Shipbucket

Waaaaait a minute - slightly embarrassed to have to ask this, but is this tug's bow to the left or the right?

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695

Technically the bow is the left hand end - and is used when directly engaged in ship-handling/docking, it had greater clearance (by nature of the set-back wheelhouse and low free board) enabling maneuvering close to and under large hull overhangs on modern ships. When the tug is transiting independently, it actually travels Stern (right hand end) first - hence the higher free board/gunwales for sailing into a seaway/better sea keeping. Its a twin Z-drive (azipod) vessel and thus the water-flow interactions with the large skeg allow for excellent maneuverability and awesome stability - particularly when the tug is engaged in indirect 'escort towing' maneuvers.






It seems weird but it actually works extremely well, and the design is increasingly common in new tug construction globally.

Cheers

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________


____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation

It would'n work like that. first of all it will give problem with sea-capability and unnecessary stability issues... for when you drive with that end you are taking as rear (the high hull) in to the waves, the thrusters effect will start to have problems. due the entire hull will start to try to lift it self out of the water, at the same time as the Azimut thrusters is drying to pull the ship down. the other problem you get with you'r idea is that the hull will work more different than you think. that rear end with all it underwater hull, will very easy move more up and down than normall tug and thus damage that ship it's moving in to. The reason for having the Azimut trhuster aft, is that there are more lift in that section of the hull for the azimut. but also the azimut Thruster is designed to minimize unwanted movement in the hull. something you loos now.

I don't see any problem in having the azimut thruster at rear, since all Tugs in the world have it placed there.

so in fact you get an much more worse Tug than you believe by that arrangement, you have there. "There is an reason an azimut trhuster and old school propellers are mounted aft (azimuth and old school propulsion is similar with an diferent!), but voith Schneider Propeller (VSP) is a bit different.


But then my knowledge on Tugs can be wrong, and if that is correct... then something is wrong.

But you shall have for thinking out of the box... but there are things that would'n work as well outside the box... so long it's not designed for that. And Azimuth is not an out of box system. It's good because it's build to be the master of the box...!

I'm certainly no expert on the subject of Hydrodynamics, but i have seen them in action and believe they work as advertised. Please see the link below if you want any further information on the design family.

http://www.ral.ca/designs/tugboats/z-tech_class.html

Cheers

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________


____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation

interesting. what they have done basically is flipping the hull. with an extensive hull modification. (it's like they saw he voith-Schneider... and just got an idea). after I also understand from the article, these are not a pure open water Tugs. they work from the dock, and out to the outer coast line. and if they want to go further out they have to go in an tractor mode. It's not ideal for Falklands where you want an open sea tug. a tug that can take it...

as the z-tech is very new, and only tested on a few tugs, and some of them is just normal tugs, they just have flipped around without the necessary improvement. I will wait until I see one going directly out in the open sea, in full storm without an problem.... first then I will say that system is good. for the biggest problem I can see that an office engineer with no real experience out there can see is that, when she go out in the open water... she will handle like when you reversing a small boat. the end where the Azimut is will go in that direction it's pointed. while the rear/bow will move all over the place, and in bad weather an wave crossing the bow.... well to say it this way, you have to do constant course correction.

And in Falklands known for it interesting sea....

I totally agree Sir, definitely not ideal for open water operations - but i still believe they'll suit my purposes just fine, for two reasons;

1. Many examples of this type of tug have made trans-oceanic delivery voyages in 'tractor mode' with little or no sea keeping difficulties experienced (includes all 10 of the Panama Canal Authority's Z-tech 6000 series tugs (Built in Hong Kong - trans-pacific delivery voyage to Panama)

2. In the context of my AU, the MkIII will be one of three (3) tug classes operated by the FDS and will be the primary Ship-Assist/Ship Docking tug operating in relatively sheltered/confined areas of the islands with little or no need for open water operation except for transit voyages.

Thank you for your thoughts 'heuhen', I sincerely look forward to your continuing contributions as my AU develops.

Cheers

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________


____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation

Ok, I'm not quite finished this one - but i felt it was about time to make another contribution and get some feedback.

Please see below the history and development of the Falklands Defense Service's first major surface combatant - the Guardian Class Destroyer.

Daring Class Destroyers (1959 – 1990)
FDS Guardian (D02); FDS Gauntlet (D03); FDS Grenadier (D04)

Development & Introduction
These three vessels were originally ordered as part of the Royal Navy/Royal Australian Navy’s 20-ship Daring Class Destroyer order in the last days of WW2, but the end of that conflict and the subsequent downsizing of the fleet/s post-war saw just under half the order (8 British and 1 Australian ship) cancelled. Construction on three of these vessels had been started in yards both in Australia and the UK, and, instead of scrapping them on the slipway, both governments entered into a funding and manning agreement to see the ships completed as a joint contribution to the fledgling Far East Strategic Reserve force based in Singapore. Funding pressures and the changing geopolitical landscape of the late 1940’s and early 1950’s saw the work on the three ships slowed and even postponed several times until finally in 1954 the agreement that enabled their construction was abandoned, with both nations citing funding/manning shortages as reasons for ending the program. All three ships by this stage were completed to launching condition and were thus launched, only to be promptly laid up, with the Australian built example (ex. HMAS Waterhen) being towed via the Indian ocean and the Suez Canal to Portsmouth Naval Base UK for storage alongside it’s two unfortunate sisters (ex. HMS Desperate & Diligent).

