• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

natewillcome4you

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
163
Reaction score
120

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,638
Reaction score
907
Imperial Russia had much much more never-were warship projects.
Navypedia shows historical designs and ships I often get data from that site. But something seems to be changed as the sites does not shows the data pages for the ship classes? Or is it just me?
 

natewillcome4you

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
163
Reaction score
120
Imperial Russia had much much more never-were warship projects.
Navypedia shows historical designs and ships I often get data from that site. But something seems to be changed as the sites does not shows the data pages for the ship classes? Or is it just me?
The site seems rather unfinished in some areas, I couldn't tell you if that is a recent development or not.
And if you want some entertainment, take a stiff drink and read the project history section of this
 

natewillcome4you

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
163
Reaction score
120
Aaannnddd since we're on the topic of WW1 Imperial Russian warship projects, here are some that I'm not actively searching for information on, but will hopefully serve to enrich y'all with knowledge nonetheless

16 inch gun dreadnought projects
Borodino battlecruisers
Imperator Nikolai I battleship
B.1 submarines
V.1 submarines
Kivach netlayers
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,638
Reaction score
907
Let me expand the list:

Submarines:
Normal:

B - 80 x 7 x 4m, 971/1264tons, 3150shp 31km/h, 2x1 102mm, 1x1 57mm AA, 2x4,1x2,6x1 457mm torpedo tubes/launchers from 1916
G - 80 x 7 x 4,3m 952/1289tons, 2200shp 30km/h, 2x1 102mm, 1x1 75mm AA, 1x4,1x4 457mm torpedo tubes from 1916
V - 80 x 7 x 4m 920/1150tons, 2200shp 30km/h, 2x1 102mm, 1x1 57mm AA, 2x4,1x2,6x1 457mm torpedo tubes/launchers from 1916, also known as Design 176-bis

Cruiser:
Project Zhuraviev - 128,95 x 10,36 x 5,7m, 4500/5400tons, 18000shp 48km/h, 5x1 120mm, 2x2,32x1 457mm Torpedo Tubes/Launchers, 120 Mines from 1909, 51mm Deck
2000ton Design - 113 x 10,6 x 5,5m 2000/2800tons, 8000shp 37km/h, 1x2 130mm, 1x1 75mm AA, 1x4,1x2 457mm torpedo tubes/launchers from 1916
2800ton Design - 113 x 10,6 x 5,5m 2800/3500tons, 8000shp 39km/h, 1x2 120mm, 2x1 75mm AA, 1x4,3x2 457mm torpedo tubes/launchers from 1916

Minelayer
Z - 230/275tons 19km/h, 1x1 37mm AA, 20 mines from 1916
Unknown - 91,4 x 9,1 x 4 x 3,66m 1700/2600tons 28km/h, 2x1 102mm, 1x1 57mm AA, 1x2,1x1 457mm torpedo tubes/launchers, 150 mines from 1916

Destroyers:
Gogland - 99,3 x 9,5 x 3m 1350/1480tons, 32000shp 61km/h, 4x1 102mm, 3x3 457mm Torpedoes, 80 Mines from 1912
Tenedos - 92,5 x 9,07 x 3,81m 1400/1580tons, 29000shp 61km/h, 4x1 102mm, 1x1 76mm AA, 4x3 457mm Torpedoes, 80 Mines from 1916

There is some obscure all gunned Destroyer project I've seen on WoWs forums with like 10-20x 102mm guns but I've not really searched for it if it's true or not.

Heavy Cruiser / Torpedo Cruiser / Torpedo Battleship / Torpedo Battlecruiser / Heavily Armoured Torpedo Cruiser:
203,4 x 25,5 x 8,2m 23000tons, 72000shp 52km/h, 4x3 180mm, 84x1 457mm Torpedoes, 400mm Belt, 85mm Deck from 1913

Monitors:
Ocean Going:

