Page 17 of 39
RE: Allied OOB Changes
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:16 pm
by oldman45
You are a fine diplomat sir. I think this should work out just fine. 50 might be a bit of overkill on the yard in Sydney, perhaps 35 is better.
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:27 pm
by Skyland
ORIGINAL: oldman45
ORIGINAL: Terminus
ORIGINAL: Terminus
I stand corrected, but wasn't the Surcouf sunk in a collision?
I think that's the consensus that it was hit by a freighter while transiting to Panama.
Later studies tend to conclude that it was sunk by US A-17 and B-18 based in Panama.
To John 3rd : could we have the SS Surcouf in your mod ? Please [;)]
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:44 pm
by John 3rd
Do you think a pair of 6" guns will tip the balance? [:D]
RE: Allied OOB Changes
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:45 pm
by John 3rd
ORIGINAL: oldman45
You are a fine diplomat sir. I think this should work out just fine. 50 might be a bit of overkill on the yard in Sydney, perhaps 35 is better.
Doubt if my ex-wife would agree with that statement!
We certainly could go with 35. At least it will provide a real yard that can do some work on Allied ships--not to mention--help with upgrades.
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:52 pm
by oldman45
ORIGINAL: Skyland
ORIGINAL: oldman45
ORIGINAL: Terminus
I stand corrected, but wasn't the Surcouf sunk in a collision?
I think that's the consensus that it was hit by a freighter while transiting to Panama.
Later studies tend to conclude that it was sunk by US A-17 and B-18 based in Panama.
To John 3rd : could we have the SS Surcouf in your mod ? Please [;)]
Interesting, I had recently read it was a collision. You would almost think that when the planes showed up they would have thought maybe that is not a German sub. The Surcouf was huge.
RE: Allied OOB Changes
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 4:03 pm
by kfsgo
ORIGINAL: oldman45
You are a fine diplomat sir. I think this should work out just fine. 50 might be a bit of overkill on the yard in Sydney, perhaps 35 is better.
Well - all the treaty battleships are around 37500t, so they won't fit, and they're The Future Of The Navy, after all - when are we supposing the upgrade takes place? 35 does give you the option of working on the slower ships; does being able to do that justify the effort involved if it's post-1936?
The
Captain Cook drydock was the one built during the war; it's about 1100ft*150ft; Wikipedia claims the Iowas are 887*108, so it should presumably
end up as a 50kt dock by late-war...just a question of what's gone on in the meantime.
e: if it's upgraded pre-war there wouldn't appear to be a need to build the CCD, however, and if you do build the CCD then it's probably a little odd to have any pre-41 upgrades - so probably an either/or situation.
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 4:04 pm
by DOCUP
John I like Mark II. I think you hit the Allied starting point on the head there.
As to your 6 in remark. My personal exp, it dosen't matter how big or small the gun is pointed at you, it always looks huge.[:D]
doc
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 4:08 pm
by RevRick
ORIGINAL: FatR
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
3. I would have to agree that the AAA enhancements to the BB supposes a level of precognition that is a bit of a leap. Perhaps allow them instead as upgrades in early '42 (of course we are talking about a lot of yard time for that)
[color=#CC000]How about have the Upgrades ready on Dec 7th. The BBs go through the PH Attack and have the immediate option?[/color]
This is reasonable too.
Actually, gentlemen, the entire upgrade was planned for around 1937. Remember the planning for the North Carolina and it's successors already included those weapons. But CNO did not want to take any of the B5 off line because of the global tensions. So, if you are going to presume a reboiler and blister overhaul, it makes little to no sense not to go ahead with the AAA, particularly the 5/38 tw mount portion. They should have something like 8 - 5/38 tw, and 16 1.1's (if you don't posit that someone in the BuWeps got their head out of their tookus and found out how much the 40mm Bofors actually cost.)
They are going to be opened up, and drydocked anyway. Not to complete the project when it's design origin was already in production doesn't make a lot of sense, even with the Navy's hidebound hesitance to change.
IF you really want to look into things: in the deep recesses of memory, I recall reading about the engines for the 1920 South Dakota Class were laying around somewhere. I do not know where I read that, but if you are going to rip the guts out with the reboilering - sticking the engine sets for the 1920 SoDaks (rated 60K hp, I believe) would make this group a lot closer to the new BB's coming on line in speed than puttering around at 20 kt on a good day. I played with that on SpringSharp and came up with a projected speed of 25.5 kt.
