You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

1

Tuesday, May 15th 2012, 3:57am

Mexico Q2/42

Mexico Naval Developments - Q2/1942

A. Industrial Allocation

3.5 of 3.5 factories producing warship material for 3,500 tons, plus a stockpile of 270 t, and 0t of scrap for 3,770 t. 3,760 t are used, leaving a stockpile of 10 t.


0 of 3 factories are dedicated to infrastructure material production, and produce 0 pts plus 0 bonus points.

B. Infrastructure Development


C. Naval Construction

Veracruz:

S1:
S0:
D2: Scrapping (1) Type 1915 destroyer

Acapulco:

S1:
S0:
D$: Scrapping (2) Type 1915 destroyer

La Paz:

S0:
D0: Reffiting DD Alkyone, receives 90t completed

Cancun:

D0:


Loaned US Docks:

Scrapping (3-6) Type 1915 destroyer


D. Transactions


1,500t to Phillipines for 2 Samal class BCs (6,000t remaining)
1,100t to USA for 20 Wickes class DDs (1,100t remaining)
1,070t to Persia for Quab class CVL (completed)



E. Other Notes

2070 tons to be recovered Q1/43


New units laid down this quarter:




F. Updated Order of Battle

Note: x(Y)+Z = completed (under repair/refit) + under construction (scrapping)

Capital Ships: 4(0)+0
Carriers: 2(0)+1
Heavy Cruisers: 2(0)+0
Light Cruisers: 15(0)+0
Destroyers: 87(1)+20-6
Gunboats: 4(0)+0
Patrol Boats: 20(0)+0
Frigates: 13(0)+0
Minelayers: 6(0)+0
Torpedo Boats: 14(0)+0
Motor Boats: 2(0)+0
River Boats: 45(0)+0
Experimental: 3(0)+0
Submarines: 23(0)+0
Landing Ship: 2(0)+0

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Desertfox" (Jun 22nd 2012, 10:59pm)


2

Tuesday, May 15th 2012, 4:27am

RE: Mexico Q2/42

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
3.5 of 3.5 factories producing warship material for 3,500 tons, plus a stockpile of 270 t, and 0t of scrap for 3,770 t. 3,760 t are used, leaving a stockpile of 10 t.

Your Q1/42 report says 220 tons of stockpiled material.

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
1040 tons to be recovered Q3/42
1030 tons to be recovered Q4/42

Eh? Where's all this coming from? If it's from the six DDs scrapping in Q1/42 and Q2/42, then that tonnage is in recycling until Q4/42 at the earliest, and only tallies up to 172 tons each (so 6 * 172 = 1032 tons). Where's the rest of the scrap tonnage coming from? There's nothing that was scrapped in Q4/41 that'd be returning 1040t of scrap...

3

Tuesday, May 15th 2012, 4:35am

Yeah I made a mistake in Q1/42, the non-deal with Persia was for 100 tons not the 50, I had in Q1.

I scrapped 6 DDs in Q1, and 6 different ones in Q2. The ones in Q1 were bigger. Isn't recycled tonnage available two quarters after?

4

Tuesday, May 15th 2012, 5:07am

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Yeah I made a mistake in Q1/42, the non-deal with Persia was for 100 tons not the 50, I had in Q1.

I scrapped 6 DDs in Q1, and 6 different ones in Q2. The ones in Q1 were bigger. Isn't recycled tonnage available two quarters after?

Two full quarters, yes - so Q4/42 for ships scrapped in Q1/42.

Also, double-checking the numbers, those DDs need 3.3 months to scrap (the last 40% of that time in the drydock). So the destroyers you started scrapping in Q1/42 won't actually be done until the first few days of Q2, and the six you started scrapping this quarter won't finish scrapping until the first few days of Q3.

5

Wednesday, May 16th 2012, 3:11pm

Looking back over this again, it appears there's another issue that you've overlooked in regards to those destroyers that you're scrapping.

