WesWorld

The RN has no radars at sea, only a handful on land and no naval prototypes even in the workshop or on the designers drawing board.

I've mapped out my entire GB aeronautical designs until 1950 already. I intend being only 3 years ahead in planes from now to 1943-44 then being 4 years ahead until the end of 1950. This I feel will leave the RAF trailing to field at some point.

It would be nice if others posted thier proposed specifcations a year or so before the planned plane is going to fly. That way we can all see what is going on and not have any shocks and it shows an element of planning rather than a new six-engined 100 ton bomber cropping up one year and everyone wondering where it came from!

Whittle can't be cloned, such technology would surely breach the tech rules...

The RAF will build experimental jets (the Air Ministry like a good wheeze) but I'll post more relevent info about that in 1937 nearer the time. I feel we need some kind of gentleman's agreement now on jet engines to define when they will appear and who will build them. This will stop any tears later on and ensure everyone can read it before they decide to invent it first.

And before anyone steals the idea the steam-turbine engine for aircraft was my idea first and I dreamed up the HTP Steam Turbine for aircraft from my own head. Again development of that will take until the mid 1940s. Long term planning is the key in my opinion to avoid unrealistic timeframes.

Re: Jets - The plan, I thought, was to mostly stick with historical development times.

For Germany, my plan is to stick with historical development times up through at least 1941. The Jumo 004 and later engine developments might be easier if Germany's access to various high-temperature alloys is not limited as it was historically (this will also affect some piston engines as well). For the US, I haven't done enough research on US jet research to say anything at this point, I'll be looking into that.

Quoted

And before anyone steals the idea the steam-turbine engine for aircraft was my idea first and I dreamed up the HTP Steam Turbine for aircraft from my own head.

Actually, if you watch Sakura Taisen (which takes place in the early 1920s), you'll know that Japan has already done that.
Steam powered planes, steam powered cars, steam powered airships, steam powered control instruments, steam powered trains, steam powered ships, steam powered Koubu spirit armor... All courtesy of Kanzaki Heavy Industries. Only thing that is not steam powered are the humans.

The Germans thought of putting a steamturbine in the Me-264...

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
The Germans thought of putting a steamturbine in the Me-264...

Yep. But I doubt that Germany will go that route. First, I'd need a reason to buying extreme-range bombers, which currently I don't see a need for for Germany.

Nordmark intends to possibly develop the Saab J-21 (or a less advanced prop driven predecessor.), which could be developed into a prototype jet, but I can't see it flying until mid to late 1944/5.

As for prop aircraft, I reckon Nordmark will slow down development, as I'm presently around 3-4 years ahead, and that is a bit too much for my liking.

The J-21 had both prop and jet versions

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10
Only thing that is not steam powered are the humans.

oh, I don't know about that....ever heard of the expression "he's just blowing off steam"??

Similar plans for Atlantis, finnish developing the Accrisius Ac-15 Aves fighter, DB-1 Sereia divebomber and B-3 Vanguard. Meanwhile Spartan is improving the Spartan Sp-20 Corsair, with the A2 variant and the Vanquish bomber.

Ive pretty much discussed this elsewhere, but my plans are to produce the IAR 80,PZL P.50, and PZL P.38, all but the P.50 to the historic design, in both Poland and Romania, for Poland and Romania. Future development of fighters will be a continuation of these three designs with more power, and better armament. My two nations, even with the +3 year won't be getting into jets until at least 1950 (or even later.

Bombers, on the other hand, will be the PZL P.37, and PZL P.46, with development of both.

Bulgaria will finish its delivery of 72 Bf109B fighters, and will then switch to 72 Supermarine Spitfires for 1937-1939. In 1945, or if a war starts, I'll order 72 more of whatever's hot at the moment.

I'll dabble in little side-orders, and I'll have Bulgaria work to build its own monoplane fighter, probably by 1940, but I'll keep most of my orders international.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Re: Jets - The plan, I thought, was to mostly stick with historical development times.

That would leave Canada entirely dependant on US and UK designs, and ruin all my fun. :\

India will just run their current Air Corps aircrafts to different series. The basic frames will stay but upgrades either in armament or/and engines will happen thru the rest of the decade.

The naval branch of the BNS pretty much is following OTL US Navy development.

A. Regarding Tech/Economic trees vs. Agreements etc.

I don't think I care for the Hearts of Iron tree idea, esp. at this stage.

The greater economy falters on the fact that the naval budget would vary by nation. Belgium has much less need for a Navy than the Netherlands. I recall the discussions with Fyrwulf over the reasonable size of Brazil's army and how much more developed vs. historical it was. This would really impact India and the Kongo, SAE...etc etc.
Far to late to consider I believe.

If a hard tech timeline was considered, I think the format should be that a nation "spends" on research to be "X" number of years ahead of current tech in some category.

The further ahead, the greater the expense. However once the calender rolls around, your +5 year advance is now only +4 years, and you have to shell out more funds to get back to +5 years. Beyond that basic idea I haven't a clue.

B. Regarding optional guidelines.
I rather think that is what we had.
The aircraft one was existing when I came to WesWorld, and it's ripple effect in anti-aircraft is noticable. We also kinda worked out a 'let tanks catch up to historical, then hold' one recently.

These were both optional- if you wanted to tailor make with Planebuilder or Tanksharp, they served as a guideline, else you could grab something from the right historical timeframe, or even not specify until you need too.

