WesWorld

I've hassled a few of you guys privately on this matter already, but figure I'll go public now.

It's easier designing ships when you know you've got ten years left in an arms limitation treaty. We're in the tough part now, I think: the treaty's in effect, but will soon end, and we don't know what will happen afterward (and no, I'm not seeking to initiate a discussion on replacement treaties. No, no, no, no.).

India has a need to replace several cruisers soon. The Colombo class light cruisers (~21,000 t total, counting the sunken Kalyan) are about fiteen years old, as are the Hyderabad class heavy cruisers (~25,000 t, counting the sunken Male). Both classes are small, slow, and under-armed compared to more modern types.

I have the resources available to replace the Colombos and Hyderabads from 1934-1937. What I don't have is a clear sense of how to spend it.

The new CL types will be called upon primarily for independent surface actions, sea lane patrol, and action in confined areas such as the Red Sea or Persian Gulf. Escorting fleet units is less of an issue - I have modern units assigned to that task already. Should I be looking to develop a single multi-function unit to handle these different tasks, or should I bite the bullet and produce a scout cruiser/exploratori for the confined areas and/or a slowish Penelope type CL for sea lane patrol? Bear in mind that the two Trincomalees and the two rebuilt Kolkatas will be available to fill some of these functions along with the new CLs in question.

The new large cruisers will be called upon primairly to screen aircraft carriers and kill other cruisers. If the prey were just other heavy cruisers, I could be content with heavy cruisers. However, there's a trend toward the light battlecruiser/armored cruiser concept which a Type A cruiser isn't up to handling 1 on 1; I think a post-treaty environment may lead to more of these types of ship. Should I go with a conventional Type A under the premise that encounters with bigger cruisers are unlikely? Should I defer construction till post-treaty, and build larger cruisers of my own? Should I just build more light cruisers instead?

What're your thoughts, folks?

I would have thought that the best move would be to build several modernised versions of the Trincomalee class to fill the job description of sealane patrol/scouting, fast and well armed.
The to replace the Hyderabads, I think your best bet is to build 2 CA's to an updated Vadodara specification, as India will only have 2 CA's otherwise

Do you really need CA's to screen carriers?
How often would carriers come in gunnery range of other surface units? It would seem that the carrier formations would remain at 'arms length' from surface forces and take advantage of the extended range of their a/c.
Carrier escorts should be fast and capable of heavy AA fire - within the CL spectrum it would seem
This option would give you more carrier escorts and leave the CA's to function totally in surface action units.
I would avoid the 'hybrid' cruisers (with scouting seaplanes) Their performance would hamper task force operations as they would have to manuever independently to launch a/c and stop to recover them.

I'm avoiding scout cruisers in the sense of a Tone or a CL version thereof; when I use the phrase, I'm thinking some more along the lines of a Tromp-like ship or the smaller Italian CLs.

Needing a CA escort is a good question - there aren't many instances in which a carrier found itself confronted with heavy surface units, and in some of those cases, a CA probably wouldn't have made much difference. But in 1933, I think it's a reasonable concern.

I wouldn't worry about CAs right now. There are not many countries with powerful CAs around India, and the one who do have big CAs (Italy) you cant do anything about without BCs. I would put them off for now. YOu already have a pair to escort your new carrriers.

Once the treaty ends might we see Shivaji again?

What about using CDS tonnage to build escort cruisers? I could see a smaller version of Trincomalee doing that.

You already have a good scout cruiser design (the one for Argentina) perhaps a version of her could fit the bill?

India has widespread sealanes to cover, sure. But there is only one direction an enemy can come from - west. All other arcs are covered by SAINT or SATSUMA.

So your cruiser is defined by

1.) The need for trade protection
2.) Escort heavy units
3.) Fight the Italians or Saudis

So I´d say take something along the lines of RSAN TRIUMPH.

However, there is more to consider

4.) You need numbers
5.) Capital ships are too expensive
6.) Capital units are less useful near a coast as they cannot manoeuvre freely

Hence you need something smaller. The natural trend will lead you to something bigger and more powerful than a standard cruiser of category A. You can gain local superiority by something with ~25cm guns on ~15000-18000ts and 32-33kn. Such a unit would render all enemy A-class cruisers obsolete and force your most likely opponents to react (spend money).

But you can´t build more than 2 such units, I guess. So for numbers something "expendable" is necessary. I´d say something like OTL HMS ARETHUSA or LA ARGENTINA is what you should aim for. 6-9 15cm guns on ~6000ts and a speed of 32kn and some range. Armor probably is less important for the role they´re designed for. Instead I´d add a floatplane. Probably 4 such units are within your budgets?

