|
Post by yemo on Jun 26, 2019 5:02:49 GMT -6
As expected, the great scrapping ;-). A small correction: 35 fleet destroyers are including the 12 under construction, without them you only have 23.
Still a lot, but all the destroyers were intended to take over all cruiser roles (from fleet duty to foreign stations) until the tech for better cruisers was available (and until AI fleet composition bug was fixed). For foreign stations, they are cheaper and provide much better strategic invasion defense (since even a small DD counts 1 and a CL counts 4 fleet points). Thanks, small mistakes. I do not believe these destroyers could intercept raiders. True, but AV Azizeh (31knots) and the 4 rebuilt Chasseoup Laubats (each now carrying a plane) could intercept slower/weaker AMCs and Germany needs most of their cruisers for foreign stations and fleet duty. From the experience with the Austrian war, convoy protection was much more common and hurtful than raider attacks and I found 3 heavy DDs more useful in that role (fast enough to chase enemy DDs, powerful enough to threaten enemy BCs).
I m curious how well the Azizeh AV concept works strategically (against the raiders in the submarine/raider pop up, not so much in tactical battles where she is fast enough to run away).
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 26, 2019 9:25:17 GMT -6
Personal log - 14 days in office
Today I get sketches from DNC about Vosges, but I have mixed feelings. I need to choose one or decide to scrap Vosges. I ask my staff about opinions and waiting about theirs reccomendations.
Variant/ aicraftts / engine refit / speed / conversion costs/ costs per 1 aicraft - lifetime 20 years
Variant B - 25 aicrafts, no engine refit, 28 knots, 10 M costs, 7,6 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant C - 34 aicrafts, engine refit, 28 knots, 45 M costs, 7,2 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant D - 38 aicrafts, engine refit, 26 knots, 39 M costs, 6,4 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant E - 40 aicrafts, engine refit, 25 knots, 28 M costs, 5,8 M per aicraft for 20 years
Whoops, did not even see that post before.
I would go with a cheap Variant B refit, followed by a Variant A emergency refit when the 8'' turn out to be giant weakspots against enemy bombers. Unfortunately (and unrealistically) we can not declare the former secondaries to be the new primaries. So it will unrealistically cost double to first include the 4'' as secondaries.
But that would be 13.5 million to get those 8inch requirements for the first CV out of the way and end up with a reasonably fast 28knot, well armoured carrier with 32 planes. And since planes are often damaged at the start of the scenario, the carrier could probably launch all its operational planes at once with 30 spot value.
|
|
|
Post by wevets on Jun 26, 2019 9:37:20 GMT -6
Today I get sketches from DNC about Vosges, but I have mixed feelings. I need to choose one or decide to scrap Vosges. I ask my staff about opinions and waiting about theirs reccomendations.
Variant/ aicraftts / engine refit / speed / conversion costs/ costs per 1 aicraft - lifetime 20 years
Variant B - 25 aicrafts, no engine refit, 28 knots, 10 M costs, 7,6 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant C - 34 aicrafts, engine refit, 28 knots, 45 M costs, 7,2 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant D - 38 aicrafts, engine refit, 26 knots, 39 M costs, 6,4 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant E - 40 aicrafts, engine refit, 25 knots, 28 M costs, 5,8 M per aicraft for 20 years
Sir, the fleet would be well-served by Variant E, which maximizes the aircraft available to combat commanders at an affordable capital outlay that will not interfere too much with valuable new construction, if you are willing to take recommendations from one who has not yet reached the rank of Amiral...7
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 26, 2019 9:59:25 GMT -6
I just tried another option:
First 12month refit to 27knots (oil, speed), 4x2x8'', for 39-40million. Cheap second 4month refit to remove 8'' guns in exchange for 4'' primaries and lots of planes, resulting in a CV with 27knots and 44planes for ~43million. Fast and capable enough to be useful for quite some time.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 26, 2019 11:09:16 GMT -6
I just tried another option: First 12month refit to 27knots (oil, speed), 4x2x8'', for 39-40million. Cheap second 4month refit to remove 8'' guns in exchange for 4'' primaries and lots of planes, resulting in a CV with 27knots and 44planes for ~43million. Fast and capable enough to be useful for quite some time. Board will not approved any conversion if at least 8x8" guns are included. As written earlier in personal log, A variant was not approved.
