Prev: Re: [sg] More on the Gurkhas Next: Re: [sg] More on the Gurkhas

Re: Why superships cost more per mass

From: "Bif Smith" <bif@b...>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 08:46:24 +0100
Subject: Re: Why superships cost more per mass


----- Original Message -----
From: Allan Goodall <awg@sympatico.ca>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 4:59 AM
Subject: Re: Why superships cost more per mass

> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:06:50 -0400, Richard and Emily Bell
> <rlbell@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > Your bad, this implies that surface area is linearly proportional to
volume,
> > which is FALSE.
>
> D'oh! You're right!
> > Proper comparisons (if you could find them) would be between heavy
cruisers
> > and destroyers in WWII, as they were built in similar conditions and
have
> > systems of equal technologies (guns, radar, steam).
>
> I think that's a good idea! Actually, I'm smacking my head. I have
Conways
> right here from 1860 to 1905. I would argue, though, that going too
far
back
> you'd miss the impact of construction technology, which will
accelerate in
the
> future. But it could provide an interesting comparison if the prices
and
times
> could be found.
>
>
> Allan Goodall 		 awg@sympatico.ca
> Goodall's Grotto:  http://www.vex.net/~agoodall
>
> "Now, see, if you combine different colours of light,
>  you get white! Try that with Play-Doh and you get
>  brown! How come?" - Alan Moore & Kevin Nolan,
>    "Jack B. Quick, Boy Inventor"
>
How about this for a comparison of the costs Vs mass of ships, taken
from
"Janes fighting ships of WW2".

"San Diego" class CL
Displacement=7500 tons full load
Lead ship laid down 27/3/40
Compleated 10/1/42
9 ships in class
Cost averages $23261500

"Lexington/Saratoga" CVL
Displacement=33000 tons standard
"Saratoga" laid down 25/9/20 (originaly to be a BC)
Compleated --/11/28
Cost with aircraft "was over $45000000 each"

"Iowa" BB
Displacement=52000 tons full load
"Iowa" laid down 27/6/40
Compleated 22/2/43
Cost "inclusive cost officially stated to exceed $100000000 each"

This shows a big difference in costs as the size of the ship goes up,
but
not a coresponding increase in build times (it increases, but not as
much as
the size/cost do). I`ll let other people draw conculsions from this, but
I
will add that the book states "Iowa and New Jersey were both built in
2.5
years, the same time as occupied by the Alabama, a smaller ship (42000
tons
full load)".

These above figures don`t include CVE`s, which would distort them due to
them being built on merchant hulls as cheaply as possible (Commencement
class, 12000 tons, $11000000 each).

BIF

"Yorkshire born, yorkshire bred,
strong in arms, thick in head"

This should give you some numbers to get your heads round <G>. And apart
from the CVL`s, they were all built in a short time period, making costs
and
build times consitant in the simular conditions present.

Prev: Re: [sg] More on the Gurkhas Next: Re: [sg] More on the Gurkhas