Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
-
- Member
- Posts: 368
- Joined: 12 Aug 2018, 01:31
- Location: france,alsace
-
- Member
- Posts: 368
- Joined: 12 Aug 2018, 01:31
- Location: france,alsace
Re: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
It worth, explicitely mentioning the 32 cm belt armor, instead of the common believe of a 35 cm belt armor.
"Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!"
Re: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
The two ships, from what I recall, were wet even in slightly inclement weather. Would the exchanging of the 3 28 cm guns for the 2 38 cm guns hsve worsened this condition?
Re: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
despite beeing wet they were also very fast even in the worst whether.
Construction wise both ships were overweighted even without the 38 cm by about 2000 t mostly caused by additional demands compared to the original draft.
Only solution would be increasing displacement accordingly.
Construction wise both ships were overweighted even without the 38 cm by about 2000 t mostly caused by additional demands compared to the original draft.
Only solution would be increasing displacement accordingly.
"Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!"
Re: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
After the original plans, to compensate the more weight of the 38cm turret and to create more buoyancy, the bow section in front of turret Anton should be lenghten around ten meters.
After that the hull would be significant less wet because the own created wave, would be significant forward and the hull would less pitching in water at high speed.
After that the hull would be significant less wet because the own created wave, would be significant forward and the hull would less pitching in water at high speed.
-
- Member
- Posts: 368
- Joined: 12 Aug 2018, 01:31
- Location: france,alsace
Re: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
Not a scharnhorst with 38cm original plan,I've read a "9-28cm SK C/28"
Re: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
Turret weight for a 38cm SK C/34 was 1052 tonnes, which is 302 tonnes heavier than a 28cm SK C/34.Don71 wrote: ↑12 Aug 2019, 17:14After the original plans, to compensate the more weight of the 38cm turret and to create more buoyancy, the bow section in front of turret Anton should be lenghten around ten meters.
After that the hull would be significant less wet because the own created wave, would be significant forward and the hull would less pitching in water at high speed.
This means the ship became top-heavy by 906 tonnes and lower hull even heavier, as stronger machinery had to be fitted for 38cm shell handling.
Buoyancy was much needed at the bow, as the ships had been designed for lighter weight and they were both wet forward (sometimes the Anton turret could barely be used in heavy seas) and very pitchy. There is some poor quality footage with Scharnhorst at speed - it pitched harshly, like a much smaller cruiser or destroyer.
Re: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
Commisioning of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau took place with about 2000 t overweigth.
When fueloil has been moved out by this weight, the seakeeping capabilities became better.
During service additional weights has been assigned so that the main belt became almost fully submerged - only 60 cm remain above waterline for Scharnhorst.
problems were: low freeboard, low difference of freeboard midship and foreship, fairly low protrude of the upper parts of the forward shipsides.
Scharnhorst was a very fast ship even in heaviest seastate despite beeing wet for the reasons mentioned above. It was able to open the distance to DOY during the northcape action within about one hour by about 8000 yards.
The fine bow with its low displacement is more likely boring through waves instead of pitching up and down.
When fueloil has been moved out by this weight, the seakeeping capabilities became better.
During service additional weights has been assigned so that the main belt became almost fully submerged - only 60 cm remain above waterline for Scharnhorst.
problems were: low freeboard, low difference of freeboard midship and foreship, fairly low protrude of the upper parts of the forward shipsides.
Scharnhorst was a very fast ship even in heaviest seastate despite beeing wet for the reasons mentioned above. It was able to open the distance to DOY during the northcape action within about one hour by about 8000 yards.
The fine bow with its low displacement is more likely boring through waves instead of pitching up and down.
"Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!"
- Alejandro_
- Member
- Posts: 404
- Joined: 21 May 2003, 14:26
- Location: UK
- Contact:
Re: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau with 38cm
This means the ship became top-heavy by 906 tonnes and lower hull even heavier, as stronger machinery had to be fitted for 38cm shell handling.
I thought buoyancy would not be an issue because the 28cm turrets were supposed to be a temporary measure.Commisioning of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau took place with about 2000 t overweigth.
Interesting, is there any source where I can read more about the modifications needed to receive the 38 cm guns?After the original plans, to compensate the more weight of the 38cm turret and to create more buoyancy, the bow section in front of turret Anton should be lenghten around ten meters.