Pick a Scenario

[John 3rd]

Makes some sense to me...

[Alikchi2]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


Alikchi and several of us have been working on a differing Japanese 4th Circle Plan that I HOPE will be finished with AE coming out.  Are you still planning that Alikchi?  Am looking forward to that...

As soon as the game is out I'll start putting it together - everything's ready, I think. [8D]

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: Alikchi

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


Alikchi and several of us have been working on a differing Japanese 4th Circle Plan that I HOPE will be finished with AE coming out.  Are you still planning that Alikchi?  Am looking forward to that...

As soon as the game is out I'll start putting it together - everything's ready, I think. [8D]

Thanks! That is outstanding news. I will play it the day it is released!

[Alikchi2]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

ORIGINAL: Alikchi

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


Alikchi and several of us have been working on a differing Japanese 4th Circle Plan that I HOPE will be finished with AE coming out.  Are you still planning that Alikchi?  Am looking forward to that...

As soon as the game is out I'll start putting it together - everything's ready, I think. [8D]

Thanks! That is outstanding news. I will play it the day it is released!

Glad to hear it [:D] As will I!

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: Alikchi

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


Alikchi and several of us have been working on a differing Japanese 4th Circle Plan that I HOPE will be finished with AE coming out.  Are you still planning that Alikchi?  Am looking forward to that...

As soon as the game is out I'll start putting it together - everything's ready, I think. [8D]

Alikchi, if you are making another Iron Storm and need some help with it, let me know. Basicallly what I would like to see is purely the Alt_Naval OOB for the Japanese pitted against a US OOB which incorporates a few extra carriers at the beginning of the war. Are you going to do a scenario like this? I know in Iron Storm you added a few extra what-ifs to the IJN OOB other than what was there at Alt_Naval. What about a scenario that just sticks strictly to the Alt_Naval OOB? Maybe we could coordinate a couple mods between us? [:)]

[Alikchi2]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: Alikchi

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


Alikchi and several of us have been working on a differing Japanese 4th Circle Plan that I HOPE will be finished with AE coming out.  Are you still planning that Alikchi?  Am looking forward to that...

As soon as the game is out I'll start putting it together - everything's ready, I think. [8D]

Alikchi, if you are making another Iron Storm and need some help with it, let me know. Basicallly what I would like to see is purely the Alt_Naval OOB for the Japanese pitted against a US OOB which incorporates a few extra carriers at the beginning of the war. Are you going to do a scenario like this? I know in Iron Storm you added a few extra what-ifs to the IJN OOB other than what was there at Alt_Naval. What about a scenario that just sticks strictly to the Alt_Naval OOB? Maybe we could coordinate a couple mods between us? [:)]

One thing I was going to do was play with Alt_Naval's stuff, yes! I did have a few ideas, but not fully fleshed out, as the scenario John mentioned ("Circles", two extra Shokakus and various bits instead of the Yamatos, other minor change) is priority one. However, I've always been fond of the basic idea I had back in the day - Alt_Naval's OOB counterbalanced by marginally stronger Allied strength from all sides - earlier British reinforcements, Ranger in theatre, perhaps a couple Lexingtons not scrapped, stronger Dutch & French forces, etc. Basically we're working along similar lines to similar ends.

So, what do you suggest sir? [8D] I think once we input A_N's stuff as a 'base' we could have lots of fun.

[Terminus]

I personally think you should do something non-Alt_Naval, seeing as how you already did it...

[Alikchi2]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I personally think you should do something non-Alt_Naval, seeing as how you already did it...

Oh, agreed, that's my first priority. But Alt_Naval's stuff is too.. well fleshed-out not to play with at least a little (assuming I have time).

Probably I'll just stick with what I have planned when I remember how much of a pain in the ass it is to input all those destroyers. [;)]

[bobogoboom]

btw OU sucks.[:'(]

[Alikchi2]

ORIGINAL: bobogoboom

btw OU sucks.[:'(]

[John 3rd]

Damn Alikchi--That is an IMPRESSIVE set of icons!  

[Alikchi2]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Damn Alikchi--That is an IMPRESSIVE set of icons!  

Desperate times call for desperate measures!

[RevRick]

I have been 'fiddlin' with Iron Storm, and some of the AltNaval ideas as well. I like the reworking of the Fuso and Ise classes, and included them in my fiddlin'.