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 26, 2019 11:23:26 GMT -6
I just tried another option: First 12month refit to 27knots (oil, speed), 4x2x8'', for 39-40million. Cheap second 4month refit to remove 8'' guns in exchange for 4'' primaries and lots of planes, resulting in a CV with 27knots and 44planes for ~43million. Fast and capable enough to be useful for quite some time. Board will not approved any conversion if at least 8x8" guns are included. As written earlier in personal log, A variant was not approved. It was not approved to convert BC Vosges to Variant A. But it would get approval to convert BC Vosges to Variant B.
And I see no reason why it would not get approval to cheaply convert Variant B to Variant A, after finding out that the 8'' guns and magazines are problematic during working up, after all France never used 8'' guns before... .
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 26, 2019 11:29:23 GMT -6
Board will not approved any conversion if at least 8x8" guns are included. As written earlier in personal log, A variant was not approved. It was not approved to convert BC Vosges to Variant A. But it would get approval to convert BC Vosges to Variant B.
And I see no reason why it would not get approval to cheaply convert Variant B to Variant A, after finding out that the 8'' guns and magazines are problematic during working up, after all France never used 8'' guns before... . Now, I understand your points. Cost effectivity per aicraft would be around D variant.
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 26, 2019 11:35:50 GMT -6
It was not approved to convert BC Vosges to Variant A. But it would get approval to convert BC Vosges to Variant B.
And I see no reason why it would not get approval to cheaply convert Variant B to Variant A, after finding out that the 8'' guns and magazines are problematic during working up, after all France never used 8'' guns before... . Now, I understand your points. Cost effectivity per aicraft would be around D variant. Yes, for only 1/3 the total costs (13.5 or so vs 39million) and retaining the quite good 28knot top speed.
edit: For BC => Variant B => Variant A. Not for the second, much more expensive experiment where I converted to 27knot speed+oil first and thus ended up with 44 planes after the second refit.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jun 26, 2019 11:52:48 GMT -6
Variant/ aicraftts / engine refit / speed / conversion costs/ costs per 1 aicraft - lifetime 20 years
Variant B - 25 aicrafts, no engine refit, 28 knots, 10 M costs, 7,6 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant C - 34 aicrafts, engine refit, 28 knots, 45 M costs, 7,2 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant D - 38 aicrafts, engine refit, 26 knots, 39 M costs, 6,4 M per aicraft for 20 years
Variant E - 40 aicrafts, engine refit, 25 knots, 28 M costs, 5,8 M per aicraft for 20 years
Not that it makes much of a difference, but I'd suggest using some subset of the F, G, H, I, J, and K turrets rather than the D, E, S, and T turrets - forward and aft wing twin turrets are heavier than the others, in this case by ten tons per turret. It'd be enough to get an extra plane onto variants B and C, at least, though I don't think it'd let you do anything useful on variants D or E.
If you're willing to drop to 25 knots for Variant E, it might be worth considering bulged versions of Variants B and C, which would have superior torpedo protection to the others while still making 25 knots and giving about four more aircraft as compared to the non-bulged Variants B and C.
Of the variants shown: - Variant B is cheap and fast but otherwise unimpressive. - Variant C is a bit iffy since it's significantly more expensive than variants B and E, but it has a reasonable advantage in speed over variant E and a reasonable advantage in aircraft capacity as compared to variant B. Also, it costs about as much up front and about 50 million more over its lifetime than a 16,000t 29kn 34-plane CVL would, though of course the CVL would take 26 months to build whereas Vosges can be converted in 12 months.
- Variant D is insufficiently better than Variant E to justify its significantly greater conversion and lifetime costs. Its only advantage over Variant E that I can see is that it's one knot faster, and for that you pay an extra 11 million up front or ~20M over 20 years of service and lose two aircraft. On the plus side, it at least carries slightly more aircraft than you could put onto a CVL.
