Small Tanker plans required

[Der Teddy Bar]

I would be appreciative if someone can supply me with a plan of the Small Tanker for it's rezoning.

[AG124]

I don't know if this helps, but here is a link to the Patapasco class tanker. There is no diagram on this page, but there are some reference links at the bottom that might have something.

http://warships.web4u.cz/lode.php?la...trida=Patapsco

Are the zones on this ship wrong?

[booger2005]

Originally Posted by AG124

I don't know if this helps, but here is a link to the Patapasco class tanker. There is no diagram on this page, but there are some reference links at the bottom that might have something.

http://warships.web4u.cz/lode.php?la...trida=Patapsco

Are the zones on this ship wrong?

Hey, I think that IS the small tanker. Were all the merchants in SHIII based on US NAVY military types?

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by booger2005

Hey, I think that IS the small tanker. Were all the merchants in SHIII based on US NAVY military types?

The coastal merchant, liner, and small merchant are generic. All other merchants are based on mass-produced US navy/merchant marine ships.

[AG124]

I can't help but notice that the Small Merchant is identical to the Small Cargo from SH2. :hmm: Maybe it was based upon a picture that a member of the dev teams had?

When you say the liner is generic, are you talking about the passenger liner or the AMC/Transport?

Also, what do you think of the German Commerce Raider? I don't like it - it looks to be from the 1960s to me, and is 10,000 GRT heavier than any actual German raider.

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by AG124

I can't help but notice that the Small Merchant is identical to the Small Cargo from SH2. :hmm: Maybe it was based upon a picture that a member of the dev teams had?

When you say the liner is generic, are you talking about the passenger liner or the AMC/Transport?

Also, what do you think of the German Commerce Raider? I don't like it - it looks to be from the 1960s to me, and is 10,000 GRT heavier than any actual German raider.

I mean the passenger liner. I think that the troopship is actually a common C-3 modification.

The commerce raider looks somewhat modern - maybe early-to-mid 1930's. It's not very heavily streamlined so it doesn't look out of place (although some ships, in fact, did have streamlining by the 1930's).

Re: the ship plans, I think that a shrunken-down T-2 or T-3 damage zone profile would be OK, since the small tanker is just a miniature engines-aft ship.

[AG124]

I think that the troopship is actually a common C-3 modification.

Actually I was talking about the NPTR. Sorry - I should have been more clear.

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by AG124

Actually I was talking about the NPTR. Sorry - I should have been more clear.

Oh, OK. Probably generic, but it seems to be heavily based on the "Jervis Bay" and her sister ships.

[AG124]

I think you're right about that - even though it appears quite a bit longer, the NPTR does appear similar to the Jervis Bay. The model was probably a combination of several similar liners.

BTW - remember the "Fast Cargo" from SH2? I was reading the unit file a couple of days ago, and it said the model was based loosely on the C3. Doesn't look like a C3 to me...

(This thread got off-topic fast. )

[iambecomelife]

Originally Posted by AG124

I think you're right about that - even though it appears quite a bit longer, the NPTR does appear similar to the Jervis Bay. The model was probably a combination of several similar liners.

BTW - remember the "Fast Cargo" from SH2? I was reading the unit file a couple of days ago, and it said the model was based loosely on the C3. Doesn't look like a C3 to me...

(This thread got off-topic fast. )

Yes, I remember them all too well. Again, I don't like to be overly critical but they really looked out of place. I wonder why a naval architect would design a ship with the funnel placed in front of the bridge. You'd have a giant cylinder obstructing the forward view & spewing soot toward the deck officers - not good at all for navigation.

[booger2005]

Originally Posted by iambecomelife

Yes, I remember them all too well. Again, I don't like to be overly critical but they really looked out of place. I wonder why a naval architect would design a ship with the funnel placed in front of the bridge. You'd have a giant cylinder obstructing the forward view & spewing soot toward the deck officers - not good at all for navigation.

I saw two specials over the weekend on the history channel about the Tirpitz and Graf Spree and they showed stock footage of convoys and in one of them I'm almost certain I recognized the "Fast Cargo" with stack in the middle and bridge aft.