WesWorld

Pengolodh
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 4
(4/19/03 1:08:14 pm)
Cut the category of sloops?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry to bring this in so late, but I have had a revelation of sorts.

I have been discussing the matter of sloops and unlimited ships to some length with Ho0man, and it is clear that the way things stand in the present draft are not logical, as it is entirely possible to build an unlimited number of vessels whose qualities are generally on a par with the sloop-category. Am uncertain about whether to leave things as is, or to eliminate the sloop-category wholesale, and instead make some changes to unlimited ships - specifically:
- allow a greater number of guns, but somewhat smaller calibre (max number 6 or 8, max calibre 5.1inch/13cm) on type (b) (600-2000tons)
- allow aircraft to be launched from type (b)
- Remove the ban on armour from unlimited type (b)
- Alter wording on armour on type (c) to indicate that such ships may not have armoured hulls (which will then allow for gunshields)

This has the beneficial effect of removing a conspicuous inconsistency from the treaty, and simplifying the rules quite a bit.
Best regards
Pengolodh
"Iraq will not be defeated. Iraq has now already achieved victory - apart from some technicalities."
- Mohsen Khalil, Iraqi Ambassador to the Arab League

aowwt
Administrator
Posts: 43
(4/19/03 3:56:09 pm)
Re: Cut the category of sloops?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We should just have a deffination of a torpedoe boat stating the obvious fact of max gun size and hull size. Then state that any ship below 'x' amount of tonnage but larger than the torpedo boat is unlimited but cant have armoured hulls, large caliber guns and no torpedoes and the tubes. I would say that a 57mm gun would be the max on a torpedo boat with 500 tons and a 105mm or smaller gun for the unlimited non torpedo boats. I think anything larger would put them in the destroyer catagory. Plus i would put a speed cap of 25 knots on non torpedo boats and no launching of aircraft except for scout planes done by catapult.
Lessons for modern warfare:
"human intel is necessary, always be on the look out, and expect the unexpected"

Come to the Wargamer Forum at JPs Panzers Board

King of Riva
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 49
(4/19/03 6:48:28 pm)
Modifications to the treaty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Pengolodh pointed out, we´ve discussed things and came up with the solution that it would be best to skip the Sloops entirely but modify the unlimited category in H Ib somewhat. So clarify things, I will re-post the paragraphs that will change if you agree. Please read this stuff carefully and in detail.

This is the original draft:

PART 2 - DEFINITIONS OF TERMS IN THE TREATY

For the purposes of the present Treaty, the following expressions are to be understood in the sense defined in this Part.

VI. SLOOP
Surface vessels of war the standard displacement of which does not exceed 1,500 tons (1,524 metric tons), whose largest guns do not exceed the calibre of 5.1 inches (130 mm) calibre, which is not fitted with or designed for the possibility of launching torpedoes, which is not so constructed or reconstructed that
aircraft may land thereon, and which is not designed or rebuilt for a speed greater than 24 knots.

H. VESSELS NOT SUBJECT TO LIMITATIONS IN NUMBER AND/OR TONNAGE

I.
Subject to any special agreements which may submit them to limitation, the following vessels are exempt from limitation:

(a) Naval surface combatant vessels of 600 tons (610 metric tons) standard displacement and under;


(b) Naval surface combatant vessels exceeding 600 tons (610 metric tons), but not exceeding 2,000 tons (2,032 metric tons) standard displacement, provided they have none of the following characteristics:

(1) Mount a gun above 6 inch (153 mm) calibre;
(2) Mount more than four guns above 3 inch (76 mm) calibre;
(3) Are designed or fitted to launch torpedoes;
(4) Are designed for a speed greater than 20 knots.
(5) Are protected by armour plate;
(6) Are fitted with any means of launching aircraft into the air;
(7) Are fitted to receive aircraft on board from the air.


