RHSEBO: Updated - and expanded to ALL scenarios

[el cid again]

I propose to replace RHSPPO - Scenario 74 - with RHSEBO.

I am not aware of anyone using PPO - the PPO concept is used entirely in EOS family and survives in that form.

EBO is a variation of EEO - itself a variation of EOS - which is the Japan Enhansed Scenario proposed by Joe
Wilkerson about 3 years ago. The B stands for Battleships.

Essentially we have a Japanese planned war effort starting still sooner than in EEO - but this one isn't a secret because Japan
fails to agree to the London Naval Treaty. Thus a naval arms race - mitigated by the poor conditions of the depression era -
occurs sooner.

The purpose of the scenario is actually to rationalize how the Dutch Battlecruisers might have been built. \
Also de Zeven Proviencien class - wonderful ten gun light cruisers (likely with DP batteries - at least the twins). Instead of Yamato class -
Japan builds to the earlier designs. I need to study the US in this period - but likelly there are variations of the Washington class - or possibly more of them. Some ships taken out of service in this period probably also remain Material for this is solicited.

This is modest enough I can do it in WITP - and in a few days - without slot issues - but I need some art help. Since Terminus has art for the Dutch ships - and he presented it in the discussion leading to this - I assujme he will contribute it. Other ideas are also open here: might there have been some fortifications built? If so - where ?

[Historiker]

Names:

Willem van Oranje (Wilhelm I. von Oranien-Nassau)
Wilhelmina Helena Pauline Maria (Queen 1890-1948)


Admirals/ Naval Persons:
Michiel de Ruyter (the CL needs another name)
Piet Heyn (Buccaneer)
Abel Tasman

Politician:
Johan Rudolf Thorbecke
Johan van Oldenbarnevelt
Johan de Witt
(possible "Johan-class")

Scientists:
Antoni van Leeuwenhoek
Desiderius Erasmus
Christiaan Huygens
Baruch de Spinoza
Hugo de Groot
Hendrik Antoon Lorentz

Artists:
Rembrandt van Rijn
Vincent van Gogh

Else:
Anton Herman Gerard Fokker (Maybe for an AV or CV(L) ) - maybe a CVL with 20-30 planes?
Eduard Douwes Dekker / Multatuli (Writer)
Cornelis Lely (constructed the Zuiderzeewerke)

That should be enough for some ships...
All names took from the "De Grootste Nederlander" list, all are from the top 50. So all of them are considered today as some of the greatest Netherlands. All are already dead in 1941 or - in case of the Queen - live long enough to have done what makes them famous enough for a shipname...

[DuckofTindalos]

Think Tasman's first name was "Abel", but potayto, potahto...

[Historiker]

He's right...


Taking the 1912 plan, I think the following:
In 1912, the Dutch committee calculated for 35 to complete the fleet expansion plans.
So I take 35 years and divide them through the number of ships. That's what was calculated as possible in 1912. We can take this data and we have what's theoretically possible in 1912. Of course, we mustn't forget that there was the depression, but the economy will grow in total between 1912 and 1941, no?:

9BBs = one new every 43,5 month
6DDs = one every 67 month
16TBs = one every 25,5 month
8 big SS = one every 51 month
2 big MLs = one every 17,5 years

They definitly have enough shipyards to build this ships, the designs may come both from Germany and England - I think its only the question of money.

[DuckofTindalos]

Isn't it always...

[Historiker]

Isn't it always the same one, who makes this comments...

[DuckofTindalos]

Regarding art, the battlecruiser side isn't mine to contribute. You'll have to ask forum member Dixie for that. You can have the cruiser side if you want it; that's just a cut-n-paste I made myself.

[el cid again]

The Dutch BC program was more real than I understood - and a single drydock to build them was constructed early in anticipation of orders.
Political considerations preclude more than one being ocmpleted before WWII began in ETO - or German delivery of the main guns - but one might have been far enough along to move under her own power (and complete in the USA by the time our PTO begins). It would be the early design - only 8 5.9 inch guns - but it is a nice, simplified Scharnhorst design - with very Dutch lines. We need a name for her. [Holland? with projected sisters Niederland and Gelderland???]

[el cid again]

There were two British variations - and in these conditions it is likely the conservatives would have won out - with a variation of the KGV with three triple 15 inch turrets. For this we can use existing KGV art. We also have Lion art for BBO - and maybe the lead ship could be far enough along to include. It appears there might be one or two early KGV - but the whole class would be uniform. The other variation would be a 12 fourteen inch gun (three quad) variation - with less protection. No problem with names.