Putilov Design 1915 - 92,6 x 17,68 x 3,66m 3995tons, 3200shp 26km/h, 1x2 305mm, 4x2 120mm, 165mm Belt, 64mm Deck from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 1 - 100 x 20 x 4,88m 7400tons, 3000shp 22km/h, 1x3 356mm, 6x1 152mm, 2x1 63mm AA, 2x1 40mm AA, 2x1 533 Torpedoes, 275mm Belt, 75mm Deck from 1916
Design 1915 Variant 2 - 100 x 20 x 4,88m 7550tons, 3000shp 22km/h, 1x3 356mm, 8x1 152mm, 2x1 63mm AA, 2x1 40mm AA, 2x1 533 Torpedoes, 275mm Belt, 75mm Deck from 1916
Design 1915 Variant 3 - 100 x 20 x 4,88m 7550tons, 3000shp 22km/h, 1x3 356mm, 8x1 152mm, 2x1 63mm AA, 2x1 40mm AA, 2x1 533 Torpedoes, 275mm Belt, 75mm Deck from 1916

Riverine:
Design 1915 - 80 x 15 x 1,5m 1400tons, 19km/h, 3x2 120mm from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 1 6inch - 85,34 x 14,93 x 1,74m 1750tons, 1450shp 20km/h, 1x2 152mm, 2x 152mm Howitzer, 4x1 102mm, 2x1 40mm AA, 76mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 1 8inch - 85,34 x 14,93 x 1,9m 1900tons, 1500shp 20km/h, 1x2 203mm, 4x1 102mm, 2x1 40mm AA, 76mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 2 6inch - 89,92 x 15,7 x 1,75m 1950tons, 1500shp 20km/h, 1x2 152mm, 2x 152mm Howitzer, 4x1 102mm, 2x1 40mm AA, 76mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 2 8inch - 89,92 x 15,7 x 1,9m 2150tons, 1600shp 20km/h, 1x2 203mm, 4x1 102mm, 2x1 40mm AA, 76mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 3 6inch - 96,01 x 16,61 x 1,76m 2150tons, 1600shp 20km/h, 1x2,1x1 152mm, 4x 152mm Howitzer, 4x1 102mm, 2x1 40mm AA, 76mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 3 8inch - 96,01 x 16,61 x 1,91m 2400tons, 1700shp 20km/h, 1x2,1x1 203mm, 4x1 102mm, 2x1 40mm AA, 76mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 4 6inch - 97,54 x 17,37 x 1,77m 2350tons, 1700shp 20km/h, 2x2 152mm, 4x 152mm Howitzer, 4x1 102mm, 2x1 40mm AA, 76mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1915
Design 1915 Variant 4 8inch - 97,54 x 17,37 x 1,93m 2600tons, 1800shp 20km/h, 2x2 203mm, 4x1 102mm, 2x1 40mm AA, 76mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1915

Battlecruisers:
Borodino - 228,6 x 30,5 x 10,2m 32500tons, 68000shp 49km/h, 4x3 356mm, 24x1 130mm, 8x1 76mm AA, 4x1 63mm AA, 6x1 533mm Torpedoes, 238mm Belt, 63mm Deck from 1914
I've seen upgun proposals with twin 406mm cannons but not sure if these were still Imperial Russian or Soviet proposals

Coastal Battleship / Super Monitor:

Design 1916 - 112,9 x 28,6 x 5,26m 11000tons, 3x3 356mm, 12x1 102mm, 4x1 76mm AA, 254mm Belt, 25mm Deck from 1916

