WesWorld

Quoted

Several navies considered {quads} 1916+

And then there were the Tillmans... ;-)

- 3 shaft arrangements are just not good for battleships because the central shaft has to travel underneath the aft barbette. For carriers there is no such problem.

- When it comes to it, Kaiser can build more or less whatever he wants. How do any of these designs fit in with Germany's needs? Possible confrontations are going to be in the North Sea, Baltic or Channel. For these Kaiser's design is flawed. Why have so much deck armour when hits will be on the belt? Aircraft aren't that much of a threat. Dive bombers don't effectively exist, and aircraft aren't carrying bombs any bigger than 1000lb with 100lb bombs more common. A 1000lb bomb has to dropped from 7000ft to penetrate 4" thick deck armour. Level bombing is a joke when there are no effective bombsights, dive bombers release their loads at around 1500ft.

- Incremental armour is better than AoN. If you have 380mm main, upper and end belts then it will be better than just having a 380mm main belt. However it would weigh far more. So for designs that are built to be below a specific tonnage, AoN offers more advantages.

- Dual purpose guns. Italy has decided to put LA guns on her ships and no HA AA guns. Do you have any idea how hard it would be to hit an aircraft when you have no FC mechanism whatsoever and no proximity fuses? Simply pointing and shooting at aircraft doesn't really work. Italy will instead use the 37mm/54 for AA. This is good for altitudes up to 5000m and LA work. Essentially, the 37mm gun is completely superior to heavy AA guns of this time. The FC mechanism is still point and shoot, but with tracer it becomes a lot easier. A 37mm hit will still destroy most aircraft of this age.

Quoted

And anyway, keep in mind that in real life probably G3 would've never been built. Not sure about that but I've read somewhere that the British simply lacked the capability to build such a ship and was used as kind of a "joker" in the Washington talks to get their points through.

No way. The G3 ships could easily have been afforded for the expense of 1 County Class cruiser. I have a huge spreadsheet detailing the costs of G3 by Harry Flashman, and yes they could have been afforded. N3 with 18" guns could have been a paper tiger, but we just don't know. G3 however was not known to the US or Japan. They thought that it had 7" belt armour! and were in complete ignorance of her real capabilities.

- Again, Kaiser can design what he likes, but think about where Germany is likely to fight.

So in essence, Kaiser is allowed to build what he'd like to build, but will likely receive critisim if the design doesn't look german enough, or a logically german concept.

I can understand this (having receiving flak for some of Chile's designs). I would say that Kaiser should design as he likes, but take into account what Germany would need given the various treaties, political climate, and question the threat from the surrounding nations accordingly. How long will it take to build a force that can deal with the French and Russian Navies? What sort of force will be needed against Russia and Nordmark in the Baltic Sea? Do you really want to antagonize the British again with an arms race (size of ship wise, not numbers)? Do you want to take Germany in a different direction because if the limitations it is (or may be) under.

If Germany is kept under the VT, what sort of replacements can it construct for the retained pre-dreadnoughts and dreadnoughts? If Germany is not allowed to join the CT, then have a backup plan. How large of a ship can Germany construct without being in violation of the Wesworld VT? 13,000 tons instead of 10,000? Is this for replacing the battleships only or just normal maximum construction? Then of course, how does one replace the 24,700 ton Kaiser-class ships when they are due to be replaced in....1939-40?

These are the questions I would ask as Germany.

Our Versailles Treaty allows Germany six capital ships of 120,000 t combined. No new capital ship may exceed the size of the largest currently retained ship - I don't recall which one it was, but it's around 25,000 t.

Gun size is not to exceed twelve inches under the VT.

The three predreadnoughts are eligible for replacement, as I recall, but Germany has seen no merit in laying any down until its future limits are determined.

Oooookay...now the design stuff.

One of the greatest concerns I had about taking Germany on is that its every decision would be more closely scrutinized than other nations - both due to hindsight and the controversial aspects of historical designs. This has come to pass. We have barely blinked at South Africa or the Netherlands going from 4x2 to 3x3 in their capital ships, yet we now have sixty-plus responses, mostly negative, to Kaiser's design.

Now, I'm not going to rehash the technical aspects of the discussion thus far. Instead, I want to focus on the situation in Germany in 1926. Remember, even though Germany is a historical nation - like the Netherlands - the Wesworld Germany of 1926 is not Historical Germany of 1926. The last decade has been very different. Let's see where we're at:

1. As noted, the Versailles Treaty is more lenient than historical. The Reichsmarine is larger and it can build larger, more capable replacement vessels than historical. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the Design Board (The "MA" referred to in the articles Hooman posted) is also larger than historical, and with that, also home to more diverse opinion and knowledge.

2. As noted in the news article from Q4/25, Germany has designs in hand for a variety of vessels that would fit either the Versailles or Cleito Treaties. Ergo, they have been designing such ships for a couple of years now. By the time a capital ship is laid down by Kaiser, a minimum of three years will have elapsed since design work began. That ship will not have been rushed - there will be time to consider how best to do things, with regards to all aspects of the design. Given that other navies have already made the transition from 4x2 to 3x3 in that time - including the Netherlands, UK, and South Africa - it is also reasonable to assume that Germany will have had time to consider the merits of doing the same, before it lays down the next capital ship.

