WesWorld

Given some ambiguity and dis-satisfaction with the current rules, I've written out the following for comment and discussion. I don't think the essentials change, but hopefully the grey areas are removed:


Modifying warships

There are a number of tasks that can be done to improve a warship. These are grouped into five categories, with increasing complexity, cost, and infrastructure requirements. The most complex task in a warship improvement project determines the overall cost and infrastructure requirement.

Cost is both the percentage of original building time required to do the work, and the percentage of the light displacement that must be spent in warship materials.

Infrastructure requirements are, in order of complexity:

None (N): The ship can anchor anywhere and do the task itself - provided it has miscellaneous weight to carry the materials needed.

Tender (T): The ship and a tender or repair ship can anchor anywhere to do the task - provided the ships have the miscellaneous weight to carry the materials needed.

Port (P): The ship must be anchored at a military facility containing at least one Port, Slip, or Drydock. The ship is considered to be tied up at a pier - it does not use a drydock.

Drydock (D): The ship must be in a drydock long enough to accommodate it.

Level 1: Manual Refits (Cost = 5%)

-Changes (number/quantity/type/location) to searchlights: N
-Changes to ship’s boats: N
-Changes to deck mounted guns served by ammo lockers or belts (that is, no hoist): N
-Cosmetic or temporary changes to superstructure (ie, a fake funnel): N

Level 2: Minor Refits (cost = 15%)

-Changes to radar: P
-Changes to deck mounted guns served by hoists: T
-Changes to depth charge racks and throwers: T
-Changes to torpedo carriages: T
-Changes to gun directors: T
-Minor changes to superstructure (enclosing a bridge, adding a searchlight platform): T

Level 3: Major Refits (cost = 25%)

-Changes to catapults and/or above-decks seaplane hangers: P
-Changes to deck mount or turret armor: P
-Changes to conning tower armor: P
-Changes to external armor belts: P (upper), D (ends, main)
-Changes to underwater torpedo tubes: D
-Changes to sonar: D
-Removal of secondary (or tertiary) gun turrets (barbettes plated over and possibly covered): P
-Refurbishment of internal fittings for life-extension purposes: P

Level 4: Partial Reconstruction (cost = 50%)

-Changes to bunkerage (type or quantity): P
-Replacement of superstructure: P
-Changes to internal belt armor: P (upper), D (ends, main)
-Changes to deck armor: P
-Replacement of secondary turrets with new secondary turrets: P
-Changes to secondary (or tertiary) barbettes (addition, change of caliber, change to armor or capacity, replacement with bunkerage): P
-Replacement of secondary barbettes with powerplant machinery: D
-Removal of main gun turret (barbette plated over and possibly covered): P
-Change to powerplant (type and output): D
-Change to bow form: D
-Change to trim of ship: D
-Change to torpedo bulkheads: D

Level 5: Total Reconstruction (cost = 75%)

-Replacement of main gun turrets with new main gun turrets: P
-Changes to main barbettes (addition, change of caliber, change to armor or capacity, replacement with bunkerage): P
-Replacement of main barbette with powerplant machinery: D
-Insertion or removal of section of hull amidships: D
-Reshaping of stern: D

Note

There may be a scenario in which the most complicated task in a job is something requiring the use of a port - yet the job also includes a lesser task that requires the use of a drydock. For example, removal of submerged torpedoes (a 25% task) and a change to internal armor (a 50%) task. In this case the ship would have to spend 25% of its original build time in drydock, and the remaining 25% could either be spent in drydock or just in the port.

For the proposed changes in the Chilean Dreadnoughts, would that be a Partial or Total Reconstruction? If its Total I might as well replace the main guns with 14 inch. The point of question would be the removal of Q battery and the new powerplant. I do not know if the new power plant would require the removal of the barbette, but it seems likely.

Looks good, but I would suggest shifting the changes to secondary and main turrets down one level; 'drop-in' replacements such as S&G's triple 11"=twin 15" shouldn't take 75% IMHO.

Seems mostly ok.

I like it, alot.

In reguards to the cost of changing calliber I'm indifferent. It seems a high price at a cost of 75% but its a good way to keep people from designing a ship to be upgunned in order to cercumvent the CT rules.

This list is intended to list what is technically possible, rather than what is legally possible. If the consensus is that turret replacement is too expensive as noted here, it can be "dropped" a level. Upgunning will just have to be addressed elsewhere.

Still brings up the question of how extensive is the Chilean reconstruction (as I'm inexperianced in deturmining if the barbette would be removed or not in the proposed refit with more powerful oil engines from coal engines while removing Q turret from amidships)?

