A jack-of-all trades tender.
Two things stood out during the war. Aircraft could make a difference, and more tenders and oilers where needed. As such this design.
Built to tender rules, it is designed to support 15,000 tons of shipping. It also uses 500 tons for aircraft facilities. Which are split into the following, forward is space for 10 aircraft (4 wheeled fighters, 3 float scouts, 3 float fighters), aft is space for either up to 3 balloons, or 5 flying boats. Aircraft can take off but not land on board. The ship can serve as a seaplane tender and support a full squadron.
The heavy armament is for self defense and can take out most AMCs/raiders out there, allowing it to operate with light escort.
The main role for this ship would be to find a nice anchorage and set up shop. Perfect for the Pacific islands.
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y22/ReneJr/nesship.gif)
New Switzerland Tender laid down 1922
Displacement:
10,000 t light; 10,323 t standard; 14,637 t normal; 18,088 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
540.00 ft / 540.00 ft x 72.00 ft x 24.40 ft (normal load)
164.59 m / 164.59 m x 21.95 m x 7.44 m
Armament:
4 - 6.00" / 152 mm guns (2x2 guns), 108.00lbs / 48.99kg shells, 1922 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline, all amidships
4 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1922 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
10 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns in single mounts, 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1922 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 565 lbs / 256 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 90
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 0.50" / 13 mm 520.00 ft / 158.50 m 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 148 % of normal length
- Torpedo Bulkhead:
0.50" / 13 mm 520.00 ft / 158.50 m 24.00 ft / 7.32 m
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 1.00" / 25 mm 0.50" / 13 mm 0.50" / 13 mm
Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 22,303 shp / 16,638 Kw = 21.00 kts
Range 25,500nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 7,765 tons
Complement:
664 - 864
Cost:
£1.405 million / $5.621 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 71 tons, 0.5 %
Armour: 365 tons, 2.5 %
- Belts: 123 tons, 0.8 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 231 tons, 1.6 %
- Armament: 11 tons, 0.1 %
- Armour Deck: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 757 tons, 5.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 3,808 tons, 26.0 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 4,637 tons, 31.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 5,000 tons, 34.2 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
22,171 lbs / 10,057 Kg = 205.3 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 4.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.18
Metacentric height 4.2 ft / 1.3 m
Roll period: 14.8 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 51 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.04
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.50
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has raised forecastle, raised quarterdeck
Block coefficient: 0.540
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.50 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23.24 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 42 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 34
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 22.00 ft / 6.71 m
- Forecastle (25 %): 20.00 ft / 6.10 m (12.00 ft / 3.66 m aft of break)
- Mid (50 %): 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
- Quarterdeck (20 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m (12.00 ft / 3.66 m before break)
- Stern: 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Average freeboard: 15.20 ft / 4.63 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 81.0 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 92.5 %
Waterplane Area: 26,881 Square feet or 2,497 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 197 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 98 lbs/sq ft or 480 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 1.09
- Longitudinal: 1.18
- Overall: 1.10
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather
A submariner's delight!
Sorry: armament + armor is more than 2% of the ships total weights at normal displacement, so it is not eligible to be built to merchant rules, tender or no.
Well it wasn't going to be true armor, more like general strengthening. But I guess I can remove some. The 6" guns are causing problems, don't know where to stick them so the pic looks nice.
Most of the time these ships will spend parked in some remote atoll, and when they are moving they are pretty fast and have those nasty little blimps. Not an easy sub target.
Quote from: Desertfox on July 16, 2010, 07:11:19 PM
Well it wasn't going to be true armor, more like general strengthening. But I guess I can remove some. The 6" guns are causing problems, don't know where to stick them so the pic looks nice.
Most of the time these ships will spend parked in some remote atoll, and when they are moving they are pretty fast and have those nasty little blimps. Not an easy sub target.
Anything that spends most of it's time parked is a juicy sub target.
Anything that moves really fast can't handle something as delicate as a blimp.
Any ship that is launching aircraft must steam in a straight line.
Sorry, DF- your logic isn't logical.
This ship will be a sitting duck any time it is doing what it is designed to do.
If it's parked in an atoll, it's going to have torpedo nets deployed, and I'll give the sub captain who penetrates said atoll props. Last I checked it never happened in the Pacific in WWII.
15 knots is fast for a sub target but not to fast for the blimp. (thought I do need to develop those nifty German autogyros...)
If it's launching aircraft it has bigger problems than subs. And it probably won't be launching more than 1 at a time, at most 4.
Quote from: Desertfox on July 16, 2010, 07:19:51 PM
If it's parked in an atoll, it's going to have torpedo nets deployed, and I'll give the sub captain who penetrates said atoll props. Last I checked it never happened in the Pacific in WWII.
