Ammo stockpiles

[WallShadow]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

And ALL of her guns are functional. I volunteered to help to National Guard test her guns after the rebuild. The "hull section" in the museum is, IN FACT, the handiwork of Niagra's guns. She is also FULL Coast Guard certified for open water. She would be a powerful Naval unit but her habitability simply SUCKS. as primitive as camping. I still wouldn't mess with ANY of the 20 black powder cannon in the Museum's possession.

Perhaps, but she would make a great pattern, and her plan might be scaled up to a sloop,perhaps armed with Davis guns or recoilless rifles, if black powder gun tubes are not available.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by WallShadow

Perhaps, but she would make a great pattern, and her plan might be scaled up to a sloop,perhaps armed with Davis guns or recoilless rifles, if black powder gun tubes are not available.

No need for this. Just go to BoatTrader.com and do a search for sailboats and sailing Catamarans in the 40 foot to 150-foot range. There are THOUSANDS of them in Aisa, The Mediterranean, The Carribean, Europe, and both North and South America.

These boats have modern engines, electronics, water desalinization (on larger boats), and are actually very comfortable to live aboard. Even the smaller 26ft to 40ft models can withstand around 250 kg of weapons mountings and much larger boats could mount weights of up to 2 tons. They are every bit as durable as wooden boats and most sailboats under 30ft are trailerable with a typical pickup.

Do a google search for them on the manufacturer's websites and you can even find deck plans to use in your games.

[aspqrz]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

No need for this. Just go to BoatTrader.com and do a search for sailboats and sailing Catamarans in the 40 foot to 150-foot range. There are THOUSANDS of them in Aisa, The Mediterranean, The Carribean, Europe, and both North and South America.

These boats have modern engines, electronics, water desalinization (on larger boats), and are actually very comfortable to live aboard. Even the smaller 26ft to 40ft models can withstand around 250 kg of weapons mountings and much larger boats could mount weights of up to 2 tons. They are every bit as durable as wooden boats and most sailboats under 30ft are trailerable with a typical pickup.

Do a google search for them on the manufacturer's websites and you can even find deck plans to use in your games.

They can take the weight, sure, but can they take the stress of the weapons actually being fired ... now, this is from something in Alistair Maclean's 'The Golden Rendevous' so it may not be entirely correct, but I would expect it's not complete BS ... in that there are comments to the effect that the pirates are mounting something almost equivalent to a 3.7" gun in the Merchie ... and the First Officer thinks/comments that they would be lucky to get off more than a couple of shots before the deck plates buckled, rendering the mount (and the weapon) useless.

Now, this is from memory, and its more than 25 years since I read it last, and don't have a copy at hand any more, but I also STR that there was a comment to the effect that some Merchant Shipping Companies were paid (or subsidised) by HMG to put in reinforced hull sections on their ships so they could take heavier guns in an emergency ... I suspect that's no longer the case, and probably wouldn't have been by TW2K.

However, I would strongly suspect the bit about ruining the deck plating would still be true ... and how many people would know that in advance?

Any Navy/Merchant Navy/Coast Guard types have any inputs here?

Phil

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by aspqrz

They can take the weight, sure, but can they take the stress of the weapons actually being fired ... now, this is from something in Alistair Maclean's 'The Golden Rendevous' so it may not be entirely correct, but I would expect it's not complete BS ... in that there are comments to the effect that the pirates are mounting something almost equivalent to a 3.7" gun in the Merchie ... and the First Officer thinks/comments that they would be lucky to get off more than a couple of shots before the deck plates buckled, rendering the mount (and the weapon) useless.

Now, this is from memory, and its more than 25 years since I read it last, and don't have a copy at hand any more, but I also STR that there was a comment to the effect that some Merchant Shipping Companies were paid (or subsidised) by HMG to put in reinforced hull sections on their ships so they could take heavier guns in an emergency ... I suspect that's no longer the case, and probably wouldn't have been by TW2K.

