|
Post by ieshima on Sept 14, 2020 14:05:32 GMT -6
You know, at this rate I'll have to open a bed and breakfast in Peking just to accommodate everyone.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 15, 2020 4:27:51 GMT -6
Oh, I am planning on "sending" the Zenta on a bit of a tour partly to honour the voyages the class' historical counterparts embarked upon, the historical Zenta-class being the quasi-colonial assets of the Kriegsmarine. The Zenta herself participated in fighting the boxer rebellion (her captain got killed during the siege of the diplomatic district), Szigetvár visited Mexico and North America in january of 1902, the story says they also visited the wrecks of the Spanish Caribbean Squadron. A bit of sightseeing shouldn't hurt the cadets.
aeson : That's an absolutely fair remark, as far as I am aware, the K.u..K. KM. itself organized it's destroyers into Torpedo Flotillas. Originally, when I set up the game, I had to think about how to handle a very rudimentary, fictional organizational level that could aid the narrative, and how it should interact with RtW's random OOBs. Ultimately I've decided that the ""official"", on-paper structure will utilize "divisions", whereas whatever RtW feels like throwing together will be a "squadron". In such a way I can think about building and handling ships in context of a virtual organizational framework, an example of which will happen in '08 January (making it perhaps a bit more interesting than simply "building 18 destroyers"), while retaining a rather simple, thus manageable difference over what RtW does in battles with it's ad-hoc "squadrons". It's not an elegant solution, but for simplicity and consistency's sake I opted to go with this.
|
|
|
Post by pastur on Sept 15, 2020 6:58:05 GMT -6
I love your graphs and statistics. You always do such a wonderful job of making your analyses use the same considerations a real life naval staff officer of the period would have, and it's always fascinating to see e.g. gunfire hit maps and other information that would actually govern construction decisions.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Sept 15, 2020 8:26:51 GMT -6
That's an absolutely fair remark, as far as I am aware, the K.u..K. KM. itself organized it's destroyers into Torpedo Flotillas. Originally, when I set up the game, I had to think about how to handle a very rudimentary, fictional organizational level that could aid the narrative, and how it should interact with RtW's random OOBs. Ultimately I've decided that the ""official"", on-paper structure will utilize "divisions", whereas whatever RtW feels like throwing together will be a "squadron". In such a way I can think about building and handling ships in context of a virtual organizational framework, an example of which will happen in '08 January (making it perhaps a bit more interesting than simply "building 18 destroyers"), while retaining a rather simple, thus manageable difference over what RtW does in battles with it's ad-hoc "squadrons". It's not an elegant solution, but for simplicity and consistency's sake I opted to go with this. As I said, it doesn't really matter. Personally, I think I'd have gone for Task Unit/Force/Group nomenclature for the ad-hoc formations you get in battle and Flotilla/Squadron/Fleet nomenclature for theoretical 'permanent' formations for organizational purposes since [type] flotillas/squadrons and [station] squadrons/fleets were fairly common as 'permanent' organizational units while Task Whatevers tended to be more impermanent and ad-hoc in the period covered by the game. I also probably would've avoided using Division for the notional permanent force structure since, at least in the English-language version of the game, 'Division' is already used for the lowest-level formations in the Order of Battle within the game and so there's a possibility that e.g. DesDiv 23 could be both an ad-hoc destroyer formation in an engagement and a 'permanent' destroyer formation in the notional organizational force structure.
|
|
|
Post by thefleetofoceans on Sept 15, 2020 16:37:55 GMT -6
You know, at this rate I'll have to open a bed and breakfast in Peking just to accommodate everyone. Well the Antrim will be Arriving in late 1907, and perhaps one of the Austrian Cruisers may follow. But I fully intend on having Albert Blackadder link these two RP's together, or get sunk trying.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 17, 2020 13:54:43 GMT -6
An admirable sense of duty! For now, back to our regularly scheduled programming. I am hoping I'll get to uh, actually playing the game this weekend, but I do not want to run too far forward. And hence...