3. The Design Board is answering to a democratic civilian government. This government has put forward a document (The Frankfurt Amendments) which gives a good sense of its preferred foreign policy - neutral and isolationist - that sets the context for capital ship construction.

Given the isolationism aspect, the civilians in charge of the Reichsmarine's purse strings will likely favor ships designed for operations in the Baltic and North Sea. That implies certain technical considerations that have already been raised.

But, given the neutral part, the Reichsmarine has to be prepared to defend - on its own - the Reich against any of FAR, AANM, Nordmark, or the UK. Yes, numerically, this is impossible - but it must be attempted. Operationally, the range of potential threats ranges from Petr Veliky behemoths to modern Nordmark battlecruisers. There will be pressure to build the best individual ships possible, using the best innovations available. This could be an argument for triple turrets, DP secondaries, AoN, and what-not.

4. From the technical stand-point, Germany has introduced All or Nothing armor: on the Karlsruhe and Ersatz Arcona class cruisers. I would assume that there were studies done on incremental and full-length armor schemes, and that for some reason, the MA decided to go for all or nothing. Whatever the reasoning, there is now a precedent that German naval designers are considering foreign innovations and are willing to introduce them into service - rightly or wrongly. It's entirely reasonable to me that the logic used to put AoN armor on a light cruiser can be applied to a battleship.

In a very different situation. Nearby are powerful designs that historically never got off the draftman's table. He has to design ships that take possible opponents into account.

Since Germany has 6 capital ships, I'd go along with a German treaty allocation equal to that of France.

I've always thought France should have had larger limits from the get go, but I'd chalk that one up to "hindsight is 20/20".

I tend to Agree with Admiral K. in reguards to Germany's limits being the same as France.

I'm awefully tempted to find a way to get Germany regain the Yavuz from Turkey in order to bring Germany's overall available build tonnage down somewhat to compinsate for the agregate tonnage limit being doubled. (perhaps a sale clause in the CT revisions in 28?)

That would give Germany 4 (instead of 3) older dreadnoughts to eat up some of that tonnage and keep them busy for a while in reguards to modernizing the fleet. Both turkey and Germany being losing powers in the great war could likely be forced to make a few consesions to regain the trust of the rest of the world, or am I just being delusional?

Quoted

Both turkey and Germany being losing powers in the great war could likely be forced to make a few consesions to regain the trust of the rest of the world, or am I just being delusional?

So long as you pay me, I don't really care.

Hell if I didn't the Phillipines surely would!!!

Where they get the money on the other hand is another story...

Surely would what? Buy Yavuz? "Don't tempt me, baby..." :-)

Quoted

(perhaps a sale clause in the CT revisions in 28?)

Since Turkey is not a signatory to the Cleito Treaty, they can sell whatever they want to whoever they want whenever they want (whew!). And the CT doesn't ban the purchase of ships...so if Turkey and Germany want to send Goeben home, then they can do so, at any time.

---

Rocky: Hmm, I hadn't thought of it like that. Thanks for pointing those things out...considering that, then the first design (3x3 + DP) does seem more reasonable.

However I still think the "first" German capital ships should be closer to the size of The Twins.

Keep in mind Turkey is also looking at older Capital ships as a cheaper alternative to buying a more expensive new build's. Only a CT signatory can give Turkey either of these.

Does this mean Turkey is interested in old German battleships (which soon will be replaced)?

Quoted

Does this mean Turkey is interested in old German battleships (which soon will be replaced)?

I still need to write my Q1/26 news, but you can probably get the idea from looking at my report for this quarter...

Quoted

Does this mean Turkey is interested in old German battleships (which soon will be replaced)?

An interesting point, since Germany is not currently restricted from selling capital ships. Neither is Chile, but Chile doesn't yet have the replacements it would like before retiring (in some fashion) Swiftsure and Triumph. I doubt Turkey would want the Capitan Prat, but it will be the first "battleship" Chile replaces....with a heavy armored cruiser or another coastal defense battleship.

Acctually my idea was to somehow send Yavuz back to Germany, shes the odd ship of the fleet. Germany on the other hand IMO could regain her and build 2 new BB's to conform to French limits (6 hulls) without being too powerfull for our liking, and yet still be able to modernize the fleet at a reasonably steady pace.

Turkey would ultimately like to standardize its fleet and replace Yavuz but thats another issue.

Interesting idea as well. A 10 x 11" gun battlecruiser returning home after more then ten years. It would fit in better with the Kaiser-class Dreadnoughts as they are of the same design year.

Germany regaining Yavuz sounds nice from a sentamentalist view point, but it won't happen while I run the place.

Historically, the ship's in an awful state of repair during the '20s. She's small, slow, underarmed, and coal-fired compared to contemporary battlecruisers and battleships. Yes, she'd be an improvement on the Pre-dreads, but a new-build on the same tonnage would make waaaayyyyy more sense.

'Course, Kaiser may see it differently in 1927...

J

Well it dosn't much matter to me, it just means shes Turkey's problem to deal with! Yavuz Sultan Selim is rated at 94% but that may have to be revised.

Not laying out Turkey's actions in our alternate WW1 makes it difficult to know just what state shes in....yet another project on the horizon for me!

The Germans could refit Yavuz for Turkey though. Incidents do happens....