You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

1

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 5:01pm

Rebuild of CL Thrasius Class

In the sino-filipino-war, it became clear that China has a shortage of amphibious assault ships. For this reason, the CNDO was instructed to close this gap as soon as possible. Since China had bought the old light cruisers of the Thrasius class, here a corresponding modification is made till "actually" amphibious ships are available.

Original CL Thrasius Class


[size=1]original drawing from Wes[/size]

Rebuilt to a support ship for amphibious operations


[size=1]drawing from parador but using parts from Red Admiral[/size]


Original stats:

Quoted


4.574 t light; 4.761 t standard; 4.990 t normal; 5.173 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
459,71 ft / 456,00 ft x 52,00 ft x 16,01 ft (normal load)
140,12 m / 138,99 m x 15,85 m x 4,88 m

Armament:
2 - 5,98" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 107,15lbs / 48,60kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on centreline ends, evenly spread
6 - 5,98" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 107,15lbs / 48,60kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
4 - 3,00" / 76,2 mm guns in single mounts, 13,50lbs / 6,12kg shells, 1912 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
10 - 1,00" / 25,4 mm guns (1x10 guns), 0,50lbs / 0,23kg shells, 1912 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mount
on side
Weight of broadside 916 lbs / 416 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
4 - 21,0" / 533,4 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3,15" / 80 mm 310,01 ft / 94,49 m 12,01 ft / 3,66 m
Ends: 1,57" / 40 mm 146,00 ft / 44,50 m 8,01 ft / 2,44 m
Upper: 1,18" / 30 mm 160,01 ft / 48,77 m 8,01 ft / 2,44 m
Main Belt covers 105% of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 1,57" / 40 mm - -

- Armour deck: 1,18" / 30 mm, Conning tower: 6,10" / 155 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
ERROR: Revise drives, 4 shafts, 35.613 shp / 26.567 Kw = 28,00 kts
Range 5.000nm at 10,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 412 tons

Complement:
296 - 385

Cost:
£0,439 million / $1,756 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 115 tons, 2,3%
Armour: 1.012 tons, 20,3%
- Belts: 629 tons, 12,6%
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Armament: 11 tons, 0,2%
- Armour Deck: 333 tons, 6,7%
- Conning Tower: 38 tons, 0,8%
Machinery: 1.305 tons, 26,2%
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2.092 tons, 41,9%
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 416 tons, 8,3%
Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 1,0%

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
6.539 lbs / 2.966 Kg = 61,0 x 6,0 " / 152 mm shells or 1,2 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,25
Metacentric height 2,8 ft / 0,9 m
Roll period: 13,0 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,20
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,24

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak
Block coefficient: 0,460
Length to Beam Ratio: 8,77 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 21,35 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 56 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 57
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 10,00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0,00 ft / 0,00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 21,00 ft / 6,40 m
- Forecastle (20%): 20,01 ft / 6,10 m
- Mid (70%): 20,01 ft / 6,10 m (10,01 ft / 3,05 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (15%): 10,01 ft / 3,05 m
- Stern: 10,01 ft / 3,05 m
- Average freeboard: 17,09 ft / 5,21 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 104,2%
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 153,6%
Waterplane Area: 15.252 Square feet or 1.417 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 109%
Structure weight / hull surface area: 87 lbs/sq ft or 422 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1,06
- Longitudinal: 1,80
- Overall: 1,12
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily



Rebuild:

Quoted

Thrasius-rebuild, China Light Cruiser laid down 1912 (Engine 1940)

Displacement:
4.400 t light; 4.535 t standard; 4.990 t normal; 5.353 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
459,71 ft / 456,00 ft x 52,00 ft x 16,01 ft (normal load)
140,12 m / 138,99 m x 15,85 m x 4,88 m

Armament:
1 - 5,98" / 152 mm guns in single mounts, 107,15lbs / 48,60kg shells, 1912 Model
Breech loading gun in deck mount
on centreline forward
8 - 1,85" / 47,0 mm guns (2x4 guns), 3,17lbs / 1,44kg shells, 1940 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all aft, all raised mounts - superfiring
2 - 1,85" / 47,0 mm guns (1x2 guns), 3,17lbs / 1,44kg shells, 1940 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mount
on side forward, all raised guns
8 - 0,79" / 20,0 mm guns (2x4 guns), 0,24lbs / 0,11kg shells, 1940 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, all forward, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 141 lbs / 64 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 400

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 3,15" / 80 mm 310,01 ft / 94,49 m 12,01 ft / 3,66 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 105% of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0,79" / 20 mm 0,39" / 10 mm -
2nd: 0,39" / 10 mm 0,39" / 10 mm -

