Shipbucket

The culmination of 1,385 posts.

_________________

Jabba's Worklist

just 3.4 times less than me

what do you call fast for an inland ship? 20 knots or so?
I will join the other points, about this ship being real bad and all, also the inland merchants will be the last parts of transport to be nuclear powered, as they are compared to trains and cars a lot more economical (but slower)

you also have to tell me about how you put an nuclear reactor in the size of a car, the LWNP was very small (based on the airborne reactors in design) and was the size of an quite large truck.

it is an interesting starting point, to start looking at higher speed alternatives for land cargo due to high fuel prices, but this is by far not the way to go.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

I'd say that even ten knots would count as "fast" in an inland-cargo context. Modern tug-barge traffic is more like half of that. There just isn't a driver for making things much faster than that unless you can go a LOT faster, and you'll never be able to go that fast. Meanwhile, even at ten knots, turning circles are growing, stopping distances are lengthening, and potential collision damage to bridges and other vessels is increasing dramatically.

It's dangerous and there's no point.

I mention rivers once, and everyone thinks it's a riverine vessel.
It is not.

Here is the quote again.
She is a high speed ocean going vessel that can go down certain rivers i.e. Amazon, Mississippi, the really big rivers.

---------
ALG can make a reactor the size of a car because they use as little nuclear material as possible as well as using the latest in material science and also by car I don't mean 3 door hatchback I mean something like a saloon sized one.

The Tripple E Class can navigate those rivers. No need for specialized designs.
And even if that wasn't the case you've chosen the absolute worst hull and superstructure setup possible for an ocean going vessel, let alone a highspeed one.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

Now wouldn't it be better to have many small ships instead of a few large ones? If one sinks/has an incident, that a lot less containers exposed to the chance of being lost/spilling. Besides smaller river vessels won't be as effected by the current when going around bend s nor will they have the chance of running aground in a bend or striking a bank. On the largest river system of my country, the Murray Darling, while terrible for traffic due to snags, sharp bends and shallow waters, can support craft of 30-60m in length with specialized design. In order to make most of the Amazon, a length of 30-70m would be best and draft of 1-2.5m

_________________
Work list(Current)
Miscellaneous|Victorian Colonial Navy|Murray Riverboats|Colony of Victoria AU|Project Sail-fixing SB's sail shortage
How to mentally pronounce my usernameRow-(as in a boat)Don-(as in the short form of Donald)Dough-(bread)
"Loitering on the High Seas" (Named after the good ship Rodondo)
There's no such thing as "nothing left to draw" If you can down 10 pints and draw, you're doing alright by my standards

^ Far too many of which have been exactly as useful as that example.

Ok, now to address APDAF's designs. I'll start off with what's frankly the least important issues.

erik_t and ace already thoroughly picked apart the practical and safety issues of a nuclear-powered "high speed" riverine container transport. I can't think of anything other than an RTG that would qualify as a "compact" nuclear power generator under what you outlined, so there goes your cargo space. Even so there's no way such an expensive ship can justify itself confined to river transport. If you need a "green" solution they'll go to methane-powered gas turbines and reciprocating engines way, way before they adopt freakin' nuclear power. They'll go solar before that point, even. And really, in most cases the reason why the water transport still exists is because the infrastructure (i.e. harbors) is already there and to put up more efficient infrastructure (i.e., roads and trains) just wouldn't be worth it (usually by way of expensive bridges required to cross these rivers).

But the most, by far, the most important issue is that it frankly just looks awful. It looks like an outright retrograde compared to some of your efforts. Really, it's a very small (by most modern standards) container ship. I know I'm going to look like a hypocrite but how can you mess that up, man?

Hi all,

I'm aware that this is my 3rd post, so if I'm stepping over the line, please say, but I've been reading the APDAF epic (you lot should really group them up somewhere, perhaps as a "There but for the grace of god..." thing) and, for all my evident lack of experience, feel compelled to offer whatever small help that I can.

APDAF, the question you need to be asking, a lot, is "Why?"- for example, on the container ship, the key points you've shouted about - nuclear powered, fast, riverine, 600-TEU (and with some of the other ships you've created as well - the imperial yacht springs to mind) - the key questions have effectively been "Why nuclear?", "Why fast?", "Why rivers?" and "Why so big?". Very little on a ship is put on "because it looks cool" (especially on something hauling containers) so, especially here, with a population of very technically literate individuals, "because it looks cool" will not garner much help. Even if it's an AU where flight didn't take off the ships themselves still need to be rational - that is, they still need to be built to accomplish something and then to do that in the most cost-effective manner possible, or close to it. That's where the fun lies in this - you have a tremendously complicated set of rules (AU, or even reality) and the opportunity to create something within this vast, complex, cumbersome framework that you can show to somebody else and have them say "I never thought of that!"

Anyway, starting to ramble. To be honest, I don't know if this will help but if it does, to any extent, great. My time here (and the time I will undoubtedly spend here to come) is already useful.

APDSmith

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.

NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695

Mainly fuel costs, this ship was built just before the oil crisis but in the AU the oil crisis never ended and the price of even unrefined oil is getting prohibitively expensive $400 per barrel on a good day.
Also range is a big factor as well as you only have to refuel every few years rather than every other week.
Something are needed now not next week especially when your at war, it's in the Rhienland Empire's best interest to stop republicanism and communism from spreading as the big four corporations have billions at stake.
It is not a riverine vessel, I mention rivers once and everyone thinks it is.
It's not that big it is practically tiny when you look at the Triple E class.