New ships designs

House of Steel.

Also the Jayne's books, which were published by Ad Astra as background material for their Honorverse tabletop game.

SWM wrote:

Theemile wrote:The Current "Roark's Drift" Class of Manticorian Marine transport is about that size (4.5 Mtons). The "Roughneck" Marine Carrier, the Havenite design Honor captured at Cereberus is alos that size - it carried 20K marines and 84 - 600 ton assault shuttles. (it is discussed in The Havenite Jayne's book)

4.5 Mtons is also the size of the JMNT freighters and the "Volcano" class ammo carriers. It makes we wonder if as many of the fleet train type ships as possible are built on a common frame and share parts like the compensator and nodes - it would allow a class of limited size maintenance and crew training advantages.

I doubt that the freighters and ammo carriers are built on the same frame as the marine transports. As I recall, the marine transports do have warship frames and defensive systems. The freighters and ammo carriers are probably civilian-style frames with no hammerheads--albeit with military-grade equipment.

IIRC the Roark's Drift had no hammerheads like the Merchie designs (The Roughneck certainly was a merchie style hull). While the frame might be differnet, the common size does suggest at least a level of parts similiarity.

In general, Ships almost always tend to increase in size. This is the 1-up-man-ship mentality. Each time a new ship is built, the builder generally want's it to be better than the last. This means more equipment, better equipment & bigger size to accommodate it. This is true in all military equipment. The modern MBT (Main Battle Tank) is a WWII "Heavy" Tank (the M-1A1 is the same weight as a Tiger I). It also has a 120mm canon, compared to the Tigers "tinny" 88mm which would just bounce off a M-1! The speed is better than a WWII light tank due to tech advancement. The 1st US "Dreadnought", USS South Carolina was basically a modified Vermont class PD hull with the Mid Cal secondary guns replaced with 2 more main turrets. After the 1st generation of DNs. Each successive class was bigger & bigger for every country. More guns, bigger guns etc. This was only interrupted with the bankruptcy of post WWI, But when treaties wore off, it was picked up right where it left off. The same was true for carriers. The US kept building each class with more & more plane capacity. Japan was a little different during the war. After Midway, they went with smaller & cheaper to get some out, to use, but still built 6 new ships of an enlarged Hiryū class (3 of which were completed at the end but lacked experienced air crews).
As for the arguments for "Super" CLACs Vs more "Light" CLACs, this is the same argument that the US Navy & Marines have been having for 40yrs. The Navy wants big "Battalion Carriers" (LHA/LHD) a few ships to carry the entire Marine Corp in as few hulls as possible. Fewer hulls means a reduced need for escorts. The Marines want lots of smaller oceangoing transports (LPD/LSD), "eggs-in-1-basket", more hulls more locations & missions etc... This has been waiving back & forth which resulted in neither getting what they want but both getting some of what they want (especially with the Marines adopting VTOL aircraft that can operate from the Navys big transports). The same may occur with CLACs, some Navys going with more/smaller & others going with bigger & bigger. As the Navy is usually in charge of ordering new ships, I think the general trend will be the 1-up-man-ship trend. But this may stray due to political influence (as with Roosevelt and the Independence class CVL - "Build some & that's an order" )

The Tiger 1 weighed 56 metric ton, the Tiger 2 weighed 67 metric ton. And the Jagd Tiger was at 70 metric ton.

Rob the Fiend wrote:The Tiger 1 weighed 56 metric ton, the Tiger 2 weighed 67 metric ton. And the Jagd Tiger was at 70 metric ton.

Then there's the insanity of the US prototype T28 super-heavy tank; 86 metric tons. But "only" a 105mm gun.

Still, for WWII that's a big. (and even for post-war that particular gun is a very long one for a tank). It's 68 calibers long; 30% longer than the 105mm/52 gun on the original M-1 Abrams.

Rob the Fiend wrote:The Tiger 1 weighed 56 metric ton, the Tiger 2 weighed 67 metric ton. And the Jagd Tiger was at 70 metric ton.

Encyclopedia of Tanks & Armored Fighting Vehicles (ISBN 1-57145-806-9.): M-1 Abrams Weight: 56.3 tons pg 50, PzKpfw VI Tiger I Weight: 56 tons pg 243. point still stands with your figs.

Duckk wrote:House of Steel.

HB, page 406.
"Aside from the dedicated Broadsword-class LCA {my insert: page 359} and the new Kamerling class {page 353}, instellar transport was provided throughout the war by aging Rorke's Drift-class Fast Attack Transports and the Guadalcanal-class Heavy Assault Transports. With the drawdown of onboard marine complements due to the increased automation onboard Manticoran Warships, a design study was put in place in 1920 PD for a new class of Marine transport. Designed to attach to a fleet to provide a centralized Marine support unit, the as-yet-unnamed LPX (Attack Transport, Experimental) can carry three regiments plus support on a large battle cruiser-sized hull, with enough active and passive defenses to protect itself as part of the fleet train, and sufficient small craft capacity to deploy a full regiment in a single wave."

Note that we do not have detailed specs/description in House of Steel on the size or troop payload of the Rorke's Drift class or the Gudalcanal-class.

The newer Kamerling is a nominal "CL-sized" "system control cruiser" but it is slightly larger and very slightly better armed than the Broadsword "CA-size" "marine operations support cruiser". The K has the much higher accel of newer designs, but ordinarily carries a 25% smaller complement of Marines, and does not appear to have the B's depth of C&C and planetary operations support capabilities.

dreamrider

MAD-4A wrote:

Rob the Fiend wrote:The Tiger 1 weighed 56 metric ton, the Tiger 2 weighed 67 metric ton. And the Jagd Tiger was at 70 metric ton.

Encyclopedia of Tanks & Armored Fighting Vehicles (ISBN 1-57145-806-9.): M-1 Abrams Weight: 56.3 tons pg 50, PzKpfw VI Tiger I Weight: 56 tons pg 243. point still stands with your figs.

I thought he ment the M1A2, it weighs around 65 metric ton.
Clear case of weight creep.