September, 1907
As the economy settles after the shock of more than two years of hostilities, it is becoming clearer just how much the reparations propelled the state - and in turn the Navy - forward. Current funding almost reaches the level it lingered on right before the breakout of the war, and is comparable to the french and russian budgets.
In practice, this means that the fleet could in it's current state of low-readiness fund the construction of one Kaiser-class battleship at zero balance, while maintaining a reserve of 56 million Crowns. This should easily be enough for the destroyer program, although still not very reassuring when it comes to a theoretical battlecruiser plan. Speaking of the devil, we've gained more intelligence on the Royal Navy's new capital ship:
The ship got commissioned just one week before - she is the baseline of her category. Her broadside is one of a battleship's, her armor of an armored cruiser's, and she's faster than the Admiral-class - granted, only by one knot on paper, but that one knot can go a long way. Should we decide to pursue the concept, we will require something... even faster.
Research and development continued their work as well: experiments conducted with the testing tank seemed to yield a useful technical solution for submarine diving planes, but the armor piercing shells also got their caps improved.
Section of the 30,5cm APC Model 1907 shell with the redesigned softcap.
October, 1907
While the first ship of the "Erzherzog-replacement"-type semi-dreadnoughts whose keel got laid down was the Kaiser and hence she loaned her name for the class, in fact the Hunyadi was placed in commission sooner, which marked the ceremonial highlight of this month. Here is hoping that she will be able to somewhat ease the burden the humble coastal defense battleships were required to carry during the war. Although, funnily enough, officially the Kaisers are still "coastal defense battleships", but we'd likely be hard-pressed to pick a single expert from any nation who still buys this. In fact, there is a possibility for fundamental changes in what either the Common Ministerial Council or the Court expects from the Navy, but so far nothing detailed filtered through on the official channels. Nothing reassuring at least, then again, which rumor is such? Internally, the most important debate of the month touched upon the of training. Unfortunately it would be quite a stretch to say that we have achieved anything vaguely resembling a "conclusion", but ultimately a decision has been made to expand the basic training programs for the estimated cost of 700.000 to 1.000.000 Crowns per month. Counter-arguments point out - and these points are not wholly unreasonable - that this sum coupled together with the research budget could almost pay for the construction of two Admiral-class cruisers and the difference might not be noticeable enough in a live combat situation anyway. Unlike the difference of fielding a whole lot more 15cm rifles. For now however, the Navy has the money for the first time to go beyond the baseline requirements, so let's see if we can gain anything from this. The two selected areas are:
Torpedo warfare and...
Gunnery. Given how many times various squadrons were attempting or were forced to fight night battles, practicing night engagements was also very much on the table, but in the end it was decided that we will divert resources towards areas which seem to be useful in more general conditions. If things go as planned, we can expect the first class of crews who can be deemed proficient by the standards of the new courses in about a year. Incidently, the markets also returned to the usual way of doing business in peace, resulting in the Witkowitz Mines and Iron Works licensing a novel quality control method from a french steel mill.
November, 1907
December, 1907
S.M.S. Kaiser and S.M.S. Hunyadi having "fun" with the elements while entering the Channel on the former's shakedown cruise.
Various notables of the state, still visibly drunk on the addicting taste of victory and glory - for which in some cases they personally have sacrificed nothing whatsoever -, watched in content, jovial joy as the Kaiser and Hunyadi, dressed overall, lined up for the parade led by the destroyers Panther and Python. While Vittorio Veneto is slowly gaining shape on her slip rivet by rivet, and an unreliable, cunning regime is calling for vengeance within a stone's throw distance, it's hard to not spare a passing thought for just how much grief this victory might still bring for us in the not-so-far future.
At the diner, a chancelor of the Court was kind enough to point out that "there is some confusion at the Court over the fact that the old cruisers were the ones sent to France" - meaning the Donaus two years earlier. Some light explanations here (the Admirals were not fully ready until three months later), some polite remarks there (the mission could've waited a few weeks), and the actual issue slowly becomes clear. Our best cruisers - similarly to the brand new semi-dreadnoughts - are short-ranged. Which wasn't a point of discussion for an Empire fending for itself on it's territorial waters (fifteen years ago we had ships that were basically floating turrets with barely enough freeboard not to sink at anchor), but it starts to become one for an Empire proudly wishing to show the flag.
