|
Post by hmssophia on Jun 20, 2019 1:36:52 GMT -6
"I am pressured to win a war against the Russians that I thus far have not been able to against the United States. Surely they will suffer against our battle line, especially with the EoI arriving this month and her sisters forthwith, but what of their battlecruisers? Will we face them and rely on armour alone? Surely we will. We will."
Diary of the Admiral, January 1916Russia entered the war in October and already by January reports were reaching Britain of unrest troubling the Tsar. Had they leapt too soon into a conflict they couldn't maintain? It seemed not when American ships appeared in their ports to assist them in their counter-blockade efforts against the British. Thus a back and forth began between the two sides as blockade runners darted and dared on into British, Russian and Japanese ports while both alliances claimed to be blockading the other. This was not helped by the reporting that in the same months a US pre-dreadnought and a British light cruiser were interned in the same port due to mechanical issues, fuel shortages and supply degradation. Had it not been so serious the situation would have been considered farcical (Indeed, the much celebrated television series 'Blackadder goes forth' produced in the 1990's was set aboard HMS Calliope interned in Venezuela alongside their opposite numbers aboard USS Oklahoma). "Dear Sirs, We entered this war with score-and-eight submarines, a fine number of boats to command and with some of the best and smartest crews a man could ask to serve with him. But this war has weighed heavy on my little empire, sirs, and I have lost ten fine boats to the enemies predations. Ten boats and fully a third of the men under command for whom I have had to write letters and inform wives of their passing. I rest easy in the fact that they do so for my country, but therein lies the rub. Sirs, the Admiralty commands we operate as privateers as old, on the surface with a deck gun. But that is not so easy these days, with the Americans hiding quick-firing guns of their own on merchants. Sirs, let my boys hunt. Let them slip the leash and strike as their training commits them too. Unleash the submarines, Sirs, and you shall have this war."Vice-Admiral Tonald, Letter to the Admiralty, 1916 It has now been three years since the last design work was done on a capital ship for the Royal Navy, long enough that the EoI class has almost left the slips in its entirety. Now for the first time since Puerto Rico there are calls for a new ship to bolster the heavy forces of the British Empire, but there is uncertainty as to what it should look like. Should it be a battleship, larger and faster than the EoI, an evolution in ship design which will be able to face down any ship at sea? Should it be a battle cruiser, an admission that speed is vital to survival, a heavier Invincible with better gun fittings and better armour despite her nimbleness? Or should there be a break with tradition, a recognition that sheer numbers were vital, an a design for an exceptionally heavy armoured cruiser with speed, heavy guns and range coming second to pure economic efficiency?
The Submarines request the opportunity to fight unrestricted by rules: [ ] Let them. The enemy can pay the price. [ ] We are honourable men. We fight by law.
A new capital ship? [ ] A battleship of near 35,000 tons [ ] A battle cruiser of 30,000 tons [ ] An armoured cruiser of 15-20,000 tons.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 20, 2019 4:33:24 GMT -6
My dear John,
You and I are both fighting battles with the Admiralty. I to engage the fleet, and you to use your submarines. I would like to offer my assistance in persuading them. They are too cautious with our vessels and need to understand that in order to win, we need to sink their ships. However, I think that we need more submarines before engaging in the noble pastime of unrestricted merchant sinking. I shall write as much to the design and procurement board. In the meantime, I suggest that you engage your flotilla in fleet support. You will be able to bring about the action you do crave and help me convince the pen-pushers to fight.
Give my love to Margaret and the children. We must dine together again soon, before the damned rationing closes the Ivy!
Best regards, Robert
[Letter from Admiral Robert Nelson to Vice-Admiral Tonald]
----
Design and Procurement Board The Admiralty Whitehall
Dear Sirs,
After careful consideration, the War Office and the Admiralty requests and requires that you develop a new design of the 'Dreadnought' type. These vessels should displace no less than 35,000 tons and be armed with a main battery consisting of 16" guns. It should be armoured by at least 12" in the belt and 3" in the deck. Secondaries are to be light or non-existent. It is suggested that the debacle of the Mars design is studied and adapted to prevent the same. Turret armour is essential. Two of these are to be laid down with the option of two additional vessels should funds be available.
