|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 12, 2018 10:29:27 GMT -6
How about allowing added torpedo bulges to increase the fuel capacity, possibly at the expense of weight, a bit more speed and a slightly higher chance of explosion?
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 12, 2018 11:48:38 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by ursamaior on Dec 12, 2018 12:40:58 GMT -6
How about allowing added torpedo bulges to increase the fuel capacity, possibly at the expense of weight, a bit more speed and a slightly higher chance of explosion?
I really like this one! Especially because lot of older BBs and BCs were retrofitted with them in the 1920s 30s.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 12, 2018 12:47:10 GMT -6
How about allowing added torpedo bulges to increase the fuel capacity, possibly at the expense of weight, a bit more speed and a slightly higher chance of explosion? You might find this interesting. navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-047.php
|
|
|
Post by archelaos on Dec 12, 2018 14:38:24 GMT -6
The first job considered, I think, was artillery spotting, just by time helos matured, there was no point in spotting as radars were more effective, so they were not really used in this role on ships. The first helicopters were used for amphibious and shipboard operations but included were rescue operations especially during the launch and recovery of aircraft on carriers. The First US helicopter in production was the XR-4. The Bell UH-47 was used for moving wounded and rescue during the Korean War. It was designated the H-13. I've actually flown in one of those years ago. Watch MASH if you want to see them. German Kolibri was tested as artillery observer and scout on board of cruiser Koln in 1941
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 12, 2018 16:40:03 GMT -6
Beware: Helicopters are high maintenance vehicles and when they have problems while flying, there is no easy way to land, they land like a brick. If the game does allow for the development of the helicopter, it had better add this.
Helicopters have a large number of moving parts, designed to minimal weight and high stress (fatigue) conditions. This, combined with a low tolerance for failure, results in high maintenance. Ratios of Maintenance Man Hours (MMH) to flight hours is often 3.5 to 4.5. That is, four hours of maintenance is conducted for every flight hour. Parts are replaced well before expected failure. Many parts are machined to very close tolerances. Metal used to manufacture parts have certifications regarding the source, treatments, and inspections. It is not unusual for spare parts to cost $5,000 to $15,000 with a few exceeding $50,000. Consequently, the current parts cost (in 1996) per flight hour of a Black Hawk is $1,602.70 ($351.54 consumable and $1,251.16 reparable). The Longbow Apache spares cost per flight hour is $3,851.18 ($444.20 consumable and $3,406.98 reparable).
Maintenance-manhours per flight hours for modern jets is high, for the F-117 it was 50 man-hours per flight hour, for the F6F Hellcat it was 1.245 man-hours per flight hour. The Eurofighter is about 9 hours. The F4U required 1.65 man-hours.
Saab Draken.- 50 to 1
Eurofighter....- 9 to 1
F-14............. - 24 to 1
F-18E/F........- 6 to 1
F-18E/F........- 15 to 1 (different source)
Saab Gripen..- 10 to 1
C-17.............- 20 to 1
F-15A/B........- 32.3 here thru f117 stats from (HaveBlue and the F-117A by David Aronstein)
F-15C/D........- 22.1
F-16A...........- 19.2
F-117...........- 150 (pre 1989)
F-117...........- 45 (after improvements, post 1989)
CH-46E........- 19.6 in 1995 GlobalSecurity.org
CH-46E........- 27.2 in 2000
CH-53D........- 24.8 in 1995
CH-53D........- 27.9 in 2000
F-20.............- 5.6 (http://www.f20a.com/f20maint.htm)
A-6E............- 51.9 DMMH/FH (http://yarchive.net/mil/fa18_vs_a6.html)
F/A-18C.......- 19.1 DMMH/FH
B-2..............- 124
It goes without saying, that in combat, all those numbers go right out the door. The maintenance man-hours can double and triple for aircraft in combat depending on the number of sorties.
|
|
|
Post by grosseadmiralfox on Dec 13, 2018 2:22:42 GMT -6
Helo's can be used for 1. Search and Rescue 2. Plane guards 3. Movement of men and supplies between ships 4. Anti-submarine warfare. 5. Insertion and extraction of special units into enemy territory. It will take time for this technology to mature where is can actually do the jobs that I have offered but with time, it could. The first job considered, I think, was artillery spotting, just by time helos matured, there was no point in spotting as radars were more effective, so they were not really used in this role on ships. From what I can remember, it took a while (and a lot of resources) for radar-based artillery spotting to be effective. Not only that, but having helis (like the Dragon) as depth charge users would be rather easy...
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Dec 14, 2018 13:20:43 GMT -6
It is incredibly interesting seeing people look at naval helicopter use, especially the German ones, as my focus has in the past been exclusive to the land potential the Luftwaffe wasted by ignoring them.