Battleships:
Stepanov Design - 104,5 x 20,5 x 7,2m 9270tons, 9000shp 30km/h, 3x2 305mm, 50x1 37mm, 380mm Belt, 75mm Deck from 1914
Skvortsov Design - 153m 20600tons, 5x2 305mm, 7x2 152mm from 1883
Imperial Technical Society Design 1906 - 112,5 x 21 x 6,8m 10500tons, 28km/h, 2x2,4x1 305mm, 20x1 120mm, 2x1 457mm Torpedoes, from 1906
Ivan Grigoryevich Bubnov Design - 210 x 32,6 x 9,83m 34300tons, 67500shp 46km/h, 3x4 406mm, 24x1 130mm, 4x1 102mm AA, 18x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 35mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 1 - 228 x 33 x 9,2m 39400tons, 68000shp 46km/h, 4x3 356mm, 24x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 2 - 230,4 x 33,5 x 9,2m 40500tons, 70000shp 46km/h, 4x3 356mm, 24x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 3 - 230,4 x 34 x 9,1m 40700tons, 70000shp 46km/h, 4x3 356mm, 28x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 4 - 230,4 x 33,1 x 9,2m 40000tons, 69000shp 46km/h, 3x3 406mm, 24x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 5 - 230,4 x 33,3 x 9,2m 40400tons, 70000shp 46km/h, 3x3 406mm, 24x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 6 - 237,6 x 35,2 x 9,4m 45400tons, 74000shp 46km/h, 4x3 406mm, 24x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 7 - 237,6 x 36,2 x 9,4m 46200tons, 76000shp 46km/h, 4x3 406mm, 24x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 8 - 237,6 x 36,8 x 9,3m 47100tons, 76000shp 46km/h, 4x3 406mm, 28x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
Putilov Shipyard Design 9 - 235,2 x 34,2 x 9,4m 43400tons, 72000shp 46km/h, 3x4 406mm, 24x1 152mm, 8x1 457mm Torpedoes, 280mm Belt, 38mm Deck from 1914
1914 Ultimate Battleship Design - 265 x 34,4 x 9,15m 45000tons, 120000shp 56km/h, 4x4 406mm, 24x1 152mm, 4x1 457mm Torpedoes, 300mm Belt, 63mm Deck from 1914
Vladimir Polievktovich Kostenko 1916 Design 1 - 252 x 30 x 10,1m 42360tons, 144000shp 58km/h, 4x2 406mm, 6x2,8x1 152mm, 250mm Belt, 70mm Deck from 1916
Vladimir Polievktovich Kostenko 1916 Design 2 - 240 x 30 x 10,1m 44000tons, 120000shp 56km/h, 3x3 406mm, 6x2,8x1 152mm, 275mm Belt, 70mm Deck from 1916
Vladimir Polievktovich Kostenko 1916 Design 3 - 240 x 30 x 10,1m 43600tons, 96000shp 52km/h, 2x3,2x2 406mm, 6x2,8x1 152mm, 300mm Belt, 70mm Deck from 1916
Vladimir Polievktovich Kostenko 1916 Design 4 - 230 x 30 x 10,1m 45000tons, 72000shp 46km/h, 4x3 406mm, 6x2,8x1 152mm, 325mm Belt, 70mm Deck from 1916

Carrier:
Admiral Lazarev Conversion - 76,5 x 15 x 5,4m 4000tons, 2000shp 19km/h, 10x Blériot XI aircrafts, from 1910
 

natewillcome4you

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
163
Reaction score
120

able

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
56
Reaction score
71
Vladimir Polievktovich Kostenko 1916 Design 2 - 240 x 30 x 10,1m 44000tons, 120000shp 56km/h, 3x3 406mm, 6x2,8x1 152mm, 275mm Belt, 70mm Deck from 1916

Skvortsov Design - 153m 20600tons, 5x2 305mm, 7x2 152mm from 1883
 

Attachments

  • SP1050838.JPG
    SP1050838.JPG
    74.2 KB · Views: 62
  • SP1050839.JPG
    SP1050839.JPG
    78.3 KB · Views: 61
  • SP1050727.JPG
    SP1050727.JPG
    76.4 KB · Views: 62
  • P1050732.JPG
    P1050732.JPG
    2.6 MB · Views: 65

Iron Felix

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
333
Reaction score
750
Admiral Lazarev Conversion - 76,5 x 15 x 5,4m 4000tons, 2000shp 19km/h, 10x Blériot XI aircrafts, from 1910
About big submarines:
Matrosov 2100-ton destroyer (130x11.24x3.45 m, 35 200 hp, 33-34 knots, 1000 miles with 25 knots, 8x130 mm guns, 2x76.2 mm AA guns, 3x3x457 mm torpedoe tubes, 300 mines or, for "regular" artillery use - 200 mines):
340717_original.jpg
4200-ton destroyer (151x14.6x4.23 m, 46 000 h0, 32 knots, 1000 miles with 32 knots, 2000 miles with 25 knots, 6x130 mm guns, 2x AA guns, 4x machine guns, 2x3 torpedo tubes, 300 mines):
00000031 (1).jpg
Concept of armour for battleship, N. A. Virenius, ~1914 (I think, size of battleship with Virenius armour - no less 100 000 tons):
Virenius.jpg
Concept of main guns for battleship, N. A. Virenius, V. N. Ferzen, ~1915 (If it was a 100 000-ton battleship, I think, it's a 16" or 18" guns):
Virenius 2.jpg
 