Ten submarines of the newest design are also required to be laid down to replenish the strength of the 1st and 3rd submarine flottilas. An option of an additional ten is also desirable with the same conditions as the capital ships'.
It is necessary to note that the capital ships have the budgetary priority.
Admiral Sir Robert Nelson, War Office
|
|
|
Post by princeofsavoy on Jun 20, 2019 7:12:36 GMT -6
"At times, I have been questioned by my own party colleagues regarding the necessity of the two-power standard. Now, the present situation answers this question better than I ever could. We are now at war with two major western naval powers, who even individually are dangerous, but with their combined might severely outnumber us in every respect, in all classes of ships and boats, who outnumber us on the seas, on the land, and in the new battleground in the air.
In contrast, our ally, the Japanese Empire has proven itself largely useless. What did we expect from a nation that submitted to a few american gunboats mere decades ago? A nation that had cut itself off from all new ideas, from all foreigners, yes from the very concept of naval warfare for centuries? A Nation that lived so long in savagery?
I know I am very hard on this government- And hard on myself as a member of this government! But only by looking at our flaws may we overcome them. And only by speaking bluntly before her majesty's loyal opposition may we ensure that a way forward is found that all major parties in this house can agree on.
The way forward I propose in short is this: Submarines may have been decried as anti-British by some. The British way is supposedly lining up our ships in the way we did at Trafalgar and hope our enemies somehow do the same thing. But one must only look at the disaster of Pureto Rico to see what you reap with such idealistic thought! We must use all of our forces, including our submarines to the very best of our ability. We must not allow the Americans and the Russians any longer to evade them by sailing under false flags, by transporting means of war, including ammunitions and weaponry in 'cruise ships', as we have many credible reports of. We must cast aside useless worries about even more great powers intervening in this war. Germany is still reeling. Italy has nothing whatsoever to gain from us. France cannot afford a war with us.
We must learn from our mistakes. We must build several armoured cruisers before we should worry about replacing the losses in the very Battleships that have proved so useless so far! We must as soon as possible confront and destroy the Russian Navy to bring the odds back in our favour, whatever the cost may be. We must protect our colonies around the globe from attempts of invasion.
But despite our shortcomings, and mistakes, I think we have one advantage in this War. I see the advantage the British Nation has had the past few centuries as concerns it's fighting prowess at sea, not in having the biggest, or the most ships. It does not lie in a continual string of perfect naval policies. It lies in the British people, their natural interest and ability to brave the sea. It lies even more in the bravery of our Sailors, perhaps the only thing in the world that might surpass even the bravery of our soldiers. It lies in the stokers who toil tirelessly to propel their battleships to victory. It lies in the Captains of our destroyers, who have no fear to charge into far superior forces and turn them away to keep others safe, and the skill under pressure of the crews that manage to keep their ship afloat during this endeavour. It lies with our submariners, who venture far in their cramped boats, never knowing when a depth charge may put them beneath the waves permanently.
We didn't surrender when Napoleon had engulfed all of Europe. We didn't surrender when our Colonies in Newfoundland and Canada faced invasion from the superior numbers of Americans. We didn't surrender against the Russians in our last War. In fact, in this vast nation I only can think of one thing I would deem 'unbritish', and that is surrender!"