15 knots is fast for a sub target but not to fast for the blimp. (thought I do need to develop those nifty German autogyros...)
If it's launching aircraft it has bigger problems than subs. And it probably won't be launching more than 1 at a time, at most 4.
1.) If it happened at all, it can happen in the Pacific.
2.) 15 knots is DAMN FAST for a blimp to be moored. Maybe you should look into how that actually happens?
3.) Perhaps now, but as time goes on...
Just saying, speed doesn't save carriers from subs- just look at WWII in the Pacific.
Well if you start sending your subs poking into atolls, they are going to be mighty easy to sink. A ship anchored next to an atoll is nearly impossible to find UNLESS the sub goes looking inside the atoll, and there's like a million of them around.
15 knots would be towing speed, and those are not really blimps more like big barrage balloons, when not in use they would be completely deflated.
Speed might not save them, but hiding probably will. Oh and NS is about to start pouring money into ASW...
Quote from: Desertfox on July 16, 2010, 07:31:40 PM
Well if you start sending your subs poking into atolls, they are going to be mighty easy to sink. A ship anchored next to an atoll is nearly impossible to find UNLESS the sub goes looking inside the atoll, and there's like a million of them around.
15 knots would be towing speed, and those are not really blimps more like big barrage balloons, when not in use they would be completely deflated.
Speed might not save them, but hiding probably will.
DF, 15 knots is VERY FAST for pulling a barrage balloon.
Imagine the kinds of stresses you will put on the mooring mast and the towing cable.
It's not as possible as it might look.
Well I should know soon enough, Had a few ships try that during this war. If anything, I can always strap a DH2 fuselage under the balloon, the engine should reduce stresses fine.
I Know from experience in this war that ASW nets are not fool proof, nor are airpatrols infalliable.
That being said 15 knots is a hard target for sub who is submerged to avoid the aircraft and balloons durring daylight hours. At night anchored in a lagoon she is going to be a very hard target to find and in shallow water to boot. On the other hand she is not going to be taking off from her deck anything that is carrying a heavy bomb/torpedo load she will have to winch the armed plane out and onto the water to give the plane the 1/2 mile of take off room it needs.
And Yes Pouring money into ASW is a very very good Idea. Heck we need entire new catagories of ASW added after 1920...... Active Sonar was developed late 1918/1920 period just late enough to miss World War 1. Early Hydrophones well the ship using them really couldnt be moving by latter ones could operate at slow speeds.
Nope, but they do help. Well a couple of MGs and some light bombs would make any sub captain wince. But if she's in a lagoon, there is plenty of calm water for seaplanes and probably clearings for wheeled ones. She'll serve more as a maintenance shop.
I'm going to redo the pic, the diamond gun config and three islands don't work very well, and she looks too much like an aircraft carrier. I'll switch to a two island engines in back, and reccess the 6" guns lower in the hull.
Wow, like the way the redo turned out, now it looks like a tender and much more impressive.
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y22/ReneJr/nesship-Copy.gif)
The Mirandas will end up being 1,400 tons lighter and 2 knots slower.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y22/ReneJr/newships2.gif
Miranda class, New Switzerland Cruiser laid down 1920
Displacement:
6,004 t light; 6,327 t standard; 7,515 t normal; 8,465 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
540.00 ft / 540.00 ft x 54.00 ft x 20.00 ft (normal load)
164.59 m / 164.59 m x 16.46 m x 6.10 m
Armament:
10 - 6.00" / 152 mm guns (5x2 guns), 108.00lbs / 48.99kg shells, 1920 Model
Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists
on centreline ends, majority forward, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
4 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1920 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships
6 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns in single mounts, 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1920 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
12 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns (6x2 guns), 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1920 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 1,212 lbs / 550 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 250
6 - 19.7" / 500.38 mm above water torpedoes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 357.00 ft / 108.81 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 102 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 1.00" / 25 mm 0.50" / 13 mm 0.50" / 13 mm
- Armour deck: 1.00" / 25 mm, Conning tower: 4.00" / 102 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 55,367 shp / 41,304 Kw = 30.00 kts
Range 10,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,138 tons
Complement:
403 - 524
Cost:
£1.438 million / $5.752 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 151 tons, 2.0 %
Armour: 998 tons, 13.3 %
- Belts: 591 tons, 7.9 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 29 tons, 0.4 %
- Armour Deck: 344 tons, 4.6 %
- Conning Tower: 33 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,936 tons, 25.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2,729 tons, 36.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,511 tons, 20.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 190 tons, 2.5 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
8,329 lbs / 3,778 Kg = 77.1 x 6.0 " / 152 mm shells or 1.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.23
Metacentric height 2.9 ft / 0.9 m
Roll period: 13.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 71 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.40
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.20
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.451
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23.24 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 59
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 25.00 ft / 7.62 m
- Forecastle (27 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 14.00 ft / 4.27 m
- Stern: 14.00 ft / 4.27 m
- Average freeboard: 16.89 ft / 5.15 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 103.2 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 123.9 %
Waterplane Area: 18,615 Square feet or 1,729 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 120 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 89 lbs/sq ft or 437 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.96
- Longitudinal: 1.36
- Overall: 1.00
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
Two additional Miranda class cruisers will be built as aircraft carriers (once the proper tech is acquired). They would have an airwing of 20 aircraft, 15 fighters, 5 scouts.