ceccherini

In war there is no substitute for victory
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
121
Reaction score
88
Admiral Lazarev Conversion - 76,5 x 15 x 5,4m 4000tons, 2000shp 19km/h, 10x Blériot XI aircrafts, from 1910
About big submarines:
Matrosov 2100-ton destroyer (130x11.24x3.45 m, 35 200 hp, 33-34 knots, 1000 miles with 25 knots, 8x130 mm guns, 2x76.2 mm AA guns, 3x3x457 mm torpedoe tubes, 300 mines or, for "regular" artillery use - 200 mines):
View attachment 655810
4200-ton destroyer (151x14.6x4.23 m, 46 000 h0, 32 knots, 1000 miles with 32 knots, 2000 miles with 25 knots, 6x130 mm guns, 2x AA guns, 4x machine guns, 2x3 torpedo tubes, 300 mines):
View attachment 655807
Concept of armour for battleship, N. A. Virenius, ~1914 (I think, size of battleship with Virenius armour - no less 100 000 tons):
View attachment 655811
Concept of main guns for battleship, N. A. Virenius, V. N. Ferzen, ~1915 (If it was a 100 000-ton battleship, I think, it's a 16" or 18" guns):
View attachment 655814
I remember Virenius concept estimated a 45000 ton standard displacement, 16 inch guns and 23 knots speed. Probably if built it would ends displacing more than 45000 ton but I think nowhere near 100000 tons. From a rapid and very approximate calculation I think the armor weight at about 25000 ton, a similar scale to Yamato, Project 23 and Montana, so the whole thing would be probably in the 60000 ton range. I remember of some mentions of a 80000 ton battleship study with 4 quadruple turret plus a twin turret superimposed but I've never found any source or infos.
 

Iron Felix

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
333
Reaction score
750
Admiral Lazarev Conversion - 76,5 x 15 x 5,4m 4000tons, 2000shp 19km/h, 10x Blériot XI aircrafts, from 1910
About big submarines:
Matrosov 2100-ton destroyer (130x11.24x3.45 m, 35 200 hp, 33-34 knots, 1000 miles with 25 knots, 8x130 mm guns, 2x76.2 mm AA guns, 3x3x457 mm torpedoe tubes, 300 mines or, for "regular" artillery use - 200 mines):
View attachment 655810
4200-ton destroyer (151x14.6x4.23 m, 46 000 h0, 32 knots, 1000 miles with 32 knots, 2000 miles with 25 knots, 6x130 mm guns, 2x AA guns, 4x machine guns, 2x3 torpedo tubes, 300 mines):
View attachment 655807
Concept of armour for battleship, N. A. Virenius, ~1914 (I think, size of battleship with Virenius armour - no less 100 000 tons):
View attachment 655811
Concept of main guns for battleship, N. A. Virenius, V. N. Ferzen, ~1915 (If it was a 100 000-ton battleship, I think, it's a 16" or 18" guns):
View attachment 655814
I remember Virenius concept estimated a 45000 ton standard displacement, 16 inch guns and 23 knots speed. Probably if built it would ends displacing more than 45000 ton but I think nowhere near 100000 tons. From a rapid and very approximate calculation I think the armor weight at about 25000 ton, a similar scale to Yamato, Project 23 and Montana, so the whole thing would be probably in the 60000 ton range. I remember of some mentions of a 80000 ton battleship study with 4 quadruple turret plus a twin turret superimposed but I've never found any source or infos.
I compared this ship with Project 24 and with the German H-42.
Project 24 has a thinner belt, 410 mm, versus 450 + 63.5 mm, and has almost no armor further than turrets №1 and №3. The total thickness of all decks is greater - 200 mm versus 127. At the same time, Project 24 with 9x406 mm cannons already had at least 81,000 tons, and the version with 9x457 mm (that is, weapons similar in weight to 12x406 mm cannons) should have become larger by another ~ 10,000 tons. The H-42 has a belt of 300 + 150 mm, that is, almost like the battleship Virenius, and has almost no armor further than turrets №1 and №4. The total thickness of the decks is 330mm, but given the lack of a 300mm belt, I think the armor should weigh about the same. The size and weight of the engines should be roughly the same, since the 1940s engines were more powerful than the 1910s.
If you look at the drawing of the battleship Virenius itself, then, based on the 16 "/ 45 barrel length, the total length of the ship should be ~ 340-350 meters, width up to 50 meters, draft up to 13 meters. I strongly doubt that this is a full-fledged drawing.
 