- Winston Churchill, Secretary of State for the Colonies, in a speech before Parliament
|
|
|
Post by baileinneraora on Jun 20, 2019 8:10:31 GMT -6
Admiral, My personal recommendations based off of your suggestions, - The Submarine force has proved exceedingly effective throughout the war so far but, losses have limited there effectiveness in the past few months. Replacements should be laid down immediately. Once commissioned exclusion zones should be announced to that any ship entering is liable to be attacked on sight and without warning. Until then Prize Rules should continue. - New Battleships of 35,000 tons to be launched. It is of my belief that in the future Deck Armour will prove of the greater importance than the deck. I thus recommend that the following mininmum requirements be made: 4'' Deck Armour 13'' Belt 15'' guns 21 knots 8 Gun Broadside
[OOC I am basically suggesting an in game version of the Revenge Class Battleships]
I thank you for seeking my advice and for trusting myself with the my current station
Yours Sincerely,
Commodore Richard Douglas DSO RN
Commander 3rd Cruiser Squadron
|
|
|
Post by rugnir on Jun 21, 2019 8:37:58 GMT -6
In a situation such as this, the ability of a battle-cruiser to chase down enemy stragglers and retreat in the face of larger forces mean that it is my preferred option. Once russia is out of the war, it will surely prove invaluble raiding the american east coast.
|
|
|
Post by hmssophia on Jun 22, 2019 6:06:53 GMT -6
" It has been decided that we shall build a new class of battleship, an upgraded version of the Empress of India that will make her even more survivable. She will carry the same five turrets of fourteen inch guns - nothing more is needed to smash the enemy after all and they have proved wonderfully reliable so far. She will make twenty-one knots the same as the rest of the fleet. But she will mass near four-thousand tons more and all of that displacement will be sunk into armouring her belt and deck such that she can resist her own guns all the way to ten-thousand yards. We trust in British steel, truly, and thus we request this new line, the King George V class, styled for our monarch long may he reign."Diary of the Admiral, February 1916The new orders to the submarine force took effect immediately - in March alone the weakened numbers of boats nonetheless managed to catch, stalk and sink thirty merchants flying enemy flags. Meanwhile the British raiders struggled in the Pacific, finding only four while Psyche struck a mine in Northern Europe and would be in dockyard hands for months. Disaster struck in the same month though. Sutlej and Argonaut, two old armoured cruisers operating out of Vancouver, were set upon by a pair of American battle cruisers. A hit to Sutlej disabled her engines and the Argonauts captain had a choice to make - fight to save his sister or run and leave her to be preyed upon by wolves. He chose noble sacrifice and charge the larger ships. She would not last log against the enemies fifteen inch guns, however, and she was put under in short order. Afterwards they hunted down the Sutlej too and sank her without much effort. "Gentlemen I have had enough of reading this of hearing this. Our boys are dying because the Royal Navy thought it could rest on its laurels and send old ships filled with young men to fight wars for them. Look where it gets us. Hundred dead or captured, picked up by the rebellious curs of the Americas and held in these camps of theirs. Gentlemen, I would ask - nay, I demand that the Navy should reinvigorate this fleet, and this Empire, and finally do it's duty to us!"Speech in parliament, Lord BancroftThus was the Illustrious class born - 29,000 tons, eight 14" rifles and barely enough armour to resist cruiser guns but not her own. Faster than the Americans, she was still expensive and only time would tell how many of these big ships could be built. The submarines continued their hunt in April with forty-six merchants going down. It seems that unrestricted warfare was the way to succeed, especially with the new longer range boats coming off the slips. May 1916 - the constant pressures of submarine and raider sinkings of the Russian merchant fleet has led to public protests. The Russians have accepted peace, a crushing blow to the Americans for whom that coalition was vital to tying up the Japanese fleet. Nonetheless the US decided to fight on, refusing to come to the negotiating table even as the armoured cruiser Portland was torpedoed and sunk by E-49. Near forty merchants were caught by British submarines in the same month, crossing over a hundred ships in less than twelve weeks. It was almost more merchants than had been sunk across the entire year and a half of war. It would soon come to be known as the 'Happy Times' by the Submarine forces. Due to this, and the twenty-nine merchants sunk in June, it is being widely reported that breadlines and food concerns are becoming a major worry in the United States. "Twelfth November 1916, Vice Admiral Cochran commanding Saint John squadron from HMS Hogue. Scouts sighted enemy invasion force approaching from the South. Infantry transports escorted by three American battleships. Sortied despite being outnumbered - couldn't face the idea of American troops on British soil. Plunged into them in the night. Took heavy fire. Multiple torpedo hits on enemy capital ships. Transports sunk. Lost Hogue, Phoebe, Gala, transferred flag to Bacchante. Sank USS North Carolina, Delaware, enemy battleships. Turned away invasion fleet. Saint John safe."