Skua class, New Switzerland Aircraft Carrying Cruiser laid down 1920
Displacement:
6,001 t light; 6,179 t standard; 7,477 t normal; 8,516 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
540.00 ft / 540.00 ft x 54.00 ft x 19.90 ft (normal load)
164.59 m / 164.59 m x 16.46 m x 6.07 m
Armament:
4 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1920 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships
6 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns in single mounts, 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1920 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread
12 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns (6x2 guns), 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1920 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 132 lbs / 60 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 300
6 - 19.7" / 500.38 mm above water torpedoes
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 342.00 ft / 104.24 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 97 % of normal length
- Armour deck: 1.00" / 25 mm, Conning tower: 4.00" / 102 mm
Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 55,193 shp / 41,174 Kw = 30.00 kts
Range 11,000nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,338 tons
Complement:
401 - 522
Cost:
£1.168 million / $4.671 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 16 tons, 0.2 %
Armour: 947 tons, 12.7 %
- Belts: 570 tons, 7.6 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armour Deck: 344 tons, 4.6 %
- Conning Tower: 33 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,930 tons, 25.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2,367 tons, 31.7 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,476 tons, 19.7 %
Miscellaneous weights: 740 tons, 9.9 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
9,022 lbs / 4,092 Kg = 83.5 x 6 " / 152 mm shells or 1.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.19
Metacentric height 2.7 ft / 0.8 m
Roll period: 13.7 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 73 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.02
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.24
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.451
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23.24 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 59
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 25.00 ft / 7.62 m
- Forecastle (27 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 14.00 ft / 4.27 m
- Stern: 14.00 ft / 4.27 m
- Average freeboard: 16.89 ft / 5.15 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 96.9 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 124.6 %
Waterplane Area: 18,615 Square feet or 1,729 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 132 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 78 lbs/sq ft or 379 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.25
- Overall: 1.00
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
Not possible. Not on 6000 tons. Not 20 aircraft.
I'd think your beam is to narrow for that. Just as an example and Armstrong-Whitworth Sisken was 33'+ wide, that leaves you <21' for your tower width, plus wiggle room.
You might want to add a flying boat for scale.
Why do you think you'll find a safe place to land the wheeled aircraft out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean?
Sometime by 1925 or so someone will finally get the tech for a real full length carrier with arrestor wires until then.... Italy will be happy to put some small two engined Flying Boats on cruisers with gunpoweder catapults for recon flights with a radio. Im probably going to build 1 Prototype for Experiments a forward take off deck and land on shore or in the water.
I have the tech I just can afford to build huge numbers of ships and I desperately need auxilarys and some new cruisers :(
Though I think New Switzerland needs more of them then I do.... :o
QuoteMain belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces
You might want to change this.
Quote from: Desertfox on July 17, 2010, 10:43:00 PM
Wow, like the way the redo turned out, now it looks like a tender and much more impressive.
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y22/ReneJr/nesship-Copy.gif)
I REALLY like it, DF.
Probably your best ever.
As a practical ship, probably not the best; but as a 'pretty' ship, she's awesome.
I'd like to see a top view plan of the 6,000 t carrier.
Ditto, for that matter, the tender thing. there's a lot going on there.
QuoteNot possible. Not on 6000 tons. Not 20 aircraft.
I would agree if they where WWII aircraft, but these are WWI fighters and scouts, not torpedo bombers. The USS Ranger could theoretically carry 86 aircraft. And she was only twice as big.
QuoteI'd think your beam is to narrow for that. Just as an example and Armstrong-Whitworth Sisken was 33'+ wide, that leaves you <21' for your tower width, plus wiggle room.
That's if she has a tower. Planes could take off ahead of it and land behind.
QuoteYou might want to add a flying boat for scale.
Adds to the To Do List
QuoteWhy do you think you'll find a safe place to land the wheeled aircraft out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean?
On the Aux you mean? I don't, think CAM. Wheeled aircraft would have better performance than their float counterparts, which might come in handy when taking out zeppelins. The planes would have to ditch afterward, they would have flotation bags but I wouldn't expect any more than a 25% recovery rate.
QuoteYou might want to change this.
Just 5 ft, I will.
QuoteI REALLY like it, DF.
