Funnels

Warship design and construction, terminology, navigation, hydrodynamics, stability, armor schemes, damage control, etc.
paul.mercer
Senior Member
Posts: 1224
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm

Funnels

Post by paul.mercer »

Gentlemen,
Can somebody explain why on the KGV class ships the British designers went for twin funnels when they had just finished converting the QE class and the Royal Sovereigns to single funnel? Also, it appears that the G3 design had they been built would also be twin funneled, yet the latest German ships (Scharnhorst, Gneisnau, Bismarck & Tirpitz)all were single.
Keith Enge
Member
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 1:36 am

Re: Funnels

Post by Keith Enge »

The KGV had en echelon machinery distribution for better survivability. Listing from fore to aft, they had boilers, then turbines, more boilers, and finally more turbines. With this distribution, there was less chance that a single hit would take out all of the boilers or all of the turbines. Therefore, because the two sets of boilers were separated, they couldn't share the same funnel. The German capital ships, on the other hand, had all of their boilers then all of their turbines; the boilers could thus share a single funnel. It wasn't only German capital ships that had this distribution, their heavy and light cruisers had it too as did their destroyers. It wasn't until the Type 39 torpedo boats that they went en echelon. Most German ships tried to get some more safety by putting some other compartments between some boilers and other compartments between some turbines. This, however, increased the length of their machinery spaces considerably and helps explain why they had so little room for magazines and thus so few shells/charges carried.
paul.mercer
Senior Member
Posts: 1224
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm

Re: Funnels

Post by paul.mercer »

Thanks Keith,
I have to say that I always thought that the two funneled ships looked a bit old fashioned compared with Bismarck and the twins!
Post Reply