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 4:51 pm
by ny59giants
Mk 2 - Feedback
The repair shipyard issue at Sydney could be worked around by the use of ARDs. The Allies get 5 of them in USA (Scenario 2) that can each hold up to 55k. Have one arrive or a slightly smaller sized one at Sydney or Melbourne sometime in the second half of 42. Thus, keep the original size until the ARD arrives to help out.
I like Rev Rick's speed of 25 being the one for the 5 BBs having their boilers replaced.
I play both sides and I don't want to see the sub launched torpedoes get too powerful too soon. If that were to happen, then Japan could be in trouble soon after the SRA is captured. [:(]
BBB (Big Bad Boise) plus 4 newer DDs in Philippine Archepelago would be nice. [8D] Make sure they are the Porter Class DDs with 8 x 5" guns. Better crew experience here only would be nice.
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:53 pm
by oldman45
They were going to build 6 of the South Dakota's, is it reasonable to think they built
all of the engines and if so, we could have all of the big 5 reboilered to give them a 25kn speed. I feel a snoopy dance coming on
Edit: One of my sources says that 5 sets of engines were complete with no record of what happened to them. How convenient, here we have 5 wonderful turbines and boilers just laying around waiting to be used. [;)]
Edit II: My source called back to remind me that the South Dakota engines probably would not fit in any of the Big 5. delete the happy dance [:(]
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 7:41 pm
by DuckofTindalos
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Do you think a pair of 6" guns will tip the balance? [:D]
Maybe the 8" guns she actually carried will.
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:43 am
by JeffroK
ORIGINAL: FatR
So, other Allied powers.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Britain
Terminus Force Z Recommendation:
I think we should start by allowing Indomitable to come to the party. No Caribbean grounding.
After that, Renown, Belfast (she gets rebuilt more quickly), and four K-class destroyers. After that, we assume that all the DD's in refit at Singers are available. PoW and Repulse deployed with almost no destroyer support, so it's not unrealistic to prioritize that.
This gives a Force Z like this:
BB Prince of Wales
BC's Repulse & Renown
CV Indomitable
CA Belfast
DDs
Jupiter, Electra, Encounter, Express, Stronghold, Kelvin, Kimberley, Kingston, Kipling
OK, I agree with this.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
2. Improve Singapore's Aircraft composition to something more envisioned with the 335+ Front-Line Planes desired:
--How about a couple of Hurricane or, dare I say, Spitfire Squadrons?
All Spitfires are needed in Europe and Africa. This is late 1941, and British airforce is not in a good position - it might have and edge in numbers, but it is outclassed by Luftwaffe. Most likely scenario is adding 1-2 more squadrons of Hurricans/Bufalloes. Or maybe early Warhawks, if those are given to British.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
--Completely fillout the Vilderbeest and Swordfish units.
--More Recon/Air Search assets
OK.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Air Comment: Replace Buffalo with Hurri IIA/B, Vildebeeste with Beaufort I, Blenheim IF with Beaufighter IF, Blenheim I with Blenheim IV.
See the comment on Spitfires above. Even if British evaluate the enemy more realistically, all modern planes are needed in the war that's already goes on. Heck, some squadrons in Britain itself still were flying Swordfishes in summer of 1942.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
3. A somewhat built defense line north of Singapore.
North where? It makes sense along the northern border of Malaya.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
4. How about the 18th ID STARTING in Singapore or at sea in the IO and ready for the player to send it wherever?
Better in the sea.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
5. Better Commonwealth dispositions in Malaya/Burma:
Add an extra Brigade to 9th & 11th Indian Divisions.
If you do, I advise make them understrength and partially disabled and set very low experience, reflecting freshly raised troops. By that moment the pool of trained Indian troops was really drained.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Move 23 Australian Bde, 2/4 Pioneer and 2/4 MG Bn to Singapore.