Probably your best ever.
Thanks. She turned out quite well, especially compared to my first attempt. Definitely the best looking auxiliary out there!
QuoteI'd like to see a top view plan of the 6,000 t carrier.
Ditto, for that matter, the tender thing. there's a lot going on there.
Working on one. Based on a 400'x40' hangar and a Siemens Schucker DIV (the new Swiss fighter) at 27'x19', the 6k carrier could fit 25 planes (without using folding wings). The scouts would be larger, and space would have to be provided for the elevator, but I think my original estimate of 20 is perfectly fine. Course as planes get larger, less can fit in.
Catapult assisted merchantmen? That is the model? Not possible.
Your flight deck is too short and narrow and your hull volume is too small. Hosho which is 25% larger cannot carry and operate that many WW I aircraft.
Sorry Fox. :( I just went through this process myself to get something that was doable and permissible. This one does not work either technically or legally.
Quote from: damocles on July 18, 2010, 10:57:47 AM
Catapult assisted merchantmen? That is the model? Not possible.
I believe he meant the operation of wheeled aircraft would be similar to a CAM, i.e. they don't come back after launch, at least not to land.
Fox, 400x40 won't hack it w/ 27x19 planes.
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd42/Sachmle/Foxcarrierspace.jpg)
Box is 400'x40x, red squares(since I can't draw planes) is 27'x19', large blue square represents space required for the hatch/elevator/however you get them on deck. Best you can do is 12, 11 w/ something resembling decent spacing, 10 would probably be better.
Quote from: Sachmle on July 18, 2010, 11:20:23 AM
Quote from: damocles on July 18, 2010, 10:57:47 AM
Catapult assisted merchantmen? That is the model? Not possible.
I believe he meant the operation of wheeled aircraft would be similar to a CAM, i.e. they don't come back after launch, at least not to land.
Fox, 400x40 won't hack it w/ 27x19 planes.
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd42/Sachmle/Foxcarrierspace.jpg)
Box is 400'x40x, red squares(since I can't draw planes) is 27'x19', large blue square represents space required for the hatch/elevator/however you get them on deck. Best you can do is 12, 11 w/ something resembling decent spacing, 10 would probably be better.
I think his takeoff run may be way too short.
D.
Even if the tower sits in the middle of the ship so he only has the forward deck for launching, it's still ~180' to the end of the flight deck. 150' if you don't put the tail against the tower. I think he's got enough for take off, barely.
What I want to know now is where the crew, engines, ammo, fuel oil, avgas, pilots, food, and stores go in a ship that's only 540' long if 400' of it is aircraft hanger?
The CAM ship is the auxilary not the light carrier.
You guys forget that Sopwith Pups where flying off of turrets. Furious forward flying off deck was about 200ft and the CVEs where about 500ft long. At 30knots most WWI would need very little space to take off. We are talking about take off speeds in the 50 knot range.
Rather tight in there, isn't it? I won't want to be the Wing Commander and have to argue with the Chief about getting my planes out on deck and ready to go in any reasonable amount of time.
If you need most of the runway to take off you won't be able to deck spot strikes. At best you'd probably only be able to launch scouting flights (if you really have so little deck space for takeoffs).
I just noticed that this ship is almost exactly the same size as Hosho, just 5 feet thinner. And Hosho was theoretically capable of 26 aircraft (thought closer to 15 in practice).
20 Aircraft don't require a lot of crew (certainly less than 5 twin 6" turrets), and no torpedoes or heavy bombs carried. MG ammo and very light bombs don't take up a lot of space. And these planes don't burn that much gas.
Quote
Rather tight in there, isn't it? I won't want to be the Wing Commander and have to argue with the Chief about getting my planes out on deck and ready to go in any reasonable amount of time.
That a lesson to be learned.
Quote
If you need most of the runway to take off you won't be able to deck spot strikes. At best you'd probably only be able to launch scouting flights (if you really have so little deck space for takeoffs).
Not a strike carrier, torpedo bombers would be tough to operate successfully from it. It only has two jobs, scouting, and fleet defense. Four fighters and two scouts would be up on deck at all times. So only 14 planes below decks.
Quote from: Desertfox on July 18, 2010, 11:54:58 AM
The CAM ship is the auxilary not the light carrier.
You guys forget that Sopwith Pups where flying off of turrets. Furious forward flying off deck was about 200ft and the CVEs where about 500ft long. At 30knots most WWI would need very little space to take off. We are talking about take off speeds in the 50 knot range.
You have no space to do aircraft maintenance and repair on that design DF. I would buy the aircraft being in a single line so 10 - 12. If you want more have a bunch disassembled as a reserve, figure an operational air group of 8, with another 8 disassembled.
Michael
QuoteFour fighters and two scouts would be up on deck at all times. So only 14 planes below decks.
