Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 13 of 17  [ 161 posts ]  Go to page « 111 12 13 14 1517 »
Author Message
apdsmith
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 15th, 2013, 5:38 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 855
Joined: August 29th, 2013, 5:58 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Hi APDAF,

OK, so the next questions are "Have you thought of the other effects?" Oil at the price means, effectively, little to no plastics, for instance. By the time you reach $400/barrel, I think you're back at the point where whaling becomes useful as a source of hydrocarbons again. From what I've read of the NS Savannah, at that price point nuclear probably does become economic compared to oil-fired container ships, certainly for long-distance freight, but that doesn't help for the riverine bit. I know it's not the ship's primary role, but it's mentioned in the design, so I'll mention it here. As soon as you reach the coast, your nuclear container ship isn't just competing with a triple-E, it's also competing with a lorry and a train. And I suspect it loses to both of those quite substantially.

As to "Why Fast" - I assume you're using the same sort of map I've seen previously, with France displaced off to the middle-east somehow. That's an entirely separate argument, but I'd like to point out one thing. Germany, in both world wars, had a significant advantage over the british because all of the internal logistics happened over train lines. Britain, supplied heavily by sea, didn't, and was therefore vulnerable to blockade, which was promptly attempted. I know Britain's part of the Anglo-Germanic Empire you've got going on, but to be honest, you've got to secure a channel crossing of all of approx 18 nmi. With both sides friendly. A slow 5-knot journey will be less than 4 hours across that, not "next week". I don't see any other substantial journeys that *must* be made by ship, unless you're using it for offensive ops, in which case, I'd ask where? Why? I note the lack of defensive armament - I'd assumed that this was a rear-echelon ship, quite happily not ever getting shot at.

The rivers thing, everybody's mentioned because you mentioned it. Virtually anything can travel at least a little way up the amazon or other big rivers without any problems at all - heck, the germans managed to fit a battlecruiser up the River Plate in WWII! - so if it's intended for those, it's just an ordinary ship. If it's not intended for those, it's a mite big to fit, seems to be the consensus - again, coming back to "the ship needs to be rational" - in RL you will get some ships designed for a specific environment that they will never leave - Great Lakes freighters, river boats on the Rhine or the Thames - or designed to cope with a crunch point that nevertheless greatly increases the ship's utility - Panamax, Malaccamax (sp?), etc, etc - so if this is designed for a river, is it a specific one?

Again, comparison with the Triple E class, what's the ship for? If it's supposed to be a big hauler, why not the size of the triple E? If it's in a restricted environment, *which* restricted environment? The Amazon is not a particularly restriced environment.

If it sounds like I'm being mean, I'm not trying to be. I'm just trying to figure out what it is you want this ship to do? What is it's job, and why is it *this* ship that does that job and not another (like the triple-E, for instance)

Regards,
APDSmith

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.
[ img ]
NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Morten812
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 15th, 2013, 5:54 pm
Offline
Posts: 281
Joined: September 16th, 2011, 7:02 am
Location: Denmark
Contact: Website
Oh no - another APDAF round....

_________________
Morten812

Morten Jensen
Randers
Denmark

Traffic Manager


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
apdsmith
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 15th, 2013, 6:32 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 855
Joined: August 29th, 2013, 5:58 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Hi Morten,

I figure you guys must be worn out by now, so it falls to the new guys (I hestitate to call it a hazing, but if the shoe fits...)

On a serious note, it's clear APDAF isn't daft, but I think he gets overcome with "!!!111 MOAR GUNZ111". Which is fine, but I get the impression that this is *not* the site for that.

Regards,
APDSmith

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.
[ img ]
NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 15th, 2013, 7:35 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 9049
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
Shipbucket have almost always been an forum about drawing real ships. but whenever someone is drawing an AU ship "Shipbucket" demand it to be a ship that is close to what i possible, within our own knowledge.

But if you want to go over board on guns.... like mounting an 18in gun on an PT boat, then "nationstate" (just an example) is the site for you...