Herewith the results of my orchestration thus far:

With the Washington and London Naval treaties (the latter almost being a failure except for limiting cruiser and destroyer tonnages) not being as encompassing as they were - the IJN is allowed two Amagi class as expanded Nagatos. The IJN also builds the first six carriers, replaces Junyo and Hiyo with two more Shokakus, but then begins to standardize on a successor class, for which I have adopted the Kairyu's. They begin building in 1941 after the last two Shokaku's are launched, and begin appearing in early 43.

Since the IJN had planned to build a lot of 16.1" armed ships and (presumably) started work on the weapons, instead of two more Amagis and four Tosas, they find they have enough weapons to fit out three modified Tosa class (they actually look more like smaller Yamatos) with a speed of 32 kts, and somewhat less armor employed. Since the treaty limitations on new battle ship construction in the first London treaty ends in 1935, these ships begin construction immediately (obviously the plans had been developed over the previous several years.) This class will be completed in 1941-42. All of this work will obviously require new ways to be built as well, and they all cannot be accounted for by the requirements for new tenders, merchant shipping, and reconstructions (unless the IJN is building 40,000 ton Oilers!) There are still rumors of the IJN comtemplating, and or building some super battleships, which must be taken into account.

The combined signals, rumors, and odd photos of construction ways (including one snapped from a long oblique shot taken from a government charted Pan Am Clipper flight which was landed in Tokyo bay with an emergency diplomatic delegation to discuss the naval crisis in 1934 which showed a vessel with a long flat top under construction from a long way off) finds its way to USN and RN intel circles, and combined with the new data being heard from agents and sources in Germany, gets the attention of CNO, FDR, and the congress. In the grand tradition of the "repair" of the USS Constellation in the previous century, the USN (still being led by the gun fraternity) first takes a long look at it Battle Line - primarily the age and speed factors. The "Big Eight" are looked at long and hard. The two South Dakotas allowed in the Washington Treaty, the four Colorados, and the Tennessee class are taken, by turns, in hand and rebuilt, beginning with the engines.

The South Dakota and Indiana are taken in hand first, following the logic that the IJN is just starting its building program, and should not be ready to do anything hostile immediately. The improved boiler designs of the current engineering allow for enough steam generation in a smaller plant to run the engines designed for the Lexington battle cruisers to be fitted and run at 85% capacity. And increase of 150% in power increases the speed of the South Dakota twins to a touch over 28 kts. There is a redesign of the superstructure and the secondary battery is changed to reduce the 6" secondaries to eight, four on each side, and add 10 5"25 mounts. Torpedo blisters are also added to the underwater protection.

The four Colorados are taken in hand next. They receive a more extensive upgrading topside, as well as new engines. They serve as the test bed for the engines of the new North Carolinas being designed. With 115K horsepower, a slightly lengthened bow structure, torpedo blistered sides, their speed doesn't increase as much as expected, does reach a tick under 27 kts. The topside modernization sees all of the 5"51s removed, and replaced by a total of 10 (5/side) 5"38 single mounts, and a pair of 1.1" AA cannon each. (The gun fraternity is finally paying attention to what the Lexington and Sara are doing in Fleet Exercises, at least as far as possible damage to their precious babies!!!) Beginning modernization in 1940, the Tennessees will carry this a bit farther.


The Tennessee class is last, and Tennessee herself is still in the yards at Seattle on out outbreak of war. The same engineering plant changes take place, but with modified torpedo blisters and bow to reduce enough drag to put their speed just over 27.5 kts. The superstructure is completely redone, with four of the twin 5"38 mts being built and put on the North Carolina and the New Hampshire, as well as the four Massachusetts class follow-ons, (Massachusetts, Alabama, Ohio, and Louisianna)

In carrier development, the USN decided to build the fourth carrier (Ranger) using more of the 84,000 tons left under the carrier tonnage, and built a 17,000 ton precursor to the Yorktown class. A useful ship, the Ranger was too lightly built for extended operations, but could maneuver with and conduct flight operations with the Lexington and Saratoga in most situations. By the time of completion in 1934, it was realized that somewhat larger designs were necessary, and the Yorktown and Enterprise were built, then a slightlly improved ship, the Hornet, completing in 1939. When the IJN walked out of the final treaty, the USN realized that they would also need more aircraft carriers (and Congress realized they would need more of everything) simply to say within reach of the IJN, and thus passed the Two ocean Navy bill in 1939. That led to the ordering of the Wasp and Constellation upon completion of Hornet, and a fourth improved Yorktown, Congress (since they went along with the appropriation despite intense efforts by the pacifists to cease the "arms race in the guise of public works spending" efforts of the Navy. But, FDR, and Carl Vinson, loved the Navy. This also allows for the completion of the Illinois and Kentucky, as well as four more Baltimores during the war which follows, at the expense of the Alaska class.