That would be -12' of deck space. There is only 150' of useable space forward of the bridge, since you can't really put the tail of a the aft most plane directly against the tower. At 27' (your numbers) long, x 4 fighters, + 2 scouts= 162'. The most you could have is 2, barely, on deck waiting. Once they're launched 2 more could be brought up. That leaves you 96' for taking off.
14 planes below deck, 6 up on deck + one taking off. The tower is 20'x40' which I think is excessively big. The deck is also larger than it will be but there is still plenty of space around. The plane forward has 200ft for take of, which is alot for a fighter (which I can attest to from personal experience).
Ok, earlier you said the tower wasn't offset, not it is. There's ONLY 182' TOTAL forward of the tower. Not 200'. And don't forget you engine room/stacks. They're not behind the tower as in the last pick, they're way aft.
I said IF she had a tower. Most early carriers didn't have one. 182' is a lot of room, like that pic miketr just posted of Akagi, I'm sure the two lower decks where not longer that 180'.
Don't understand the stack comment...
From wiki:
QuoteAkagi's main flight deck was 190.2 meters (624 ft 0 in) long, her middle flight deck began right in front of the bridge and was only 15 meters (49 ft 3 in) long and her lower flight deck was 55.02 meters (180 ft 6 in) long. The utility of her middle flight deck was questionable as it was so short that only some of the lightly loaded aircraft could use it, even in an era when the aircraft were much lighter and smaller than they were during World War Two.
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y22/ReneJr/nesship-Copy.gif)
We are both talking about the same carrier, right?
Nope, that is his tender I think.
The carrier is supposed to be a modifed version of the Miranda-class cruiser.
Ah! Figured you were talking about the real aircraft carrier, not the auxiliary.
Yeah that one does not have an offset tower. But the only planes taking of from there will be fighters in a CAM style role. Only two on deck at any time and her deck is wider (74'), so two fighters fit side by side with room to spare. The aft flight deck is only for handling the blimps/repairing flying boats, and can not be used for landings or takeoffs. Additional planes can be stored amidship, but only stored.
I think you need a side image of your carrier (or at least a prototype) so to not confuse anymore.
Very quick and dirty drawing. I used the Aurora class as a base which will be very similar to the Mirandas.
Oh. See, now it makes sense.
Deck park on the landing deck just asks for trouble. Put them forward of the superstructure.
Deck park with wood and canvas biplanes may not be terribly advisable. There will be weather conditions where you really want to put all your aircraft below, and otherwise you're looking at greater maintenance problems.
Quote from: Sachmle on July 18, 2010, 12:57:24 PM
QuoteFour fighters and two scouts would be up on deck at all times. So only 14 planes below decks.
That would be -12' of deck space. There is only 150' of useable space forward of the bridge, since you can't really put the tail of a the aft most plane directly against the tower. At 27' (your numbers) long, x 4 fighters, + 2 scouts= 162'. The most you could have is 2, barely, on deck waiting. Once they're launched 2 more could be brought up. That leaves you 96' for taking off.
Does that include the lift which is not usable deck space?
Quote from: damocles on July 18, 2010, 03:01:11 PM
Quote from: Sachmle on July 18, 2010, 12:57:24 PM
QuoteFour fighters and two scouts would be up on deck at all times. So only 14 planes below decks.
That would be -12' of deck space. There is only 150' of useable space forward of the bridge, since you can't really put the tail of a the aft most plane directly against the tower. At 27' (your numbers) long, x 4 fighters, + 2 scouts= 162'. The most you could have is 2, barely, on deck waiting. Once they're launched 2 more could be brought up. That leaves you 96' for taking off.
Does that include the lift which is not usable deck space?
It doesn't matter, I was using the wrong ship for measurements.
The elevator that lifts aircraft from the hanger still marks the limits of where the takeoff run is. And if he has two elevators then it will be his stern elevator that marks that limit. You can't deckpark on top of the elevators either. So that means he has no room topside there to store planes in the weather.
Same criticism. I think at the numbers he claims, he's not got any way to move the planes and still give himself a takeoff run.
D.
No damn way that it'll work out for that many planes.
Sorry, DF- those planes look like pieces of wood in a dovetail joint.
Half the number of planes on the carrier and it makes sense.
Is the carrier going to have the island/funnels on the port side, or is that just a "hurried sketch" thing?
Room for crew, munitions, etc should not be an issue if she has proper cruiser freeboard below the hanger deck.
I think it is not impossible to fill the hanger as you have it, with a ~Sopwith Pup type of fighter. You'll have the same problem with growing aircraft as the Japanese and British did with their small carriers, but you know that.
I do think the lifts are a problem in their current locations - they constitute large holes that take up nearly the entire width of the ship at that point. They will leave very little room for personnel movement and ducts/pipes going around them. Granted, it looks as if you could scale them down a few feet and still have them useful.