The impersonal report of Peter Cochran describing the battle of the Bay of Fundy where the first american Dreadnought of the war was sunkJanuary 1917 - After 27 months of war with the Americans, including a brief interlude of Russian conflict, the United States approach the British with diplomatic messages; they would like the conflict to come to an end. Despite arguing that they are the victors and that the war can do nothing but go their way, the merchant losses from submarines and the sinking of two brigades worth of infantry at Fundy have made it clear that if things continue the costs will only continue to rise. Thus a peace is drawn up. Minor concessions are made along the Canadian border and trade agreements between the two would contribute to the peace and help the United States recover from the hardships imposed upon their citizens. Two years and thousands dead: but at least it was over. At least it was done. As the Royal Navy came out of it's wartime standing and the fleet was redeployed to a peacetime status, it shrank massively. Ships were placed into mothballs or reserve and only the bare bones were kept on active duty. But new things were coming down the pipeline. The idea of expanding the capabilities of the seaplane carrier to allow planes to take-off and land at sea was being floated and it has been suggested that the Navy convert an older ship to have the flat deck necessary, whilst also seeking designs for a fighter aircraft to be carried aboard.
Carriers? [ ] No, this is a ridiculous folly [ ] Convert a small ship for testing [ ] Convert a large ship to get a real idea of the capabilities.
What's the focus for the fighters? [ ] Range [ ] Firepower [ ] Toughness
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 22, 2019 9:19:59 GMT -6
The Admiralty Whitehall London
Dear Your Lordships,
After 2 years of war, the world is at peace again. I write to respectfully decline the offer of a full-time position at the Admiralty. This will be my last recommendation letter to you before I reapply myself to the bickering in the columns of the Times.
As we have seen in the war, new technologies played, against my wishes and expectations, a greater part than the fleets of old. Seaplane carriers such as my son's Border Knight and Vice-Admiral Tonald's submarine flotilla kept the Americans at bay while the Russians were beaten to a pulp. I therefore propose that an entire class of ships be refitted as flat-topped 'aircraft carriers' (as I propose the type be termed). These should carry at least 15 aeroplanes, 10 for strike missions and 5 for defence. Aircraft should be developed in these roles. An inventor to whom I spoke last week had a proposal for equipping biplanes with 'air-dropped' torpedoes. I suggest these be considered in the 'strike' role.
As for the 'fighter' role, it is overly optimistic to presume that it will be very good; it is, after all, a new technology. Good engines can, however, be fitted. It is therefore logical to optimise such a craft for speed and reliability, with the understanding that the other combat attributes be improved over time.
I have accepted the honour from the King to become the 1st Earl of Hampshire and thank Your Lordships for the recommendation to His Majesty. I have forsworn a peacetime office in the navy but, should the need ever arise, I am willing and able to retake my position in times of war.