7 Armoured Bde is at start in Burma
7th Armored was planned to be sent to Singapore, IIRC.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Dutch
1. We had some ships thrown out for additional consideration earlier. What about them?
Add perhaps a couple DDs, fortuitiously saved from Germans, and that's that.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
2. A few more modern planes for them?
From where? Dutch don't even have aircraft production anymore.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
French
Available Free French Ships
Why they are in the Pacific? It is not like New Caledonia is that important for the Free French. Moving more British/American ships to combat Japanese makes more sense, because of simplified logistics.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Australia
Would it be feasible to increase repair yards in Australia ?
During the war yes, but unfortunately we can't do it. Well, as a compromise between mechanics and realilty I can see the above-proposed expansion of the Sydney shipyard to 35.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Aussie Air/Land Ideas:
Wirraway replaced by P43 and P66, not required by the USAAF but better than the Wirra!
As it said, it was an attack aircraft... And again, Australians filled the squadrons with that they had. Give them some hand-me-downs from US, like Vindicators and B-24s in early 1942 maybe. Then open upgrade for B-20s.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Bring the Aussie versions of the Beaufort, Beaufighter & Mustang forwards, these were the first modern aircraft produced and there were many delays in getting them going.
Why Australian ones?
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Australian Army
(The rump of 8th Div has gone to Malaya)
A Militia Bde moves from Melbourne to Darwin.
A Militia Bde goes from Sydney to Pt Moresby
A Militia Bde goes from Brisbane to Rabaul.
A Militia Bn to Tulagi
A Militia Bn to Lae, move the NGVR to Milne Bay
Except the move from Melbourne to Darwin, sending the militia units outside of Australia is politically problematic, AFAIK.
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
ECONOMY
Add Allied Economic Bases on the map for some flexibility.
OK. We'll need to discuss this in detail later.
Was this to be FatR telling us what to do or JohnIII seeking ideas, I hope he is in the japanese side of the thread telling them taht anything they think of is BS. (Which is why I have avoided it.)
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:37 am
by John 3rd
ORIGINAL: oldman45
They were going to build 6 of the South Dakota's, is it reasonable to think they built
all of the engines and if so, we could have all of the big 5 reboilered to give them a 25kn speed. I feel a snoopy dance coming on
Edit: One of my sources says that 5 sets of engines were complete with no record of what happened to them. How convenient, here we have 5 wonderful turbines and boilers just laying around waiting to be used. [;)]
Edit II: My source called back to remind me that the South Dakota engines probably would not fit in any of the Big 5. delete the happy dance [:(]
Oldman--YOu just about made me spew my tea reading this entry!
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:43 am
by John 3rd
JeffK: I've really enjoyed the entire conversation we've had on both sides of the Mod. I've tried to serve as mediator over here while keeping my ears to ground over there.
FatR and I, as well as others, discussed so many concepts in the RA mammoth thread that we were already pretty close to agreement when it came the Japanese development side. The synergy over there has been excellent. Things have gotten passionate as they always do with people lobbying for their pet projects and interests and I think we've managed to chart a pretty successful course to this point. Having long-term Modders jumping in like JWE, Juan, Term and a couple of others has only served to open up new directions of thought as well as keep the 'are you CRAZY' thinking somewhat in check.
I'll add that last comment to BOTH sides of the Mod!
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:45 am
by John 3rd
ORIGINAL: Terminus
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Do you think a pair of 6" guns will tip the balance? [:D]
Maybe the 8" guns she actually carried will.
Terminus just made the point I was trying to convery with the above Post! [;)]
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:51 am
by John 3rd
Other Comments:
1. RevRick: I like the idea of the Upgrade for the Big 5. If they cannot get their speed upgraded then we might certainly look at the FULL upgrade for Dec 7th. Heck--the JFB inside me REALLY would love to clock those BBs even more if they were useful starting DAY ONE! Sorry but I do think the 1.1s have to stay...
2. Michael:
a. Changing the US Torps is an AFB Dream and I hate that idea! Wish we could simply do a gradual improvement as it historically occurred. Am still thinking about a device upgrade for all SS starting in--say Aug 42--when they figured out the depth problem and starting turning OFF that useless magnetic exploder.
b. The ARD arriving in late-42 is an interesting idea! We could allow for some expansion of the actual yard with then an ARD arriving as a reinforcement. It would elegantly solve the issue and allow for Capital Ship repair and upgrade.
