WesWorld

1st Quarter 1937
Total # of Factories--Factories for Naval Cons.--Factories for IP--Dedicated IP Factories
30--30 for 30,000 tons--0 For 0 IP--0 for 0 IP in Q1/37

Surplus Tons--Tons Used--Left Over Tonnage
43275--38807---34468

Ships under Construction
Ship's Name--L/D--Shipyard--Q/Y--Tons/Q/Remaining--Status
SS Salmon--Q1/37-Groton S0--Q1/4--326/762--Building
SS Seal--Q1/37-Groton S0--Q1/4--326/762--Building
SS Skipjack--Q1/37-New London S0--Q1/4--326/762--Building
SS Snapper--Q1/37-New London S0--Q1/4--326/762--Building
SS Stingray--Q1/37-Squantum S0--Q1/4--326/762--Building
SS Sturgeon--Q1/37-Squantum S0--Q1/4--326/762--Building
SS Pike----Q3/36--Groton S0--Q3/4--326/109-- Building
SS Shark----Q3/36--Groton S0--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
SS Tarpon----Q3/36--New London afloat--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
SS Perch----Q3/36--New London afloat--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
SS Pickerel----Q3/36-- Squantum afloat--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
SS Permit----Q3/36-- Squantum afloat--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
SS Pollack----Q3/36-- Squantum afloat--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
SS Pompano----Q3/36-- Squantum afloat--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
SS Plunger----Q3/36--Squantum afloat--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
SS Barracuda----Q3/36--Squantum afloat--Q2/4--326/109-- Building
DD Radford--Q3/36--Norfolk afloat --Q2/4--514/1371-- Building
DD Jenkins--Q3/36--Norfolk afloat --Q2/4--514/1371-- Building
DD LaVallette--Q3/36--Norfolk afloat --Q2/4--514/1371-- Building
DD Nicholas--Q3/36--Philadelphia afloat --Q2/4--514/1371-- Building
DD O'Bannon--Q3/36--Baltimore afloat --Q2/4--514/1371--Building
DD Chevalier--Q3/36--Boston afloat --Q2/4--514/1371-- Building
DD Saufley--Q3/36--Boston afloat --Q2/4--514/1371-- Building
DD Waller--Q3/36--Camden afloat --Q2/4--514/1371-- Building
DD Strong--Q3/36--Camden afloat --Q2/4--514/1371-- Building
DD Taylor--Q3/36--Camden afloat --Q2/4--514/1371--Building
DD McDougal--Q1/37--New York S2 --Q1/4--635/1905-- Building
DD Porter--Q3/36 --New York afloat --Q3/4--635/635--Building
DD Selfridge--Q3/36 --Boston afloat --Q3/4--635/635--Building
CV Enterprise--Q2/35--New York afloat --09/10--2066/4132--Building
BB Montana--Q1/37--Bremerton S4--Q1/22--2613/55749-Building
BB South Dakota--Q1/37--Boston S4--Q1/22--2613/55749-Building
CL Brooklyn--Q1/37--San Francisco S3--Q1/7--1565/8346-Building
CL Helena--Q1/37--San Francisco S3--Q1/7--1565/8346-Building


Ships Under Repair, Refit, Rebuilding, or Reconstruction
Ship's Name--Started--Shipyard--Q/Y--Tons/Q/Remaining--Status
BB Tennessee Rebuild L4--Q1/36--San Francisco D4--Q5/6--2259/2259--Rebuilding.
BB California Rebuild L4--Q1/36--San Diego D4--Q5/6--2259/2259--Rebuilding.
BB Colorado Rebuild L4--Q3/36--Pearl Harbor D5--Q3/6--2259/6777--Rebuilding.
BB Maryland Rebuild L4--Q3/36--Bremerton D4--Q3/6--2259/6777--Rebuilding.
BB Washington Rebuild L4 --Q1/37--Boston D4--Q1/6--2259/13554--Rebuilding
BB West Virginia Rebuild L4 --Q1/37--New York D4--Q1/6--2259/13554--Rebuilding

Ships Being Scrapped
Ship s Name--Started--Shipyard--Q/Y--Tons/Rec.--Status

Industrial Production
Project--Total IP Req.--IP Allocated--IP Remaining

So the USN is finally starting on their shiny new battleships and CLs? Mwahahahaha!!

(Today is a Mwahahaha mood for me.)

Yep, it's time. The US hasn't built a new BB since the last of the Big Six were completed in 1924, or a CL since the last of the Columbia's were completed in 1928, so it's time.

I suspected it wouldn't be much longer until the US started work on that.

Aside from Montana and South Dakota, which names are you giving the battlewagons?

The next two are USS Utah and USS Iowa.

Just how many ships does the U.S. have? Theres no tally ala Rock Doctor format.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
Just how many ships does the U.S. have? Theres no tally ala Rock Doctor format.

I agree that would be helpful.

Just a query.......

How can you have a free floating sub still under construction?

Would they not have to spend all their build time in the slips?

Why would they need to spend all their time in the slips?? They're surface vessels that submerge, after all.

Take a look at the timeline for USS Gato as an example: laid down Oct. 5, 1940, launched Aug. 21, 1941, commissioned Dec. 31, 1941, completed shakedown and set sail for Pearl Harbor Feb. 16, 1942.

They are not QUITE as simple as surface ships that submerge.
ALL surface ships can submerge, submarines have the advantage of being able (usually) to re-surface.

It just seems to me that a sub cannot have any great amount of work
carried out on it's interior due to the size of the hatches,
and the hull isn't seaworthy until it's closed in,
so how can it be launched before it's almost completed?

As for your example of Gato, 290 days on the slips, 132 days freefloating.
That's ~75% of it's build time on the slips, not the 40% our rules (and I imagine most of our spreadsheets) allow.

So any ships launched before 75% complete should, theoretically, go straight into long term submergance testing!!

Apart from this example, weren't the German u-boats practically finished before launching? Most of the photos and footage I've seen would suggest it.

Funny that you should say that, but I have thought about that as well...

I'm either having an odd case of Deja Vu, or I think we recently discussed sub-launching rules elsewhere...

Something to note tho, regarding the Gato dates; A ship can (and usually is) completed a bit before it is comissioned, especially the first of a new design.

All the subs of the class show a similar pattern: about twice as long on the slip as fitting out alongside. Of course, that's not really uncommon: IJN Yamato was 33 months in the slip and 16 fitting out alongside. So yeah, the WW rules don't match reality, this isn't news.

Quoted

Originally posted by Commodore Green
It just seems to me that a sub cannot have any great amount of work
carried out on it's interior due to the size of the hatches,
and the hull isn't seaworthy until it's closed in,
so how can it be launched before it's almost completed?

You´re right. This is a weak spot in WesWorld. Submarines do not sim well with SS nor do our building rules (which Hrolf is using correctly) reflecthow subs were build historically.

However, the easier the rules the better and we´re 17 years into the sim now and using the 40/60 rule for submarines hasn´t been a problem yet. Not really at least. So I think Hrolf did just fine and we should keep it at that.

But, again, you are right. Historically things were different.

Most of the electrical and general outfitting, testing and stocking could be done while they are floating. Nearly all subs have a launch date. Of course we don;t know how much stuff is actually fitted inside at that time.

Some ships lauch almost complete, but I think the 40% works well for ships.

For subs just say they don't launch/complete until 100%. It's only spreadsheet talk after all, in my reports now my subs lay down and complete. There is no launch date.