The deck park bothers me - it seems to me like something that comes into play after time, when a navy has enough confidence in its aircraft handling procedures to have the confidence that they can put the extra aircraft aboard.
Mmm. One other observation - that narrow flight deck won't be very forgiving. Either the pilot's perfectly lined up, or he's going over a side. Could be problematic for gun emplacements, depending on where you site them.
Was definitely a 'hurried sketch' but why not? Let's put them on the port side. *thumbs nose at rest of world*
Yeah, this carrier might be able to operate Wildcats, Applecores (ASW), and lightly loaded Dauntless, but no more than 10 total, and barely... Definitely no torpedo bombers, thought the Brits somehow operated Corsairs and Avengers of their escort carriers.
Deck park was more of a, we are going to have high attrition rates so let's stuff a few more planes on board, thing. Twenty planes fit in the hangar fine, and once they get bigger they can get folding wings.
Here's a more accurate hangar layout pic. Definitely need some smaller scouts. Guns would be moved further to the edges too.
Looking MUCH more reasonable, though I think that the guns will have to go. there doesn't seem to be room for them AT ALL on this ship. Perhaps start out with a virtually unarmed carrier like most OTL navies?
Once you get flush-deck tech, I think you have a winner!
Reminds me of HMS Vindictive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Vindictive_%281918%29
Michael
The flying deck is very low.
This is a better position for elevators.
Jef
Based on the drawing, I agree that there is very little room for ship based weapons because of the size of the hanger below the flight deck. Maybe some small AA guns on sponsons and a main battery weapon of two on the stern or bow unde the flight deck. The US light carriers and escort carrier I believe had one or two five inch guns under the aft deck at first...then they landed those for weight and maybe added AA guns...because what does a tiny carrier need a 5" anti-ship gun for anyway (it was not a 5"/38 DP gun, it was a 5"/51 off a battleship.)
American Escort Carriers operated Avengers because of those folding wings...They did not operate Dauntless Dive Bombers after the first carrier because they too up too much space. Also the Avenger made a good ASW aircraft it seems as it could carry depth charges instead of a torpedo.
Quote from: Ithekro on July 19, 2010, 11:15:16 AM
because what does a tiny carrier need a 5" anti-ship gun for anyway (it was not a 5"/38 DP gun, it was a 5"/51 off a battleship.)
I think they were intended for shooting at surfaced subs, since the CVE's were largely used for ASW duties.
The planes force the sub up and the 5/L51's gave the carrier a way to shoot at the sub.
It was a tail gun used for ship killing (i.e. running away from enemy cruisers.)
At Samar that was how those guns were used. I think their AAA usage was minimal.
Another ship, subchaser/coastal minesweeper. Very cheap. Can theoretically be built using merchant rules.
S-1, New Switzerland Subchaser laid down 1920
Displacement:
49 t light; 51 t standard; 54 t normal; 57 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
127.47 ft / 100.00 ft x 14.00 ft x 3.00 ft (normal load)
38.85 m / 30.48 m x 4.27 m x 0.91 m
Armament:
2 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns (1x2 guns), 1.95lbs / 0.89kg shells, 1920 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mount
on centreline forward
2 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns (1x2 guns), 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1920 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mount
on centreline amidships
Weight of broadside 5 lbs / 2 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 250
Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 2 shafts, 339 shp / 253 Kw = 15.00 kts
Range 1,100nm at 10.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 6 tons
Complement:
9 - 12
Cost:
£0.009 million / $0.037 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1 tons, 1.1 %
Machinery: 12 tons, 21.9 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 32 tons, 58.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 5 tons, 9.3 %
Miscellaneous weights: 5 tons, 9.3 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
122 lbs / 55 Kg = 62.3 x 1.6 " / 40 mm shells or 0.3 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.12
Metacentric height 0.3 ft / 0.1 m
Roll period: 10.3 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 52 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.08
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.30
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has rise forward of midbreak
Block coefficient: 0.450
Length to Beam Ratio: 7.14 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 10.00 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 61 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 40
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 70.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 7.00 ft / 2.13 m
- Mid (50 %): 7.00 ft / 2.13 m (5.00 ft / 1.52 m aft of break)
- Quarterdeck (25 %): 5.00 ft / 1.52 m
- Stern: 5.00 ft / 1.52 m
- Average freeboard: 6.24 ft / 1.90 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 91.3 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 115.1 %
Waterplane Area: 893 Square feet or 83 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 161 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 19 lbs/sq ft or 93 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.91
- Longitudinal: 6.33
- Overall: 1.11
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate
Good seaboat, rides out heavy weather easily
Quote from: Desertfox on July 27, 2010, 11:46:41 AM
Another ship, subchaser/coastal minesweeper. Very cheap. Can theoretically be built using merchant rules.