Barely a few days later a letter informed the Marinesektion about the Archduke suggesting that in the future, every ship should be expected to leave the Mediterranean Sea and conduct maneuvers without coaling, meaning they should be expected to have an endurance of roughly 4000 nautical miles at economical speed at a bare minimum - unless special circumstances recommend deciding differently.
Lord knows what we should seek 4000 miles away from Cattaro, aside from trouble of course, but "in order to reliably aid our allies in the future and bring up the Kriegsmarine to the same standard as our potential adversaries", political will is pushing us towards building a blue water navy - at least in theory. And regular funding aside, the amount of money the harbor infrastructure ate up in the previous years make it very hard to come up with counter-arguments based on displacement.
Well! Perhaps we can finally celebrate the end of a year one day without any ominous overtones. Until that, cheers and a happy new year!
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Sept 17, 2020 20:59:35 GMT -6
Those are some nasty swells! It'll have been a hard-tack dinner that night I'll warrant, and a prayer that half their coffee is still in its cup when they go to drink it!
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Sept 18, 2020 11:54:19 GMT -6
Happy new year, and is great to finally see the Semi-Dreads hit the waters! While I very much would've loved t see them get a little bit of action in that last war, I suppose they will hopefully get their chances down the line, as that's a class of ships that rarely get their chance to shine. I also look eagerly to your new destroyer program, and the model that will probably come with it
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 20, 2020 12:48:30 GMT -6
I really wanted to see them in action as well, and by that I specifically mean "against pre-dreads". In the advent of all big-gun ships, both BBs and BCs, not so much. Either way, I hoped that I can continue tonight, but chances are it won't be the case. However, I'd not rob everyone's time just by saying "there's nothing to see here just yet, sorry!", so about that very-soon-to-be-fired-up destroyer program:
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 24, 2020 17:47:24 GMT -6
January
The first task of the new year is undoubtedly to take care of the destroyers. Back in September of 1902 it was a reasonable decision to bolster the ranks with new ships of the already available Tiger-class, whose production we already gained significant experience in, whereas at the same time the new 600-ton drafts seemed to complicate things more than they would've brought to the table back then.
Things have changed since then. The first step was to summarize the experience aquired thorough the war, take a look at the current situation, crew reports, the technological possibilities and spice it all up with a bit of wild guesswork regarding the future - and then bake it all into a set of requirements as follows.
- Regarding their endurance, the new destroyers must meet the formal criteria of "being able to leave the Mediterranean Sea without additional coaling under any circumstances" (meaning basically "during wartime"), as we might not be able to count on for example Bizerte for basing forever, and the heavy units should not be left without a screen. In practice, this means that the K.u.K. Kriegsmarine is now semi-officially distancing itself from the "coastal defence force" doctrine - although not entirely without any sort of political pressure from the background. As such, since the destroyers are expected to remain at sea for relatively long durations as well, the cramped quarters of the old Lussin-class ships should not serve as a basis for the new design.
- Potential usage of the old 5cm guns on the new plans are unsatisfactory, and the 7cm caliber, if possible, should be avoided as well. It would be preferred for the ships to be equipped with the 10cm SFK L/40 (E) Model 1903, an artillery piece which proved itself onboard the armed merchant cruisers, and after the disarmament of said AMCs we also have some excess already in storage. Destroyer-on-destroyer engagements proved that gunnery cannot be overlooked, hence designs with less than two guns are entirely unacceptable.
- Designs with less than two torpedo tubes are, again, unacceptable. Three out of four italian capital ships succumbed to torpedoes, and while we don't have any intel on foreign torpedo types unfortunately, the current Whitehead models are constantly under development, and are generally well-liked weapons which the crews regard highly and do trust.
- In the last battle of the war destroyers have struggled to build up favourable positions for torpedo runs. Although the conditions of the night battle strongly suggest that higher speeds would not have helped either, we should still not underestimate the versatility and safety higher battle speeds could provide. As such, the bare minimum the new destroyers should be capable of is the speed of the fully loaded Tiger-class ships: 26 knots - but preferably more.