However, I would strongly suspect the bit about ruining the deck plating would still be true ... and how many people would know that in advance?

Any Navy/Merchant Navy/Coast Guard types have any inputs here?

Phil

No one is going to be putting anything larger than a manually powered 20mm on any sailboat and the deck will easily withstand the recoil of a weapon like this (many Navy patrol boats are RIBS...fiberglass inner hulls with rubberized outer "inflation rings" and they mount similar weaponry). Most pirates using the readily available "private sector" sailing fleet are going to be limited to boats in the 35ft to 60ft range as these are the most common. These vessels will have basically unlimited endurance but will only accommodate 6 people comfortably. Small arms will be the predominate weapon type simply based on space and availability. Large pirate groups will probably "flotilla" (form fleets) in multiple boats and maneuver as "squadrons" in battle. The basic catamaran (my first choice) would also have the advantage of a shoal draft, allowing cats to "run into or through" the shallows while deeper draft monohulls would have to go around most shoals. Cats also have more storage space on board the vessel.

Many of the larger "commercial" fishing vessels will suffer the exact same fate as "commercial shipping," ie being grounded for lack of fuel. These vessels could mount smaller AT or larger AA guns but there wouldn't enough fuel to use them. A typical fishing vessel will use about 1 liter per kilometer traveled. That's a conservative estimate too. Any larger vessel in use will probably be used as a "mothership" and send out smaller RIBS or sailboats as an "attack force," in order to both preserve the larger vessel and because most larger vessels lack the speed to run down even a small sailboat.

Antique ships like the Brig Niagra being mentioned above DO NOT MOUNT their armament. The cannon can roll back upon firing and use "stop lines" made of heavy bull rope to arrest their movement. Those ships would be a powerful asset to a government due to their firepower (which is easily resupplied by any chemist) and independence from fossil fuels. These ships are rare, however.

[aspqrz]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

No one is going to be putting anything larger than a manually powered 20mm on any sailboat and the deck will easily withstand the recoil of a weapon like this (many Navy patrol boats are RIBS...fiberglass inner hulls with rubberized outer "inflation rings" and they mount similar weaponry).

I was referring to the OP who opined that the larger craft (he mentioned ones up to 150') could mount weaponry up to a couple of tons.

Sure, if it's all in the form of field or pintle mount 20mms ... heck, probably even 25mms ... but no way will they mount a single weapon of that weight (or even two of half that weight) without the problem noted ... unless someone knows something neither of us seem to?

(Aside: Maybe they could mount Harpoon or similar Missile Boxes ... not much recoil on them, presumable ... as long as there's some way of minimising any effect from the rocket exhaust. But at the point where you're desperate enough to be using these sorts of civvie craft, what's the chance of any Harpoons being still around ... given that, even during the Cold War, my understanding is that there were never enough missiles for each available launcher/platform to carry one apiece at the same time, never mind reloads).

Phil

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by aspqrz

I was referring to the OP who opined that the larger craft (he mentioned ones up to 150') could mount weaponry up to a couple of tons.

Sure, if it's all in the form of field or pintle mount 20mms ... heck, probably even 25mms ... but no way will they mount a single weapon of that weight (or even two of half that weight) without the problem noted ... unless someone knows something neither of us seem to?

(Aside: Maybe they could mount Harpoon or similar Missile Boxes ... not much recoil on them, presumable ... as long as there's some way of minimising any effect from the rocket exhaust. But at the point where you're desperate enough to be using these sorts of civvie craft, what's the chance of any Harpoons being still around ... given that, even during the Cold War, my understanding is that there were never enough missiles for each available launcher/platform to carry one apiece at the same time, never mind reloads).

Phil

Since I am BOTH the "original poster" AND the person who replied the second time, I'll answer again, especially since I'm the owner of a sailboat and know EXACTLY what I was talking about in my earlier post.

