea
 
Surcouf is analagous to a modern cruise-missile armed submarine. Both are armed for a land attack mission but Surcouf was premature.
To be more accurate Surcouf was designed during the interwar era when unrestricted submarine warfare wasn't legal and thus sticking some heavy cruiser scale guns on a sub for commerce raiding was actually a viable idea
Basically the latter, Surcouf had 8" guns and an airplane to spot the fall of shot for them so that she could theoretically outrange and destroy 6" armed auxiliary cruisers and armed merchantmen without proper fire control systems in a surface fight, those were expected to be the escorts for most convoys in the period Surcouf was designed in. She was not meant for land attack
 
It is not as if other countries did not use the same Cruiser Submarine loophole anyway. Thought Surcouf was the most extreme. Others had at most 6" guns iirc. (British had a 12" submarine once, the M class)

But yes, that loophole was closed in LNT.
 
USS Union, United States Ironclad Battleship laid down 1875

Displacement:
12,048 t light; 12,694 t standard; 13,674 t normal; 14,459 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(340.00 ft / 337.36 ft) x 68.00 ft x (31.00 / 32.53 ft)
(103.63 m / 102.83 m) x 20.73 m x (9.45 / 9.92 m)

Armament:
4 - 15.00" / 381 mm 25.0 cal guns - 1,211.75lbs / 549.64kg shells, 100 per gun
Muzzle loading guns in Coles/Ericsson turret mounts, 1865 Model
1 x Twin mount on centreline forward
1 x Twin mount on centreline aft
4 - 9.00" / 229 mm 45.0 cal guns - 307.56lbs / 139.51kg shells, 150 per gun
Muzzle loading guns in casemate mounts, 1870 Model
4 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
4 hull mounts in casemates- Limited use in heavy seas
8 - 0.40" / 10.2 mm 10.0 cal guns - 0.02lbs / 0.01kg shells, 150 per gun
Breech loading guns in deck mounts, 1875 Model
8 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread
Weight of broadside 6,077 lbs / 2,757 kg

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 15.0" / 381 mm 206.28 ft / 62.87 m 9.45 ft / 2.88 m
Ends: 11.0" / 279 mm 111.05 ft / 33.85 m 9.45 ft / 2.88 m
20.03 ft / 6.10 m Unarmoured ends
Upper: 15.0" / 381 mm 206.28 ft / 62.87 m 8.00 ft / 2.44 m
Main Belt covers 94 % of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 15.0" / 381 mm 2.00" / 51 mm -
2nd: 6.00" / 152 mm - -

- Protected deck - single deck:
For and Aft decks: 3.00" / 76 mm
Forecastle: 2.00" / 51 mm Quarter deck: 2.00" / 51 mm

- Conning towers: Forward 1.00" / 25 mm, Aft 1.00" / 25 mm

Machinery:
Coal fired boilers, simple reciprocating steam engines,
Direct drive, 2 shafts, 6,394 ihp / 4,770 Kw = 14.00 kts
Range 3,000nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1,765 tons (100% coal)

Complement:
631 - 821

Cost:
£0.930 million / $3.720 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 611 tons, 4.5 %
- Guns: 611 tons, 4.5 %
Armour: 4,402 tons, 32.2 %
- Belts: 2,961 tons, 21.7 %
- Armament: 544 tons, 4.0 %
- Armour Deck: 872 tons, 6.4 %
- Conning Towers: 25 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 1,426 tons, 10.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5,409 tons, 39.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,626 tons, 11.9 %
Miscellaneous weights: 200 tons, 1.5 %
- Above deck: 200 tons

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
19,989 lbs / 9,067 Kg = 15.3 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells or 3.1 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.37
Metacentric height 4.9 ft / 1.5 m
Roll period: 12.9 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 60 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.76
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 2.00