(c) Naval surface vessels not specifically built as fighting ships which are employed on fleet duties or as troop transports or in some other way than as fighting ships, provided they have none of the following characteristics:

(1) Mount a gun above 6 inch (153 mm) calibre;
(2) Mount more than four guns above 3 inch (76 mm) calibre;
(3) Are designed or fitted to launch torpedoes:
(4) Are designed for a speed greater than 20 knots;
(5) Are protected by armour plate;
(6) Are designed or fitted to launch mines;
(7) Are fitted to receive aircraft on board from the air;
(8) Mount more than one aircraft-launching apparatus on the centre line; or two, one on each broadside;
(9) If fitted with any means of launching aircraft into the air, are designed or adapted to operate at sea more than ten aircraft.

If you agree to the changes, it will read as follows:

PART 2 - DEFINITIONS OF TERMS IN THE TREATY

For the purposes of the present Treaty, the following expressions are to be understood in the sense defined in this Part.

VI. SLOOP
canceled

H. VESSELS NOT SUBJECT TO LIMITATIONS IN NUMBER AND/OR TONNAGE

I.
Subject to any special agreements which may submit them to limitation, the following vessels are exempt from limitation:

(a) Naval surface combatant vessels of 600 tons (610 metric tons) standard displacement and under;


(b) Naval surface combatant vessels exceeding 600 tons (610 metric tons), but not exceeding 2,000 tons (2,032 metric tons) standard displacement, provided they have none of the following characteristics:

(1) Mount a gun above 5.1 inch (130 mm) calibre;
(2) Mount more than eight guns above 3 inch (76 mm) calibre;
(3) Are designed or fitted to launch torpedoes;
(4) Are designed for a speed greater than 24 knots.
(5) canceled
(6) canceled
(7) Are fitted to receive aircraft on board from the air.


(c) Naval surface vessels not specifically built as fighting ships which are employed on fleet duties or as troop transports or in some other way than as fighting ships, provided they have none of the following characteristics:

(1) Mount a gun above 6 inch (153 mm) calibre;
(2) Mount more than four guns above 3 inch (76 mm) calibre;
(3) Are designed or fitted to launch torpedoes:
(4) Are designed for a speed greater than 20 knots;
(5) Are protected by armour plate on the hull;
(6) Are designed or fitted to launch mines;
(7) Are fitted to receive aircraft on board from the air;
(8) Mount more than one aircraft-launching apparatus on the centre line; or two, one on each broadside;
(9) If fitted with any means of launching aircraft into the air, are designed or adapted to operate at sea more than ten aircraft.

Rooijen10
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 80
(4/20/03 1:40:02 pm)
Re: Modifications to the treaty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Somehow I would miss the sloop category. :(
However as you pointed out, Pengolodh, it is too easy to build sloop-like ships which would fall in the unlimited category. In essence, the sloop category would be obsolete.
One thing I just noticed and don't quite understand is the maximum caliber allowed in the current version for sloops and unlimited ships: Why is the maximum caliber allowed on unlimited ships 6" and on sloops 5.1" ? Why wasn't the maximum for the unlimited class at 5.1" or lower ?
While I will go for the newly proposed version, I shall still use the old sloop definition to determine which of my ships will be called sloops and which don't when it is decided to scrap the sloop category.

Walter

harry the red
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 2
(4/25/03 10:02:58 pm)
Re: Modifications to the treaty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh dam it, I spent a day and a half developing ships for future construction and you fellows are changing the treaty again, what are you trying to do, give me nightmares. :o

Seriously I hope this does not affect the following two types of ships that I have designed that are in the under 600-ton category.

One type is a large torpedo bout class in the German style, while the other is a sub chaser. Both vessels are capable of over 25 knots the torpedo boat being the faster of the two. The main armament of both is the 76mm high angle general-purpose gun. The sub chaser carries three of these while the torpedo boat has only one. The only armour they carry is a gun shield and splinter protection on the CT (12.7mm)

I have no problem in limiting the torpedo boat to a 57mm armament nor removing armour from both vessels but I don’t want a limitation of speed placed on non torpedo bout vessels that are in the under 600 ton category. Apart from the above reservation I have no problem in abandoning the sloop category.