We were discussing arming a SAILING ship to either protect one's self from pirates or for war using available equipment. The weight requirements were for mounting "old school" armaments that could be fabricated or commandeered for a sailboat, NOT a freighter or tramp steamer (which seems to be what you were referring to).
A centerline gun mount WILL NOT WORK on a modern sailboat. This is because the Bermuda Rig (with its angled head sail and angled main sails which will often overlap) REQUIRES a certain size of head sail (depending on wind conditions) in order to "balance the helm" (maintain control and enhance handling) at speed. ANY centerline gun mount would interfere with the movement of the head sail and induce "weather helm" during maneuvering.

The weight limits I posted were for "old school" black powder cannons and newer reproductions that could be lifted from museums or collectors and mounted on the decks EXACTLY like they were in the age of sail...on free rolling carriages that were restrained by rope "recoil arrest" & "run out" assemblies. Because these guns can "roll back" upon recoil, they WOULD NOT transfer that recoil into the deck plates (as demonstrated by the very small ships mounting such guns during the Age of Sail). Let's take the Brigg Niagara (which WallShadow and I were discussing at the time) as a "for instance..."
She is 110 feet long and mounts 18 32 pounder Carronades (at 900kg each) and 2 12 pounders (at 1500kg each) with NO DIFFICULTY in handling recoil. The ship is no more heavily built than say, PlayStation II (a 125ft modern Catamaran) in its deck area. PlayStation II would have NO DIFFICULTY mounting Niagara's weapons fit on her decks.

The only thing I WOULD do is mount the recoil ropes to the cleats or stay mounts (NOT THE RAILINGS) to prevent a cannon from crossing the deck and heading for "Davey Jone's Locker" through the opposite side railing during firing. Another thing you might want to do to a modern sailboat is to glue some plywood to the deck to prevent gouging up the fiberglass too much.
Otherwise, there is no reason a modern sailboat couldn't mount old school cannon on deck.

Other "real world" examples of "recreational vessels" pressed into service exist in our world right now. Just look at Iran's speedboats in The Gulf. They are "off the rack" Sea Rays complete with THE SAME commercial Raytheon radar/navigation suite that Sea Ray offers to boaters all around the world upgunned with remote fired RPGs (in racks of 8), 2 torpedo tubes, or (more recently) quad wire guided AT missile launchers on the foredeck and HMGs or Autocannon in a rear AA mount. They even have Sea Ray's commercial bow mounted spotlight. These boats are functionally IDENTICAL, except for the weapons of course, to the same boats rich people use in the Med, Bahamas, or Florida. These boats were so effective at causing harm to shipping during the Iran-Iraq war that the US Navy began escorting merchant ships through the Straits of Hormuz. They work.

[.45cultist]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

Since I am BOTH the "original poster" AND the person who replied the second time, I'll answer again, especially since I'm the owner of a sailboat and know EXACTLY what I was talking about in my earlier post.

We were discussing arming a SAILING ship to either protect one's self from pirates or for war using available equipment. The weight requirements were for mounting "old school" armaments that could be fabricated or commandeered for a sailboat, NOT a freighter or tramp steamer (which seems to be what you were referring to).
A centerline gun mount WILL NOT WORK on a modern sailboat. This is because the Bermuda Rig (with its angled head sail and angled main sails which will often overlap) REQUIRES a certain size of head sail (depending on wind conditions) in order to "balance the helm" (maintain control and enhance handling) at speed. ANY centerline gun mount would interfere with the movement of the head sail and induce "weather helm" during maneuvering.

The weight limits I posted were for "old school" black powder cannons and newer reproductions that could be lifted from museums or collectors and mounted on the decks EXACTLY like they were in the age of sail...on free rolling carriages that were restrained by rope "recoil arrest" & "run out" assemblies. Because these guns can "roll back" upon recoil, they WOULD NOT transfer that recoil into the deck plates (as demonstrated by the very small ships mounting such guns during the Age of Sail). Let's take the Brigg Niagara (which WallShadow and I were discussing at the time) as a "for instance..."
She is 110 feet long and mounts 18 32 pounder Carronades (at 900kg each) and 2 12 pounders (at 1500kg each) with NO DIFFICULTY in handling recoil. The ship is no more heavily built than say, PlayStation II (a 125ft modern Catamaran) in its deck area. PlayStation II would have NO DIFFICULTY mounting Niagara's weapons fit on her decks.

