Shifting my paradigm: Ship Sizes.

Gargamel · 12-19-10, 01:22 AM

I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

The other day at work, I drove by the local port, and saw this (better paint job though, But I wanted to show how it was riding, all the other photos she's riding low):

http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/shi...MMSI=212791000

I immediately wondered as to it's tonnage, and how easy would it be to sink with one eel.

So I google it on my phone as I went whizzing by, and was astonished by it's tonnage, 17,000!

Now I know that's fairly small by today's standards, but to me the ship did not look that big at all, I really was placing it in with the Granville size freighters we see ingame. I wish I had taken a photo fo it then, because maybe it was just the perspective I saw, but it really truly didn't look that big at all.

In size, how does this compare? The Nogat is 150m x 23m, 7.5m draft. Were the ships of the era that much smaller? As I look at the ESB right now, it seems it's a bit bigger than a large Merchant. But that's sitting at about 7,000 tons.

Where are they getting all the extra tonnage from in today's ships?

If anybody has some good links to shipbuilding techniques or what not of the day, I'd be interested to read this.

desirableroasted · 12-19-10, 01:39 AM

Tonnage... what a can of worms.

Go here to have your head thoroughly confused:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonnage

SH3 models warships after displacement tons. That is, a Revenge class BB displaces about 31,000 tons (the weight of the water it would push out of an overflowing bathtub; nothing to do with the actual weight of the ship).

And I know I have read... but I cannot find it in my forum search ... that merchant "tonnage" in SH3 is based on Gross Register Tonnage. Which has to do with how much it can carry.

And these are two different things... but apparently make sense to people in the know.

Could some GWX folks weigh in on this? Because it is a bit of a mystery.

Gerald · 12-19-10, 02:01 AM

Sirius Star is an oil tanker owned and operated by Vela International Marine.With a length overall of 1.090 feet (330 m) and a Capacity of 2.2 million barrels (350,000 m3) of crude oil, the ship is Classified as a Very Large Crude Carrier s VLCC.I guess it takes several eels here... ....

Gargamel · 12-19-10, 02:16 AM

@ DR: Ok, I thought all ships went by displacement tonnage. So maybe the merchants were going by cargo tonnage, and were of similar sizes to todays ships, but just a different yard stick?

@ V: Ok... so what her tonnage? And I bet one good shot in the right place my light her up pretty good. Course, if she was running with just ballast, you may not have enough eels...... ANd wait a second.... thats 330m? That's what's considered a super tanker right? Bout the same length as a carrier? OK, it must have been my perspective I saw the Nogat at, cause in no way was I placing her as 1/3 - 1/2 the length of a carrier, or any big ship.

Gerald · 12-19-10, 02:22 AM

162.252 tons, may need to use the aft eels.....perhaps

Gargamel · 12-19-10, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendor

162.252 tons, may need to use the aft eels.....perhaps

Ok somebody needs to make a Philadelphia Project mod..... have one of these drop out of a time warp as an easter egg or something LOL.

Gerald · 12-19-10, 02:49 AM

Axeman3d · 12-19-10, 07:25 AM

So, if the Wikipedia article is correct, the GRT tonnage used in Silent Hunter is just the cargo spaces of the ship. In actuality if the ship tonnage was worked out in more modern GT tonnage, they'd be 3 or 4 times heavier at least. It makes the huge gap between modern and WWII sizes seem a lot closer.

Hitman · 12-19-10, 09:13 AM

Quote:

162.252 tons, may need to use the aft eels.....perhaps

That would be the Knight's cross with diamons for only six torpedoes and 1 ship

... not bad

Mittelwaechter · 12-19-10, 09:16 AM

Philadelphia-Mod? Here you go...

ediko · 12-19-10, 11:58 AM

Nice pictures

Imagine how unhistorical (or rather how much more) the game would become if we had the real tonnage shown. I can already remember some patrols that would become 500k tonnage ones instead of the 50

Or did the KM really measure the damage they inflicted by the amount of water they pushed out in the sea?

Sailor Steve · 12-19-10, 12:07 PM

Okay, here's the problem. GRT is based on internal volume, not weight. It is a number decided upon by the Insurer and the ship's Owner. It decides what the Insurer will pay to the Owner if the ship sinks, and it decides what the sub captain who sank the ship will be officialy credited with.