ceccherini

In war there is no substitute for victory
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
121
Reaction score
88
Admiral Lazarev Conversion - 76,5 x 15 x 5,4m 4000tons, 2000shp 19km/h, 10x Blériot XI aircrafts, from 1910
About big submarines:
Matrosov 2100-ton destroyer (130x11.24x3.45 m, 35 200 hp, 33-34 knots, 1000 miles with 25 knots, 8x130 mm guns, 2x76.2 mm AA guns, 3x3x457 mm torpedoe tubes, 300 mines or, for "regular" artillery use - 200 mines):
View attachment 655810
4200-ton destroyer (151x14.6x4.23 m, 46 000 h0, 32 knots, 1000 miles with 32 knots, 2000 miles with 25 knots, 6x130 mm guns, 2x AA guns, 4x machine guns, 2x3 torpedo tubes, 300 mines):
View attachment 655807
Concept of armour for battleship, N. A. Virenius, ~1914 (I think, size of battleship with Virenius armour - no less 100 000 tons):
View attachment 655811
Concept of main guns for battleship, N. A. Virenius, V. N. Ferzen, ~1915 (If it was a 100 000-ton battleship, I think, it's a 16" or 18" guns):
View attachment 655814
I remember Virenius concept estimated a 45000 ton standard displacement, 16 inch guns and 23 knots speed. Probably if built it would ends displacing more than 45000 ton but I think nowhere near 100000 tons. From a rapid and very approximate calculation I think the armor weight at about 25000 ton, a similar scale to Yamato, Project 23 and Montana, so the whole thing would be probably in the 60000 ton range. I remember of some mentions of a 80000 ton battleship study with 4 quadruple turret plus a twin turret superimposed but I've never found any source or infos.
I compared this ship with Project 24 and with the German H-42.
Project 24 has a thinner belt, 410 mm, versus 450 + 63.5 mm, and has almost no armor further than turrets №1 and №3. The total thickness of all decks is greater - 200 mm versus 127. At the same time, Project 24 with 9x406 mm cannons already had at least 81,000 tons, and the version with 9x457 mm (that is, weapons similar in weight to 12x406 mm cannons) should have become larger by another ~ 10,000 tons. The H-42 has a belt of 300 + 150 mm, that is, almost like the battleship Virenius, and has almost no armor further than turrets №1 and №4. The total thickness of the decks is 330mm, but given the lack of a 300mm belt, I think the armor should weigh about the same. The size and weight of the engines should be roughly the same, since the 1940s engines were more powerful than the 1910s.
If you look at the drawing of the battleship Virenius itself, then, based on the 16 "/ 45 barrel length, the total length of the ship should be ~ 340-350 meters, width up to 50 meters, draft up to 13 meters. I strongly doubt that this is a full-fledged drawing.
Making more accurate measurements clearly show the drawings are approximate indications of respectively armor and armament arrangement and are neither a good reference of the proportion of the battleship project nor consistent between them. Taking the armor drawings (i call the ship reproduced by them "option A") we find immersion to be 1/21 of the waterline length, construction height 1/14 of WLL, width is the construction height multiplicated 2,11 thus length/beam ratio is 6,63. Vertical armor height is about one half of construction height and the length of the section 45 cm thick is one half of the WLL. I think the only real life absolute measurement we can take to convert these proportions in actual dimensions is immersion, as a limit of 9,5 meters was imposed for Baltic vessels. So we obtain a length of about 200 meters, 30 meters of width and a construction height of 14,2 meters, somewhat smaller than the official contemporary 16" armed battleship project but not impossible. If we assume a quite high and arbitrarily chosen block coefficient of 0,7 we have a normal displacement of 39900 tons. Assuming a belt height of 7,1 meters, we obtain 639 cubic meters of armor for the 45 cm section plus 440 cubic meter for the 31 cm section. Assuming a full lenght twin orizontal belt add other 756 cubic meter of armor for a total of 1835 cibic meters. Specific weigh of steel is 7,8 kg/dm3 so armor weight not accounting for barbettes and conning tower is 14313 tons. Option A is thus quite plausible. The drawing showing armament (we can call it option B) is much less realistic. Comparing with option a we have about the same freeboard/length ratio of 42:1 and a somewhat higher length/beam ratio of 7:1. The part of the guns protruding out of the turrets is 1:28 of the lenght. Taking the turret picture as a reference we find that that part is the 60% of the total length of the gun. Assuming A 406mm/45 we have reference gun length of 10,92 meters resulting in a WLL of 307 meters and a beam of 44 meters. We don't know the draft so I take in consideration 2 hypothesis: first the aforementioned draft limit of 9,5 meters (option b1), second a length/draft ratio analogous to option a resulting in 14,6 meters of immersion (option b2), quite close to current baltimax and way more than any Russian/Soviet project i know of. For the block coefficient we can evaluate 3 hypothesis: 0,51, that of Dunkerque and the smallest of any capital ship i know of; 0,7 for reference to option A and as the largest plausible value and 0,62 the same of borodino battlecruiser as a close historical reference. So we have a displacement of 64757 ton for B1 bc 0,51, 78724 for B1 0,62, 88882 for B1 bc 0,7 and 100580 for B2 bc 0,51, 122274 for B2 bc 0,62, 138051 for B2 bc 0,7. Using the same relations to calculate option B armor result in an armor volume of 3374 metric cube for a weight of 26317 tons. Option A has a similar armor to standard displacement of historically built battleship, notably Richelieu class. Also its displacement is consistent with contemporary battleship with similar armament such as the south dakota and the Russian navy planned 16" gun battleship with 3 quadruple turrets but undoubtedly option A is too tight to combine both the armor and the armament shown in the drawings, still is not too far from the mark. Option B1 appears far too big for the given capabilities while option B2 is simply too big for the Baltic and too much a ship for the armor and armament. In conclusion no one of the drawings represent the proportion of a real battleship but a ship with that armor and armed with 2 quadruple and 2 twin 16" gun turret would be somewhere in the middle but surely closer to A than to B1.
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,638
Reaction score
907
100.000tons indeed too large tonnage for such a vessel.
Check the closes comparable design in case of armamanet the IJN's No.13 preliminary design E or F, both have 12x 41cm cannons though E in 3 quad turrets:

