Ships of the wall

munroburton wrote:I'd be more impressed if you found something from the 20th or 21st century that used wood as an engineering material because "it's what we have available".

What about the de Havilland Mosquito? Used wood because it was available as non strategic material.

The Japanese also adapted the all metal Ki-84 fighter into the wooden Ki-106 due to metal shortages near the end of WW2. They were also designing a wooden version of the L2D "Tabby" (licence built DC-3) transport aircraft for the same reason.

Mike.

Michael Riddell wrote:

munroburton wrote:I'd be more impressed if you found something from the 20th or 21st century that used wood as an engineering material because "it's what we have available".

What about the de Havilland Mosquito? Used wood because it was available as non strategic material.

The Japanese also adapted the all metal Ki-84 fighter into the wooden Ki-106 due to metal shortages near the end of WW2. They were also designing a wooden version of the L2D "Tabby" (licence built DC-3) transport aircraft for the same reason.

Mike.

Point taken, but there's a wee bit of a difference between an aircraft and an armoured warship.

munroburton wrote:Point taken, but there's a wee bit of a difference between an aircraft and an armoured warship.

Alrighty then, challenge accepted!

What about the temporary coconut log breakwater fitted to the Heavy Cruiser USS Minneapolis after she had her bow blown off at the Battle of Tassafaronga?

http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/WarDamageReports/WarDamageReportCA27-CA36/WarDamageReportCA27-CA36-16.jpg

Not strictly structural, but it did the job of keeping the water out!

Mike.

Michael Riddell wrote:What about the temporary coconut log breakwater fitted to the Heavy Cruiser USS Minneapolis after she had her bow blown off at the Battle of Tassafaronga?

That someone thought to jury-rig a field repair like that does not mean a yard would prefer to actually build it that way.

I'd say the Mosquito's a better example.

TheMonster wrote:

Michael Riddell wrote:What about the temporary coconut log breakwater fitted to the Heavy Cruiser USS Minneapolis after she had her bow blown off at the Battle of Tassafaronga?

That someone thought to jury-rig a field repair like that does not mean a yard would prefer to actually build it that way.

I'd say the Mosquito's a better example.

Or the minesweepers built with wooden hulls for their inherent non-magnetic (and easy to repair) properties. Or the WWII PT boats which where also wooden hulled for cost, weight, and repairability reasons.

Jonathan_S wrote:

TheMonster wrote:That someone thought to jury-rig a field repair like that does not mean a yard would prefer to actually build it that way.

I'd say the Mosquito's a better example.

Or the minesweepers built with wooden hulls for their inherent non-magnetic (and easy to repair) properties. Or the WWII PT boats which where also wooden hulled for cost, weight, and repairability reasons.

I was just going to mention the PT boats...

Now you've done it. I've just had a vision of an SD(W) built entirely out of wood with its entire armour consisting of sidewalls and bucklers. Plus the wedge, of course.

Aar, Jim lad, run up the Jolly Roger!

Cheers

John

TheMonster wrote:That someone thought to jury-rig a field repair like that does not mean a yard would prefer to actually build it that way.

I'd say the Mosquito's a better example.

Jonathan_S wrote:Or the minesweepers built with wooden hulls for their inherent non-magnetic (and easy to repair) properties. Or the WWII PT boats which where also wooden hulled for cost, weight, and repairability reasons.

Ah, but I brought up the Minneapolis 'cos he said an armoured warship!

True, it's a field repair, but it is an example of using wood due to lack of availability of other materials. After Tassafaronga the repair unit at Tulagi had to deal with three cruisers with big holes in them - four if the Portland was still there from earlier in the month. It must've been a headache to find enough steel to repair 3 (or 4) ships all at once. Using timber would have been logical for a less demanding structural role, thus saving steel.

Mike.

Michael Riddell wrote:

TheMonster wrote:That someone thought to jury-rig a field repair like that does not mean a yard would prefer to actually build it that way.

I'd say the Mosquito's a better example.

Jonathan_S wrote:Or the minesweepers built with wooden hulls for their inherent non-magnetic (and easy to repair) properties. Or the WWII PT boats which where also wooden hulled for cost, weight, and repairability reasons.

Ah, but I brought up the Minneapolis 'cos he said an armoured warship!

True, it's a field repair, but it is an example of using wood due to lack of availability of other materials. After Tassafaronga the repair unit at Tulagi had to deal with three cruisers with big holes in them - four if the Portland was still there from earlier in the month. It must've been a headache to find enough steel to repair 3 (or 4) ships all at once. Using timber would have been logical for a less demanding structural role, thus saving steel.

Mike.

The field repair of the USS Minneapolis was to take pressure off the remaining forward bulkhead and to lesson or prevent flooding. It was also used so that the ship could steam under her own power and get back to the US faster. IIRC if she was towed it would have been at a max's speed of about 5 knots vs about 20 knots with the false bow.

WLBjork wrote:...but a pre-dreadnought would get battered by a WW2 era CA (if not CL).

no - Russian PDs fought German DREASNOUGHTS at Moon sound. While TTs may be a problem (most were designed before TT protection) but they still fought well. The German PDs even fought the Grand fleet at Jutland (only 1 was lost {to a TT}) a CA (TTs not withstanding) would be in trouble from those 12" guns.