After briefly examining the potential possibilities - both technically and financially -, the MTK set a standard for 900 tons to work with. The design process then consisted of digging up the drafts of the TB.600(B), and then of course, reworking it massively. In accordance with the "long-range fleet destroyer" concept, the constantly wet turtle deck on the bow of the Tigers had to go and the new ships now feature a different raised forecastle with a tad bit more freeboard. On one occassion the captain of the S.M.S. Dinara had to re-write his report from memory after the ship's logbook got completely soaked on the bridge. The hull got lenghtened and is now equipped with three 10cm (British-licenced 4" QF) guns and - based on the TB.600(B) layout - four 45cm torpedo tubes. The lightweight engines are expected to push the speed up to 30 knots under full load and at an estimated 13.300 HP. While some legitimate concerns got raised over the expected reliability of these engines, this is planned to be addressed on the organizational level. One of the key reasons is the usage of the mixed coal-and-oil firing with the four Yarrow boilers - the fuel was possibly the most controversial issue of the TB.900 program, given that virtually the entire destroyer force will face issues if the mixed firing will prove to be problematic, but even with that the endurance goal can only be considered to be safely achieved by making a report about an estimated range for a tad bit below 12 knots of "economical" speed. Sometimes moving the goal post a little bit is truly in everyone's interests.
We are planning to build 18 of the Ersatz Lussins - as the class was traditionally and temporarily named -, and integrate them into the existing three destroyer formations as such:
The divisions were drawn up with five plus one ships in mind - five ships seeming to be the ideal amount to keep under control within a single group in a battle, and one ship to cover for maintenance and casualties at most of the times. With all ships operational, recon and escort sortie rotations can be organized more naturally as well. This will be helped by the fact that the Tiger-class ships will serve as fleet reserve - they might undergo a refit concentrating on adding minesweeping capability, but it is up in the air just yet. The three remaining Lussin-class ships will be sold off, scrapped or potentially handed over to the newly-estabilished Torpedo School once the new destroyers will be commissioned. The entire program is expected to reach it's conclusion by the spring of 1909. The 18 ships will cost expectedly ~54 million Crowns overall to design and build - funding is, for once, already available.
So far every sign points towards that these ships, if and once commissioned, will clearly be the most powerful ships of their type in the world. For how long - that remains to be seen.
Although I usually don't comment on the AAR "outside" since I often don't have much need to do so, now I'll mention just for the sake of curiosity that I took the little part about the "drenched logbook" from a historical occurence: the ship in question was the Huszár-class destroyer S.M.S. Ulan (transl. 'Lancer') who escorted the Zenta on the day of her sinking (16. aug. 1914.). Ulan almost got cornered as well, but managed to slip away just barely by overloading the machinery so the destroyer achieved 30 knots (on her trials she achieved to do 28 knots in comparison). Turns out machinery safety is of secondary concern when half of the entire anglo-french fleet is firing at someone. Her breakthrough was later described as such on one account: "Ulan rushed through a maze of water columns thrown up by the incoming shellfire, trembling in her whole body due to the overstraining. (...) The roaring of the boiler draft fans filled the ship, and paint chipped off from the red-hot funnels in glowing pieces." This is a photograph of the destroyer, note the state of the bow even under the much more calm and normal conditions. Ulan, while I am at it, survived the Great War, in 1920 she was given to Greece by the Entente and served under the name 'Smyrni' until 1932, when she was struck from the register and got scrapped.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 25, 2020 10:10:03 GMT -6
January, 1908
Although officially the ships will be named at launch as per tradition*, here are the new Ersatz Lussin-class destroyers - or, as they will be addressed as in the future, the Leopard-class.
Laid down the Stabilimento Tecnico Triestino: - Leopard
- Staar (Starling)
- Meteor
- Geier (Vulture)
- Krähe (Crow)
- Rabe (Raven)
- Komet (Comet)
- Marabu (Marabou stork)
Laid down by the Ganz-Danubius at Fiume-Bergundi: - Reihar (Heron)
- Falke (Falcon)
- Harpie (Harpy)
- Kranich (Crane)
- Uhu (Owl)
- Bussard (Buzzard)
Laid down by the Pola Naval Arsenal: - Orjen (named after a mountain range)
- Sperber (Sparrowhawk)
- Magnet
- Condor
As there are no foreseeable issues to hinder the completion of the destroyers neither financially nor technically, we can expect every divisions to be equipped and familiarized with the new equipment by the autumn of 1909.