MY 0,02¤.

HoOmAn

I can do one of a couple things on 6,000 t or less:

-6x2 12.5 cm, 3 cm deck/gun/belt armor, 34 knots. 150 t misc weight.

-3x2 15 cm, 3x2 12.5 cm, 5 cm belt/turret armor and 3 cm deck, 33.3 knots, 150 misc. weight.

Four such units can be afforded, assuming I also spend on a couple of heavy cruisers.

Regarding Triumph: a useful vessel, but if I lay one down pre-1936, it would complicate any subsequent treaty negotiations considerably.

I don't have the resources to spend on both escort cruisers and proper cruisers, so the proper cruisers get the nod. I consider the difference in speed to be worth the additional cost. Anyway, what tonnage I do spend on CDS goes to torpedo-armed sloops.

I have looked at that scout cruiser, but reckon it may be too small to function in trade protection roles on the high seas.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
India has widespread sealanes to cover, sure. But there is only one direction an enemy can come from - west. All other arcs are covered by SAINT or SATSUMA.

While not quite correct, as the NEI is home to a comparable navy. However in any hostilities, access to those eastern sealanes would be almost immediately eliminated.

The narrow window between completion of CAs and the post-treaty environments make those dicey unless optimised for certain roles. Overall, I agree with Hooman. Outside of that, I would really encourage you to explore designs for your long planned great northern offensive to project Indian Naval power to Kabul and beyond! Think rollers- lots of them !

Given the point in time and the limits on Indian ability to afford everything that might be wanted, I think my leanings would be towards focusing more on light cruisers than on heavies. The possible end of the Treaty regime and the building of "super-cruisers" by various powers does suggest that more heavies might be quickly out-moded.

Quoted

Outside of that, I would really encourage you to explore designs for your long planned great northern offensive to project Indian Naval power to Kabul and beyond! Think rollers- lots of them !

I was thinking more of building a canal. Certainly any local Afghan troublemaker would think twice knowing that India could send a salvo of torpedoes into their mountain hideouts.

Hrolf, I've considered that notion as well.

While a Shivaji might only raise eyebrows a Triumph would certainly cause a reaction in Australia, Lion might start gaining pounds and mating...

What you need is one of these:

That should help with the Afghanis.

I still can´t understand why Australia is concerned of India.....?!

Friends of Japan, who seem to have the Aussies worried with their Chosian and Formosian puppet fleets. Also India has quite a population to utilize in times of war.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
Also India has quite a population to utilize in times of war.

But nobody seriously expects them to swim to Australia, right? :o)

India does have landing ships, one of the more comprehensive landingship fleet's too I might add.

Quoted

While a Shivaji might only raise eyebrows a Triumph would certainly cause a reaction in Australia, Lion might start gaining pounds and mating...

Oh well. An arms race between Australia and India doesn't do either of us any good.

Quoted

Friends of Japan, who seem to have the Aussies worried with their Chosian and Formosian puppet fleets.

By the same token, Australia is actively working with another Japanese ally on some expensive Antarctic programs.

In any case, if Australia's worried about Japan, the logical response is...worry about Japan.

Quoted

India does have landing ships, one of the more comprehensive landingship fleet's too I might add.

True - but Indian sealift capability is still less than a division, and I'm not certain why I'd ever want to invade Australia.

One question for me in this line is if India decides to focus on light cruisers, should they include some large light cruisers (that count against heavy cruiser tonnage) in their mix, on the theory that post-Treaty the size of light cruisers intended for battle will grow. Ie, perhaps India should consider a pair of 10,000 ton "large light cruisers", and using the rest of their cruiser tonnage allocation on a mix of scout cruisers and light cruisers.

It's a thought. Certainly something akin to a Cleveland or Brooklyn could be effective in some roles.

Australia is worried about a lot of countries not just India. But there is a large chance that India and Australia could end up fighting each other. SATSUMA wants to "liberate" European colonies if that happens Australia would have to step in if it involved Malasia or Pakistan. Also India is the closets of the SATSUMA countries and the one on my SLOC. I dont fear an invasion but I do fear being cut of.

Simply put I chose India because its the right size. I can match her ship to ship something impossible with Japan or the SAE and too easy in the case of the Phillipines of Chile. In other words she gives me a reason to build what I build.

Dont you have that 15 gun Vadodora around?

She's in the "never-was" section in the Indian encyclopedia.