The number listed for the ship in the OP is Deadweight tonnage, which is how much cargo the ship is actually expected to carry. There can be a huge difference.

Here the modern Gross Tonnage is smaller - not quite 12,000.
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/...php?lid=401151

Given the ship's length - 150m - I would have guessed the GRT to be around 7000, the same as an Empire or Liberty ship; but the design is more modern and obviously built to maximize cargo space in ways not fully understood sixty years ago.

Second look: Here is the Wiki on Liberty Ships. Note that Nogat is both longer (150m vs 135m) and wider (25m vs 17m) with roughly the same draft (8.8m vs 8.5m). And note that the Liberty shows a displacement tonnage of over 14,000 tons, roughly twice the GRT which was about 7200 tons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship

Tessa · 12-19-10, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Given the ship's length - 150m - I would have guessed the GRT to be around 7000, the same as an Empire or Liberty ship; but the design is more modern and obviously built to maximize cargo space in ways not fully understood sixty years ago.

Liberty ships are like the red shirt of cargo ships from that time period. Very little engineering went into designing them - thus why so many were lost initially, engineers never took into account the poor grade steel + low atlantic water temp = very brittle steel. Many Liberty ships cracked in half (literally) without a torpedo hit at all, the ships tonnage load was more than the ships hull could handle at such low temperatures causing them to frequently break apart.

While a simple solution was found to reslove this problem, Liberty ships were never designed to last very long; whole idea being quantity over quality. If the ship could be built in only several days time it only needed to make a couple round trips in order to be successful.

Gargamel · 12-19-10, 11:31 PM

Ok, so merchant tonnage is based on amount of cargo they could hold, or would be insured for. Warships were displacement then. What about Liners (white star type stuff), I'm guessing that's displacement then too, since they (I'm assuming) didn't have a lot of room for bulk cargo where it wasn't feasible to list 5k tons for such a huge ship....

Sailor Steve · 12-19-10, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tessa

Liberty ships are like the red shirt of cargo ships from that time period. Very little engineering went into designing them - thus why so many were lost initially, engineers never took into account the poor grade steel + low atlantic water temp = very brittle steel. Many Liberty ships cracked in half (literally) without a torpedo hit at all, the ships tonnage load was more than the ships hull could handle at such low temperatures causing them to frequently break apart.

While a simple solution was found to reslove this problem, Liberty ships were never designed to last very long; whole idea being quantity over quality. If the ship could be built in only several days time it only needed to make a couple round trips in order to be successful.

All true, but what does any of that have to do with Gargamel's question?

12-19-10, 01:22 AM	#1
Gargamel Lucky Sailor Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Rome Posts: 4,272 Downloads: 81 Uploads: 0	Shifting my paradigm: Ship Sizes. I'm trying to wrap my head around this. The other day at work, I drove by the local port, and saw this (better paint job though, But I wanted to show how it was riding, all the other photos she's riding low): http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/shi...MMSI=212791000 I immediately wondered as to it's tonnage, and how easy would it be to sink with one eel. So I google it on my phone as I went whizzing by, and was astonished by it's tonnage, 17,000! Now I know that's fairly small by today's standards, but to me the ship did not look that big at all, I really was placing it in with the Granville size freighters we see ingame. I wish I had taken a photo fo it then, because maybe it was just the perspective I saw, but it really truly didn't look that big at all. In size, how does this compare? The Nogat is 150m x 23m, 7.5m draft. Were the ships of the era that much smaller? As I look at the ESB right now, it seems it's a bit bigger than a large Merchant. But that's sitting at about 7,000 tons. Where are they getting all the extra tonnage from in today's ships? If anybody has some good links to shipbuilding techniques or what not of the day, I'd be interested to read this. __________________ Luck is a residue of Design.

12-19-10, 01:39 AM	#2
desirableroasted Grey Wolf Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: In the mountains, now. On the edge of the sea before. Posts: 933 Downloads: 47 Uploads: 0	Tonnage... what a can of worms. Go here to have your head thoroughly confused: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonnage SH3 models warships after displacement tons. That is, a Revenge class BB displaces about 31,000 tons (the weight of the water it would push out of an overflowing bathtub; nothing to do with the actual weight of the ship). And I know I have read... but I cannot find it in my forum search ... that merchant "tonnage" in SH3 is based on Gross Register Tonnage. Which has to do with how much it can carry. And these are two different things... but apparently make sense to people in the know. Could some GWX folks weigh in on this? Because it is a bit of a mystery. __________________ "Well, now, that's true... the IXC is a bit of a chick magnet..but you really can't beat the VIIB for off-road fun."

