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.
Quoted
I got yelled at when I tried designing Tenacious as an amphibious carrier.
Quoted
I don't think the freeboard is anywher near high enough to accommodate an airgroup, a well deck, vehicles, and 1,200 troops.
Quoted
The concept overall doesn't make sense until troop-carrying helicopters and the doctrine behind them exist. The aicraft carrier and landing ship functions have very different operating requirements.
Quoted
Originally posted by Rooijen10
Quoted
The concept overall doesn't make sense until troop-carrying helicopters and the doctrine behind them exist. The aicraft carrier and landing ship functions have very different operating requirements.
It is a bit like what wiki says of the Akitsu Maru's planned role: provide aircover during amphibious and landing operations. Unlike the OTL IJA carriers, these have deck-landing capability so they're probably a bit more useful than those OTL ships.
Quoted
Originally posted by Rooijen10
Quoted
I got yelled at when I tried designing Tenacious as an amphibious carrier.
Was unaware of that. Must have missed that...
... and looking at the thread, I don't really get that impression (at least it does not look as bad as you make it out to be, unless you got yelled at in PMs)...
Quoted
Originally posted by Brockpaine
Quoted
Originally posted by Rooijen10
Quoted
The concept overall doesn't make sense until troop-carrying helicopters and the doctrine behind them exist. The aicraft carrier and landing ship functions have very different operating requirements.
It is a bit like what wiki says of the Akitsu Maru's planned role: provide aircover during amphibious and landing operations. Unlike the OTL IJA carriers, these have deck-landing capability so they're probably a bit more useful than those OTL ships.
I must still express my incredulity - amphibious assault carriers are more a 1960s thing. What justification is there for it existing in the 1940s?
Quoted
Originally posted by Rooijen10
It does make me wonder now. If I had called it an "amphibious warfare ship" like I did with the Kumano, would it have given a different idea as to what this ship is?
Quoted
the limited ability to operate planes that the Kumano's have
Quoted
Just my two yen.
Quoted
350 tons ------ 25 landing crafts
200 tons ------ Doors and landing craft launch system, cranes
2420 tons ----- 1210 soldiers
469 tons ------ Cargo
1369 tons ----- 37 planes
192 tons ------ 12 Type 90 tanks
5000 tons total
This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Rooijen10" (Sep 5th 2013, 5:57pm)
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH