North Carolina-class Battleships

[Kensei]

 

 

Name: North Carolina-class battleship

 

Builders: New York Naval Shipyard (North Carolina)

 

Philadelphia Naval Shipyard (Washington)

 

Operators:  United States Navy

 

Preceded by: South Dakota class (1920) (planned) Colorado class (actual)

 

Succeeded by: South Dakota class (1939)

 

Cost: $60,000,000 each

 

In service: 1941–47

 

Completed: 2

 

Retired: 2

 

Preserved: 1

 

Class & type: Battleship

 

Displacement:

1942:

36,600 long tons (37,200 t) (standard)

44,800 long tons (45,500 t) (full load)

 

1945:

46,700 long tons (47,400 t) (North Carolina full load)

45,370 long tons (46,100 t) (Washington full load)

 

Length: North Carolina:

728 ft 8.625 in (222.113 m) overall

713 ft 5.250 in (217.456 m) waterline

 

Draft: 35 ft 6 in (10.820 m) maximum

 

Length: Washington:

728 ft 11.625 in (222.190 m) overall

713 ft 8 in (217.526 m) waterline

 

Draft: 34 ft 9 in (10.592 m) maximum

 

Beam: 108 ft 3.875 in (33.017 m) maximum

104 ft 6 in (31.852 m) waterline

 

Propulsion: four sets of General Electric geared turbines, providing 121,000 shp ahead and 32,000 astern[6]

eight Babcock & Wilcox three drum express type boilers fitted with two furnaces and double uptakes[6]

 

Speed: 1941: 28 knots (32 mph; 52 km/h)

 

1945: 26.8 knots (30.8 mph; 49.6 km/h)

 

Endurance:

1941: 17,450 nmi (20,080 mi; 32,320 km) at 15 knots (17 mph; 28 km/h)

1945: 16,320 nmi (18,780 mi; 30,220 km) at 15 knots[6]

5,740 nmi (6,610 mi; 10,630 km) at 25 knots (29 mph; 46 km/h)

 

Crew: Design: 108 officers, 1,772 men

1945: 144 officers, 2,195 men

1947, North Carolina: 135 officers, 1,639 men

1947, Washington: 146 officers, 1843 men

 

 

Armament:

9 × 16 in (406 mm)/45 caliber Mark 6 guns

20 × 5 in (127 mm)/38 caliber Mark 12 guns[

 

Armor:

Belt: 12" on 0.75" STS (305 mm on 19 mm), inclined 15 degrees, tapering to 6.6" on 0.75" STS (168 mm on 19 mm) at lower edge[10]

Barbettes:

centerline forward: 14.7" (373 mm)

sides 16" (406 mm)[10]

centerline aft 11.5" (292 mm)

Turrets:

face plates 16" (406 mm)

sides 9.8" (249 mm)

back plates 11.8" (300 mm)

roof plates 7" (178 mm)

Secondary guns:

mounts 1.95" (50 mm)

magazines 1.95" (50 mm)

Decks:

Centerline

main 1.45" (37 mm)

second 1.4" + 3.6" (36 mm + 91 mm)

third 0.62" (16 mm)

total 7.07" (180 mm)

Outboard

1.45" (37 mm)

second 1.4" + 4.1" (36 mm + 104 mm)

third 0.75" (19 mm)

total 7.7" (196 mm)

Conning tower:

centerline sides 14.7" (373 mm)

beam sides 16" (406 mm)

roof sides 7" (178 mm)

bottom plates 3.9" (99 mm)

communication tube 14" (356 mm)

 

Aircraft carried:

Vought OS2U Kingfisher

Curtiss SC-1 Seahawk

 

Notes: The North Carolina class was originally planned to be armed with quadruple 14" guns, but due to the escalator clause in the Second London Naval Treaty, and Japan's refusal to agree to the limitation of 14" guns, they were eventually armed with triple 16" guns for greater firepower and encouraged indirect firing. This was done reluctantly, as President Roosevelt faced tremendous political pressure to not be the first nation in the world to adopt 16" guns in a new design after becoming a signatory to the Second London Naval Treaty.

[Kensei]

Reserved.

[TenaciousTanaka]

Awwww,  my homestate namesake.  As a kid, and even young adult, I've spent enough time on her I could probably  be commissioned as a plank owner.  lol

 

Ever since  they   painted her  back into a "ROUGH" similarity of her 1944 Measure 32 camo  paint job, she stands out like a beacon in the Cape Fear River.  