I remain, Your Lordships, your most obedient servant,
Admiral Robert Nelson (ret.), 1st Earl of Hampshire
|
|
kaiwi
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by kaiwi on Jun 22, 2019 11:24:20 GMT -6
Once again I was sitting together with the man that had lead the German navy for many years, despite all that has been said about him, despite himself leading the last attack in the war against us, he looked serene and relaxed in his exile in his Hampshire House. While we talked a lot about the reasons he fled from Germany after the communist coup we also disused our recent “events” with the Americans. I asked him pretty directly what he might think of our war effort and the overall course the war had taken. He only smiled at me and said.: “A long time ago I was commander on our station in Asia and the Chinese have a old curse: May you live in interesting times. I would say you Brits have interesting times indeed.”From Robert Calporans “Tee with the Enemy” 1917 Oxford Press (Thank you all for the best AAR or whatever it is I had the ever honour to read.....period )
|
|
|
Post by hmssophia on Jun 22, 2019 12:36:23 GMT -6
(Thank you all for the best AAR or whatever it is I had the ever honour to read.....period ) Thanks so much! The poster input is definitely making it even better.
|
|
|
Post by renlybaratheon on Jun 24, 2019 8:25:06 GMT -6
Dear Sir.
So once again their lordships plans have come to naught. Submersibles were the cry, let us rule the waves by operating not on but under the waves they said. Balderdash and bother i say, His Majesties Submarine E whatever its name is, they cant even give them names like proper bloody ships, has disgraced the service. Its captain and crew transformed into no more than pirates, I for one would be honoured to serve of the board of Inquiry.
So here we are, a war on two fronts, the only thing that could possibly make this worse would be if we were to embark on some sort of fool hardy adventure on the mainland of Asia, i fervently hope the war office posses more sense that their colleagues across Whitehall
Not that anyone will listen to a washed up old sea dog but for gods sake, crush the Russians, Rebuild the fleet and take this blessed war back to the Americas rather than allowing them to fight off our coasts
letter to 'The Times' from Commodore Nicholas Syke (retired), Godalming, Surrey]
|
|
|
Post by hmssophia on Jun 24, 2019 21:22:37 GMT -6
"They're tearing up her deck m'ladthey're taking off her gunsshe'll never fight like that againnot give side to setting sunShe's going to be all flat m'ladas smooth as halls of yorewith hoists upon the after partsand runway to the foreThe cannons are all quiet, m'ladnever again to roarThe Cressy is to be brand newand serve forever more"Fields of Cressy, Poem, 1917"We are to have a new ship constructed from the hull of the old. The Admiralty, in all its wisdom, has insisted that we take these new aircraft more seriously as our enemies may and thus we will be having a ship to fly them off of. I do not know why; I do not see the reason. We have planes that can fly off of our carriers, and Border Knight has proved that they are useful for little more than reconnaissance at very long range. Perhaps I will be proven wrong but thus far I see nothing but spending for spending's sake.Nonetheless, my fellows insist. Thus I have authorised the Cressy to go in for a long refit. She hadn't been modernised, so she'll be a perfect solution to an expensive problem. Her guns off, her superstructure flattened, she is to be turned into an ironing board of a ship with twelve aircraft able to fly off her. If she ends up as anything but an oddity, I will be very surprised."Diary of the Admiral, January 1917The peaceful opening months of 1917, those that followed two years of war which established the United States as a challenge to British dominance of the seas, were mostly administrative in nature for the Royal Navy. Bringing the global deployments to a peacetime footing was a complicated affair: old ships had to be brought off station to be replaced with newer vessels whilst those were refit, placed in reserved or simply scrapped. Most stations retained at least a handful of cruisers and destroyers but those which were considered less important kept only a single ship or a pair at most. The two dreadnoughts, now aging in both design and hull, went in for minor refits which fitted them with directors for their still useful twelve inch guns. Meanwhile six pre-dreadnoughts (three Formidables, three Canopus) were sold for scrap as obsolete. A quartet of the Canopi were kept for foreign duty but it was not thought that they would last long. Invincible, Jupiter and the armoured cruiser Spartiate became the new Mediterranean squadron, replacing the aging Victorian battleships there. "The Japanese, the Germans, the Italians and the Russians, they've called a disarmament conference in the Hague. It seems they are sick of the warmongering of the United Kingdom and the Americans. It's tosh really, but I've told our boys to keep up some appearance of civility at least. I doubt anything will come of it, of course."The signing of the Hague Naval Arms Limitation Treaty, July 1917"I am... stunned, to say the least. Are we seen as such warmongers? The Americans, blast them, they came to the table with the others and it wouldn't do very well to have the five of them arrayed against us. Seventeen years though, my god. A building holiday they call it. I call it a shocking departure from the proper affairs of a navaly inclined nation."