Early Service
Salvation came in the form of a need to provide a credible and permanent naval deterrent force in the South Atlantic as a counter to Argentina’s territorial ambitions for the Falkland Islands, South Sandwich Islands and South Georgia, all British Overseas protectorates. In the summer of 1957, all three ships were taken in hand at John Brown’s Clyde-side Dockyards, fitted out and completed before commissioning into the RN as HMS Gauntlet, Guardian and Grenadier during 1959. For the following 13 years, the three ships served as the RN’s South Atlantic Patrol force, with each relieving each other on 6-monthly rotations, being based at Port Stanley on East Falkland when deployed south.

Second Life
Unlike their RAN sister ships, the British Darings received little or no modernization during their RN service careers, and were approaching obsolescence by the early ‘70’s. As such, the three members of the ‘Guardian’ sub-class were, like their sisters, decommissioned and laid up pending disposal in 1973, their role as South Atlantic Guard Ship being taken by rotations of newer fleet units such as the County Class DDGs and Type 12 Frigates, along with the dedicated Antarctic patrol vessel, HMS Endurance. A shortage of major fleet units following the cancelling of the Type 82 DDG program saw alternate options brought forward for comprehensive refits to the three Guardians, and, based on work done to modernize the Australian Darings, each of the ships in turn was was slipped at Portsmouth Naval Dockyard for refit to the standard of the upgraded RAN ships. apon recommissioning, instead of returning the RN, Guardian, Grenadier and Gauntlet were rotationally crewed with a mixed Royal Navy/Falkland Islands Defense Force crew, with their Pennants and ship prefix’s changing to FDS (Falklands Defense Ship) to reflect their dedicated role. As an interesting aside, complete Australian plans for the refit were sourced and used verbatim, including the use of the RAN's 'storm grey' colour scheme and USN-style Hull Numbers. The result; the Guardians emerged from refit looking excactly like their RAN sister ships! The only point of difference being the fitment of a stylised map of the Falklands on the aft funnel in place of the RAN Kangaroo. Their unique appearance and gun-only armament (in an increasingly missile-armed navy) gained the three ships an enthusiastic following by ship spotters and naval enthusiasts whenever they returned to the UK from deployment.



As always, constructive comment is welcome - I will post the final chapter and SB drawing for this class a little later.

Cheers

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________


____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation

As Promised, the second and final installment.

Withdrawal and War
The ships continued their rotational South Atlantic deployments until budget cuts and issues maintaining the FIDF portion of the mixed crews saw the class withdrawn in turn as refit and dry-docking became due, their lack of a credible air defense capability also meaning that their unescorted presence on active duty, far from home was now less than ideal. Guardian herself was the last to fly her decommissioning pennant, returning from her final patrol in late 1981. All three ships thence re-entered familiar territory on the reserve fleet buoys at Portsmouth awaiting sale or scrap, until news of the Argentinian invasion of the Falklands and South Georgia froze all further rationalization of the navy. Whilst their lack of commonality with other fleet units militated against their reactivation, the conflict in their former home territory did lend the class a stay of execution till a more rational assessment could be made post-war.

Third Time’s a Charm
Following Britain’s successful liberation of the Falkland’s the necessity to once again provide a forthright and continual presence in the South Atlantic loomed as a problem for the stretched and budget pressured Royal Navy. HMS Endurance was reactivated and along with the increased presence on the Falkland’s brought about by the construction of RAF Mount Pleasant, RN fleet units were again stationed south to conduct sovereignty patrols and to deter any further Argentine aggression. Following the successful campaign by the islanders for recognition of autonomy and entry into the Commonwealth as a peer territory, The newly reborn Falklands Defense Force began to seek a means by which it could begin to share and eventually take over the naval sovereignty mission from the Royal Navy. The Answer; the Guardians!! But in order to fulfill this role effectively in the 80’s and 90’s, these 30+ year-old vessels with obsolete weapons and systems would need some serious TLC. Incorporating lessons from the Conflict and systems proven in contemporary RN vessels, Guardian and Gauntlet were comprehensively refitted by Cammell Laird at Birkenhead, emerging from dry-dock as completely different ships. Seawolf missile launchers replaced B and X turrets, and a raised helipad and retractable hanger were constructed at the stern in place of the ASW mortars, enabling the embarkation of lynx and SeaKing helicopters. Towed array sonar (as fitted to the type 22 frigates) was also included on the quarterdeck below the helipad. Air search and targeting radars along with fire direction systems, comms and habitability upgrades were also performed. Grenadier was not refitted and instead donated parts to her more fortunate sisters before being sunk as a target in 1984. A radically different FDS Guardian re-commissioned into the newly minted Falklands Defense Service – Navy in June 1985, three years to the day since the surrender of Argentine Forces. Gauntlet followed in early December, continuing in service and occasionally straying from home waters to participate in exercises or ‘show the flag’ until both were decommissioned in 1999. They were replaced in FDS service by the two members of the Commander Class (FFG), complemented by the Liberator Class OPVs and other fleet units of the growing FDS-N. FDS Guardian is maintained in Port Stanley as a muesum and war memorial.




