For Modders; Cargo Specs

[JWE]

Was working on a project and thought the data might be nice for you modders out there. Data is as of Jan. 1, 1941 and gives a good breakdown as to how many ships, of what size, you might expect to see at the outbreak of the war in the Pac region. Please be judicious and plan for ~40% at 2500-3800 grt, 40% at 4000-5000 grt, 20% 5600-8000 grt. Obviously, the actual cargo capacity is way below the grt (think 60-70% or so), but that's how the folks back then tended to specify commercial ships.

5 yrs 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 > 25
U.S. 6% 6% 4% 5% 38% 11% 70% are 12 kts or less; 13% are 14 kts or more 1590 vessels >1000 grt 8,570,000 total
UK 21 11 24 21 12 11 44% are 12 kts or less; 24% are 14 kts or more 3050 vessels >1000 grt 16,650,000 total
Norway 24 21 18 16 10 11 38% are 12 kts or less; 33% are 14 kts or more 1080 vessels >1000 grt 4,550,000 total
Japan 27 11 7 16 23 16 47% are 12 kts or less; 41% are 14 kts or more 1220 vessels >1000 grt 5,260,000 total
Holland 23 8 20 25 9 15 ~ 50% 12 kts or less; ~ 30% are 14 kts or more 550 vessels >1000 grt 2,725,000 total

Of the US total of about 8,570,000 registered shipping tons (vessels >1000 grt), as of Jan. 1941, the employment breakdown is as follows:

Laid Up 1,200,000 14% 850,000 tons fitting for Govt. charter for North Atlantic service
Active in Trade 7,370,000 86%
Of Active:
Foreign Trade 2,950,000 34% of total; ~ 541 vessels 2500 grt or greater
Coastwise Trade 4,420,000 52% of total

Of Foreign Trade:
Local 750,000 9% of total; Canada, Mexico, Central America, West Indies, and North Coast of So. America to and including the Guianas
Europe 900,000 11% of total; Mainly to UK, minimal to Spain, Portugal and Sweden
South Atlantic 620,000 13% of total; Including So. America below the Guianas and Africa from Gibraltar to Kamerun
Far East 650,000 8% of total; Including Orient, India, Australasia and Africa from Angola to Mozambique

~125 vessels 2500, tons or greater, engaged in Far East service, as of Jan. 1, 1940, of which ~100 can be designated to the Orient, India, Australasia routes.

Of the UK total of about 16,650,000 registered shipping tons (vessels >1000 grt), as of Jan. 1941, the employment breakdown is as follows:

Laid Up 3,100,000 19% North Sea and Baltic route ships; 1,200,000 tons allocated for conversion to Naval Auxiliaries
Active in Trade 13,550,000 81%
Of Active:
Foreign Trade 6,288,000 38% of total; ~ 1155 vessels 2500 grt or greater

Of Foreign Trade:
Far East 1,950,000 12% of total; Including Orient, India, Australasia and Africa from Angola to Mozambique
Approximately half of this tonnage is Intranational and local routing; Capetown thru Singapore, spanning Karachi, Ceylon, Dacca

~ 150 vessels 2500, tons or greater, engaged in Far East service, as of Jan. 1, 1941, of which ~40 can be designated to Australasia routes, ~ 25 to Southern and Eastern Africa, ~ 20 to Burma/Singapore, and the remaining ~ 65 to Ceylon/India.

[JWE]

Gaaa Dog It!! Don't you just love it when your posts don't format.

The string of 6 numbers following the US, UK, Norway, Japan, Holland headers are the ages of the respective fleets as of Jan.1, 1941. The 6 numbers go in sequence with:

1) 5 yrs or less, 2) 6-10 yrs old, 3) 11-15 yrs, 4) 16-20 yrs, 5) 21-25 yrs, 6) >25 yrs old.

I wish I could develop a set of ratios for 1000-1800t, 2000-2800t, 3000-4000, 4500-5500, 6000-7500t, and 8000t and >. I'm working on it, but the tonnage distributions between and among the various national fleets are substantial. Maybe I'll just have to crank some math and take an average value. Anyway, happy modding.