This could be an example since the Chileans will be planning on doing something that is currently illegal for Treaty nations.

I think you'd have to look at the before and after of the design. If the new powerplant takes up a greater proportion of space than the old powerplant, something will have to be removed to make space for it. If you removed the turret to do this, I would assume the barbette would go with it.

The Chilean conversion would be a 'total reconstruction' under these rules.

(I think this should be more properly termed a 'major reconstruction, IMHO.)

Hmm, then there really is nothing to stop these vessels from being upgunned to 14 inches if it will cost that much to effectively reconstruct the vessels as it is.

Where would you place the stripping out of the internals of a barbette, leaving the armour intact, and say, converting it to a magazine for bombs or depth charges or into a tank for aviation fuel?

I'd treat it like converting the barbette to bunkerage - so 4 if a secondary barbette, 5 if a main gun barbette. And I'd say a port is adequate support, no drydock necessary for that particular job.

I assume you mention this in terms of Jutland - under this set of rules, I think we'd find that warship converted to a carrier would be (in most cases) a total reconstruction, on account of the barbettes - while a Japanese-style conversion of an auxiliary would only be a partial reconstruction. Good or bad?

More to do with my next series of possible conversions, Jutland had no barbettes to start with, so it wasn't a problem then.

When shall these new rules take effect? 1929? I have a refit planned for 1928 that used to be 25% cost. Now it goes up to 50% cost because I've drawn a new superstructure. I don't want to change engines or anything else, I just think she looks better with a new superstructure, and I needed somewhere to put the directors.

For Major Refit; Ability to change elevation of main guns by 5degrees. Drydock.

Is there a need to differentiate between substantial modifications to superstructure and the complete reconstruction or razing of it?

Provided everybody could live with the revisions, I'd suggest implementing them for Q1/28. If it's too quick, we could push it back to '29.

I'd thought that gun elevation would be covered by the generic "changes to deck mounts/turrets" bit. Why would you reckon a drydock to be required?

Don't bother with the superstructure bit. It only matters if you draw your ships.

1928 is fine.

Drydock no, Tied up in Port. It requires a fair amount of metal to be cut out of the turrets and partially refurbished.

This fits with the reason the Esmeralda was retired and scrapped even after she was repaired. While the vessel was repaired based on lost tonnage (7% damage), she had her forward gun replaced, which might take more. But then story wise the job was A. rushed, B. on an old frame, C. micro-factures I imagine would be difficult to detect inthis time period, D. it was her time to go.

As long as it doesn't cost more than 50% to change main guns without barbette alterations (i.e., replacing 203mm guns with 210mm), timing is no problemo for moi.

Did some thinking last night about gun alterations; the results of which (i.e. the changes to Rocky's suggestions) are bolded below:

Level 1: Manual Refits (Cost = 5%)

-Changes (number/quantity/type/location) to searchlights: N
-Changes to ship’s boats: N
-Alterations to guns of 65mm and smaller not served by hoists: N
-Cosmetic or temporary changes to superstructure (ie, a fake funnel): N

Level 2: Minor Refits (cost = 15%)

-Changes to radar: P
-Alterations to guns of 65mm and smaller served by hoists: T
-Changes to depth charge racks and throwers: T
-Changes to torpedo carriages: T
-Changes to gun directors: T
-Minor changes to superstructure (enclosing a bridge, adding a searchlight platform): T

Level 3: Major Refits (cost = 25%)

-Changes to catapults and/or above-decks seaplane hangers: P
-Changes to deck mount or turret armor: P
-Changes to conning tower armor: P
-Changes to external armor belts: P (upper), D (ends, main)
-Changes to underwater torpedo tubes: D
-Changes to sonar: D
-Alterations to guns of 66mm-195mm not involving barbette alterations: P
-Refurbishment of internal fittings for life-extension purposes: P

Level 4: Partial Reconstruction (cost = 50%)

-Changes to bunkerage (type or quantity): P
-Replacement of superstructure: P
-Changes to internal belt armor: P (upper), D (ends, main)
-Changes to deck armor: P
-Alterations to guns of 66mm-195mm involving barbette alterations: P
-Replacement of secondary barbettes with powerplant machinery: D
-Alterations to guns 196mm and larger not involving barbette alterations: P
-Change to powerplant (type and output): D
-Change to bow form: D
-Change to trim of ship: D
-Change to torpedo bulkheads: D

Level 5: Total Reconstruction (cost = 75%)

-Alterations to guns 196mm and larger involving barbette alterations: D
-Replacement of main barbette with powerplant machinery: D
-Insertion or removal of section of hull amidships: D
-Reshaping of stern: D

I think it looks good.