Considerations about naval designs

fallsfromtrees wrote:I suppose I was thinking more about the LSTs than actual troop transports. Actually moving troops around within the Empire will require shipping wore like steam ocean liners, which in fact should be putting in a appearance at about the same time as the steam merchant ships.

LSTs are great for vehicles, I'm not sure how good for animals (draft dragons). I won't say LSTs are not good, they have their uses. I feel that if limited resources are an issue then the APA-type is more versatile. Having many small craft onboard as lifeboats would also allow it to land troops quickly.

Darman wrote:

fallsfromtrees wrote:I suppose I was thinking more about the LSTs than actual troop transports. Actually moving troops around within the Empire will require shipping wore like steam ocean liners, which in fact should be putting in a appearance at about the same time as the steam merchant ships.

LSTs are great for vehicles, I'm not sure how good for animals (draft dragons). I won't say LSTs are not good, they have their uses. I feel that if limited resources are an issue then the APA-type is more versatile. Having many small craft onboard as lifeboats would also allow it to land troops quickly.

If they're great for vehicles they should be great for artillery so there is reason to build them. Green Valley brigade was carrying something like 100-200 guns. When we invent diesel engine I think that they will design SPG soon so when it will be invented LST would be great.

This has been a really interesting discussion. I think that if one has to choose, the steam transports should probably come first. I don't foresee a lot of amphibious landing in hostile territory. But I can see situations such as Gorath Bay and possibly Silk Town where troops wiil be landed after fortfications have been bombed into surrender by the navy. Then there is the bit that could well come up taking Zion from the seaward side.

But none of that really resembles a D-Day landing or island hopping in the Pacific against hostile fire. So I find myself skeptical of the need to design landing craft to deal with that situation. What they used in Corisande still seems adequate to current need.

Don

n7axw wrote:But none of that really resembles a D-Day landing or island hopping in the Pacific against hostile fire. So I find myself skeptical of the need to design landing craft to deal with that situation. What they used in Corisande still seems adequate to current need.

Don

Which would be one reason an LST-type vessel would not, IMHO, be the best use of scarce resources, whereas an attack transport-type vessel would be. Such a transport vessel would be equipped to carry troops for long distances, and have the requisite number of small boats for emergencies that also happen to be suited for amphibious landings. Additionally, it would have one or more cranes for loading/offloading cargo such as artillery pieces and wagons. By building it to standard specifications and giving contracts to as many shipbuilders as possible, you spread the design as widely as possible and hopefully economies of scale will make this vessel type or modifications of it, an enticing buy for civilian shippers, especially those engaged in the military's carrying trade.

And it's really close from that to cargo ships, similar to current world ships should be soon developed. When Navy will switch for oil there would be need for large fleet of oil tankers and other support ships.

Darman wrote:Which would be one reason an LST-type vessel would not, IMHO, be the best use of scarce resources, whereas an attack transport-type vessel would be.

A LST style ship has advantages and disadvantages:

Pro: A LST doesn't need sophisticated harbor facilities, it just needs a beach to provide "roll on, roll off" delivery of goods or troops. Since steel hulled ships can be bigger than galleons, better harbors are going to be needed, or the ability to without harbors.

Con: LSTs were notoriously a rough ride -- i.e. they weren't terribly seaworthy. The relatively flat bottom and bow-doors/ramp aren't really compatible with the blue water needs of the ICN.

Darman wrote:By building it to standard specifications and giving contracts to as many shipbuilders as possible, you spread the design as widely as possible and hopefully economies of scale will make this vessel type or modifications of it, an enticing buy for civilian shippers, especially those engaged in the military's carrying trade.

Liberty Ships, which is what your specification amounts to, were "one size fits none." They were too small for post-war commerce and too fragile to make back their cost before falling apart.

What Charis needs is ever evolving steamship designs, with no more than ten or twelve of any one design. Each design would be optimized for a specific task and/or build upon the lessons learned from preceding designs. They need a whole range of steamship types, from tramp steamer to passenger liner, to bulk/ore carriers and everything in between.

Weird Harold wrote:

Darman wrote:Which would be one reason an LST-type vessel would not, IMHO, be the best use of scarce resources, whereas an attack transport-type vessel would be.

A LST style ship has advantages and disadvantages:

Pro: A LST doesn't need sophisticated harbor facilities, it just needs a beach to provide "roll on, roll off" delivery of goods or troops. Since steel hulled ships can be bigger than galleons, better harbors are going to be needed, or the ability to without harbors.

Con: LSTs were notoriously a rough ride -- i.e. they weren't terribly seaworthy. The relatively flat bottom and bow-doors/ramp aren't really compatible with the blue water needs of the ICN.

Darman wrote:By building it to standard specifications and giving contracts to as many shipbuilders as possible, you spread the design as widely as possible and hopefully economies of scale will make this vessel type or modifications of it, an enticing buy for civilian shippers, especially those engaged in the military's carrying trade.

Liberty Ships, which is what your specification amounts to, were "one size fits none." They were too small for post-war commerce and too fragile to make back their cost before falling apart.

What Charis needs is ever evolving steamship designs, with no more than ten or twelve of any one design. Each design would be optimized for a specific task and/or build upon the lessons learned from preceding designs. They need a whole range of steamship types, from tramp steamer to passenger liner, to bulk/ore carriers and everything in between.

I agree that Charis needs the designs, but I'm not convinced that the expense for all of that should come out of the imperial purse. Let the imperial purse pay for one design to be used as a troop transort but convertable to a freighter after the war. Then let the private sector pay for R&D on whatever other designs might be needed.

Don

Several unrelated points. The use of containerized cargo has been brought up before. Post-War use of LSTs or LCTs would allow cargo to be shipped to and from smaller ports that wouldn't be usable by larger freighters. And as an aside, does anyone see a seaport on the Cauldron connected to Tellesberg by rail and road? Such a port would drastically cut down on shipping times to the west of Old Charis.

doug941 wrote:Several unrelated points. The use of containerized cargo has been brought up before. Post-War use of LSTs or LCTs would allow cargo to be shipped to and from smaller ports that wouldn't be usable by larger freighters. And as an aside, does anyone see a seaport on the Cauldron connected to Tellesberg by rail and road? Such a port would drastically cut down on shipping times to the west of Old Charis.

I agree with the idea of a railroad between Tellesburg and a port on the Cauldron. IIRC, the terrain is a bit rough which might make that railroad a pain in the arse to build. But it can probably be done and would pay off.

Don

One of my college professors was a navy officer in World War 2. In addition to signing large numbers of documents stating that he had seen Admiral King sign the orders to proceed at some level with the invasion of Japan, and therefore the following orders were to be executed, and getting to read the classified casualty estimates, which were hideous, he was tasked with transporting a post-war Chinese cavalry division from South China to North China. This included the division's theater (Chinese opera) company. He opined that the women also did sing.

However, I can confirm that with some work you can use an LST to carry a *lot* of horses, though I do not know how many LSTs were needed in all.

Cleaning them out afterwards, well, that was a horse of a different color.

Edit: Spelling error.