Daring Class Destroyers (1959 – 1990)
FDS Guardian (D02); FDS Gauntlet (D03); FDS Grenadier (D04)

Built: 1949-1959
In Commission: 1959-1999
Number in Class: 3

Type: Destroyer (DD/G)
Displacement: Std: 2,830 tons, Full Load: 3820 tons
Length: 390ft (120m)
Beam: 43ft (13m)
Draft: 12.75ft (3.89m)
Propulsion: CODAG System;
2 x 2 Rolls-Royce Spey SM1A boost gas turbines (37,540 shp / 28 MW)
2 x 2 Rolls-Royce Tyne RM3C cruise gas turbines (9,700 shp/ 7.2 MW)
Speed: 30kts (56kph full)
18kts (33.3kph cruise)
Range: 7,500 nautical miles (14,000 km) at 15 kn (28 km/h)

Crew: 250 + up to 30 overload/embarked forces

Aviation: 1-2 Westland Lynx, or
1 x Westland SeaKing

Surface Action: 1 x QF 4.5”/45 (113mm) MkV Guns in 1 twin mount – UD Mk VI
2 × 30mm DS30M automated guns
2 × Miniguns
4 × General-purpose machine guns
Helo-mounted armament;
Hellfire air-to-surface missile
Excocet anti-ship missile

Air Action: 2 x SeaWolf anti-air missile launchers

Sub-surface action: 2 x STWS Mk.2 triple torpedo launcher with Stingray ASW torpedos
Helo-mounted armament;
Stingray torpedoes
Mk11 depth charges

Countermeasures: 4 x Marconi Sea Gnat 6-barrelled launchers
Graseby Type 182 towed torpedo decoy

ESM/ECM: MEL UAA-1 intercept + BAe AN/SSQ-108(V) Outboard tactical intercept and direction finding system
2 x Type 670 jammers (replaced by Type 675(2))

Sensors and Navigation: Type 1022 long range search and illumination radar
Kelvin Hughes Type 1006 navigation radar
BAe GSA 8 Sea Archer optronic director
2 x Marconi Type 911 directors (SeaWolf)
Ferranti Type 2050 search Sonar
Dowty Type 2031 VLF towed Sonar

And there you have it. Please give comment where you feel it's due - any and all helpful suggestions are weclome.

Cheers

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________


____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation

well, a few comments on your darings. first of all, photobucket has resized your image.
second, hood has drawn an entirely new rendition of the daring with updated parts and style from the australian ones you used as base. http://shipbucket.com/images.php?dir=Re ... 201952.png the guns, director, radar are all parts that at least should be updated.
third, I find it unlikely they would be exactly the same, australia being in a different ocean (colour) then the falklands, and with of course some different ideas about how it should work (parts). for example, the 2 WM eggs and the LW-02 radar on the australian darings are a bit unlikely on an ship that operates at least in the beginning still as british ship, IMO. the australian ones were also a bit different from the british ones as build (LIMBO, secondary guns, for example)

the last one, looking a bit like an daring FRAM, is something which looks a bit over the top, and most likely is. I'll see what you do with the first 2 before I am commenting on that one, though.

the background story, while not entirely possible, is plausible though IMO, and something can be done with the ships as you are planning.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Can you add some basic ideas to your backstory, How different are your Falkland Islands in your AU ?
Just asking as the real FI have a population of 2,932 in 2012 so running 3 ships with Crew: 250 + up to 30 overload/embarked forces might be a bit hard ! (unless they are all Uk manned apart from a token Falkland Islands presence ) but you then get into issues about the cost etc

If you want a Falkland Islands in your AU with the forces to defend itself then you need a richer bigger Falkland's ! (say find loads of oil in 60/70s ! then you can pay for it all and man it from UK etc).

But I think this would create LOTS of butterflies (and stop a 82 war, as Argentina would have no illusions that UK would walk away from the Falkland's (I also don't think they would be separate from the RN just the FI would pay a large chunk of the MOD budget and get a few ships stationed down south on rotation/ along with maybe a RM commando ? If you just want to defend the island an airport with a small squadron of anti shipping/fighter aircraft is probably cheaper then 3 destroyers ie Mount Pleasant )

I didn't think Argentina started to realy claim them till later (ie when the RN stoped being a superpower size fleet ), Wiki says