Design and Description
Two armoured cruisers of a new design, HMS Duke of Edinburgh and Black Prince, the latter named for Edward, the Black Prince, were ordered for the Royal Navy as part of the 1902–03 Naval Estimates. They were the first ships to be designed for the Royal Navy under the supervision of the new Director of Naval Construction, Sir Philip Watts. The new design was significantly larger than the previous Monmouth and Devonshire class cruisers, mounting a heavier main armament of six 9.2 in (234 mm) guns in single turrets.
Duke of Edinburgh displaced 12,590 long tons (12,790 t) as built and 13,965 long tons (14,189 t) fully loaded. The ship had an overall length of 505 feet 6 inches (154.1 m), a beam of 73 feet 6 inches (22.4 m) and a draught of 27 feet (8.2 m). She was powered by four-cylinder triple-expansion steam engines, driving two shafts, which produced a total of 23,000 indicated horsepower (17,000 kW) and gave a maximum speed of 23 knots (43 km/h; 26 mph). The engines were powered by 20 Babcock & Wilcox water-tube boilers and six cylindrical boilers. The ship carried a maximum of 2,150 long tons (2,180 t) of coal and an additional 600 long tons (610 t) of fuel oil that was sprayed on the coal to increase its burn rate. At full capacity, she could steam for 8,130 nautical miles (15,060 km; 9,360 mi) at a speed of 10 knots (19 km/h; 12 mph). The ship's complement was 789 officers and enlisted men.
Her main armament consisted of six BL 9.2-inch Mk X guns in single turrets, two on the centreline and two on each beam, giving a broadside of four 9.2 in guns. Her secondary armament of four BL 6-inch Mark XI guns was arranged in single casemates. They were mounted amidships on the main deck and were only usable in calm weather. Twenty Vickers QF 3-pounders were fitted, six on turret roofs and fourteen in the superstructure. The ship also mounted three submerged 18-inch torpedo tubes.
Read more about this topic: HMS Black Prince (1904)
Famous quotes containing the words design and/or description:
“Humility is often only the putting on of a submissiveness by which men hope to bring other people to submit to them; it is a more calculated sort of pride, which debases itself with a design of being exalted; and though this vice transform itself into a thousand several shapes, yet the disguise is never more effectual nor more capable of deceiving the world than when concealed under a form of humility.”
—François, Duc De La Rochefoucauld (1613–1680)
“Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
—Paul Tillich (1886–1965)