That depends on what's in the misc weight...
Heh....I don't think that six depth charges on this ship (2 out of 49 tons, 4%), should lead it not to be able to built to merchant standards. I mean, this ship is obviously just a slightly modified fishing boat. The only thing that drives it over is the placing of a few depth charges on the ship......I think it should be able to be legally built to merchant standards.
Very few fishing boats in 1919 (or today) have a BC of 0.45 and can do 15 knots.
At any rate, if you do decide to build this to merchant standards, the mods will have to huddle, as we do (often quietly and behind the scenes) on many merchant built ships.
About the most impractical armament I've seen on Nverse small boats. Both mounts needing at least a crew of 3, the boat would be the definition of lively (with 0.9m draught), and 40mm ammo would only scratch a sub's pressure hull. NM that 15kts is slow.
QuoteHeh....I don't think that six depth charges on this ship (2 out of 49 tons, 4%), should lead it not to be able to built to merchant standards. I mean, this ship is obviously just a slightly modified fishing boat. The only thing that drives it over is the placing of a few depth charges on the ship......I think it should be able to be legally built to merchant standards.
The 550kg of armament and 250kg of ammunition does not leave much for depth charges.
Eh....didn't notice the guns.
I could buy it if it had only one or two 20 mm's, but with the 40 mm's....
How would you sim a stock fishing boat?
The minesweeper would be the one built to merchant standards and would be more lightly armed (only one of each weapons).
40mm APC rounds should have no problem breaching sub hulls. Even then creating holes in the ballast tanks would be a major problem for any sub.
A stock fishing boat?
In 1920?
Well, in the Gulf, you're looking at a a ship of:
1.) anywhere from 40'-100'
2.) anywhere from 3:1 to 5:1 L:B ratio
3.) anywhere from 6-8 knots on average
4.) anywhere from 4'-10' in draft depending on length.
Few of these ships will likely go over 50 tons... most will stay below 30 tons.
Quick and dirty, but this looks and feels a lot like a merchant form with gear bolted on. Note that I used petrol engines: I've been looking into the history of marine diesels a bit, and by 1920 they weren't terribly common on civilian ships it seems compared to what we read around here.
Armament + misc weight is still over the 2% limit, but I'd be willing to overlook that, especially if wooden construction.
Quote
Swiss Patrol Boat, New Switzerland Civlian Derived Patrol Boat laid down 1920
Displacement:
50 t light; 52 t standard; 54 t normal; 56 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
70.00 ft / 63.00 ft x 16.00 ft x 3.00 ft (normal load)
21.34 m / 19.20 m x 4.88 m x 0.91 m
Armament:
1 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm guns in single mounts, 1.95lbs / 0.89kg shells, 1920 Model
Quick firing gun in deck mount
on centreline forward
1 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns in single mounts, 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1920 Model
Machine gun in deck mount
on centreline amidships, 1 raised gun
2 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns in single mounts, 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1920 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 3 lbs / 1 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 250
Machinery:
Petrol Internal combustion motors,
Direct drive, 1 shaft, 215 shp / 160 Kw = 12.00 kts
Range 1,200nm at 8.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 4 tons
Complement:
9 - 13
Cost:
£0.007 million / $0.029 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 0 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 8 tons, 13.8 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 33 tons, 60.3 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 4 tons, 7.4 %
Miscellaneous weights: 10 tons, 17.9 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
201 lbs / 91 Kg = 103.0 x 1.6 " / 40 mm shells or 0.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.00
Metacentric height 0.3 ft / 0.1 m
Roll period: 11.9 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 38 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.06
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.52
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.630
Length to Beam Ratio: 3.94 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 7.94 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 73 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 19
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 12.10 degrees
Stern overhang: 4.00 ft / 1.22 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 14.00 ft / 4.27 m
- Forecastle (12 %): 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
- Mid (50 %): 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
- Quarterdeck (12 %): 11.00 ft / 3.35 m
- Stern: 12.00 ft / 3.66 m
- Average freeboard: 11.09 ft / 3.38 m
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 70.2 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 169.5 %
Waterplane Area: 745 Square feet or 69 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 199 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 16 lbs/sq ft or 78 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.61
- Longitudinal: 87.48
- Overall: 1.00
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
Shiny! I'll probably build both designs, the fishing boat one for minesweeping and minelaying, the other one as a subchaser. Speaking of the subchaser would it be possible to build it to DD rules if speed is bumped up(~20kts)?
No, not really.
Let me see. A wannabe DD at quarter price of a pure military vessel... That would be a bargain, wouldn't it?
Of, It seems that kind of ship is already in the rules. Called a MAS boat.
And those are actualy more expensive than anything else, except submarines.