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 20.986 shp / 15.655 Kw = 24,50 kts
Range 5.000nm at 16,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 818 tons

Complement:
296 - 385

Cost:
£0,247 million / $0,989 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 18 tons, 0,4%
Armour: 493 tons, 9,9%
- Belts: 489 tons, 9,8%
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Armament: 5 tons, 0,1%
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0,0%
Machinery: 561 tons, 11,2%
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2.078 tons, 41,6%
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 590 tons, 11,8%
Miscellaneous weights: 1.250 tons, 25,1%

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
9.525 lbs / 4.320 Kg = 88,9 x 6,0 " / 152 mm shells or 1,9 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,03
Metacentric height 2,0 ft / 0,6 m
Roll period: 15,4 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 83 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,04
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,65

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak
Block coefficient: 0,460
Length to Beam Ratio: 8,77 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 21,35 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 48 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 10,00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0,00 ft / 0,00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 21,00 ft / 6,40 m
- Forecastle (20%): 20,01 ft / 6,10 m
- Mid (70%): 20,01 ft / 6,10 m (10,01 ft / 3,05 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (15%): 10,01 ft / 3,05 m
- Stern: 10,01 ft / 3,05 m
- Average freeboard: 17,09 ft / 5,21 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 67,8%
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 173,8%
Waterplane Area: 15.252 Square feet or 1.417 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 166%
Structure weight / hull surface area: 86 lbs/sq ft or 420 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1,16
- Longitudinal: 1,86
- Overall: 1,22
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

1250tons = aircraft and vehicles:
--------------------------------------------
250tons = 10 planes
150tons = doors, landing craft launch system, cranes
700tons = 350 soldiers
50tons = 5 landing crafts
100tons = cargo

=> 50% rebuild !!!!!! needs 2200tons !!!

2

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 5:06pm

Yes, it does look like you need a rebuild to fix the "ERROR: Revise drives" problem. *runs away* :D

3

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 5:24pm

Er, no offense - but is this a joke?

For the price of rebuilding those antiques, you could sim and construct a very potent landing ship that would last two decades or so, and would be far more useful than these... not entirely sure what to call them, really. I don't see the purpose of the flight deck: catapult or no, the width and length of the deck won't let the ship handle anything more than a Fieseler Storch or a Piper Grasshopper. The only advantage is that you could rebuild these ships in seven months, rather than waiting ten months for a good purpose-built ship. It just doesn't look like an idea anyone but the most desperate navy would consider.

Can I propose an alternate design?

4

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 5:29pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Er, no offense - but is this a joke?


Not really ..... i have the CL's and thought this could be a way to use them 5-10 years. And if it's just for "test purpose".

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
For the price of rebuilding those antiques, you could sim and construct a very potent landing ship that would last two decades or so, and would be far more useful than these... not entirely sure what to call them, really. I don't see the purpose of the flight deck: catapult or no, the width and length of the deck won't let the ship handle anything more than a Fieseler Storch or a Piper Grasshopper. The only advantage is that you could rebuild these ships in seven months, rather than waiting ten months for a good purpose-built ship. It just doesn't look like an idea anyone but the most desperate navy would consider.


So you better scrap the CLs ???

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Can I propose an alternate design?


Sure !

5

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 5:38pm

Quoted

I don't see the purpose of the flight deck: catapult or no, the width and length of the deck won't let the ship handle anything more than a Fieseler Storch or a Piper Grasshopper.


Do you think they will be usefull without the flight deck "only" as troop transport ???

6

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 6:01pm

Grasshoppers or floatplanes could be pretty useful in an amphibious scenario.

What can you do with a 25% refit? Alot cheaper and I would expect not much loss in capability.

7

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 6:05pm

Quoted

Originally posted by parador

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
For the price of rebuilding those antiques, you could sim and construct a very potent landing ship that would last two decades or so, and would be far more useful than these... not entirely sure what to call them, really. I don't see the purpose of the flight deck: catapult or no, the width and length of the deck won't let the ship handle anything more than a Fieseler Storch or a Piper Grasshopper. The only advantage is that you could rebuild these ships in seven months, rather than waiting ten months for a good purpose-built ship. It just doesn't look like an idea anyone but the most desperate navy would consider.


So you better scrap the CLs ???

Yes. You can net a nice 686 tons from scrapping each ship (I can't find out how many you have) and apply that, with your 2,200 tons assigned to the rebuild, to turn out a nice landing ship instead. A 1912 cruiser hull just isn't worth the effort to restore - it's been tramping along for thirty years by now, with all the strain and stress that involves. Sure, it's better than nothing, but not by much.