Two of the Montanas are ordered, and will complete sometime in 1944, depending on the needs of the war effort.

The IJN does build two Yamatos, and with the Amagis, the three Tosa new battleships, and the Yamatos, does have a strong battle line of fast powerful ships. The upgrading of all of the 14" battleships, and the Nagato class still gives the IJN an overall speed advantage.

At the beginning of the Pacific War, North Carolina and New Hampshire are both in the Atlantic working up, along with Pennsylvania, Arizona, Nevada, Oklahoma, New York, Texas, and Arkansas. The final three were scheduled to be decommissioned as the North Carolinas and the Massachusetts came into service. I doubt they will be now, but they may remain in the Atlantic.

I've been fiddling with this, as I've said, for over a year, and have just got back to it. There are flaws in it, but then again, this is a "What If" situation anyway.

Let me know what you think. It has always been a Naval History fantasy of mine to upgrade the Tennessees and Colorados before the war started, and now I can...

[Terminus]

Very nice, Reverend...[&o]

[51st Highland Div]

That is an excellent piece of at naval history rev rick...very nice indeed [:)]

[John 3rd]

Interesting and somewhat plausible.

[JWE]

Very perceptive, Rev, and quite valid.

For the Japanese, however, developmental things went South in early ’42. Why not let them build some Zuikaku follow-ons instead of the Unryus? They had no yard space, so it would have to be ton-for-ton, but you could squeeze a couple ‘kakus out by early ’44, instead of Taiho, with some sidebar (maybe 2) Unryus by mid ’44.

Took them 2 and a half years to build anything capital, so no matter what the “Circle” plan, it couldn’t happen, but some judicious planning “could” have put an additional first line carrier or two off the ways by 6/44.

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Very perceptive, Rev, and quite valid.

For the Japanese, however, developmental things went South in early ’42. Why not let them build some Zuikaku follow-ons instead of the Unryus? They had no yard space, so it would have to be ton-for-ton, but you could squeeze a couple ‘kakus out by early ’44, instead of Taiho, with some sidebar (maybe 2) Unryus by mid ’44.

Took them 2 and a half years to build anything capital, so no matter what the “Circle” plan, it couldn’t happen, but some judicious planning “could” have put an additional first line carrier or two off the ways by 6/44.

I was basing a large part of the IJN build up on the AltNaval scenario, which had them build up to have 5 23,000 CVs building at the same time to be ready in 1942, which I find to be a little aggressive, specially when for at least part of that time the two hypothetical Karima class BBs were building as well. Stipulating that at least two naval shipyards would need to put in one more building way, and that the two follow on Shokakus to replace Junyo/Hiyo would be launching in 41 should free up three carrier sized ways, with the final of the three Tosa BBs completing as well. This assumes the meglomaniacs in the design bureau get their way and the Yamato and Musashi are laid down as planned to replace the first to Tosas.

It would seem to me that an increase in yard capacity nationwide would be necessary for anything like this program, which would be one of the casual observations which find its way into intelligence analysis to point to some sinister plans afoot in the Imperial Headquarters.

As far as the numbers go, Japan had been pushing for a 10:10:7 ratio for BBs before, which presumable would have happened if they were allowed to build the two Amagis in exchange for the USN building the 4th Colorado and the two South Dakotas, (each with four extra guns, thus equating a 5th Colorado.)

One thing I have been thinking about is the allowance for the RN would be for the restrictions on the Nelson and Rodney to have been eliminated as one of the consequences for the Amagis, and possibly one or two of the Saints to have been built (were they N3s or G3s.) The Nelsons were to have been larger and faster when designed, but were compromised in layout and in speed because of the Washington Treaty. If that is not as restrictive, then four improved Rodneys would have been built as a balance, and might have spurred further 16" gunned BB development. I haven't been able to find anything much out about the originally planned Nelsons, but if they were capable of 28-29 kts and had a more conventional Layout, they would have led more naturally to the KGVs being similarly armed, I would think.

[el cid again]

The most critical resource, after oil, for both USA and Japan, was steel. Steel is used for many things - but you can only use any given batch for one thing. Increasing how much you get is a slow and expensive process - and meaningless for Japan if it cannot lift more iron ore and coke - which it can not without some source of shipping to do so.