The only thing I WOULD do is mount the recoil ropes to the cleats or stay mounts (NOT THE RAILINGS) to prevent a cannon from crossing the deck and heading for "Davey Jone's Locker" through the opposite side railing during firing. Another thing you might want to do to a modern sailboat is to glue some plywood to the deck to prevent gouging up the fiberglass too much.
Otherwise, there is no reason a modern sailboat couldn't mount old school cannon on deck.

Other "real world" examples of "recreational vessels" pressed into service exist in our world right now. Just look at Iran's speedboats in The Gulf. They are "off the rack" Sea Rays complete with THE SAME commercial Raytheon radar/navigation suite that Sea Ray offers to boaters all around the world upgunned with remote fired RPGs (in racks of 8), 2 torpedo tubes, or (more recently) quad wire guided AT missile launchers on the foredeck and HMGs or Autocannon in a rear AA mount. They even have Sea Ray's commercial bow mounted spotlight. These boats are functionally IDENTICAL, except for the weapons of course, to the same boats rich people use in the Med, Bahamas, or Florida. These boats were so effective at causing harm to shipping during the Iran-Iraq war that the US Navy began escorting merchant ships through the Straits of Hormuz. They work.

Need to note this for "Gateway".

[unkated]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

The weight limits I posted were for "old school" black powder cannons and newer reproductions that could be lifted from museums or collectors and mounted on the decks EXACTLY like they were in the age of sail...on free rolling carriages that were restrained by rope "recoil arrest" & "run out" assemblies. Because these guns can "roll back" upon recoil, they WOULD NOT transfer that recoil into the deck plates (as demonstrated by the very small ships mounting such guns during the Age of Sail). Let's take the Brigg Niagara (which WallShadow and I were discussing at the time) as a "for instance..."

She is 110 feet long and mounts 18 32 pounder Carronades (at 900kg each) and 2 12 pounders (at 1500kg each) with NO DIFFICULTY in handling recoil.

The ship is no more heavily built than say, PlayStation II (a 125ft modern Catamaran) in its deck area. PlayStation II would have NO DIFFICULTY mounting Niagara's weapons fit on her decks.

Incorrect. Age of Sail warships (actually, until the mid 1840s any ship, as most ships heading for international waters were built to be equipped with some armament) were designed to be equipped decks were reinforced with scantlings and knees preciesly to support the down thrust from cannon recoil - several hundred pounds moving rapidly and absolutley some of it is pushing down.

Modern sailing vessels, especially pleasure craft are absolutely NOT made to support that kind of peak pressure on a deck. Neither are their sides built with the kind (and frequency) of ribs for breach lines to anchor from; something like a 4-lbr cannon (much less a 6, 12 or 24-lbr) would tear the cleats or eyes out of the vessel when fired.


Uncle Ted

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by aspqrz

They can take the weight, sure, but can they take the stress of the weapons actually being fired ... now, this is from something in Alistair Maclean's 'The Golden Rendevous' so it may not be entirely correct, but I would expect it's not complete BS ... in that there are comments to the effect that the pirates are mounting something almost equivalent to a 3.7" gun in the Merchie ... and the First Officer thinks/comments that they would be lucky to get off more than a couple of shots before the deck plates buckled, rendering the mount (and the weapon) useless.

Now, this is from memory, and its more than 25 years since I read it last, and don't have a copy at hand any more, but I also STR that there was a comment to the effect that some Merchant Shipping Companies were paid (or subsidised) by HMG to put in reinforced hull sections on their ships so they could take heavier guns in an emergency ... I suspect that's no longer the case, and probably wouldn't have been by TW2K.

However, I would strongly suspect the bit about ruining the deck plating would still be true ... and how many people would know that in advance?