At present, it appears the Chinese amphibious forces are primarily infantry-based, and have no larger ships to unload tanks or supplies. You've already got some fast transports, so what *I'd* do is make something in the 900-1,500 ton range, similar to an LST - or a larger ship built like a small assault landing ship, with a squadron of small landing craft to take troops ashore.

I *think* you've got six of these, so you'd get around 4116 tons from scrapping them. If you planned on refitting all six at 2,200t a pop, you've probably got ~17,316 tons to play with. That'd let you build six ships of design one (below) and two ships of design 2.

According to your accounting, you'd get around 2,100 troops on six cruiser conversions. With the two+six option I'm offering here, you'd get the same number of troops, but with tanks and trucks to support them, more supplies embarked, and a much more useful assault force all around.

Quoted

[SIZE=3]Chinassault 1, Chinese Landing Ship laid down 1941[/SIZE]

Displacement:
1,394 t light; 1,443 t standard; 1,764 t normal; 2,021 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
289.32 ft / 278.87 ft x 55.77 ft x 7.22 ft (normal load)
88.18 m / 85.00 m x 17.00 m x 2.20 m

Armament:
8 - 1.85" / 47.0 mm guns (4x2 guns), 3.17lbs / 1.44kg shells, 1941 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all aft
8 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm guns in single mounts, 0.24lbs / 0.11kg shells, 1941 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 27 lbs / 12 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 800

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion motors,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 2,966 shp / 2,212 Kw = 16.00 kts
Range 5,500nm at 16.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 578 tons

Complement:
135 - 176

Cost:
£0.387 million / $1.549 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 3 tons, 0.2 %
Machinery: 78 tons, 4.4 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 663 tons, 37.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 370 tons, 21.0 %
Miscellaneous weights: 650 tons, 36.8 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
4,932 lbs / 2,237 Kg = 1,556.9 x 1.9 " / 47 mm shells or 1.9 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.40
Metacentric height 3.8 ft / 1.1 m
Roll period: 12.1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.00
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.53

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has raised forecastle, raised quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0.550
Length to Beam Ratio: 5.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 16.70 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 44 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 46
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 3.28 ft / 1.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 16.40 ft / 5.00 m (9.84 ft / 3.00 m aft of break)
- Mid (50 %): 9.84 ft / 3.00 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 16.40 ft / 5.00 m (9.84 ft / 3.00 m before break)
- Stern: 16.40 ft / 5.00 m
- Average freeboard: 12.40 ft / 3.78 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 57.6 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 150.7 %
Waterplane Area: 10,855 Square feet or 1,008 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 212 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 50 lbs/sq ft or 244 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.95
- Longitudinal: 1.58
- Overall: 1.00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Miscellaneous Weight:
- 300 tons for 150 troops
- 300 tons for tanks, trucks, or vehicles
- 50 tons for other supplies


Quoted

[SIZE=3]Chinassault 2, Chinese Landing Ship laid down 1941[/SIZE]

Displacement:
4,247 t light; 4,358 t standard; 4,795 t normal; 5,144 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
398.33 ft / 393.70 ft x 59.06 ft x 13.12 ft (normal load)
121.41 m / 120.00 m x 18.00 m x 4.00 m

Armament:
8 - 1.85" / 47.0 mm guns in single mounts, 3.17lbs / 1.44kg shells, 1941 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on centreline ends, evenly spread
8 - 0.79" / 20.0 mm guns in single mounts, 0.24lbs / 0.11kg shells, 1941 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
Weight of broadside 27 lbs / 12 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 900

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0.79" / 20 mm 0.39" / 10 mm -
2nd: 0.39" / 10 mm 0.20" / 5 mm -

- Conning tower: 0.79" / 20 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion motors,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 3,677 shp / 2,743 Kw = 15.00 kts
Range 5,500nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 787 tons

Complement:
287 - 374

Cost:
£1.021 million / $4.083 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 3 tons, 0.1 %
Armour: 11 tons, 0.2 %
- Belts: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 6 tons, 0.1 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 5 tons, 0.1 %
Machinery: 97 tons, 2.0 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 1,735 tons, 36.2 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 548 tons, 11.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 2,400 tons, 50.1 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
11,936 lbs / 5,414 Kg = 3,767.7 x 1.9 " / 47 mm shells or 2.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.10
Metacentric height 2.7 ft / 0.8 m
Roll period: 15.1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 64 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.01
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 2.00

