What to do, what to do...Pt. 2

Old-School Heel

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 3:38pm

By mid-1927, Akbar and Jahangir will be in service, giving India a pair of fast battleships.

Of India's two older battleships, Dara Shikoh will have to go. She will be broken up, with her guns being installed as coastal defence weapons somewhere.

The other unit, Babur, can be maintained under the treaty until replaced. A replacement is not likely to be laid down before 1930.

Babur's another slow (21.5 kts), coal-firing ship, with a 30.5 cm main battery. she received a refit in 1920 prior to her sale. What should India do with her?

-Scrap her once the two Akbars are worked up.

-Do an extensive rebuild and keep her in active service

-Keep her in active service, don't bother with a rebuild

-Don't rebuild her, but keep her in service as a training ship (still counting against my BB tonnage since she wouldn't meet the CT definition of a training capital ship)

-Rebuild her as a Filipino-style polar exploration vessel (just kidding!)

Thoughts? Please refer to the Encyclopedia for Babur's stats if required.

Go to the top of the page

Rooijen10

Mr. Valentines Day

Posts: 9,644

2

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 6:10pm

Why not turn it into a Museum ship and use the entrance money to finance your other ships?

Go to the top of the page

The Rock Doctor

Old-School Heel

Posts: 5,310

3

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 6:38pm

Let's see...four hundred million people, eaching paying, say, 1 kg of material ("Just leave the iron ingot beside the gangway, please")...

Somehow I'm not sure the rest of Wesworld would necessarily sanction that.

Go to the top of the page

Rooijen10

Mr. Valentines Day

Posts: 9,644

4

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 6:46pm

With money, I am not thinking about warship materials to build your ship, but money to finance your ships (you know, the price that is given in the SS files in UK Pounds and US Dollars). Since we do not have economic rules, doing something like that shouldn't matter. Still it will give that ship a purpose. The people of India who come and visit that ship will get an idea how it is to be on a ship like that.

Go to the top of the page

Red Admiral

Italian Stallion

Posts: 7,019

5

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 8:25pm

You can't really do much with the design. I suggest just keeping her in her present form. It doesn't cost anything.

Go to the top of the page

Swamphen

Mr. Dynamite

Posts: 4,191

6

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 9:29pm

I was thinking along the same lines...if you were to do a rebuild in 1927, and then lay down a replacement in 1930 or 31, that doesn't seem very cost-effective.

Of course, if India can have her tonnage limit upped to 120,000 tons at some point between now and then, it might be worth keeping her.

Go to the top of the page

Ithekro

Sage

Posts: 3,661

7

Friday, January 7th 2005, 2:52am

Could you reduce the ship down in a major rebuild to become an armored cruiser? Rebuild the engine for oil, remove some armor and remove all the main guns and replace them with triple or quadruple 210mm cannon turrets. Then the ship might be lighter (if less then 13,000 she could be re-rated a cruiser). It could also be assigned a different task, such as coastal defense, a raider, dedicated shore bombardment, carrier escort (if your carriers are slow), or some such thing.

Go to the top of the page

Swamphen

Mr. Dynamite

Posts: 4,191

8

Friday, January 7th 2005, 3:02am

Unfortunatly, the treaty doesn't allow that (my Manila icebreaker conversion proposal fell afoul of the same clause).

Go to the top of the page

The Rock Doctor

Old-School Heel

Posts: 5,310

9

Friday, January 7th 2005, 4:29am

Thanks for the feedback thus far.

I would not be counting on my tonnage going up any time soon. If it did, it would make more sense to me to build a pair of similar ships, or a third Akbar and some bigger beast.

Swampy's correct about the Treaty preventing any armored cruiser attempts - anyway, she's way too big for her to slip under 13,000 standard unless she's converted to a "boiler". Indian carriers will be, by Wesworld standards, fast, thirty-one knots plus - so a carrier escort is out.

Go to the top of the page

1Big Rich

Intermediate

Posts: 180

10

Saturday, January 8th 2005, 6:32pm

Kind of off the wall, but

I say strip her and turn her into a fast oiler. Instead of an albatross around the neck of the new BB's, make her an asset to them.