In Q1/42, you've got two 96m long Type 1920 destroyers scrapping in a D2 dock, and four 96m long destroyers scrapping in what it appears is a D4 dock (I presume that's what the D$ actually is.) However, a D2 dock is only 170m long - so you can't actually fit two 96m long destroyers into a D2, even if you dispense with the required 10m of separation. The same problem goes for the D4 - at 270m long, it's not long enough for four 96m long vessels to be scrapped.

In other words, you're scrapping twice the number of ships that will fit in each drydock.

6

Wednesday, May 16th 2012, 10:01pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Looking back over this again, it appears there's another issue that you've overlooked in regards to those destroyers that you're scrapping.

In Q1/42, you've got two 96m long Type 1920 destroyers scrapping in a D2 dock, and four 96m long destroyers scrapping in what it appears is a D4 dock (I presume that's what the D$ actually is.) However, a D2 dock is only 170m long - so you can't actually fit two 96m long destroyers into a D2, even if you dispense with the required 10m of separation. The same problem goes for the D4 - at 270m long, it's not long enough for four 96m long vessels to be scrapped.

In other words, you're scrapping twice the number of ships that will fit in each drydock.


Side by side? I know I can cram 4 S class destroyers into a D4 by having two pair.

7

Wednesday, May 16th 2012, 10:04pm

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc
Side by side? I know I can cram 4 S class destroyers into a D4 by having two pair.

Side by side would work, but that's against the rules, too.

8

Friday, May 18th 2012, 5:16am

I thought we had a discussion that you could fit ships side by side, especially high L:B ratio destroyers significantly shorter than the dock. Isn't there a famous picture of a DD next to BB at Pearl Harbor? Or alternatively, if scrapping requires 40% of time in dock then scrap one then scrap the other?

9

Friday, May 18th 2012, 5:26am

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
I thought we had a discussion that you could fit ships side by side, especially high L:B ratio destroyers significantly shorter than the dock. Isn't there a famous picture of a DD next to BB at Pearl Harbor?

We've had at least two discussions that I've found, but it was discussion only. I went back and double-checked, and while there was support for it, no rule change was ever called for. So at the moment, the original rule still stands - no side-by-side work is permitted.

In our second discussion, I did propose that we set drydock width to 1/4th of the length, and institute rules to allow for side-by-side repair (with open space between ships), but my proposal also specifically forbid side-by-side construction. (Scrapping ships side-by-side wasn't addressed at all).

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Or alternatively, if scrapping requires 40% of time in dock then scrap one then scrap the other?

That is a viable option, yes. You'd just need to stagger the scrapping process more than you've currently done - after all, can't scrap 40% of one ship then move it out of the drydock and get the other. The last 40% obviously has to be at the end of the ship's scrapping period.

10

Monday, May 21st 2012, 9:51pm

*grumbles about having to do math*

@ Bruce, got your email but will try to see if there is a simpler solution.

Fortunately I don't need the scrap tonnage to pay anyone so nobody worry, you will get payed...

11

Monday, May 21st 2012, 9:58pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
*grumbles about having to do math*

I thought you were an engineer, man! If you don't want to do math, maybe you should've gotten a degree in Medieval Japanese Poetry instead! ;) :D

:P

12

Monday, May 21st 2012, 10:17pm

Lol, I've done too much bloody math already! Was hoping for some peace and quiet once I graduated. :P

I did of all things write a medieval Japanese style poem once... never again!

13

Monday, May 21st 2012, 10:50pm

Maybe you should study Shakespeare. :)

14

Tuesday, May 22nd 2012, 4:15am

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Lol, I've done too much bloody math already! Was hoping for some peace and quiet once I graduated. :P

I did of all things write a medieval Japanese style poem once... never again!


Tankas are not *that* difficult, particularly in English.

Numbers rarely sum
Debit, credit, both contend
In old Mexico
The balance is oft obscured
Habits costlier than purse

15

Tuesday, May 22nd 2012, 4:28am

*Laughs*