Shipbucket

The same source (navypedia, wikipedia) that gave the swedish ship 380 mines, gives the polish Gryf 600 mines. maybe it's a mistake coming from a different way of counting it (stored inside/ ready to lay). Or the difference comes from the fact that gryf was designed since the begining as a minelayer while Älvsnabben is a converted marchant ship (i think that's the right explanation).
last theory (but i doubt about it): Is it possible that Swedish use a different,bigger type of mine?

By the way, thank for your comments.

_________________
"You can rape history, if you give her a child"
Alexandre Dumas

JE SUIS CHARLIE

Norwegian HNoMS Olav Tryggvason too only 280 mines. And she was purposes build minelayer, with heavy armament for it's type...


And she was described as one of the big ones!

Olav Tryggvason was a bit smaller. It was design to fit 2 twin torpedo tube mount, that may have spend space unusable for mine racks.

It's described to use a covered mine deck, this could be less roomy that using a wide open deck.
I think minelayer have very variable design.

Cruiser-minelayer like british Adventure or french Pluton, even being far bigger than the ship we are talking about, carried only respectively 280 and 290 mines (should have roomier machinery to great speed).
on the other and the US Terror, bigger than swedish norwegian and polish ship but smaller than the british and french, carried up to 900 mines.

_________________
"You can rape history, if you give her a child"
Alexandre Dumas

JE SUIS CHARLIE

Norwegian ferrys during the cold war could take up to a 1000 mines. On a 70-95 car ferry.

Anyway, all i mean is that the Pahlavi had the same mine capacity as the gryf, whatever it was.
If someone find a source differing on this data i will consider it.

_________________
"You can rape history, if you give her a child"
Alexandre Dumas

JE SUIS CHARLIE