How many other BBs were prevented by the 3 Yamatos?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Terminus

"Building a slip isn't that complex"????????

Just ask Henry Kaiser. What you don't get is Aryan efficiency. American ships were a lot more expensive than comparable UK ships, even though UK shipbuilders were hardly the most modern or efficient.

How should I understand this?

American ships cost about 2.5x the cost of equivalent UK ships (measured in both money and man-hours). Certainly, American shipyards--e.g., the Kaiser yards--set some records for rapid building, but they also set records for price. Henry Kaiser got into the business from scratch, but he also made a bundle.

[mikemike]

ORIGINAL: herwin

What you don't get is Aryan efficiency.

??? Can't say I'm too impressed by Indian shipyards.

[Historiker]

ORIGINAL: mikemike

ORIGINAL: herwin

What you don't get is Aryan efficiency.

??? Can't say I'm too impressed by Indian shipyards.

The Iranian shipyards aren't the most productive as well...

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

ORIGINAL: mikemike

ORIGINAL: herwin

What you don't get is Aryan efficiency.

??? Can't say I'm too impressed by Indian shipyards.

The Iranian shipyards aren't the most productive as well...

That's an allusion to a comment by Steve Kosakowski on Totaler Krieg. The way America got its productivity was not by following the model found in many games with a production model (Kos: "What if we divert Orc production into a new Nazgul prototype, get the cost down, and build lots of those?"). America got its productivity by accepting sky-high levels of inefficiency.

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

That's why I've written:

Building a slip isn't that complex. IIRC, the slip for the gigantiv H-39 was expected to be completed within 15 months. Its rather the additional industry

What's a slip than a solid pieve of ground with an angle of about 4° to the water and strong enough to carry the weight?

Can you explain me why the huge Japan isn't able to build a slip with a length of 250-300m in such a huge country? of course, it takes water deep enough in front of it (which can be digged out) and enough room for the ship to stop (which can be assisted by the brakeing shields). But apart from that? Enlighten me!
I already wondered how when you (?) once said that the Dutch weren't able to do this as well.

I'm no naval engineer, but I can't see too many differences, so I'm happy for additional informations.

Actually, Japanese geography is a negative factor in this, because the country is very mountainous, and the bits that aren't are heavily urbanized. The Japs had HUGE problems finding the space to build the facilities to construct battleships. Check "Kaigun".

[Historiker]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Historiker

ORIGINAL: mikemike




??? Can't say I'm too impressed by Indian shipyards.

The Iranian shipyards aren't the most productive as well...

That's an allusion to a comment by Steve Kosakowski on Totaler Krieg. The way America got its productivity was not by following the model found in many games with a production model (Kos: "What if we divert Orc production into a new Nazgul prototype, get the cost down, and build lots of those?"). America got its productivity by accepting sky-high levels of inefficiency.

You don't get it, right? What I, what we wonder about is the wort Aryan. I guess you should know what this means to a german...

[DuckofTindalos]

What did I tell you?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Historiker



The Iranian shipyards aren't the most productive as well...

That's an allusion to a comment by Steve Kosakowski on Totaler Krieg. The way America got its productivity was not by following the model found in many games with a production model (Kos: "What if we divert Orc production into a new Nazgul prototype, get the cost down, and build lots of those?"). America got its productivity by accepting sky-high levels of inefficiency.

You don't get it, right? What I, what we wonder about is the wort Aryan. I guess you should know what this means to a german...

Yes, I get it--I speak German and have taken German history at university, with an emphasis on domestic policy during the period 1870-1933. There are a lot of wargamers who like to play Yahoo Panzer and spend a lot of time and effort figuring out how to optimise German production. Usually, they don't like Totaler Krieg because it takes into account Nazi-period domestic political constraints, and the German player ends up with Goering and Goebbels in addition to Guderian and Rommel. Everyone involved in WWII had to deal with similar constraints--the reason Japan failed to build hordes of aircraft carriers wasn't the availability of slipways; it was Japanese domestic political constraints. American politics (and overall productive capacity) allowed the US Navy to buy a lot of expensive aircraft carriers--but only so long as there was Japan to fight. The term Aryan efficiency refers to the way the Yahoo Panzer crowd likes to play games that incorporate production models. You don't get that in reality.