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has low quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0.550
Length to Beam Ratio: 6.67 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 19.84 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 32 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 32
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 10.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 26.25 ft / 8.00 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 22.97 ft / 7.00 m
- Mid (50 %): 19.69 ft / 6.00 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 13.12 ft / 4.00 m (19.69 ft / 6.00 m before break)
- Stern: 13.12 ft / 4.00 m
- Average freeboard: 20.11 ft / 6.13 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 62.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 220.1 %
Waterplane Area: 16,226 Square feet or 1,507 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 182 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 72 lbs/sq ft or 352 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.96
- Longitudinal: 2.25
- Overall: 1.04
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Miscellaneous Weight:
- 300 tons for 1x heavy landing craft
- 72t for 8x landing craft (9t each)
- 28t for miscellaneous items associated with landing craft
- 800 tons for cargo
- 1200 tons for 600 troops

8

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 6:12pm

Quoted

Originally posted by parador

Quoted

I don't see the purpose of the flight deck: catapult or no, the width and length of the deck won't let the ship handle anything more than a Fieseler Storch or a Piper Grasshopper.


Do you think they will be usefull without the flight deck "only" as troop transport ???

No, I don't - like I said, they're old hulls, not designed for trooping infantry.

Foxy *is* correct, however, in that some air cooperation elements are nice to have for amphibious work. But it is much better provided by a dedicated ship that doesn't have to worry about trying to conduct air operations while loading or unloading troops. It's just asking for trouble, mixing two distinct roles that should not be mixed.

It's only when we get to the 1950s and 60s, when helicopter-mobile landing forces become viable, that it becomes at all realistic to equip amphibious ships with flight decks.

9

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 6:16pm

I agree with everything Brock says. These ships are too old for cutting about and not worth the cost. At some point a ship reaches the end. 1912 was a long time ago...

Also these flight deck amphibs look cool, yes the IJA tried some OTL, but really they have limited utility. A pure transport is better.

10

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 6:19pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
Also these flight deck amphibs look cool, yes the IJA tried some OTL...

Unless I'm forgetting something, I think all of the IJA's conversions were rather larger, too - 10-12,000 tons. I don't know of any that were this small. That about right, or am I forgetting something?

11

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 6:22pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
Also these flight deck amphibs look cool, yes the IJA tried some OTL...

Unless I'm forgetting something, I think all of the IJA's conversions were rather larger, too - 10-12,000 tons. I don't know of any that were this small. That about right, or am I forgetting something?


No, your memory is not playing tricks.

They were also built on merchant hulls that were beamier and didn't have armor. They also did not attempt to carry cruiser armament.

12

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 6:29pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Yes. You can net a nice 686 tons from scrapping each ship (I can't find out how many you have) and apply that, with your 2,200 tons assigned to the rebuild,
to turn out a nice landing ship instead. A 1912 cruiser hull just isn't worth the effort to restore - it's been tramping along for thirty years by now, with
all the strain and stress that involves. Sure, it's better than nothing, but not by much.


The stresses during the years of use on the high seas are definitely not negligible. This is also the point , which cause me the greatest "abdominal pain".
How realistic is such a rebuild ?!?!?! Frankly, I think very unrealistic !!



Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
At present, it appears the Chinese amphibious forces are primarily infantry-based, and have no larger ships to unload tanks or supplies. You've already got
some fast transports, so what *I'd* do is make something in the 900-1,500 ton range, similar to an LST - or a larger ship built like a small assault landing
ship, with a squadron of small landing craft to take troops ashore.

I *think* you've got six of these, so you'd get around 4116 tons from scrapping them. If you planned on refitting all six at 2,200t a pop, you've probably
got ~17,316 tons to play with. That'd let you build six ships of design one (below) and two ships of design 2.


I must confess that your proposal looks much better and more thoughtful than my "plan". By the way, i have "only" 4 of the CL's so the tonnage gaining
from scrapping will be ~2744tons.

So i think i will go this way .... may be i will rebuild the CLs to pure transporters (better than nothing) or use them as target ships. I don't know.

Thanks for your simulations. I think/hope i can use them for building the vessels ?

13

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 6:33pm

Ah, couldn't find any post that gave the numbers, so I presumed that you had all six.

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
Thanks for your simulations. I think/hope i can use them for building the vessels ?

Feel free to do so - just note that they're one of my designs. :)

14

Tuesday, February 14th 2012, 8:03pm

Also a nitpick, when did the ships lose their 6" guns and ship 5.9"? I must say I agree with everything Brock says, in fact IMO these ships should have been retired after Mexico no longer had use for them. They have had very long lives indeed.

15

Wednesday, February 15th 2012, 12:27am

@Wes: I think that's Springsharp's doing, actually. I've noticed before that if you start with metric and go to Imperial, and vice versa, the conversion is actually very imprecise.