Any Navy/Merchant Navy/Coast Guard types have any inputs here?

Phil

No idea about ships/boats, but in 03 we welded mounts for our heavy weapons onto our dump trucks, also had home made steel boxes that we put in the back of the HUMMVE's with posts to mount the heavy weapons. On the dump trucks it worked fine for any of the heavy weapons we had (M2HB, Mk. 19, and/or M240B) on the HUMMVE's the .50 was a bit scary they never broke or even bent but the did shake all over the place. I have no idea what the hardness of the steel was, but I am guessing it was mild. It was just stuff we found around and used.

[aspqrz]

Originally Posted by CDAT

No idea about ships/boats, but in 03 we welded mounts for our heavy weapons onto our dump trucks, also had home made steel boxes that we put in the back of the HUMMVE's with posts to mount the heavy weapons. On the dump trucks it worked fine for any of the heavy weapons we had (M2HB, Mk. 19, and/or M240B) on the HUMMVE's the .50 was a bit scary they never broke or even bent but the did shake all over the place. I have no idea what the hardness of the steel was, but I am guessing it was mild. It was just stuff we found around and used.

I do know, however, that Armoured Cars (the sort used to collect/carry Cash from/to Banks etc.), even with beefed up suspension, have a drastically reduced service life compared to the base model truck or van they are based on - nothing about their chassis (heck, do they even have a chassis these days?), engine, diff/gear box etc. is designed to carry that extra weight and it evidently shows.

For Dump Trucks, sure, no probs ... they're build to haul extra weight anyway. For Humvees, well, it would depend on whether any additional armour or weapons overload the frame etc.

For Technicals and other converted, but basically civilian, vehicles - same problems as the commercial 'Armoured Cars', I would guess.

Phil

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by aspqrz

I do know, however, that Armoured Cars (the sort used to collect/carry Cash from/to Banks etc.), even with beefed up suspension, have a drastically reduced service life compared to the base model truck or van they are based on - nothing about their chassis (heck, do they even have a chassis these days?), engine, diff/gear box etc. is designed to carry that extra weight and it evidently shows.

For Dump Trucks, sure, no probs ... they're build to haul extra weight anyway. For Humvees, well, it would depend on whether any additional armour or weapons overload the frame etc.

For Technicals and other converted, but basically civilian, vehicles - same problems as the commercial 'Armoured Cars', I would guess.

Phil

In America, this depends on the type of Armored Car. There are three general types of Armored Car in production... The Light, GP (for general purpose) and Heavy. All the major players in the US Commercial Armored Car market (Lenco in Canada, Texas Armoring, MCT, and Supreme when I worked them) offer all three levels.

The Light Armored Car: These are built on a Dodge, Chevy or Ford 1-Ton van or truck chassis and are in fact too light (and too small) to endure a long service. These are often armored with Kevlar panels to reduce weight and are either NIJ Level 2A, 2 (AV 1/2 in my game) or Level 3A (AV 1). These are designed to carry only 1 Ton of cargo and are OFTEN OVERLOADED (because coin boxes & bags weigh a lot). They average a life of about 7 years and 300,000 miles. The current "darling" of the "Light Weights" is the Sprinter Van in both single and double axle varieties. I HATE Sprinters! The low deck height is nice but they have a NARROW wheelbase (and width) coupled with a HIGH center of gravity (due to the stand-up interior). They EAT tires and brakes (and its no wonder with 13" tires and 10" brakes on a 1-Ton cargo van) and the 4 cylinder diesel sounds like it will blow up at any minute at highway speeds. Electrical issues also plague them (just like Dodge).

