Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 1 of 2  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 »
Author Message
ALVAMA
Post subject: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 3:01 pm
If I have a tanker built about 1937, single shaft and a depth of 10.5 meter. I want to rebuild it as mothership for landingcrafts (as done by British too) And I want to cut the depth to 6 to 7 meters. Can I cut in the steel of the hull? like cut a part off. I know you can make the ship lighter and it will raise, but when I add tanks and LCTs it won't help. Also did Americans done this with shipship into lakers? Is it possible?


Top
[Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 4:18 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
You can, though carving off the top isn't the way to go.
The easiest way would be to reduce the mass of cargo carried.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
ALVAMA
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 4:32 pm
Thiel wrote:
You can, though carving off the top isn't the way to go.
The easiest way would be to reduce the mass of cargo carried.
Yea Indeed. A problem I got in mind. If she not carried any oil (whish will be quite some) she will carry tanks, soldiers, weapons and LCTs you'll get around the same king of heavy weight


Top
[Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Not necessarily. The ship I work on can carry 35000 mt oil. That works out to some 540 M1s. However, even if we discount the gun and all the gear necessary to get them on board park and them hubcab to hubcab you can only fit ~130. That works out to about 8450 mt.
You could double that by installing an extra deck, but that still only comes to 20000 mt (I'm including ~3000mt for the deck)

In short you're going to run out of space much sooner than buoyancy. This will have the added benefit of reducing the ship's draught considerably.
Of course this only works out like this for my ship, but the general idea result will be the same no matter what ship you use.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
ALVAMA
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Ah Okay. Well Thank-you for answering!! Now I can make the drawings!


Top
[Quote]
APDAF
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 5:20 pm
Offline
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am
You could use the bits you cut off to widen it..


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 5:22 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 9101
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
APDAF wrote:
You could use the bits you cut off to widen it..
It will only destroy the hull, designed properties. and the structural integrity.

And it will also be cheaper to build a new ship.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 5:33 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7510
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
APDAF wrote:
You could use the bits you cut off to widen it..
let's say... you could scrap the ship, melt the metal, make new plates of it, build an new ship of it....that would be easier then what you describe.

_________________
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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 5:41 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Unless you resort to bulges

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: AU design questionPosted: September 13th, 2011, 6:04 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7510
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
Thiel wrote:
Unless you resort to bulges
true. but still.... removing plating from 'somewhere' and then reshaping it to fit elsewhere...... not impossible, but not the thing I would do.

_________________
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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 1 of 2  [ 15 posts ]  Return to “General Discussion” | Go to page 1 2 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]