[el cid again]

The USA stronly considered triple quad 14 inch guns for its ships - and went over to 16 inch ony because Japan was feared to be building guns of at least that caliber. There was also an 18 inch gun project - dating from a 1918 battleship design - and wanted by Stalin for his projects - but it would dictate a 65 000 ton ship - and take too long. Likely there might be one or two early Washingtons - possibly armed with 14 inch - or three twin 16s. As soon as triple 16s were available - the regular Washington's might follow. The Iowas might be cast early - as repeat South Dakotas - arriving sooner in the war - and getting you six of them.

[el cid again]

The Russians were very serious - but too late. But they MIGHT have just got one variation of an Italian design far enough along to sail -
and if it somehow could escape ETO - it might complete in the USA. The Russians did have design data enough to build their copy of the US 16 inch - they wanted an even bigger weapon - and they always planned to make their own engines (contrary to many reports). The slipways for these shps still exist - and are great strategic assets. No problem with names here either.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

He's right...


Taking the 1912 plan, I think the following:
In 1912, the Dutch committee calculated for 35 to complete the fleet expansion plans.
So I take 35 years and divide them through the number of ships. That's what was calculated as possible in 1912. We can take this data and we have what's theoretically possible in 1912. Of course, we mustn't forget that there was the depression, but the economy will grow in total between 1912 and 1941, no?:

9BBs = one new every 43,5 month
6DDs = one every 67 month
16TBs = one every 25,5 month
8 big SS = one every 51 month
2 big MLs = one every 17,5 years

They definitly have enough shipyards to build this ships, the designs may come both from Germany and England - I think its only the question of money.

It appears no drydock or slipway large enough was ever built. But there was "the battlecruiser drydock" built in the 1930s.

[Historiker]

Is it really a problem building a slipway?
I mean, what is a slipway? Just a flat area in the right angle that the ship slips to the water with a massive fundament to allow thousands of tons on it. It can't be THAT problem building slips within a year or even faster. I think the biggest problem is (beside the money) to get enough skilled worker, no?

I don't see any great technical knowledge that's needed to build a slipway, especially as the Dutch really should have enough experience with weak ground and such things as they are the masters of building dikes.

I guess you've read what I've written in the other thread that I think it should be possible concerning all data, that even (or at least?) two BCs are completed or at least able to flee to England in 1940, so that they are ready for service in 12/41.

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The Dutch BC program was more real than I understood - and a single drydock to build them was constructed early in anticipation of orders.
Political considerations preclude more than one being ocmpleted before WWII began in ETO - or German delivery of the main guns - but one might have been far enough along to move under her own power (and complete in the USA by the time our PTO begins). It would be the early design - only 8 5.9 inch guns - but it is a nice, simplified Scharnhorst design - with very Dutch lines. We need a name for her. [Holland? with projected sisters Niederland and Gelderland???]

I called mine the Den Haag...

[Historiker]

Would the pride of the Durch navy really only get the name of a city?
AFAIK, the Netherlands have more than just this three provinces, no?

[DuckofTindalos]

BTW, Sid, the battlecruisers weren't meant to carry the 5.9in guns. They were projected to carry this:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNSwede ... _m1924.htm

I used the British 4.7in QF gun to save a slot in the device database.

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Would the pride of the Durch navy really only get the name of a city?
AFAIK, the Netherlands have more than just this three provinces, no?

Yeah, hence the "Seven Provinces".

[mlees]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Is it really a problem building a slipway?
I mean, what is a slipway? Just a flat area in the right angle that the ship slips to the water with a massive fundament to allow thousands of tons on it. It can't be THAT problem building slips within a year or even faster. I think the biggest problem is (beside the money) to get enough skilled worker, no?

No. The ground has to be firm enough, while being close enough to the water, to support the weights of the ship and the construction dock.

(The building slip for the Musashi cracked...)

I don't see any great technical knowledge that's needed to build a slipway, especially as the Dutch really should have enough experience with weak ground and such things as they are the masters of building dikes.

Dikes don't need to support 30000 tons concentrated on 200m by 50m of area pressing down on soft(ish) firmament.

True, the lateral forces of the sea are immence, but that is spread out by the dike, braced against the high-than-sea level land areas nearby.

A 30000 ton ship, presses down, not sideways. You need good solid foundation underneath the dock to support that.

I guess you've read what I've written in the other thread that I think it should be possible concerning all data, that even (or at least?) two BCs are completed or at least able to flee to England in 1940, so that they are ready for service in 12/41.

It's doable, but you make it sound like it is as easy as paving a parking lot... unless i misread your post. [;)]

[Historiker]

Don't you think, that a nation that depends on the knowledge of stability of ground with a huge number of shipyards and harbours isn't able to find the right place for some slipways?

[DuckofTindalos]

Well, the Netherlands isn't exactly a big country.