[bstarr]

Yes, I get it--I speak German and have taken German history at university, with an emphasis on domestic policy during the period 1870-1933. There are a lot of wargamers who like to play Yahoo Panzer and spend a lot of time and effort figuring out how to optimise German production. Usually, they don't like Totaler Krieg because it takes into account Nazi-period domestic political constraints, and the German player ends up with Goering and Goebbels in addition to Guderian and Rommel. Everyone involved in WWII had to deal with similar constraints--the reason Japan failed to build hordes of aircraft carriers wasn't the availability of slipways; it was Japanese domestic political constraints. American politics (and overall productive capacity) allowed the US Navy to buy a lot of expensive aircraft carriers--but only so long as there was Japan to fight. The term Aryan efficiency refers to the way the Yahoo Panzer crowd likes to play games that incorporate production models. You don't get that in reality.

You do realize you've gone from comparing Liberty ship construction to that of a Yamato-class battleship to comparing Liberty ship construction to the German player's production in a 1999 wargame (which has little, if anything, in common with WITP:AE, btw).

[DuckofTindalos]

He probably doesn't care.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: bstarr

Yes, I get it--I speak German and have taken German history at university, with an emphasis on domestic policy during the period 1870-1933. There are a lot of wargamers who like to play Yahoo Panzer and spend a lot of time and effort figuring out how to optimise German production. Usually, they don't like Totaler Krieg because it takes into account Nazi-period domestic political constraints, and the German player ends up with Goering and Goebbels in addition to Guderian and Rommel. Everyone involved in WWII had to deal with similar constraints--the reason Japan failed to build hordes of aircraft carriers wasn't the availability of slipways; it was Japanese domestic political constraints. American politics (and overall productive capacity) allowed the US Navy to buy a lot of expensive aircraft carriers--but only so long as there was Japan to fight. The term Aryan efficiency refers to the way the Yahoo Panzer crowd likes to play games that incorporate production models. You don't get that in reality.

You do realize you've gone from comparing Liberty ship construction to that of a Yamato-class battleship to comparing Liberty ship construction to the German player's production in a 1999 wargame (which has little, if anything, in common with WITP:AE, btw).

To close this out: Japanese production was like American, German, Soviet and British production--it reflected what leaders or politicians thought they could reasonably ask for. However, as we used to say about American bureaucrats: "you want it bad; you get it bad". And sometimes, it doesn't matter how much you want it, you ain't gonna be getting it. Think about the frontier of production--how it expands as you increase the resources and money you put into the industry--and the non-linear trade-offs you get between possible products. Dumping the Yamatos in favour of Shokakus requires a different mix of inputs, and you can't do that with perfect efficiency, especially when you've already been overreving the naval shipbuilding industry.

Cheers,

[Remenents]

Shokakus would have been the best choice for the CVs, imho. Fast and can carry a good mixture of planes. I would really assume that Japan would have built Carriers rather than BBs, they knew that planes would be a big factor in the war to come. They MIGHT have built a BB or 2... but more than likely, what should have happened is if they were builing them, after Dec. 7th, and seeing the devestation their CVs did, they would have probably converted them into the Fuso style BB/CV hybrid.

[DuckofTindalos]

The Shokakus were much, much too expensive to mass-produce. The Taiho was a super-Shokaku and even worse.

[Remenents]

Yes, they were expensive. Perhaps they would have gone with Kagas? Or better yet, perhaps they would have sat down and actually thought about making a well rounded carrier class that wasnt so expensive to mass produce?

[Akos Gergely]

"Dumping the Yamatos in favour of Shokakus requires a different mix of inputs, and you can't do that with perfect efficiency, especially when you've already been overreving the naval shipbuilding industry."

I agree on this 100%. You can not just simply replace Yamatos with equal tonnage of xy (insert your choice) CVs.

As far as Japanaese resources were IRL the Unryu was perhaps close to the best that they could have mass-produced realistically. True the Shokakus were state of the art as well as Taiho, but the letter was even more resource intensive than an Essex which tonnage/firepower wise was a much better investment (of course sacrificing the armored flight deck).

Would you trade the Unryu program+shadow conversions for 2-3 Shokakus? Probably yes but still in the long run the outcome is the same - no trained pilots and not enough planes.