Another critical resource for a major ship is engines. Once again - you cannot build more ships with big engines in a limited time due to the need to wait for engines for them The Unryus sort of forced this issue - using destroyer engine sets instead of the designed cruiser sets - but the bigger carriers more or less used battleship engines sets. Japan can build two of these in a year - and it needs a period longer than the war to change that - a bad investment - since out year production will not be useful in time for the conflict.

The only ways to get more ships DURING the war is

1) Start production sooner. Substitute the class you want for something they built. It has to already be designed of course.

2) Use ships that require less time to produce - and less powerful engines - a solution Japan adopted in many instances. This mitigates against very large ship production, unfortunately.

[mikemike]

If you want to play around with the Washington Treaty results, start off with the ships that were available or building, and go from there.

I'd see Alt History unfold like this:

The battleship issues were thrashed out. Then a member of the US delegation, seeing that Britain had three aircraft carriers (Argus, Eagle, Furious) and soon Hermes in addition, and the USN only Langley, and although nobody could really say what carriers might be good for eventually, proposed giving each of the principal nations permission to convert two of their finished or building ships to carriers. That way the USN could recoup part of the money already sunk into the building program by converting the two Lexingtons which were farthest advanced. The British delegation consented, seeing this as an opportunity to get some mileage out of Courageous and Glorious which would otherwise have been scrapped as useless. The Japanese reasoned that, while nobody was quite sure how to fit carriers into the naval strategy, anything that would help letting hulls under construction survive was to be pursued, and, still smarting because the battleship issue hadn't gone to their liking, demanded being allowed to convert all four of the Amagi class.

The US delegation, with another four Lex hulls to dispose of, saw no harm in that, as the ships that counted (battleships) were not impacted, and consented, provided everybody got the same allowance, and that it was ensured the converted ships had no battleship-type protection and only small-caliber armament (six-inch guns or less), so the Japanese couldn't convert them back to BB's later on.

The British delegation was put into a quandary: the only additional hulls suitable for conversion were Repulse and Renown, and while they were convinced that those ships would be more useful as carriers than as battlecruisers, this would leave them with just eleven 15-inch ships and two new-construction 16-inch ships, so at a qualitative and quantitative disadvantage against the USN. They therefore demanded the right to build four new ships with 16-in guns as non-negotiable condition for the increased number of carriers.

Public (and published) opinion in the USA, spearheaded by people like Billy Mitchell, forced the US government to go for the maximum number of carriers, even if that meant accepting the British conditions and readjusting the battleship accord. The result of a prolonged and occasionally acrimonious wrangling between the delegations was as follows:

USA: may complete Colorado, West Virginia, Washington, South Dakota, and Indiana as battleships, Lexington, Saratoga, Constellation and Ranger as carriers
has to give up building the rest of the Lexington and South Dakota classes
may keep Nevada, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Mississippi, Idaho, Tennessee, California, New Mexico, Maryland
has to scrap all pre-dreadnoughts, South Carolina, Delaware, Florida, Utah, Wyoming, Arkansas
may keep Texas as a target ship,
may keep New York in a partly demilitarized state as training ship

Great Britain:
may build four battleships with 16-in guns and a maximum displacement of 38.000 tons (as compensation for the South Dakotas)instead of the G.3 class
has to give up building the N.3 class
may convert Courageous, Glorious, Repulse, Renown to carriers
may keep Hood and all ships of the Queen Elizabeth and Revenge classes
may convert Thunderer to a target ship
may keep Iron Duke in a partly demilitarized state as training ship
has to scrap everything else

Japan
may complete Mutsu, Kaga, Tosa as battleships, Amagi, Akagi, Atago, Takao as carriers
has to give up building the Owari and No. 13 classes
may keep Kongo, Haruna, Kirishima, Fuso, Yamashiro, Ise, Hyuga, Nagato
has to scrap all pre-dreadnoughts
may convert Settsu to a target ship
may keep Hiei in a partly demilitarized state as training ship

France and Italy each were allowed to build one new battleship each after 1925 respectively 1927; everybody else agreed upon not beginning any new ships until 1933. France elected to convert Béarn to a carrier, Italy relinquished that right as they didn't feel they needed carriers.

Limits for all new construction except the four British ships were a maximum displacement of 35.000 tons and a maximum caliber of 16 inches.

Building that many new ships had a major impact on the defence budgets, and especially Britain found that it couldn't build as many trade protection cruisers as were needed, but the USA and Japan, too, had to scale back their cruiser building programs:

CA's built until 1930:
Britain 10 including two for Australia
USA 12
Japan 9
France 6
Italy 4

I'll leave the London Treaty of 1932 to your imagination; this may be the starting point for the Alt-IJN program.