The General Purpose Truck: This truck is often referred to as The A-Body because that's what Brinks calls them (and therefore so does everyone else). The Dunbar Truck that rescued the wounded during the LA "44 Minute Shootout" was a second generation A-Body (5-speed auto, open layout). For those who would question the protection provided by Armored Cars... that truck "shrugged off" EVERY 7.62mm X 39 mm round fired at it (including the windows AND the run-flat tires). The truck in The Book of Eli was a gen 1 A-Body (5 or 6-speed manual).
The A-Body is Aluminum armored to NIJ Level 3 Rifle (AV 2 in my game) two axle truck (front and rear) built on THE EXACT SAME FRAME AS A US ARMY FIVE TON TRUCK (school buses use this frame as well). The truck uses hydraulic brakes with dual coil suspension and can carry 5000lbs (2.5 Tons) on a 26,000lb gross curb weight. Early models were 5-speed manuals but 5-speed automatics have prevailed since the 1990's. This truck comprises 95% of the US armored car fleet and is the largest truck in service that you DO NOT need a CDL to drive (you DO need a medical card though). The service life of these trucks (90%+ are diesel) is 500,000 miles or 6 years to "in frame overhaul" (a top engine rebuild) and 1,000,000 miles to complete rebuild.

The B-Body: These were just a CDL-B upgrade of the A-Body adding Air Ride Suspension and Brakes, increasing cargo load to 5 tons (10,000lbs) and, on occasion, stretching the body for increased volume of cargo. A fully loaded B-Body averages 52,000lbs Curb Weight. Several variants of this model are often "uparmored" to NIJ Level 4 (AV 4 in my game) and used as "Fed Trucks." Fed trucks haul money from the Fed to the Armored Car Company's Depot...this can amount to 10's of millions of dollars and requires added security to satisfy Lloyd's of London's (the only insurance company that insures armored cars) insurance requirements for the cargo's value. This was what we drove for a fed truck while I worked at Fidelity Armored.

Heavy Trucks: There is no pattern to these trucks except that they usually have 2 or 3 REAR AXLES and can go as heavy as 80,000lbs Curb weight. These trucks are built on AM General, Oshkosh, or MAC frames and can go for 1,000,000 miles just like an ordinary Semi Truck. This is what I drove at Great Lakes Armored in the 90's (complete with 10-speed manual).

As you can see, American armored cars are very "overbuilt." The issue is that the fleet nationwide was almost 7 years old when I retired in 2012.

[aspqrz]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

In America, this depends on the type of Armored Car. There are three general types of Armored Car in production... The Light, GP (for general purpose) and Heavy. All the major players in the US Commercial Armored Car market (Lenco in Canada, Texas Armoring, MCT, and Supreme when I worked them) offer all three levels.

Ah. One should never assume

I was referring to Aussie models, which are not even close to the same standards, or weren't when I came across the original information ... and (dumb, I know), assumed it was the same for the US.

Phil

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by aspqrz

They can take the weight, sure, but can they take the stress of the weapons actually being fired ... now, this is from something in Alistair Maclean's 'The Golden Rendevous' so it may not be entirely correct, but I would expect it's not complete BS ... in that there are comments to the effect that the pirates are mounting something almost equivalent to a 3.7" gun in the Merchie ... and the First Officer thinks/comments that they would be lucky to get off more than a couple of shots before the deck plates buckled, rendering the mount (and the weapon) useless.

Now, this is from memory, and its more than 25 years since I read it last, and don't have a copy at hand any more, but I also STR that there was a comment to the effect that some Merchant Shipping Companies were paid (or subsidised) by HMG to put in reinforced hull sections on their ships so they could take heavier guns in an emergency ... I suspect that's no longer the case, and probably wouldn't have been by TW2K.

However, I would strongly suspect the bit about ruining the deck plating would still be true ... and how many people would know that in advance?

Any Navy/Merchant Navy/Coast Guard types have any inputs here?

Phil

British built merchant hulls up to the late 50s were required to have reinforced platforms, fore and aft to take up to 4-inch (102mm), this included both thicker deck plates as well as the necessary reinforcing braces to absorb the recoil. The deck plates were pre-drilled to accept various gun carriages, allowing for a variety of different marks to be installed. I have heard that this practice was continued into the 70s, built I have not been able to confirm this.