 

I was  lucky enough to get a small  block of her  original teak deck, taken off   during her 1999 deck  restoration project.   It is only a small block of wood with a deck stub attachment hole and a  small brass  plaque   commemorating the event.  I believe it is the only hunk of  worthless wood I've ever so happily and lovingly spent 30$ on.   :Smile_veryhappy:

[Kensei]

That sounds awesome! US Treaty battleships are my favorite battleships, though I focus more on the South Dakota-class than I do the North Carolina. The North Carolina-class is a beastly battleship class all by its lonesome, too. Nothing but respect for this class.  :Smile_glasses:

[Windhover118]

USS Washington holds a special place for me because she is named after my homestate and is one of the few American battleships to engage a Japanese battleship in combat. I wish she had been preserved as a museum but I am glad her sister, the North Carolina is still around.

[Kensei]

Windhover118, on 29 November 2012 - 07:41 AM, said:

USS Washington holds a special place for me because she is named after my homestate and is one of the few American battleships to engage a Japanese battleship in combat. I wish she had been preserved as a museum but I am glad her sister, the North Carolina is still around.

It's kind of the same for me and the USS Alabama. Toured her a couple of times, and saw how she weathered Katrina. Tough old ships, they are.

The broadside weight on the North Carolina-class is actually tied with the South Dakota-class and Iowa-class for second largest broadside by weight ever developed that saw combat. It's amazing to imagine just how much firepower was waiting behind the 16s".

[AlphaTanker101]

That should be a tier 2 battleship.

:Smile_trollface::Smile_playing::Smile_teethhappy::Smile_trollface:

[Kensei]

Think the Yamato 2199 refit should be tier X with its wave-motion cannon?

[Panzer109]

I got to visit this ship a while back, and it was quite impressive. The best part was getting to go into one of the turrets, and also being able to control one of the AA guns elsewhere.

[Capcon]

There is an interesting part of the story regarding the propellers and the top speed of the ship. As it neared top speed the vibration became severe as first constructed. It took many test runs and changes to propellers etc. to address the issue and those many runs in and out of harbor earned her the nickname "The Showboat".

[mrlazorz]

Panzer109, on 29 November 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

I got to visit this ship a while back, and it was quite impressive. The best part was getting to go into one of the turrets, and also being able to control one of the AA guns elsewhere.

Those pedals.
And the tower.

I live a couple hours away, I'll be able to visit her in the spring sometime.
I'll take pics probably.

[Kensei]

Capcon, on 29 November 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

There is an interesting part of the story regarding the propellers and the top speed of the ship. As it neared top speed the vibration became severe as first constructed. It took many test runs and changes to propellers etc. to address the issue and those many runs in and out of harbor earned her the nickname "The Showboat".

Haha, yeah, isn't she called "The Immortal Showboat" now that she's lived through World War II and become a museum ship?

[qaz14595]

Is it just me or dose the Bell on the what appears to be a capstan need a shine like this?  :rolleyes:

 

The Before & affter; prior to the clear coat

 

 

& With the Clear coat on the larger bell!

 

[_Jeremiah_Gottwald]

Very nice ships, I must say.

[RMS_Gigantic]

Your timing in posting this was excellent, because we obtained in-game renders of the ship at sea before this topic even left the main page's list of recent topics!

 

 

 

[shelbygt520]

if you respect North Carolina class you have to respect iowa classhttp://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/SHIP_Battleship_Iowa_Front_Firing_lg.jpg

[shelbygt520]

oh and if you like that you must respect the New Mexico class.

http://i2.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/-1/draft_lens19410377module158610338photo_1334801910a_____.jpg

[Kensei]

As cool as both the Iowa and New Mexico class of battleships are neither are the focus of this thread, or even treaty battleships which would be related to this thread. Can we at least try to discuss the renders of the North Carolina from the game that have recently been posted? Thanks. Also, feel free to create a thread on the New Mexico class if you want. I don't think one has been made yet.

 

 

Edit: Speaking of the renders, the quality looks like World of Tanks before the release of the "Improved" graphics. I'm hoping to see some improvements as they move along in the development process. Still gotta love the Showboat doing its thing!

[RMS_Gigantic]

Kensei, on 30 November 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

Edit: Speaking of the renders, the quality looks like World of Tanks before the release of the "Improved" graphics. I'm hoping to see some improvements as they move along in the development process. Still gotta love the Showboat doing its thing!

It was stated that during alpha and beta testing, the rendering system will be like World of Tanks before those improved graphics, but once the game is released they will update the rendering system to World of Tanks levels.