I just jumped over and took a look at her (not being that familiar with the Indian Fleet, let alone the rest of Wesworld). In armor and armament alone, you've got about 7500 tons. You won't be able to get all of that back but combined with her bunkerage, she should carry a credible load.

Convert her to oil firing, strip the armament, ditch the belt and armored deck, fit her with cranes, pumps, etc, for fleet replenishement. Barbettes might be a problem; they're part of the strength of the ship. They just can't be ripped out. SS won't show this but if pulled they've have to be replaced with some kind of serious strengthening for those big holes.

I'm not sure how the treaty would view this or if it is even permissable. OTOH, if it's not specifically prohibited, it must be legal, right?

Just a thought,

Big Rich

Go to the top of the page

Ithekro

Sage

Posts: 3,661

11

Saturday, January 8th 2005, 6:45pm

Reduce, Reduce, Reduce.

Would that be similar enough to disarming the vessel for training or target purposes but not to allow the vessel to remain as a capital ship? It seems like a reasonanble use of resources.

Your going to quote the treaty again....I just know it. I also say that that one clause is dumb as it places an unrealistic limit on what the treaty was suppose to do...disarm fleets.

I'd say each time something like this happens you need to sit down and the contracting nations need to work it out diplomatically. Remember, the spirit of the treaty, not the words on the paper.

I'd vote to say go for an oiler...it won't hurt the balance of power as I beleive the ship can be replaced regardless of what happens to it in this situation.

Of course, I didn't sign it, so I can't vote

Go to the top of the page

HoOmAn

Keeper of the Sacred Block Coefficient

Posts: 7,417

12

Sunday, January 9th 2005, 12:57am

Isn´t a purpose build oiler cheaper without getting even close to violatie the treaty?

Go to the top of the page

The Rock Doctor

Old-School Heel

Posts: 5,310

13

Sunday, January 9th 2005, 3:45am

Quoted

Your going to quote the treaty again....I just know it. I also say that that one clause is dumb as it places an unrealistic limit on what the treaty was suppose to do...disarm fleets.

Nah, I'll just quote you. The clause may be dumb, but it's still legally binding, whether we like it or not.

Quoted

(not being that familiar with the Indian Fleet, let alone the rest of Wesworld).

I'm hurt, Rich. Really hurt.

Um...given that we have the house rule about adding auxiliaries for the cost of a refit, it doesn't make sense to spend that kind of material on a single oiler. That 9,000-ish tons could buy me 36,000 tonnes worth of oilers...but I appreciate the suggestion.

Go to the top of the page

thesmilingassassin

The Chosen One

Posts: 13,513

14

Sunday, January 9th 2005, 3:57am

I'd go with a moderate rebuild, just AA and torpedo defence and thats it. keep her around as long as possible for training untill shes decrepid or sunk in wartime.

Playing Turkey I would love a new BB but thats not likely this early in the game.

Go to the top of the page

Ithekro

Sage

Posts: 3,661

15

Sunday, January 9th 2005, 6:42am

I'm being quoted to myself. I guess I can feel honored.

Go to the top of the page

1Big Rich

Intermediate

Posts: 180

16

Sunday, January 9th 2005, 3:02pm

Quoted

I'm hurt, Rich. Really hurt.

LOL, Rocky!! Remember though, I'm just kibitzin'. Though I am familiar with Urumi, because of, uh, other posts....

I was unaware of the house rule; that does change the economics considerably. But what if she were converted to an oiler, then the oiler converted to a carrier, post-treaty?
:-})

Seriously, given the house rule, I'll say keep her as a BB. Wes has a good suggestion with the moderate rebuild, though I'd suggest an aviation component be added for long-range gunnery spotting and scouting. She could occupy a 'Malaya' or 'Barham' role in your fleet. While it's nice to have all first line BB's, as the USN showed in the historical Pacific, having BB's available for second line duties can be clearly in the 'good thing' category too.

All in all, a pretty good discussion, RD! Thanks for opening your decision for public debate...

Regards,

Big Rich

Go to the top of the page

The Rock Doctor

Old-School Heel

Posts: 5,310

17

Sunday, January 9th 2005, 10:28pm

No prob. I've been puzzling over this for a while now, and find the input helpful, if not always practical.

Chances are there will be another such thread in a "year" or so...

Go to the top of the page

WesWorld