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:59 am
by oldman45
Just a thought, in the 1930's the British moved two 55k ton floating docks to Singapore. They would be similar to the ones the US built in 43/44. Just put them in the game. Then simply tow one or both to what ever port you want.
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:14 am
by John 3rd
I assume they didn't stay at Singgers. Where did they go?
RE: Allied OOB Changes
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:46 am
by FatR
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Allied OOB Changes
Dec 7, 1941
Perfect War Mod
MARK II Version: I went through to last two pages of Posting and think I've got everything to this point.
USA
1. The USS Wasp is Yorktown-Class
2. There are 10 newer DDs (2 Porter, 4 Mahan, and 4 Sims--4 of these in Philippines)
3. The Big Five US BB (Maryland, California, West Virginia, Colorado, and Tennessee will start the war with a partial upgrade to their propulsion while still waiting for an AA Upgrade that will be available as of 12-41.
4.Strengthen the Air Pipeline/Base Prep along the following lines:
a. Wake, Midway, and Guam: add small BF, fill out Defense Btn, put something in Guam for an Inf Unit and raise Forts by 1.
b. Base the Marine Fighters AND Vindicators at Midway to serve as western outpost of Hawaii.
b. Con Bn at Christmas, Pago-Pago, Suva, and Noumea to begin base construction.
c. Dutch Harbor gains a Con Bn
d. AS with several S-Boats (like in RA) based at Pago Pago as well as Dutch Harbor
5. We may change the DUD Torp rate to 60% matching US ship launched Torps.
PHIL
1. Add an Inf unit to Legaspi taken from Northern Luzon
2. Fill out Fighters a bit more (adding 12-18), add a B-25 Squadron and an A-20 squadron
3. Add 4 newer DDs to the Houston or Boise TF or in Manila.
4. Raise Forts in Bataan by 1 and add 20,000 supply at this base.
BRIT
1. New FORCE Z: Prince of Wales, Repulse, Renown, and DDs Kelvin, Kimberley, Kingston, Kipling
2. Add one Hurricane Squadron to Singapore as well as add 12-18 more Buffalos.
3. Fill out Vildebreest and Swordfish units.
4. Add 3rd Regiments to the two Indian Divisions in Malaya: they will be at about 50% strength and low experience.
5. Just south of Ceylon sits two TF---CV TF: Indomitable, Belfast, and DDs Jupiter, Electra, Encounter, Express, and Stronghold. This TF is escorting the 18th Brit ID...
AUST
1. Sydney Repair Yard starts at normal number but is damaged to expand out to 50.
2. Switch out 2 Wirraway for A-24
3. Add some older Fighters to the Pool as mentioned (P-36, Buffalo, P-400, etc...)
FRENCH
1. Add a STF of 1 CA, 1 CL, 4 DD, 4 SS to New Caledonia or Tahiti.
2. AS Jules Verne and a US Lead-Lease AKE serve as Depot Ships.
3. Legionairre Rgt at NC or Tahiti, and a BF at each location
4. Move the French DD already in the game to join these units.
Economy
Add on-site facilities as described earlier.
I agree with almost everything here. Except I'd still keep the shipyard at Sydney at 35. Being damaged doesn't do anything, it will be repaired in a couple of weeks. Better to add more ARDs as discussed above.
About torpedoes - on one hand, Japanese ASW is now more powerful at the start, on another, IIRC, ASW only becomes fully effective in 1944. I recently tried actively hunting down Allied subs in deep water with super-Es and Type 2 DC-armed DDs (may of 1943), and results were completely unsatisfactory - I avoided losing some of my best DDs only thanks to the still-high dud rate, lost one of the escorts and did only marginal damage. Nothing like things I've seen in Downfall.
But considering far improved foresight in weapon development for Japanese, I think it would just be unfair to leave the biggest flaw in Allied arsenal completely untouched. If you absolutely hate the idea of lesser dud rate at the start, an upgrade in late spring-summer of 1942 can be a compromise... I belive subs themselves must be upgraded, replacing Mk14 torpedo device with Mk14 Mod1, with dud rate of 60%
RE: Confirmed Additions
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:44 am
by oldman45
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
I assume they didn't stay at Singgers. Where did they go?
Yes they did, they were scuttled, when the Japanese took over.