The Hague Naval Arms Limitation Treaty of 1917 (or 'The Hague Naval Treaty') was a shocking departure from the previous years of rapid naval construction. With unified foreign support, a limitation on new construction of warships has been imposed, allowing a maximum of 12,000 tons and eight inch guns. The stated intention follows thusly; "Without the opportunity to continue the escalation of the battleship, it is these parties consideration that that enterprise can be put towards trade, civil construction and goodwill between all nations". Those who decried the treaty countered that the Armoured Cruiser would simply become the ship of choice for fighting wars. Nonetheless, the treaty had a stated end date of 1936 barring any future negotiations, and an escalator clause in case any party defaulted. Of course, the treaty had its victims. The three new British dreadnoughts (King George V, Ceasar, Centurion) and two battle cruisers (Inflexible, Illustrious) were cancelled with their hulls half complete. Similarly, the Germans scrapped four capital ships, France three, Russia two, Italy four, the United States four and Japan just a lone dreadnought. In other news, the Avro Firefly has joined the RNFAA and is undergoing testing in preparation for the completion of Cressy's conversion. Capable of 86 knots and 94 miles, a new squadron is being established at Grimsby to house the 302 fighter squadron.
We have suddenly found ourselves with unallocated budget - where should we focus it? [ ] Convert additional old ships to carriers. The Good Hopes perhaps. [ ] Build more submarines. [ ] Build a new line of armoured cruiser with 12,000 tons and 8" guns.
|
|
saden
New Member
Posts: 42
|
Post by saden on Jun 25, 2019 13:15:57 GMT -6
I say we convert ships into Carriers. It's high time for it.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 25, 2019 16:29:50 GMT -6
Navy TimesA Subsidiary of the Times Group
We welcome you all, dear Readers, to this very first edition of the Navy Times. This paper will publish monthly and discuss current affairs, both foreign and naval. We have the very best expertise at our disposal; our editor is none other than the former Admiral of the Fleet, Admiral Robert Nelson, recently proclaimed by His Majesty as the 1st Earl of Hampshire for his service in the Royal Navy. We will act both as a news provider and as a naval lobby group to keep Britain at the very front of modern naval warfare. We will also accept comments and may introduce such a column. In this issue, we explore use of light cruisers both in and out of the battlefleet as well as a guided tour and interview with the captain of HMS Border Knight, a new seaplane carrier, Captain James Nelson. But first, our Editor's Comments. Rule Britannia!After my service in the recent War of the Americas when I was Admiral-in-Command of the Naval Department of the War Office, I decided that it would be a good idea to try and involve all citizens of these here Isles in the policies and tactics that have made our navy great. This is necessary as we live in changing times to which antiquated admirals fail to completely adapt. I confess to this very sin when I discounted the fad that was the 'torpedo' in the 1880s when I had command of the fleet. I will not, my good Readers, be found guilty again. I am, therefore, greatly indebted to both the Times and the Admiralty for permission to set this up. We will attempt to be pragmatic in our here articles and fair to all points of view. I will also, however, make my recommendations every month without prejudice or mercy. Without further ado, here are the initial recommendations:- The new naval limitation treaty is by far the greatest failure of the Foreign Office so far this century. For those who do not know, this limits ships to a displacement of no more than 12,000 long tons and a main battery of guns of less than 9" in calibre. 17 years is the agreed-upon duration. This is an attempt to lower the sizes of fleets as well as naval expenditures. Unfortunately, only we will abide to it. Our fleet is too powerful and no amount of fanciful paperwork will convince our potential adversaries of that. Any ships we lay down to these terms will be woefully underpowered, even against older vessels. The treaty should be declared null and void as soon as possible. If a war is required to do this, so be it. In the mean time, we should build submarines in order to have assets useful in war. 80 is a desirable number to lay down, providing budget is available. Under no circumstances should a 'treaty cruiser' be laid down.