I'd say with hindsight, if and a very big if, the Japanes would have switched entirely to CV construction in the early '30s, then 4-5 Shokakus at war start is probable. This really contains a healthy dose of historical knowledge so not really going to happen IMHO (despite this I'll add more Shokakus next to the Yamato class in my mod just, for fun [:'(]).

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Remenents

Yes, they were expensive. Perhaps they would have gone with Kagas? Or better yet, perhaps they would have sat down and actually thought about making a well rounded carrier class that wasnt so expensive to mass produce?

That exercise in 1942 produced the Unryu class, and they had difficulty producing the required boilers and turbines. See this list. Note that they started with 16 hulls originally.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And we're comparing a Liberty ship to a Yamato-class battleship now? Bra-vo...[8|]

As a JFB, I'd love to build a Yamato every other day. [:D]

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And we're comparing a Liberty ship to a Yamato-class battleship now? Bra-vo...[8|]

As a JFB, I'd love to build a Yamato every other day. [:D]

At an inflated cost... During WWII, the USN paid about 2.5x what the RN was accustomed to paying for the same ships.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: Terminus
And we're comparing a Liberty ship to a Yamato-class battleship now? Bra-vo...[8|]

As a JFB, I'd love to build a Yamato every other day. [:D]

At an inflated cost... During WWII, the USN paid about 2.5x what the RN was accustomed to paying for the same ships.

Oh, that's rich [:D] Even the Marxist and Trotskyite econometric websites only call it 1.5x for the capitalistic US producers.

In 1938, a typical MC C2 ship cost 1.8M (direct cost at delivery). The identical ship from Greenock/Brown cost 2.4M (direct cost at delivery) - pre war, identical cost structure.

"Aryan efficiency" is utterly bogus. Pre-war, folks went to them as was nominally doing what they wanted. So Krupp did some corvette vessels, but if you was a Euro, and you wanted a merchie, you went Dutch. Germans made some good Baltic designs, but there wasn't one, not a single one, of a cross-ocean transport, that was hosted by an "efficient Aryan" design or yard. Even Spain, Portugal, Argentina, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Peru, purchased from Holland, or the US.

Source? Several hundred boxes of costs and cost comparisons, going back to 1914, in the records of the USSB and MC, in the national Archives.

I can give you "direct cost" for US, UK, CAN, shipyards for a set of identical vessels, from 1941 onward, if you are so inclined. It will not be pretty, and it will not comport with your premis.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Shark7

As a JFB, I'd love to build a Yamato every other day. [:D]

At an inflated cost... During WWII, the USN paid about 2.5x what the RN was accustomed to paying for the same ships.

Oh, that's rich [:D] Even the Marxist and Trotskyite econometric websites only call it 1.5x for the capitalistic US producers.

In 1938, a typical MC C2 ship cost 1.8M (direct cost at delivery). The identical ship from Greenock/Brown cost 2.4M (direct cost at delivery) - pre war, identical cost structure.

"Aryan efficiency" is utterly bogus. Pre-war, folks went to them as was nominally doing what they wanted. So Krupp did some corvette vessels, but if you was a Euro, and you wanted a merchie, you went Dutch. Germans made some good Baltic designs, but there wasn't one, not a single one, of a cross-ocean transport, that was hosted by an "efficient Aryan" design or yard. Even Spain, Portugal, Argentina, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Peru, purchased from Holland, or the US.

Source? Several hundred boxes of costs and cost comparisons, going back to 1914, in the records of the USSB and MC, in the national Archives.

I can give you "direct cost" for US, UK, CAN, shipyards for a set of identical vessels, from 1941 onward, if you are so inclined. It will not be pretty, and it will not comport with your premis.

Per DK Brown:

River class DE (UK): £240,000; Colony class DE (US): £570,000
Empire class (UK): £180,000; Liberty ship (US): £450,000

Warship costs
KGV (UK): £7,493,000
A-DD (UK, 1928): £221,000
B-DD (UK, 1929): £219,000
F-DD (UK, 1933): £243,000
E-DD (UK, 1934): £247,000
H-DD (UK, 1936): £254,000
Tribal (UK, 1938): £359,000
J/K-DD (UK, 1939): £401,000

And, I was hoping to close it out earlier, but I guess I need to make my point explicitly--'Aryan efficiency' is science fiction.