[Cpt Sherwood]

you need to use the code button on your posts:

Code: Select all

 that way              you         can           format          things
 any way               you         want          to have         them
 

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

you need to use the code button on your posts:

Code: Select all

 that way              you         can           format          things
 any way               you         want          to have         them
 

I write and post in Word, don't know from code buttons. So sorry.

[Cpt Sherwood]

Let me get this straight. You complain about losing the formating in your post. I give you information that using the code construct in you post will let you maintain your formating and you give me back this?

I write and post in Word, don't know from code buttons. So sorry.

I take it you can't be bothered by people answering your questions. I will try to remember that in the future, don't try to help anyone, they seem to resent it. [&:]

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

Let me get this straight. You complain about losing the formating in your post. I give you information that using the code construct in you post will let you maintain your formating and you give me back this?

I write and post in Word, don't know from code buttons. So sorry.

I take it you can't be bothered by people answering your questions. I will try to remember that in the future, don't try to help anyone, they seem to resent it. [&:]

No, I just don't know what the code buttons are.

[el cid again]

What are code buttons? Lack of formatting in the Forum is a problem. If you have a solution, please explain it so a user can use it - assuming they don't already know what you are talking about.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

Let me get this straight. You complain about losing the formating in your post. I give you information that using the code construct in you post will let you maintain your formating and you give me back this?

I write and post in Word, don't know from code buttons. So sorry.

I take it you can't be bothered by people answering your questions. I will try to remember that in the future, don't try to help anyone, they seem to resent it. [&:]

Sounds like someone could care less about the great info in JWE's post just because the tabs weren't perfect...and JWE mentioned it. He wasn't seeking help with formatting merely trying to pass on some useful info.[8|]

[Cpt Sherwood]

I thought I answered his complaint in his second posting. For all - when you are posting there is a button labeled "code". If you use it, everything between the "code" and "/code" tags will not have its formating changed( the tags will be surrounded by []}. To see, use my formated post as a quote and see how it is done. I do think the information is useful, it is just very hard to read. JWE, if you put your entire Word document between the tags, it should stay formated.

[Andrew Brown]

I have copied the table text and formatted it - does this help?:

Code: Select all

         5 yrs    6-10   11-15   16-20   21-25   > 25
 U.S.       6%      6%      4%      5%     38%    11%
 UK        21      11      24      21      12     11
 Norway    24      21      18      16      10     11
 Japan     27      11       7      16      23     16
 Holland   23       8      20      25       9     15
 
 US:
 70% are 12 kts or less; 13% are 14 kts or more; 1590 vessels >1000 grt 8,570,000 total
 
 UK:
 44% are 12 kts or less; 24% are 14 kts or more; 3050 vessels >1000 grt 16,650,000 total.
 
 Norway:
 38% are 12 kts or less; 33% are 14 kts or more; 1080 vessels >1000 grt 4,550,000 total.
 
 Japan:
 47% are 12 kts or less; 41% are 14 kts or more; 1220 vessels >1000 grt 5,260,000 total.
 
 Holland:
 ~50% 12 kts or less; ~30% are 14 kts or more; 550 vessels >1000 grt 2,725,000 total.
 
 

Andrew

PS: The "code button" is the button in the popup message window, in the long row of buttons above the text box, that is labelled "code". If you press the button while writing a post, it places two tags in the post as follows:

Code: Select all

[/b]

It is not obvious, but if you place text between these two tags, it is rendered in a fixed width font, which should preserve the spacing between the columns of any inserted text that has been formatted and aligned using a fixed width font.

The button is called "code" because rendering using a fixed width font is commonly used for writing computer code, as alignment and indentation is usually important for proper display of code. Using a fixed width font is also useful for formatting text tables, such as the above.

Edit: Re-edited table to get rid of very long lines...

[Cpt Sherwood]

ABs explanation is much clearer, thank you.

[m10bob]

JWE...as ever, you have provided us with some valuable info.

[JWE]

Thank you Andrew and Cpt Sherwood. I shall remember.

I so very rarely post formatted data that there are probably a lot of forum formatting tricks that I don't know from. I always wondered how people got their combat reports to come out so well.

Table looks great Andrew; thanks! I hope I explained the rest of the data sufficiently for understanding.

JWE

[akdreemer]

Dang AB, again you come through with very useful information. I knew that there had to be a way to get format to stick. Thanks....