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low forecastle, low quarterdeck ,
a normal bow and a cruiser stern
Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.673 / 0.678
Length to Beam Ratio: 4.96 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 18.37 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 43 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 30
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 10.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length):
Fore end, Aft end
- Forecastle: 30.00 %, 15.00 ft / 4.57 m, 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 22.00 ft / 6.71 m, 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Aft deck: 10.00 %, 22.00 ft / 6.71 m, 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Quarter deck: 30.00 %, 15.00 ft / 4.57 m, 15.00 ft / 4.57 m
- Average freeboard: 17.80 ft / 5.43 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 56.6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 119.2 %
Waterplane Area: 17,946 Square feet or 1,667 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 132 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 200 lbs/sq ft or 979 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.00
- Longitudinal: 4.80
- Overall: 1.17
Excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
Adequate accommodation and workspace room
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

The Union Class of Ironclads came about in the aftermath of two events, the first being the sinking of a monitor during a storm and French pressure during an attempt to get an emperor onto the throne of Mexico and menaced the coast with their more advanced ironclads (1 of which menaced the sunk ironclad keeping it from entering port)

Congress thus demanded that new ironclad battleships be built and gave funding for a pair of battleships with the stipulation they were only US built.

With only 7.5 million, the USN had to reuse older weapons and so chose longer versions of the XV inch Dahlgren guns that equipped the Canonicus monitors still in service.

Using the HMS Devestation as an inspiration, the USN would accidentally create one of the better warships of that type.

Slightly larger than the Devestation, Union and Liberty were well designed with a lot of armor able to resist more powerful weapons of the time while being able to resist powerful Atlantic storms and outspeed older British battleships.

The main issue was their build time and some quality issues that popped up.

9 years for both ships meant by the time they were ready, ramming battleships like HMS Conqueror had emerged and the nearly 20 year old armarment was laughable.

However, for a navy starved of funds, the two battleships were a bright spot which performed quiet and valuable work to show the flag despite occasional calls to retire them as being imperialistic. Over time, more powerful but smaller 12 inch cannon replaced the Dahlgren 15 incher, 6 inch cannon replaced the Dahlgren 9 inchers, 3 inch guns replaced the gatlings, and more powerful engines were put in increasing the speed to 17 knots in trials. However, in a straight fight many in the US navy did not view the prospect of a peer to peer fight as favorable which compared to the dread felt whenever the prospect of sending monitors against the ever powerful European battlefleets.

However, they gave the US shipbuilders experience and proved to be valuable ships to show the flag and proved to be good counters to any single battleship that tried to threaten the US.

In 1898, the two ships would fight with more modern vessels against the Spanish fleet and prove themselves as capable vessels but their age was showing.

In 1921, the Union and Liberty were dragged into a bay and pounded by Billy Mitchells air force bombers. However, their well designed interiors held up allowing the USS Pennsylvania to reach them before they sank and humiliate the man who accused the navy of wrecking the tests. Especially with the sinking of the Ostfriesland.

To this day, the proponents of both argue if the ships were tampered with.
 
In 1960 the Imperial Navy of the United British Commonwealth commissions it's first class of SSBN the Seaview class.

1621220800565.png
 
Of course. The Imperial Naval Air Service insisted. They forced through a law that every I.N. ship over 5000 tons had to have some sort of aircraft on board in 1922.
 
Last edited:
Recently I have heard the K class explained as trying to get a vessel not unlike a modern hunter killer submarine with 1910s technology. This makes a degree of sense as they were supposed to work as part of the fleet much like many modern submarines do today. While not a perfect comparison it makes sense at face value, and the utility of such craft if they had worked would have been easy to grasp.

With that in mind are there any other failed naval tech or ships which came before their time and before the technology to make it viable was available?
The Brennan torpedo (though it could be argued that it wasn't before its time, it worked as intended).
 
1959 The Imperial Navy of the United British Commonwealth completes tests of the new universal transport vehicle, commonly known as the Manta Ray.

1621306973024.png
 
Top