A direct comparison of the Tiger- and Leopard-class destroyers in wartime paint scheme. The somewhat worse lenght-to-beam ratio and drag coefficient of the Leopards are offset by the significatly more capable engine. Theoretically they will also have a slightly steadier roll rate, but it's uncertain if it will translate into a perceivable practical advantage.
Speaking of expectations, the good news is that the intel we managed to gain on the Vittorio Veneto is quite in line with the former estimations! The bad news is that... the intel we managed to gain on the Vittorio Veneto is quite in line with the former estimations.
The numbers may look similar, but it's not completely just wishful thinking to assume that the Kaiser-class' overall waterline-protection is better and the ships are in general similarly-, if not more survivable despite the thousand tons of difference in displacement. They are still undisputably outgunned - and Italy may lay down further, better capital ships. Assuming the presence of three centerline turrets wasn't trivial in anycase, for example we just got the results of the calculations for the strain heavy wing turrets would impose upon the ships' load-bearing structure. The arrangement seems to be viable, and for all it's drawbacks it could provide redundancy for the main firepower. According to intelligence, Italy took the idea one step further and on various drafts the wing turrets appear to be staggered and capable of firing over the deck area. This could potentially mean a broadside capability of eight to twelve guns. We have to seriously consider the possibility that the Kaisers may lose their advantage even before they will have any opportunity to leverage it in anger. We have won the last war with inferior battleships, and we very well might be forced to fight the next from a similar position.
* - Although the virtually non-existent "naming convention" of the K.u.K. Kriegsmarine (which is probably more akin to a chaotic free-for-all match) leaves me with a fair bit of wiggle room, I tend to try to make naming semi-historical or at least believable. This time most of the Leopard-class ships inherited names from the historical Schichau-class torpedoboats, hence the (mostly - again: chaotic) bird-names.
While I am ranting again, I have to admit, I am not completely warmed up towards the new destroyers.
|
|
|
Post by pastur on Sept 25, 2020 11:52:53 GMT -6
I'm never truly *pleased* with a class of destroyers until I have twin torpedo tubes, but your writing and the detailed analysis you put into your design decisions makes each new class seem like a genuine evolution.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 25, 2020 15:31:41 GMT -6
That's a good point, but I guess it's also the aesthetics. I like both the earlier "oversized torpedoboat"-look and also the mature "fleet destroyer" of the second war, but the current iteration is just something I need to "get used to".
March, 1908
We followed the italian footsteps, and sure enough, further investigation of the wing turrets seemed to indicate that cross-deck firing is indeed possible with proper care taken towards the deck fittings, superstructure and the blast pressure effects in general. This could result, in very simple terms, in the ability of fitting roughly two wing turrets in the place of let's say, a single midships centerline turret. And yet, the issue with the firing arcs, the difference between "theoretically safe" overpressure hitting the deck versus the cold, hard reailty, and the special care needed to be taken with the structural elements and the mass distribution may prove to be more problematic than beneficial. Still, gaining deeper knowledge about the layout is by no means a wasted effort. We have also managed to successfully switch shell manufacturing to utilize trinitrotoluene bursting charges. Although our picric-acid based ecrasite is in fact a stronger explosive by up to 10%, TNT brings about a much-needed improvement in handling safety and storage reliability.
S.M.S. Kaiser on a firing exercise in the Fasana-channel, testing the new shells at the same time Despite all the advancements in the field, gunnery with mixed calibers still isn't free of issues.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Sept 25, 2020 16:12:41 GMT -6
The update just keeps on coming . Out of curiosity, does your engine allow you to create the wakes and smoke we see in the images, or do you have to photoshop them in?
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Sept 26, 2020 17:36:05 GMT -6
This thread brings Christmas every day. 0:)
|
|