Read a translation once that demonstrates the arguments the various branches of service often had when the army immediately went "omg these would be amazing for supply transport and shot range tactical mobility." And the Luftwaffe went "meh we see no use for these."
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 14, 2018 17:12:16 GMT -6
It is incredibly interesting seeing people look at naval helicopter use, especially the German ones, as my focus has in the past been exclusive to the land potential the Luftwaffe wasted by ignoring them. Read a translation once that demonstrates the arguments the various branches of service often had when the army immediately went "omg these would be amazing for supply transport and shot range tactical mobility." And the Luftwaffe went "meh we see no use for these." Though that was probably a knee-jerk reaction in the Luftwaffe-Wehrmacht rivalry. If one endorsed something, the other said it was useless, albeit in a rather more bureaucratic way!
|
|
|
Post by grosseadmiralfox on Dec 14, 2018 19:14:01 GMT -6
It is incredibly interesting seeing people look at naval helicopter use, especially the German ones, as my focus has in the past been exclusive to the land potential the Luftwaffe wasted by ignoring them. Read a translation once that demonstrates the arguments the various branches of service often had when the army immediately went "omg these would be amazing for supply transport and shot range tactical mobility." And the Luftwaffe went "meh we see no use for these." Actually, from what I can tell, it was mostly due to the factories getting annihilated than anything. Given that the Dragon and Hummingbird (yes, the Focke Achgelis Fa-223 is nicknamed the 'Dragon' and the snycrocopter (the Flettner Fl 282) was nicknamed the 'hummingbrid') had fully planned production runs when first acquired into the arsenal...
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Dec 15, 2018 2:45:42 GMT -6
I'll defer to you. I was just summarizing what I had read (or remember having read) in some books I have. Unfortunately I don't have access to them at the moment (curse you university space constraints 😤).
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Dec 15, 2018 7:44:55 GMT -6
How about allowing added torpedo bulges to increase the fuel capacity, possibly at the expense of weight, a bit more speed and a slightly higher chance of explosion? That's a good idea but I'm not sure it works within the frame of how ranges are determined in RTW. This is predicated on RTW2 being similar to RTW1 in this regard but since ships are classed as just short, medium, long or extreme range the oil filled voids in bulges and TPS would have to add enough extra range to change from one general class to another. Honestly, I have no idea what real life cruising ranges those categories equate to. Again it's a good idea and if the developers get time to figure out the numbers and it makes a difference (or what new system they're using would be affected) then I would like to see it added at some point even if it isn't at release. I'm assuming at this point though they know what they want to be in the initial release and are just concentrating on making those features work.
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Dec 15, 2018 7:52:02 GMT -6
How about allowing added torpedo bulges to increase the fuel capacity, possibly at the expense of weight, a bit more speed and a slightly higher chance of explosion? Bulges are already in RTW1. ;V You can refit them onto your older ships. They increase torpedo defense (by 1?) while reducing speed by a couple of knots. They would not cause explosions, as they didn't contain anything more volatile than bunker oil, which tends to burn, not explode.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 15, 2018 9:26:15 GMT -6
How about allowing added torpedo bulges to increase the fuel capacity, possibly at the expense of weight, a bit more speed and a slightly higher chance of explosion? Bulges are already in RTW1. ;V You can refit them onto your older ships. They increase torpedo defense (by 1?) while reducing speed by a couple of knots. They would not cause explosions, as they didn't contain anything more volatile than bunker oil, which tends to burn, not explode. I know that, I was mainly asking for an increase in fuel capacity. Also, if I can remember from my chemistry lessons, the lighter ship fuels could explode under enough pressure so a shell hitting one would perhaps have a slight chance of explosion or at least starting a fire.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 15, 2018 9:34:51 GMT -6
How about allowing added torpedo bulges to increase the fuel capacity, possibly at the expense of weight, a bit more speed and a slightly higher chance of explosion? That's a good idea but I'm not sure it works within the frame of how ranges are determined in RTW. This is predicated on RTW2 being similar to RTW1 in this regard but since ships are classed as just short, medium, long or extreme range the oil filled voids in bulges and TPS would have to add enough extra range to change from one general class to another. Honestly, I have no idea what real life cruising ranges those categories equate to. Again it's a good idea and if the developers get time to figure out the numbers and it makes a difference (or what new system they're using would be affected) then I would like to see it added at some point even if it isn't at release. I'm assuming at this point though they know what they want to be in the initial release and are just concentrating on making those features work. I fully understand; it was more of a pipe dream. On the fuel thing, it could be done abstractly like the ranges currently. Ships over 15-20,000t could be assumed to fit bulges with big enough extra fuel tanks to move the range up a level. Basically, anything past a pre-dreadnought.
|
|