Now these are fast battleships with standard WW1 armour thickness: 305mm or 12" and long ships for good L-B ratio.
Both are below 50.000tons Now reducing their speed to standard WW1 era Russian BB speed but increase armour to 45cm I doubt the tonnage would be much above 50-55.000tons maybe max 60.000 if they go for higher speed, but will create a Springstyle simulation. But 100.000tons ain't realistic at all indeed
 

Iron Felix

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
333
Reaction score
750
Unknown Russian project (fake?):
post-60422202-0-66292100-1448523637.jpg
Gavrilov 4600-ton cruiser 5x2x120 mm guns:
5af679b1ec253_10921_original-.jpg.34d883e537a47c097ed295a667a1fd98.jpg.8651e6223ceebafba34482b...jpg
Gavrilov 8000-ton cruiser, 2x1x203 mm and 6x2x120 mm guns:

8000.jpg.939b02959e951075726c4d6e8224a4fd.jpg
Other projects:
Skvortsov armour vessel, 13800 ton, 18 (?) knots, 16x8"/45 guns, 20x75 mm/50 guns

Concept of armour vessel, based on "Borodino", 14000 ton, 8x2x8"/45 guns, 4x6" guns, 16x75 mm/50 guns, 14x47 mm and 4x37 mm guns

Coastal armour vessel, 1900:
IMG_20210426_163902.jpg
5985 ton, 2x2 + 2x1x8"/45 guns, 8x75 mm/50, 8x47 mm guns, 4x machine guns, 6x15" torpedo tubes (including two underwater tubes), 6000 hp, 16 knots, 4"-7" belt, 2" deck, 6" turrets, 3" 75 mm gun batteries

Offenberg 1898 armour vessel, 12360 tons, 4x12"/40 guns, 26x6" guns, 17 knots

Gavrilov (pre-"Izmail" type) battlecruiser:
1535888620_simmetrija.png
26 100 ton, 72 500 hp (nominal), 28 knots, 30 knots (forced), 2x3 + 2x2x12"/52 guns (or, 8x14"/52 guns), 8" belt, range 4100 miles with 13 knots.

Bushuev diesel battlecruiser:
1535888891_bushuev.png
30 000 tons, 5x3x14"/52 guns (I think, potential - 5x2x16"/45 guns), 24x130 mm/55 guns, 100-120 000 hp, 30-34 knots.

