WesWorld

He had asked me to make a seaplane carrier for him, and here it is:

Isn't that the exact same hull as your frigate?

Quoted

Originally posted by klagldsf
He had asked me to make a seaplane carrier for him, and here it is:

Inasmuch as the vessel would have to slow or stop every time it needed to recover its aircraft, wouldn't the speed implied in the International Frigate design be wasted? Or does the reworking of the superstructure imply a reduction in the powerplant?

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Isn't that the exact same hull as your frigate?

lol yup


But it's meant to be beamier...which leads to:

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan
Inasmuch as the vessel would have to slow or stop every time it needed to recover its aircraft, wouldn't the speed implied in the International Frigate design be wasted? Or does the reworking of the superstructure imply a reduction in the powerplant?

Because of the wider hull I'm pegging speed at about the high-20s/low-30s range.

Anyway, I guess I'll put it through SS.

Quoted

Originally posted by klagldsf

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Isn't that the exact same hull as your frigate?

lol yup


But it's meant to be beamier...which leads to:

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan
Inasmuch as the vessel would have to slow or stop every time it needed to recover its aircraft, wouldn't the speed implied in the International Frigate design be wasted? Or does the reworking of the superstructure imply a reduction in the powerplant?

Because of the wider hull I'm pegging speed at about the high-20s/low-30s range.

Anyway, I guess I'll put it through SS.

Yes indeed. Doing a sim in Springsharp will better determine whether the design is feasible or not. And Parador would need it to fit the vessels into his construction program.

Hi!

Those two funnels make her look like a liner...... They are just a bit low.

And I wonder if her engine is so big she really needs two?

Otherwise, very nice drawing.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
Hi!

Those two funnels make her look like a liner...... They are just a bit low.

And I wonder if her engine is so big she really needs two?

Otherwise, very nice drawing.

Yes ..... HoOmAn you're right ... but it's a good camouflage or ????

Here a quick & dirty draft of the stats:

Displacement:
5.729 t light; 5.935 t standard; 8.331 t normal; 10.249 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
555,00 ft / 540,00 ft x 60,00 ft x 20,00 ft (normal load)
169,16 m / 164,59 m x 18,29 m x 6,10 m

Armament:
4 - 4,13" / 105 mm guns (2x2 guns), 35,32lbs / 16,02kg shells, 1940 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline, all forward, 1 raised mount - superfiring
10 - 1,57" / 40,0 mm guns (5x2 guns), 1,95lbs / 0,89kg shells, 1940 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
4 - 0,79" / 20,0 mm guns (2x2 guns), 0,24lbs / 0,11kg shells, 1940 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all aft
Weight of broadside 162 lbs / 73 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 400
8 - 21,0" / 533 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 2,01" / 51 mm 0,98" / 25 mm 0,98" / 25 mm
2nd: 0,98" / 25 mm - -
3rd: 0,98" / 25 mm - -

- Conning tower: 2,01" / 51 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion motors,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 66.924 shp / 49.925 Kw = 32,10 kts
Range 25.000nm at 15,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 4.314 tons

Complement:
435 - 566

Cost:
£2,808 million / $11,233 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 20 tons, 0,2%
Armour: 36 tons, 0,4%
- Belts: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Armament: 18 tons, 0,2%
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Conning Tower: 18 tons, 0,2%
Machinery: 1.789 tons, 21,5%
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2.884 tons, 34,6%
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2.602 tons, 31,2%
Miscellaneous weights: 1.000 tons, 12,0%

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
12.908 lbs / 5.855 Kg = 365,4 x 4,1 " / 105 mm shells or 1,8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,23
Metacentric height 3,4 ft / 1,0 m
Roll period: 13,7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 66 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,04
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,16

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0,450
Length to Beam Ratio: 9,00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 26,92 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 57
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 26,56 degrees
Stern overhang: 2,00 ft / 0,61 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 26,00 ft / 7,92 m
- Forecastle (20%): 22,00 ft / 6,71 m
- Mid (50%): 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Quarterdeck (15%): 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Stern: 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Average freeboard: 19,72 ft / 6,01 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 85,6%
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 147,7%
Waterplane Area: 21.468 Square feet or 1.994 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 174%
Structure weight / hull surface area: 85 lbs/sq ft or 417 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0,95
- Longitudinal: 1,58
- Overall: 1,00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent

Breakdown of Misc. Weight: 1000tons
#############################
40tons (50x800kg bombs)
40tons (80x500kg bombs)
40tons (160x250kg bombs)
10tons (200x50kg bombs)
80tons (40 torpedoes)
100tons catapult
70tons crane (1x 50tons crane; 1x 20tons crane)
50tons 8 seaplanes
570tons storage
Aviation fuel simmed with ship fuel (2120tons)


So in my eyes some more AA's would surely be quite helpfull.

