AMCs

2 posts ยท Aug 27 1999 to Aug 27 1999

From: CGS <michael@c...>

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 09:56:06 +0100

Subject: AMCs

The big subsidised liners made very poor AMCs, they were huge and had
horrendous fuel consumption rates. Most of the ones converted into AMCs were
quickly converted back.

The oil drum flotation device scares me, pack the holds with empty oil
drums and keep her afloat even if torpedoed - apparently it worked quite
well, I think the Americans tried something similar in Viet Nam or Korea
to clear mines - an old merchant packed with polystrene (styrofoam?),
conned from a sprung platform and powered by 'outboard engines'.

The topic verges into Q-Ships, it looks like a merchant but when it
lights up a good radar system you know the missiles cannot be far behind
- we need FT 3 and its sensor rules badly.

From: Ryan Gill <rmgill@m...>

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 16:42:03 -0400 (EDT)

Subject: Re: AMCs

> On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, CGS wrote:

> The topic verges into Q-Ships, it looks like a merchant but when it

Just use the MT sensor rules. They work well and the weapons spaces
didn't change that much. Keeping the same cost/size fitment isn't such a

bad idea...