My First: Fast APA circa. 1939

[SrGopher]

Here is my first drawing. Still a WIP, trying to figure out the radars, antennae, and other details to include, and I'm debating whether I should boot the Bofors or Oerlikons. The 3"/50s and 6"/47s are of my own design, to come when I officially begin to work out the AU. Also, I'm debating to remove the aft cargo hold and either add another twin 6"/47 mount or more troop areas.

EDIT: Hold on, I forgot to fix something something...

EDIT: Got it

[Thiel]

I have to admit I'm not digging the concept or the doom and gloom paintjob.
From what I've read all APAs were either STUFTed or merchants converted on the stocks. As a result I'm not convinced they could take a six inch gun. I'm not really sure why you'd want them either.
While not exactly mutually exclusive, NGFS and troop landing operations does require widely different things of ships.
You have to be stationary to unload troops, and you usually do it quite a way out to sea. NGFS, especially with 30ies technology requires you to be a whole lot closer. It wasn't unknown for destroyers to touch bottom every now and then.
At the same time, putting heavy guns on a troop ship will eat up a whole lot of space that could otherwise have been used for troops and their supplies.
In my opinion ships like this should have a decent anti air armament and enough guns to deal with the occasional MTBs or surfaced submarine that might manage to slip through the screen. Any more than that and you start loosing main capability fast.

[Portsmouth Bill]

It is certainly interesting, so full marks for originality But yes, I reckon Thiel is correct in that ships tend to be specific in roles, so the fire support would already be on tap with the accompanying escorts; therefore troop landing ships were specialised in maximising capacity and ability to off load, either by transfer or on to a beachead.

[SrGopher]

Opinons heard. Here is the back story about why the ship is like this. The vessel takes the ideology from WWI era troop transports, being armed with guns to counter cruiser-sized vessels. The 6"/47s and 3"/50s are both American designed, although with new mountings designed in the country the vessel is from, the United States of the Pacific. Both are now in twin, DP mounts, although neither are as advanced as those found on the Worcester class. But, I guess I could get rid of the wing turrets, replace them with lighter AA guns. The 36-knot speed of the vessel comes from the nature of its design, with the hull form coming from a recent large cruiser design mounting 12" guns, although internally, the designs are very unalike. The propulsion layout is all that remains the same. The vessel also retains a torpedo belt, but very little other armor. The large bridge is for when the ship performs duty as a flagship. The fast speed is to counter any chance of submarine attack, or destroyer attack. Other than that, it is supposed to perform no different from the merchant-type designs in their intended role as a troop transport.

As for the paint job, I'll make it brighter.

[Frescone]

It sounds interesting!

[SrGopher]

New paint job, waist turrets gone. I still need help trying to come up with radar arrays for a strictly neutral nation, although Japan does seem to be getting more and more hostile, so Their systems would be off-limits.

[Thiel]

I still need help trying to come up with radar arrays for a strictly neutral nation, although Japan does seem to be getting more and more hostile, so Their systems would be off-limits.

None. Radar technology was only in its infancy. If memory serves the RN were the first to get a production radar to sea in 1938.

[Novice]

Nice effort, and apart from the above mentioned points I'll add my two bit.
First the gun mountings are too small to be 6"/47, and in fact they look remrkably similat to the twin 5"/38 gun mounting.
Second You have way too many AA guns for a ship of 1939. At that point of time in history (real life) the threat of aircraft was not percieved as it was later in the war.
Third,You have put some guns (seems like 40mm Bofors) in front of the bridge, and that will impair ship's control.
Because of remark two you should also remove the mounting in the eyes of the ship (the forewardmost guns, above the anchors), as this was a late war modification and was done by the US to counter Kamikaze aircraft crossing the bows.
Your description that this ship is capable of 36kts is way too optimistic. For that you'll need a lot of space in the hull for machinery and boilers. Boilers also tend to take a lot of upperdeck space, and truncking the uptakes into one funnel consumes even mors space. You will also need a lot of intakes to feed the engines with air and to ventilate the machinery spaces, especially if working in tropical settings.
All that aside your effort is still a good one, and I hope will see more in the coming days.

[Rodondo]

Another point I think was missed, the writing in the right hand top corner is anti-aliased, when you zoom in on it, it should not be a pixel haze

[SrGopher]

I've tried to do the letters, although I have a feeling that I some of them wrong.

The main mast has been altered to 1939-like standards. My first shot at rigging, so any help with that would be appreciated. AA gun number has been cut down and vents added (I don't know if I did those right either). And finally, two medium sized funnels have been put in place. Designed speed reduced to 33 knots. The new 6"/47 DP mounts are designed with American and British assistance.