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Morten812
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 15th, 2013, 8:29 pm
Offline
Posts: 281
Joined: September 16th, 2011, 7:02 am
Location: Denmark
Contact: Website
apdsmith wrote:
Hi Morten,

I figure you guys must be worn out by now, so it falls to the new guys (I hestitate to call it a hazing, but if the shoe fits...)

On a serious note, it's clear APDAF isn't daft, but I think he gets overcome with "!!!111 MOAR GUNZ111". Which is fine, but I get the impression that this is *not* the site for that.

Regards,
APDSmith
Just my impression - seems to me that any advice and kind help being completly disregarded by APDAF making these trend completly useless - just like his drawings and reasons behinds his 'design'

But also amazing that others still continues to advice him to no effort. He dosent listen.

Just my point.

_________________
Morten812

Morten Jensen
Randers
Denmark

Traffic Manager


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 15th, 2013, 8:32 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
APDAF wrote:
apdsmith wrote:
"Why nuclear?"
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.
<Morbo>Physics does not work that way GOOD NIGHT.</Morbo>

Any small reactor is going to have difficulty in both maintaining criticality and in going any significant period of time between refuelings. Remember, the LWNP has a life cycle of about one year for standard commercial use, and it's about the smallest reactor that can operate on a regular basis.

As another point, above about $300 a barrel (in 2005 dollars), it starts becoming cost effective to crack CO₂ and H₂O out of the air and catalyze them back into hydrocarbons or doing the same with N and H₂O to make ammonia . Now, long before this point nuclear powered ships become cost effective (for the most part), but to wave a price that doesn't make sense is just hitting rock bottom and then starting up the drill (yet again).

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 16th, 2013, 12:13 am
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Morten812 wrote:
Just my impression - seems to me that any advice and kind help being completly disregarded by APDAF making these trend completly useless - just like his drawings and reasons behinds his 'design'

But also amazing that others still continues to advice him to no effort. He dosent listen.

Just my point.
I find that, in thinking things through and then explaining them to APDAF and others, I learn more about what I don't know or never thought about.

So it's worth it to me, even if nobody ever reads it.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 16th, 2013, 8:42 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7496
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
erik_t wrote:
Morten812 wrote:
Just my impression - seems to me that any advice and kind help being completly disregarded by APDAF making these trend completly useless - just like his drawings and reasons behinds his 'design'

But also amazing that others still continues to advice him to no effort. He dosent listen.

Just my point.
I find that, in thinking things through and then explaining them to APDAF and others, I learn more about what I don't know or never thought about.

So it's worth it to me, even if nobody ever reads it.
same here. although it annoys sometimes if I have to say the same things 10 times, every time somebody tries their best and gets it wrong, it learns me new ways to do it right, so to say :P by getting teached and teaching what I had learned from others, I was able to build up my knowledge.

_________________
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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Shipright
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 16th, 2013, 2:53 pm
Offline
Posts: 397
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 2:16 pm
I will give you three words that come to mind when you say large hulled high speed river transports:

SQUAT

BANK EFFECT

If you can solve those let the USN know.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
klagldsf
Post subject: Re: Rhineland designsPosted: September 17th, 2013, 4:13 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm
APDAF wrote:
apdsmith wrote:
"Why nuclear?"
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.
Methane gas powered turbines/diesels. Even solar power or even friggin' sails.

BTW, why methane (or similar light fuels)? Because you can get it from sources other than traditional fossil fuel sources without having to resort to cracking - including garbage dumps, sewage plants and farms. We're doing this today.
Quote:
apdsmith wrote:
"Why fast?"
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.
Then why not ship it over land or air? This is an INLAND cargo vessel. If you really need it that fast, you FedEx it. That's literally how FedEx came to exist.
Quote:
apdsmith wrote:
"Why rivers?"
It is not a riverine vessel, I mention rivers once and everyone thinks it is.
So it floats around a lake then? Either way compare to the "fastest boat in the Great Lakes" which is 19 MPH - that's about 15 knots.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 13 of 17  [ 161 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page « 111 12 13 14 1517 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]