alot of ships during WW2.We started out in not so good situation because of pearl harbor,they use to make posters that would show a factory producing tanks with the words "more, More,MORE!,MORE!!" above it.
What if they found that a hull was one inch less wider over it's overall lenght that helped speed up construction time to where the design was followed but the competition time might been spead up by a day or two.
Thank you! Very interesting. That would tend to support the idea of all long hull DEs sharing the same hull, but then where do the wider beam numbers come from? To paraphrase Yul Brynner, "Its a puzzlement!"
https://archive.org/details/dejohncbutlerbogp1944v2
that ship lists 306'oa & max beam of 36'6.75".
Good morning all,
I'm considering doing a long hull DE in CAD, and I've run across a little snag. Sources indicate that the long hull DEs all used the same hull, and online references seem to indicate this with one exception - the John C. Butler class. The length and in most cases the draft appear identical, but the beam is usually quoted as about 6 inches wider than the extremely similar preceeding Rudderow class. Is this correct? Most sources show the Rudderows as being about 36' 5-6" in beam, with the Butlers being about 37' in beam.
Many thanks!
Bob
Responses