Other (pre-"Izmail") battlecruiser, 3x3x14"/52:
1535888938_shestoj-luchshij.png
 

Iron Felix

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
333
Reaction score
750
Bushuev diesel battlecruiser
In fact, this is an "Izmail" battlecruiser, but with engines 1.5-1.7 times more powerful, with a speed of 1.13-1.24 times more, and also with another turret. Interestingly, any steam turbine ship could be so "altered"? Yes, remembering the project of Gavrilov battleship with 4x4x16"/45, 120,000 hp and 30 knots... I think Gavrilov should have met Bushuev. Battleship with 5x4x16"/45, 200,000 hp and 37 knots would look better :D
Seriously though, IMHO, if someone actually decided to build a diesel battlecruiser, then one turret would be removed to improve the armor.
Also, I think it should be recalled that the Russian 14 "guns on the Izmail ships were supposed to have 3 rpm. The Izmail could thus fire up to 36 rounds per minute. The Bushuev battlecruiser, likewise, had to fire 45 rounds per minute.
Regular 14"/52 gun - 747.8 kg projectile, 203 kg charge, 731.5 mps, barrel weight 80 ton
Stronger version 14"/52 gun - 245.7 kg charge, 823 mps, barrel weight 83.33 ton
Another 14"/52 gun, designed by engineer Zabudsky - 708.4 kg projectile, 258 kg charge, 868.7 mps, barrel weight 87 ton.
The Zabudskiy gun was probably the most powerful of all Russian 14 "guns.
In addition, in 1914-1916. in Russia, they developed projectiles with improved ballistics, having a range of 20% more. I am aware of the use of these shells for 12" and for 6", similar shells were also designed for 16"/45 guns. I think the 14"/52 should have received new shells as well.
...
About early Russian diesel ships:
Katyshev 1905 diesel battleship - 10 000 ton, 8x12", 20x120 mm guns, 8" armour - belt and turrets, 18 knots, range - 18 000 miles.
Filippov project of rebuilding of "Andrey Pervozvanniy" armour vessel from steam machines to diesel engines - range 26 000 miles.
1912 project - Belyavin "motor cruiser"
Two ideas - 1) a ship that is completely similar to a conventional ship in terms of armament, armor, speed, range, but having a lower displacement, 2) a ship that has the displacement of a conventional ship, but has a range of up to 40-50,000 miles.
...
From book, S. Vinogradov, "Last giants of Russian Imperial Navy":
Beshkurtsov battleship, 1907:
 названия.png
20 000 ton, 5x2x12" guns, 6x2 or 12x1x120 mm guns

Putilov (together with German engineers from "Blohm und Voss") 1912 battlecruiser:
 названия (1).png
32 500 ton, 4x3x14"/52 guns, 26.5 knots

Variants of Putilov battleships with 14"/52 or 16"/52 guns, and with 24 or 28x6" guns:
 названия (2).png
 названия (3).png
Plan of Putilov 4x3x16"/52 guns:
 названия (4).png
 названия (5).png
By the way, here the project is designed to use 16"/52 guns. I heard about the development of 16" L/50, 52 and 54 guns at the Obukhov plant, but I have no exact data. Theoretically, triple-barrel and quadriple-barrel 16"/52 turrets could be replaced with double-barrel and triple-barrel 18"/45. Length 16"/52 - 21.1 meters, weight - ~110-120 tons (weight 16"/45 - 107 tons), 18"/45 - 20.6 meters, weight - 155 tons.
 

alexi

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 24, 2019
Messages
20
Reaction score
3
The diesel Izmail is result someone smoking crack too much (its pretty unrealistic given there's such no diesel powerful enough to run these huge ship), also what's value protection on the project (can't see it well because the picture quality).
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,638
Reaction score
907
Yes diesel ain' the best choice for speed especially in the WW1 timeframe.
 

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,638
Reaction score
907
Are you sure those Putilov designs are with 406mm/52 cannons rather the /45 ones Vickers designed for them?
The Vickers Mark A or Pattern 1914?