C. Regarding aircraft :
I will shortly run out of Fokker, Avia, and Reynard airframes (due to the OTL 1940 invasion) to 'update' stick advanced engines in.

For a while I can simply upgrade, but in a couple years- outside of the historic NAA plane fielded under the Atlantic brand, I will be making purely hypothetical planes.

Generally speaking the Netherlands will field a higher % of fighters than typical, as 1,000 fighters is far cheaper than 1,000 heavy bombers.

D.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
Regarding radar - looks like the SAE is way behind. There is no operational device and our scientists just notice that some radio waves are reflected by buildings etc. and could create some kind of "echo"....

Heh that's been known since 1904. Hülsmeyer's telemobilescope was meant for anti-collision work and could detect approaching ships, it was demonstrated in Cologne and Rotterdam.

I believe OTL Phillips Electronics made a magnetron commercially available in 1936, so the technical gear to build such things would be more available.

E.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Bulgaria will finish its delivery of 72 Bf109B fighters, and will then switch to 72 Supermarine Spitfires for 1937-1939. In 1945, or if a war starts, I'll order 72 more of whatever's hot at the moment.

Sounds like Fokker will be doomed to disappointment

In reguards to tech I was thinking simple. Each factory produces 1 "tech" point each per year. Each tech area of expertise needs 100 points to reach the peak of its developement.

For example a glider bomb would need 100 points for say AP bombs, electronics ect. before it could be used in the field.

We could limit the ammount of points allowed to be put into a specific tech. We could also limit how many points can be transfered from other country's to any one country to limit the consintrated developement of one tech by a group of nations, to simulate the certain level of secracy even allies keep between each other and more importantly to prevent powergaming.

Factories were assigned according to number of ships built initial if I have understood the rules correctly. This would mean that countries like Switzerland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia will fall far behind lets say Brazil it will ofcourse kill any reason for anyone but the major powers to build anything.

Simple? I don't know the meaning of the.. ok I do but just not good at adhering to it.

I'm inclined to think using current factory output as a basis would be unfair to some nations like Bharat. The old argument that people power should count for something beyond that.

Anyhow- using your points to roughly illustrate what I was putting forward. Imagine it's 1936.
Country "A" wants to have 1937 tanks - pays 100.
But they also want 1941 piston engines, so they pay some whopping sum- say (100+200+300+400+500) 1500pts to gain 1941 tech.
Country "B" says...1936 is good enough. 0 points.

Ok, calender cycles to 1937.
Now, Country A and now B have 1937 tanks.
Country A still has 1941 engines, has to pay 500 to get to 1942.
Country B has 1937 but decides to pay 1000 for 1941.

The problem is... I'm not convinced I'd want to inflict this book keeping on myself or others.

Well as I've preposed before we could assign factory's for Army and airforce stuff too, perhaps even civilian factory's if needed. That would give us an overall factory tally that would be more fair.

I'm not fond of assigning a year to tech, nor making it possible to spend different amounts to achieve different levels and different times. that would be a headache!

Perhaps add stages instead, for example:

50 points for basic engine tech, plus

50 points for level 1
75 points for level 2
100 points for level 3
ect. ect.

The higher the level the more you have to spend to finish developing the tech.

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
The problem is... I'm not convinced I'd want to inflict this book keeping on myself or others.

That is the problem with all rule systems I've seen.

I've played a sort of 22nd-Century Space game on another forum (the game seems to have foundered) and we had an interstellar war going on... there were no rules at startup. We ended up with a... difficulty (read: flaming spat) due to the lack of rules. (Specifically, I brought a fleet with 5:1 superiority to a fight, and my opponent demanded that his "morale bonus" permitted him to win.) I attempted to introduce production and technology rules, but no one would have any of it. So, two weeks later, the problem surfaced again when we started another battle.

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
E.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Bulgaria will finish its delivery of 72 Bf109B fighters, and will then switch to 72 Supermarine Spitfires for 1937-1939. In 1945, or if a war starts, I'll order 72 more of whatever's hot at the moment.

Sounds like Fokker will be doomed to disappointment

I'll send out an RfP in 1937. I'm not 100% set on the Spitfire, really... it's just an amusing thought to me for Bulgaria to employ both Spitfires and Bf109s at the same time. Fokker has a good chance to get a contract even if the Spitfires get purchased - Bulgaria is trying to build an indigenous fighter (the DAR 11 Ljastuvka), based on the Avia B-135, to provide extra aircraft without making big foreign purchases. If that project fails as it historically did, then Bulgaria may turn to Fokker for consolation.

SA... I wasn't around for your earlier proposals, or did not clue in.

I think the key to any such system is to make it optional at the basic level - no accounting for non-naval stuff if you don't feel like it, while at the same time you don't get overly penalized for "failing to participate".

Right now, I'm not sure how to get there.
But deciding what goals a system should achieve would be the first part. Getting there is really part two... and part three will be inflicting overly complicated linear regression equations on unsuspecting victims, stunning them to allow Dutch world dominati ... hey is this mike on?


Brockpine:
The Avia B-135 did come out in early 1935 btw. Same as the historical plane.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaines at startup. We ended up with a... difficulty (read: flaming spat)

ROFL
I can't imagine.

The only Space-based game I tried was a variant of "Star Fleet Battles" with a buddy. It was supposed to be counter based galactic warfare, but we decided to fight the tactical encounters and had production rules. Unfortunately running a tactical turn-based encounter with 30+ starships takes forever. However, few serious disagreements, just not enough time.