Faster 'legacy ships' (pre 1908) should be converted into ships capable of carrying aeroplanes. No other long range weapon is available to us under the treaty. These should be populated with only strike 'planes and regarded as fleet support units. Any ships too slow to make this grade should be scrapped. At the same time, efforts should be made to optimise a design such that a purpose-built aircraft carrier of 12,000 tons be built. All dreadnoughts and battle cruisers built after 1908 should be completely modernised - they will, after all, have to fight the next war for at least 30 months until new ships are commissioned. A war is unfortunately necessary as the world is not peaceful and we, with the greatest Empire, are doomed to be the target of aggression. France, for instance, longs for our colonies. We must crush this obsession by removing any trace of the French Empire and assimilating it into our own.
Our world has been good to our dear Nation and it is forever our duty under God to keep it that way. God bless you all.
Admiral Robert Nelson, 1st Earl of Hampshire, Editor
(For reasons of unity and security, the Navy Times will not be published in wartime)
[Front cover of the first ever edition of the Navy Times]
|
|
|
Post by hmssophia on Jun 27, 2019 13:34:31 GMT -6
"This is to be a new era for the Royal Navy - cruisers, submarines and perhaps more of these newfangled carriers that Nelson keeps suggesting we put together. I can't say I am certain of them and I'm sure that his sons presence aboard the primogenitor has no bearing on the matter. Nonetheless, it is to become a time of cruisers. Already I have the finest young men working on a design. We cannot build battleships, perhaps that is so - but we shall have our Admirals nonetheless."
Diary of the Admiral, July 1917 The Admiral class cruisers was the first British design to come out of the treaty period. Twelve-thousand tons, nine eight-inch guns and twenty-eight knots of speed, they were to be the new capital ships of the modern Royal Navy. They would be dwarfed by their big sisters, the two and a half time larger Empress class battleships, but these would be four years newer. Time would only tell if they would prove as useful as the big ones.
It was strange, the number of people who gathered for the decommissioning ceremony of E-6. She was an early submarine, one of the B-class with a very small crew and she was so insignificant that she could no longer operate anywhere but in the shallowest oceans. The newest submarines were so much larger than her that it was as if they were a different beast entirely. Thus she would be broken up, but she was overseen by retired Admirals, young widows, submarines and sailors, even workers from the yards where she had rested for so long. It was the end of a simpler time, back before these vicious machines had proved so deadly.
HMS Cressy, entirely rebuilt, reentered service in April of 1918. Now with just four 3" guns, she also carried the twelve fighters of 302 squadron based from Grimsby, an effective scouting force for the fleet equipped with the Avro Firefly. While initially training moved slowly and progression was poor in the bad spring weather, the summer months would prove ideal for the little string-and-canvas aircraft to practice in. Warm gusts made landing a doddle whether on ship or on shore, and soon the 302 were considered as elite as the best RAF squadrons who had fought against the Americans in Canada.
1919 begins to creep up very slowly on the world and, since the establishment of the Hague Treaty, it has largely been peaceful as well. A few minor scraps, a little bit of fighting amongst colonials, but overall the world has been... quiet. Which is the perfect opportunity for the Royal Navy to reconsider its priorities.