Do you know when these projects were offered?
Other projects:
Skvortsov armour vessel, 13800 ton, 18 (?) knots, 16x8"/45 guns, 20x75 mm/50 guns

Concept of armour vessel, based on "Borodino", 14000 ton, 8x2x8"/45 guns, 4x6" guns, 16x75 mm/50 guns, 14x47 mm and 4x37 mm guns
 
Last edited:

Iron Felix

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
333
Reaction score
750
Are you sure those Putilov designs are with 406mm/52 cannons rather the /45 ones Vickers designed for them?
The engineers from the Putilov plant only had information that a 16 "gun is planned and that the weight of the projectile is 1128 kg. Considering that the previous 12" and 14 "guns were L / 52, the engineers considered that the new battleships would use 16" L / 52. Obukhov plant and Vickers have developed other guns, with a projectile of 1116.3 kg.
 

natewillcome4you

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
163
Reaction score
120
Thank you Iron Felix for once again turning my weak post into a glorious thread :)

Turns out the "Z" minelaying submarine can be found on deepstorm, along with many other interesting projects, I can't link it but yeah just so you know lol
 

Brickmuppet

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Messages
191
Reaction score
34
Website
brickmuppet.mee.nu
Projects of light minelayer, 30 knots, 5x6"/50 guns, and light destroyer, 32 knots, 2x? guns
The light destroyer/corvette looks to be armed with 75mm guns. (I don't read Cryllic, but here appears to be 75mm magazines in the plan).

If they're ordering from England pre WW1 why are measurements in mm and meters rather than inches / feet or line / arshen?

Very nice blueprints.

Completely off topic: why are blueprints blue?


Back on topic:

A page on the proposed follow-ons to the Borodinos.

 

Iron Felix

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
333
Reaction score
750
its pretty unrealistic given there's such no diesel powerful enough to run these huge ship
The most powerful Russian internal combustion engine at the time was a V12, 6,000 hp, 400 rpm, and I think it shouldn't weigh more than 100 tons (a German diesel engine of the 1940s, with a capacity of 12,000 hp, weighed 67 tons, I think it was possible to create a 1.5 times heavier and 2 times less powerful engine). 20 of these engines is 2,000 tons. The weight of the engines on Izmail is ~ 3800 tons, the weight of the weapon is 7100 tons. Thus, if we use diesel engines with a general weight of 2000 tons, the weight of the weapon can be increased by 25%, up to 8900 tons.
 

Iron Felix

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
333
Reaction score
750
Information about Russian 7" gun projects.
Weight of 7" gun - 9.76 tons, projectile 74.8 kg, charge 32.5 kg, 6-8 rpm (data of Soviet 180 mm guns - weight 17.33 tons, projectile 97.5 kg, charge 37.5 or 40 kg, 920 mps)
N. A. Virenius suggestion - "squadron" light cruiser, 30 knots, triple- or quadriple-barrel 7" turrets
Weight of 130/55 guns - 5.29 tons, 6"/45 - 5.7-6.1 tons, 6"/50 - 6.85 tons. Theoretically, it is possible to replace 130 mm and 6" guns with 7".
20x130/55 (Kostenko battleship) - 10-11x7"
24x130/55 (Bubnov battleship) - 13x7"
24x6" (Gavrilov battleship) - 16-17x7"
15x130/55 ("Svetlana" cruisers) - 8x7"
 
Last edited:

Tzoli

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,638
Reaction score
907
Quite light constructed this 175mm gun you written about.
The comparable in date the British 7,5"/45 BL Mark VI was weighted 14tons.

Does this 7" or 175mm gun a short barrelled /40 or /35 weapon?
 

Iron Felix

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
333
Reaction score
750
Quite light constructed this 175mm gun you written about.
The comparable in date the British 7,5"/45 BL Mark VI was weighted 14tons.

Does this 7" or 175mm gun a short barrelled /40 or /35 weapon?
If you increase 6"/45, then the weight of 7"/45 will be 9.05-9.69 tons. In the Yan'kov torpedo battleship project, 7"/52 is indicated. I can assume that such a small weight is associated with the use of lighter and stronger materials. For example, the Russian 16"/45 projects had different weights, the carbon steel version weighed 114.25 tons , the version made of chromium-nickel steel - 98.61 tons, a difference of 1.16 times. In addition, there was a Soviet 6" Br-2, which weighed 5.3 tons, and which was converted into 180 mm Br-21 (80 kg, 750 mps), the weight of 180/40.8 should be about 5 tons.
 

Similar threads

Top