12-19-10, 02:01 AM	#3
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,223 Downloads: 548 Uploads: 0	Sirius Star is an oil tanker owned and operated by Vela International Marine.With a length overall of 1.090 feet (330 m) and a Capacity of 2.2 million barrels (350,000 m3) of crude oil, the ship is Classified as a Very Large Crude Carrier s VLCC.I guess it takes several eels here... .... __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

12-19-10, 02:16 AM	#4
Gargamel Lucky Sailor Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Rome Posts: 4,272 Downloads: 81 Uploads: 0	@ DR: Ok, I thought all ships went by displacement tonnage. So maybe the merchants were going by cargo tonnage, and were of similar sizes to todays ships, but just a different yard stick? @ V: Ok... so what her tonnage? And I bet one good shot in the right place my light her up pretty good. Course, if she was running with just ballast, you may not have enough eels...... ANd wait a second.... thats 330m? That's what's considered a super tanker right? Bout the same length as a carrier? OK, it must have been my perspective I saw the Nogat at, cause in no way was I placing her as 1/3 - 1/2 the length of a carrier, or any big ship. __________________ Luck is a residue of Design.

12-19-10, 02:22 AM	#5
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,223 Downloads: 548 Uploads: 0	162.252 tons, may need to use the aft eels.....perhaps __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

12-19-10, 02:49 AM	#7
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,223 Downloads: 548 Uploads: 0	__________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

12-19-10, 07:25 AM	#8
Axeman3d Machinist's Mate Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Central Scotland Posts: 127 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	So, if the Wikipedia article is correct, the GRT tonnage used in Silent Hunter is just the cargo spaces of the ship. In actuality if the ship tonnage was worked out in more modern GT tonnage, they'd be 3 or 4 times heavier at least. It makes the huge gap between modern and WWII sizes seem a lot closer.

12-19-10, 09:16 AM	#10
Mittelwaechter The Old Man Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,304 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	Philadelphia-Mod? Here you go... __________________ 10 happy wolves rear 90 blinded, ensnared sheep. 90 happy sheep banish the wolves. Arrest the 1% - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ6hg1oNeGE

12-19-10, 11:58 AM	#11
ediko Electrician's Mate Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Latvia Posts: 137 Downloads: 17 Uploads: 0	Nice pictures Imagine how unhistorical (or rather how much more) the game would become if we had the real tonnage shown. I can already remember some patrols that would become 500k tonnage ones instead of the 50 Or did the KM really measure the damage they inflicted by the amount of water they pushed out in the sea?

12-19-10, 12:07 PM	#12
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	Okay, here's the problem. GRT is based on internal volume, not weight. It is a number decided upon by the Insurer and the ship's Owner. It decides what the Insurer will pay to the Owner if the ship sinks, and it decides what the sub captain who sank the ship will be officialy credited with. The number listed for the ship in the OP is Deadweight tonnage, which is how much cargo the ship is actually expected to carry. There can be a huge difference. Here the modern Gross Tonnage is smaller - not quite 12,000. http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/...php?lid=401151 Given the ship's length - 150m - I would have guessed the GRT to be around 7000, the same as an Empire or Liberty ship; but the design is more modern and obviously built to maximize cargo space in ways not fully understood sixty years ago. Second look: Here is the Wiki on Liberty Ships. Note that Nogat is both longer (150m vs 135m) and wider (25m vs 17m) with roughly the same draft (8.8m vs 8.5m). And note that the Liberty shows a displacement tonnage of over 14,000 tons, roughly twice the GRT which was about 7200 tons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

12-19-10, 11:31 PM	#14
Gargamel Lucky Sailor Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Rome Posts: 4,272 Downloads: 81 Uploads: 0	Ok, so merchant tonnage is based on amount of cargo they could hold, or would be insured for. Warships were displacement then. What about Liners (white star type stuff), I'm guessing that's displacement then too, since they (I'm assuming) didn't have a lot of room for bulk cargo where it wasn't feasible to list 5k tons for such a huge ship.... __________________ Luck is a residue of Design.