Shipbucket
http://67.205.157.234/forums/

Tarakan LCH, Australia
http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=197		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  nebnoswal [ September 4th, 2010, 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Tarakan LCH, Australia
Well, here is my first attempt at a 'shipbucket'.


I've used the BMTDSL Caimen 200 design as a base for the "Tarakan" LCH, a replacement for the Balikpapan LCH class. Capable of up too 200 tons, so 2 x M1A1 easy, 1000+ nautical mile range and only 25 crew. It's my first attempt, so don't be too harsh. I modified the bridge, changed the radar, upgraded the 25mm to the Typhoon. I'm not happy with the ships penant number. I also addded the RHIB's and there recessed position. I'm thinking they cut too much into the superstructure and maybe be better off located on the stern.

I'm also thinking a future modified variant will have a heli-deck, and enlarged triage facilities.
Author:  Canadai [ September 4th, 2010, 12:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
What's the deck penetration on that forward gun? If it's got much of one, it'll interfere with your vehicle deck.
Author:  nebnoswal [ September 4th, 2010, 12:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
Canadai wrote:
What's the deck penetration on that forward gun? If it's got much of one, it'll interfere with your vehicle deck.
Don't know for sure, but there are 2 x 25mm cannons, they are either side of the well deck. I've attached the top view drawing from the BMTDSL .pdf
Author:  Thiel [ September 4th, 2010, 12:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
If I remember correctly, the Typhoon mount doesn't have any penetration at all.
nebnoswal wrote:
I also addded the RHIB's and there recessed position. I'm thinking they cut too much into the superstructure and maybe be better off located on the stern.
The recess needs to be at least three metres deep to accommodate the boat and give the crew space to move on. So assuming you have one on each side, that's six metres of beam that can't be used for cargo or accommodation.
Author:  nebnoswal [ September 4th, 2010, 1:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
Thiel wrote:
If I remember correctly, the Typhoon mount doesn't have any penetration at all.
nebnoswal wrote:
I also addded the RHIB's and there recessed position. I'm thinking they cut too much into the superstructure and maybe be better off located on the stern.
The recess needs to be at least three metres deep to accommodate the boat and give the crew space to move on. So assuming you have one on each side, that's six metres of beam that can't be used for cargo or accommodation.
Well I guess that sinks that idea (pardon the pun). Overal beam is only 10m, at the waterline. Have to find somewhere else to stow the RHIB's. I can I can keep it on the ramp, out of dite, just like they do on the curent LCH's
Author:  Portsmouth Bill [ September 4th, 2010, 1:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
Welcome aboard nebnoswal; and an interesting choice for your first submission; I googled it to see how it would look in real life:

[ img ]

Your version looks fine apart from the R.I.B. placement as mentioned above; also, the railings, while similar to the ones shown above would benefit from being in the standard Shipbucket style. You could also lighten the hull colour above the deck line as per the drawing above. The inflatable liferafts seem to be outside the railings. On the original it shows what looks like a simple navigation radar and you've replaced it with a more sophisticated set, but I'm not sure if that is necessary. That apart yours looks o.k. and I wouldn't mind seeing a version done for the real life archive :)
Author:  nebnoswal [ September 4th, 2010, 2:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
Three mods in less than 2 hrs. Thanks Bill, high praise from one as experienced as you. I've been kind of stalking you over several forums admiring your work.

Railings have been fixed, RHIB's are TBA, and the radar remains, as the LCH will have a secondary PB task.
Author:  ALVAMA [ September 4th, 2010, 2:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
Those things on deck aren't liferafts....
Author:  nebnoswal [ September 4th, 2010, 3:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
ALVAMA wrote:
Those things on deck aren't liferafts....
Which ones? The one I got of the parts sheet and put on the LCH, or the original drawing?
If so, are there any? What have I mistakenly used?

As well as having 25 crew, it can accomidate 250 troops on the well deck
Author:  klagldsf [ September 4th, 2010, 5:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tarakan LCH, Australia
Canadai wrote:
What's the deck penetration on that forward gun? If it's got much of one, it'll interfere with your vehicle deck.
This brings up something that, well, perhaps needs to be brought up.


I've noticed a tendency for some of the newer members on this board, after they have received helpful advice, to ape back that advice in haphazard fashion and perhaps be under the impression that they may know more than they really do.


People like Thiel and erik_t study extensively the types of systems they're dealing with - not just generally, but they know very well the specific stats of various systems, even some obscure ones that might not be known to even other laymen.


My point being, is that there is a big difference between the knowledge base of Thiel or erik_t, and someone who've they've been lending advice to but who doesn't have that knowledge first-hand. Typhoon, as Thiel mentioned, has no deck penetration, it is an on-deck, bolt-on system designed specifically for use that way. He knows this because he's at least somewhat familiar with the system, rather than making a generalized guess based only on very broad knowledge of weapon systems in general.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/