Shipbucket

Why did ships have these breaks, for lack of a better word, in the hull, and why were they eliminated, or at least seem to be much less common?

_________________
Eschew obfuscation

Break is the correct word, or 'hull break'. The reduction of freeboard aft of the break saved hull weight by cutting out the weight of the deck there. The break in the hull, however, given that a continuous hull girder can only be maintained in whole decks, represented a point of hull stress, and furthermore, increased stresses by reducing the depth of the hull girder. As electronics and accommodation space demands increased, the additional room given by restoring those 'cut-away' decks became worth the trade-off in weight of metal.

Ah, thanks.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation

In simpler terms, it was the equivalent of having a "cut here" line marked on the hull. It reduced weight but increased the chance that one ship would become two with the right amount of damage.

_________________
"If you want to have dinner with the Devil, make sure to bring a long spoon!"
The New Wolf's Shipyard
The New Wolf's Shipyard Forum

These days, and back then it doesnt care if you fit much armor in there or continue the hull.
A torpedo can wreck frigates/destroyer in two anytime.
Especially these days, with a hull of only a few MM thick.

_________________
Fryssian AU with Lt.Maverick 114
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9802&p=193331#p193331

Embarked on: HNLMS Karel Doorman A833
To do list:
-Zeven Provincien class cruiser
-Joint support ship all sides
-F124 Sachsen class frigate
-F125 Baden-Württemberg class frigate
-Clemencau class aircraft carrier
-Zeven provincien class frigate
-Poolster class AOR
-Amsterdam class AOR
-Minas Gerais aircraft carrier

It’s also termed the break of fo’c’sle. As others have pointed out it was a cause of back-breaking in when the ship was subjected to shock from underwater explosions but also a source of fatigue cracks in normal use. There is a detail design solution to ease the latter, however, so it remains viable. The important thing is to avoid the sudden vertical break by using an angled or curved side shell for continuity.

Regarding the supposed vulnerability of modern surface warship to torpedo attacks – under keel explosions, when they could be arranged using the fusing technology of the time, would be just as effective at breaking the back of armoured ships as modern ones. Members residing in London may find the history of HMS Belfast – an armoured vessel with her back broken by UNDEX – instructive. In addition, modern warships are designed and built with the benefit of research into the damage effects of such explosions, which were little understood - if at all - in previous generations.

RP1

_________________
"Yes siree, the excitement never stops." Togusa, Ghost in the Shell

It was especially big on large ships during the treaty era to, well, comply with treaty limitations.

O.K. another question, if the boat is on the inside of supports, and they even curl over. So, how do you get the boat in the water?

_________________
Eschew obfuscation

The Davits can rotate, so first you push the boat back until the fron clears the forward davit, then you swing it out. Then you push the whole thing forward until the stern clears the aft davit and pushes it out.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.