Actually those would be my multi-purpose boats, of which I need to build more...
The subchaser would be built to full military standard, I was just asking if for 50% more price I could increase its speed by 5kts.
MAS boats are a completely different beast.
Quote from: Desertfox on July 27, 2010, 05:18:47 PM
40mm APC rounds should have no problem breaching sub hulls. Even then creating holes in the ballast tanks would be a major problem for any sub.
You are shooting the top of a 2"+ thick steel tube that is 3/4 covered with water, that means the shots will deflect.
Even then I would prefer the RoF of a twin 40mm vs a single 75mm in a surface engagement. The depth charges are the real sub killers.
Finalized the CVL design.
Eagle Ray, New Switzerland Aircraft Carrying Cruiser laid down 1922
Displacement:
6,000 t light; 6,157 t standard; 7,386 t normal; 8,369 t full load
Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
540.00 ft / 540.00 ft x 54.00 ft x 19.70 ft (normal load)
164.59 m / 164.59 m x 16.46 m x 6.00 m
Armament:
2 - 4.00" / 102 mm guns in single mounts, 32.00lbs / 14.51kg shells, 1922 Model
Quick firing guns in deck mounts
on centreline ends, evenly spread
4 - 1.00" / 25.4 mm guns (2x2 guns), 0.50lbs / 0.23kg shells, 1922 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, all amidships, all raised mounts - superfiring
12 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm guns (6x2 guns), 0.06lbs / 0.03kg shells, 1922 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 67 lbs / 30 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 200
Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 340.00 ft / 103.63 m 10.00 ft / 3.05 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 97 % of normal length
- Armour deck: 1.00" / 25 mm, Conning tower: 4.00" / 102 mm
Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion generators,
Electric motors, 4 shafts, 54,746 shp / 40,840 Kw = 30.00 kts
Range 10,700nm at 15.00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 2,211 tons
Complement:
397 - 517
Cost:
£1.301 million / $5.204 million
Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 8 tons, 0.1 %
Armour: 944 tons, 12.8 %
- Belts: 567 tons, 7.7 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armament: 0 tons, 0.0 %
- Armour Deck: 344 tons, 4.7 %
- Conning Tower: 33 tons, 0.4 %
Machinery: 1,857 tons, 25.1 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 2,401 tons, 32.5 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,386 tons, 18.8 %
Miscellaneous weights: 790 tons, 10.7 %
Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
9,498 lbs / 4,308 Kg = 87.9 x 6 " / 152 mm shells or 1.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.20
Metacentric height 2.8 ft / 0.8 m
Roll period: 13.6 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 70 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.01
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.29
Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0.450
Length to Beam Ratio: 10.00 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 23.24 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 54
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 25.00 ft / 7.62 m
- Forecastle (20 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Mid (50 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Quarterdeck (15 %): 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Stern: 17.00 ft / 5.18 m
- Average freeboard: 17.64 ft / 5.38 m
Ship tends to be wet forward
Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 94.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 151.7 %
Waterplane Area: 18,600 Square feet or 1,728 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 134 %
Structure weight / hull surface area: 78 lbs/sq ft or 381 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.97
- Longitudinal: 1.32
- Overall: 1.00
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
I'd love to see you try and land the planes without 1918 CV tech.
Quote from: Desertfox on July 28, 2010, 08:11:19 PM
... Eagle Ray, New Switzerland Aircraft Carrying Cruiser laid down 1922 ...
Quote from: TexanCowboy on July 29, 2010, 07:49:07 AM
I'd love to see you try and land the planes without 1918 CV tech.
I don't see the problem.
What I wanna see is how the planes in the center hold get to either the fore or aft deck to launch. They're too wide to go around the superstructure forward or aft.
The two elevators are in the centerline, the superstructures fore and aft are on the portside (that's right portside...).
Heh....seeing that this is a thread about New Swiss Ships, I'm wondering where the destroyers and small torpedo boats are.... ;)
Quote from: TexanCowboy on July 29, 2010, 04:46:22 PM
Heh....seeing that this is a thread about New Swiss Ships, I'm wondering where the destroyers and small torpedo boats are.... ;)
Well, there's some in the bottom of the Rift Sea, Gulf of Aden, Tajdoura Strait...I'm not sure where the rest are. ;)
I'll just be building more Dayans and M-11s (encyclopedia) and Wys (some other thread).
I would love to build some big MTBs like these ones from WW, but the rules don't allow them:
5 Avispa Class MTB
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y22/ReneJr/LargeTB.gif)
Displacement: 100 tons
Armament: 2x47mm, 2x20mm 4x21"TT or 10 D.C.
Machinery: 4x 1200 hp Roth-Packard liquid cooled engines
Speed: 34 knots
Cruising radius: 2000 nm
Crew: 20