Choose a refit pattern: [ ] Refit the battleships with directors and AA guns [ ] Refit some Armoured cruisers as carriers
Choose a research priority: [ ] Light Forces [ ] Submarines [ ] Aircraft
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 27, 2019 18:34:48 GMT -6
Navy TimesA Subsidiary of the Times Group
Welcome yet again, dear Readers, to this here edition of the Navy Times. We are pleased to announce that, in the time since our launch, we have built up a circulation of over 1,000,000 across the Empire. Thank you! Therefore, the cost of each edition will be reduced to the sum of 3d (1 1/2d for naval personnel) from its current price of sixpence. Our editor feels that this should be available to the masses so our board decided on this course of action (the finance department was too scared to argue!). We have more naval news this week with an in-depth look into the capability of HM Naval Base Bombay as well as the rejuvenation of old HMS Seraphim into museum shop status. We also speak with Vice-Admiral Tonald about the capability of the submarine in the Royal Navy of tomorrow. The winner of the raffle for the Veteran's Mess charity was a Mr Bernard Hargreaves who will receive a lifetime subscription and an exclusive model of HMS Victory. As ever, however, we open with our Editor's Comments. Rule Britannia! This week I experienced the deep melancholy to which any naval officer will freely admit. At this occasion, I was attending the decommissioning ceremony of His Majesty's Submarine E-6, a once proud and capable boat (for a submarine is never a ship) now totally outclassed and obsolete next to her sisters, each two to three times larger than her. I spoke at length with my good friend Vice-Admiral Tonald, a long time submarine commander and former commander of E-6 herself, about her circumstances. It is always sad to see a vessel retired to the breaker's yard but we agreed that the crew would be relieved. To put to sea again in times of war aboard E-6 would be akin to setting sail aboard the Victory against iron hulled monitor ships - suicide. This illustrates nicely the changing times in which we all live; only 10 years ago 'B' class was the most capable boat in the world. Yet again, I must caution our admirals not to stay in the past for the sake of nostalgia or we will lead the world no more. So, of course, here are this month's recommendations to the admiralty.
- The 'treaty cruisers' against which I railed against so violently these past months have finally been commissioned into His Majesty's service. Although no hard-hitters, their over 25 knots (true speed classified) will allow them to operate almost as 'pocket battle cruisers'. I dismay at the need for their existence but, as other nations are constrained in the same way, they could be very useful in the position of 'raider' or 'trade protection'. Of course, little can be expected of such ships against older, true battle cruisers the only thing to do in such a situation is 'present the stern are run before the wind'.
- It is desirable to refit older capital ships with new fire control systems to prepare them for carrying the treaty-castrated fleet into the next war. This should be relatively inexpensive. However, it is of greater importance to refit older, more impotent vessels into aircraft carriers. This is practically the only to ensure we have a fleet capable of long range engagement. The refit of the Cressy is a good start but must be expanded upon. I also advise (for familiar reasons, with a heavy heart) that dedicated seaplane carriers such as the Border Knight be paid off. It is inadvisable hereafter to concentrate all scouting aircraft aboard one vessel. It would be better to disperse them to the fleet on general. For example, fitting three per capital ship and two per cruiser.
- Building upon the premise of a 'carrier navy', it is obvious that aircraft be made a research priority. I would prefer to build dreadnoughts at this stage until aeroplane technologies are mature but we are prevented from doing as such by the Hague Treaty. Therefore, we must mature the technology faster. Submarines should be built but are sufficiently advanced so as not to be a great priority.
I hope that this strategy will keep us at the top and that this damned treaty be declared void as soon as possible. God bless you all.
Admiral Robert Nelson, 1st Earl of Hampshire, Editor
(For reasons of unity and security, the Navy Times will not be published in wartime)
[Front cover of a monthly edition of the Navy Times]
---
Captain, HMS Border Knight
Dear James,
I apologise for my writings in the Navy Times and I beg your forgiveness. We will visit Devonport in a few weeks and I will try to account for my views. I realise you value BK as your own but her time is past. Needless to say, I have asked the Admiralty to transfer you as Captain to a full aircraft carrier. I can only apologise for the possible loss of your first command but all things must pass.
I understand Martin has transferred to a fighter squadron from your vessel. Don't worry about him, he'll be fine! Good luck with that girlfriend of yours.
All the best,
Your loving (and apologetic) Father
|
|