For the same price you could convert a pair of merchant ships and get both more vessels and a roomier hull. If you're looking for a new-built, certainly a sistership to the Jianghu would be a better choice, I'd say.

You'd also need a lot more weight for those seaplanes. 50 tons will probably only cover the weight of the planes themselves. You should assign at least 25 tons per plane.

Hi Brock, sure if i look for a new-built the Jianghu will get a sister .

The Do-22 has a max. start-weight of 3,7tons, also the Ar-196 !! So i think 50tons for 8 seaplanes are enough to simulate the planes. The bombs etc. are in the list !!! Also there is a "puffer" of ~ 500 tons. But may be i'm unrealistic !! I'm not an aircraft expert. So please tell me, what does the 25tons should represent if i will take it for the weight of a single aircraft.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
For the same price you could convert a pair of merchant ships and get both more vessels and a roomier hull. If you're looking for a new-built, certainly a sistership to the Jianghu would be a better choice, I'd say.

You'd also need a lot more weight for those seaplanes. 50 tons will probably only cover the weight of the planes themselves. You should assign at least 25 tons per plane.

Hmmm, well, I can change things here and there as requested. Anyway do you still want me to draw a top view? It's supposed to have two catapults, but looking at it, I think I better stagger them anyway. And the airplane crane might be a bit excessive. Also, uhhh...torpedoes? :confused:

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
Hi Brock, sure if i look for a new-built the Jianghu will get a sister .

The Do-22 has a max. start-weight of 3,7tons, also the Ar-196 !! So i think 50tons for 8 seaplanes are enough to simulate the planes. The bombs etc. are in the list !!! Also there is a "puffer" of ~ 500 tons. But may be i'm unrealistic !! I'm not an aircraft expert. So please tell me, what does the 25tons should represent if i will take it for the weight of a single aircraft.

Perhaps but most use the 50 tons per aircraft as per Springsharp rules. It assumes the 50 tons covers everything from spares to fuel.

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
Hi Brock, sure if i look for a new-built the Jianghu will get a sister .

The Do-22 has a max. start-weight of 3,7tons, also the Ar-196 !! So i think 50tons for 8 seaplanes are enough to simulate the planes. The bombs etc. are in the list !!! Also there is a "puffer" of ~ 500 tons. But may be i'm unrealistic !! I'm not an aircraft expert. So please tell me, what does the 25tons should represent if i will take it for the weight of a single aircraft.

That's accounting for only the weight of the planes - nothing in the way of their support facilities. That's why we've got this rule:

Quoted

(In addition, allow at least 25 tons per aircraft, i.e., if miscellaneous weight is just 100 tons, your ship can carry 4 planes, not 10.)

True, you did establish multiple sorts of weight for ordnance, fuel and such, but that'd be covered in the 25t minimum per aircraft.

Quoted

Originally posted by klagldsf

Hmmm, well, I can change things here and there as requested.
Anyway do you still want me to draw a top view? It's supposed
to have two catapults, but looking at it, I think I better stagger
them anyway. And the airplane crane might be a bit excessive.
Also, uhhh...torpedoes? :confused:

A topview is always helpfull to see how all is arranged, but no problem
if it's too complicated.

Two catapults will help to bring all the aircrafts faster in the air. I have
no problem with the excessive crane. So it's possible to handle big seaplanes
if there is something to repair on them.