I Am very pleased with my high-speed sub chaser and I don’t want to abandon it under any circumstance. >:(

Edited by: harry the red at: 4/25/03 10:23:26 pm

King of Riva
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 66
(4/26/03 5:06:46 am)
Re: Modifications to the treaty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again:

To skip the sloops and slightly change the unlimiteds was proposed to make things easier. If we now start to divide the <600ts category in two classes (T-Boats and non-T-Boats), we haven´t won anything.

So why limit the <600ts? I tend to say everybody can build everything he wants if the standard tonnage is below 600ts. Such a ship is too small to be important, so I don´t see a reason to limit its gun size for example. If one manages to put a 38cm gun on 600ts....okay. But seriously this can not be expected.
On the other hand 57mm is too small. Like many others I have build or plan to build several classes of mine sweepers etc. with less than 600ts but they will all carry one or two guns of 88mm or 105mm. Compared to real world designs this is the most realistic armament and I´m not willing to change it.

So again: Let´s skip the sloops and modify the unlimiteds as proposed by Pengolodh to make things easier. Don´t meddle with the <600ts category.

Rooijen10
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 87
(4/26/03 5:18:15 am)
Re: Modifications to the treaty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted

Oh dam it, I spent a day and a half developing ships for future construction and you fellows are changing the treaty again, what are you trying to do, give me nightmares.

Well, you're not the only one with "design obstacles". I had several types of ships in the 600-2000 ton range which, according to the version of the treaty I had saved, were not limited by the treaty. They had a bit of armor in the belt and a speed of 21 knots. But with the (then) latest version of the treaty, armor was suddenly not allowed and speed was decreased to 20 knots. So that meant I would have to redesign them or accept them into a limited category.

Quoted

If one manages to put a 38cm gun on 600ts....okay.

:o

King, what would happen to such vessel if it were to fire that gun ?


Maybe the same would happen as with my Tuthmosis BB when it uses a killogram of antimatter to power a broadside of the twelve 21" electro magnetic guns...

:)

Walter

Pengolodh
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 6
(4/26/03 10:40:54 am)
Reply | Edit
ezSupporter
Re: Modifications to the treaty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted

Well, you're not the only one with "design obstacles". I had several types of ships in the 600-2000 ton range which, according to the version of the treaty I had saved, were not limited by the treaty. They had a bit of armor in the belt and a speed of 21 knots. But with the (then) latest version of the treaty, armor was suddenly not allowed and speed was decreased to 20 knots. So that meant I would have to redesign them or accept them into a limited category.

With the consensus seeming to move towards accepting my proposed modifications, which will again unlimit the designs without requiring redesign, and towards not tampering with the small below-600ton category.

Am stilling mulling how to include icebreakers in unlimiteds without making it exclusive to russia, and without making it free-for-all - am thinking letting people have a number of 2000+ ton icebreakers equal to 2/3 of max no. of capital ships, rounded down. That would allow even India and Greece two large icebreakers, should they feel the need, and it would happen to fit the number 10 for Russia.

As for what would happen to a 600-ton vessel with a 38cm gun when it fires the gun, that would depend on the elevation - at low elevation, the vessel would make a good imitation of a gymnast doing a saltomortale, while at high elevation, the gun would probably smash through the keel of the vessel.
Best regards
Pengolodh
"Iraq will not be defeated. Iraq has now already achieved victory - apart from some technicalities."
- Mohsen Khalil, Iraqi Ambassador to the Arab League

Rooijen10
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 93
(4/26/03 10:54:00 am)
Re: Modifications to the treaty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted

That would allow even India and Greece two large icebreakers, should they feel the need

I guess it would have been usefull to India if it would have remained attached to Antarctica millions of years ago.
But I think that would be a good solution regarding the icebreakers.

Walter

Edited by: Rooijen10 at: 4/27/03 1:08:52 pm

The Rock Doctor
Spammer wanna be
Posts: 57
(4/27/03 7:47:00 pm)
Re: Modifications to the treaty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's not go give the Raj ideas, now...