- Variant E is a bit slow but carries the largest air group and is significantly cheaper than Variants C and D.
I would say go for either variant B or variant E, with a slight preference to variant E since I think E's lifetime costs compare more favorably to purpose-built 25- and 34-plane CVLs than B's lifetime costs do, using the CVL designs shown below as the basis for comparison.
As to the two-stage refit proposal, it'd work, but for the cheap rebuild option you'd still have a CVL-grade air group, and Variant B already has about the same 20-year cost as a 29kn 34-plane 16,000t CVL with better torpedo protection.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 26, 2019 12:29:14 GMT -6
Thanks for advice, it is 10 tons per turret, total 40 tons.
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 26, 2019 12:38:51 GMT -6
As to the two-stage refit proposal, it'd work, but for the cheap rebuild option you'd still have a CVL-grade air group, and Variant B already has about the same 20-year cost as a 29kn 34-plane 16,000t CVL with better torpedo protection.
Yes, but it would be fair to only count a fraction of the costs for that capability. The majority of the funds would be used to get the 8x8 first CV requirement out of the way for all future carrier designs.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 26, 2019 12:48:30 GMT -6
As to the two-stage refit proposal, it'd work, but for the cheap rebuild option you'd still have a CVL-grade air group, and Variant B already has about the same 20-year cost as a 29kn 34-plane 16,000t CVL with better torpedo protection.
Yes, but it would be fair to only count a fraction of the costs for that capability. The majority of the funds would be used to get the 8x8 first CV requirement out of the way for all future carrier designs. It would be done by any conversion. I am still thinking B or E variant is best. But probably E is best as more aicrafts are needed.
Even in variant E you can later remove 8" guns and do something else later. Probably increase AA capabilities.
Bulging is interesting idea however 500 tons is almost nothing for aicraft complement. The only reason is to get better torpedo protection however loosing 3 knots is quite a lot.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 26, 2019 13:01:07 GMT -6
I was now more thinking about Yatagan and Espingole classes in construction.
I think that they are not needed however some money has been already invested.
Having 71 ships for ASW duty is more than needed and on top another 12 under construction?
Relating to Espingole we have 23 destroyers for fleet duty. It is enough. However some losses could be in next war but new destroyers are quite expensive.
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 26, 2019 13:04:22 GMT -6
Yes, but it would be fair to only count a fraction of the costs for that capability. The majority of the funds would be used to get the 8x8 first CV requirement out of the way for all future carrier designs. It would be done by any conversion. I am still thinking B or E variant is best. But probably E is best as more aicrafts are needed.
Even in variant E you can later remove 8" guns and do something else later. Probably increase AA capabilities.
Bulging is interesting idea however 500 tons is almost nothing for aicraft complement. The only reason is to get better torpedo protection however loosing 3 knots is quite a lot.
My personal problem with E is, that it can not keep up with the battlecruiser fleet, and the battlecruisers are the most potent part of the French navy at the moment. 25knots also do not seem to age well, the 20year lifespan is imho pretty optimistic for that speed. And the high conversion costs are only competitive for that long 20 year lifespan. For 10 years, the costs per aircraft would go through the roof for this variant.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 26, 2019 13:11:24 GMT -6
It would be done by any conversion. I am still thinking B or E variant is best. But probably E is best as more aicrafts are needed.
Even in variant E you can later remove 8" guns and do something else later. Probably increase AA capabilities.
Bulging is interesting idea however 500 tons is almost nothing for aicraft complement. The only reason is to get better torpedo protection however loosing 3 knots is quite a lot.
My personal problem with E is, that it can not keep up with the battlecruiser fleet, and the battlecruisers are the most potent part of the French navy at the moment. 25knots also do not seem to age well, the 20year lifespan is imho pretty optimistic for that speed. And the high conversion costs are only competitive for that long 20 year lifespan. For 10 years, the costs per aircraft would go through the roof for this variant.
Even for 10 years, E is the cheapest per aicrafts. For 10 years conversion costs for E variant is about 1/5 of total costs. It is not as important but bring efficiency.
|
|