The torpedos could be hidden behind doors on the side of the ship. They need
to rotate only a few degrees from the axis of the ship. They needn't to be
shot necessarily perpendicular to the axis of ship

@Brock & Wes:

Here is the new sim:

Displacement:
5.729 t light; 5.935 t standard; 8.331 t normal; 10.249 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
555,00 ft / 540,00 ft x 60,00 ft x 20,00 ft (normal load)
169,16 m / 164,59 m x 18,29 m x 6,10 m

Armament:
4 - 4,13" / 105 mm guns (2x2 guns), 35,32lbs / 16,02kg shells, 1940 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline, all forward, 1 raised mount - superfiring
10 - 1,57" / 40,0 mm guns (5x2 guns), 1,95lbs / 0,88kg shells, 1940 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
4 - 0,79" / 20,0 mm guns (2x2 guns), 0,24lbs / 0,11kg shells, 1940 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all aft
Weight of broadside 162 lbs / 73 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 400
8 - 21,0" / 533 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 2,01" / 51 mm 0,98" / 25 mm 0,98" / 25 mm
2nd: 0,98" / 25 mm - -
3rd: 0,98" / 25 mm - -

- Conning tower: 2,01" / 51 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion motors,
Geared drive, 2 shafts, 66.924 shp / 49.925 Kw = 32,10 kts
Range 25.000nm at 15,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 4.314 tons

Complement:
435 - 566

Cost:
£2,808 million / $11,233 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 20 tons, 0,2%
Armour: 36 tons, 0,4%
- Belts: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Armament: 18 tons, 0,2%
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Conning Tower: 18 tons, 0,2%
Machinery: 1.789 tons, 21,5%
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2.884 tons, 34,6%
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 2.602 tons, 31,2%
Miscellaneous weights: 1.000 tons, 12,0%

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
12.908 lbs / 5.855 Kg = 365,4 x 4,1 " / 105 mm shells or 1,8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,23
Metacentric height 3,4 ft / 1,0 m
Roll period: 13,7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 66 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,04
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,16

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
and transom stern
Block coefficient: 0,450
Length to Beam Ratio: 9,00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 26,92 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 58 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 57
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 26,56 degrees
Stern overhang: 2,00 ft / 0,61 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 26,00 ft / 7,92 m
- Forecastle (20%): 22,00 ft / 6,71 m
- Mid (50%): 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Quarterdeck (15%): 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Stern: 18,00 ft / 5,49 m
- Average freeboard: 19,72 ft / 6,01 m

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 85,6%
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 147,7%
Waterplane Area: 21.468 Square feet or 1.994 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 174%
Structure weight / hull surface area: 85 lbs/sq ft or 417 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0,95
- Longitudinal: 1,58
- Overall: 1,00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent


Breakdown of Misc. Weight: 1000tons
#############################
40tons (50x800kg bombs)
40tons (80x500kg bombs)
40tons (160x250kg bombs)
10tons (200x50kg bombs)
80tons (40 torpedoes)
100tons catapult
70tons crane (1x 50tons crane; 1x 20tons crane)
400tons 8 seaplanes (each 50tons)
220tons storage
Aviation fuel simmed with ship fuel (2120tons)

Better.

Why the 800kg bombs? That's more the weight of a German aerial torpedo, but you've got that set up in a different line. Definitely too large for a floatplane to use for bombing - even a 500kg bomb's extremely heavy for a floatplane.

The Do-22 could handle a bombload of up to 500kg and i thought with overload may be 800kg are possible. But as mentioned above, i'm not an expert in aviation.

And btw the OTL Aichi M6A has a bombload of 2x 250kg bombs or 1x 850kg bomb !!! So i think it's not impossible that a seaplane can carry a 800kg bomb.

And the OTL Latécoère 298 has a bombload of up to ~ 700kg.

I'm just observing that's as much as most 1940s carrier planes. Considering how much grief I got over using mere 500 pound bombs on carrier aircraft in 1937, I figure you deserve fair warning.

As said, i'm not an aviation expert and if i take a look on this three aircrafts (Do-22 / Aichi M6A / Latécoére 298 ) it will be possible to handle a single 800kg bomb on a seaplane.

The french aircraft was introduced in service in 1938 and it was designed primarily as a torpedo bomber. And it was stationed on the seaplane tender Commandant Teste.

The japanese aircraft is a late war aircraft. It was planned to start via catapult from the I-Class submarine.

The german aircraft is a mid 30 aircraft with the role of a torpedo bomber and recon seaplane.


As you see, I take your warning and your regard very seriously. If my values, however, pose problems, so I will change them.

Eh, it's probably more a function of the planes being used than the design of the ship (which is more what I'm aiming to comment on).

no updated version ???

So i could use it on my own ???

Sorry, I've been kind of busy, but yes, anybody is free to modify it as they wish!