WesWorld

THE NAVALIST
- South Africans Official Navy Newspaper -
18th February 1926

On Tuesday last week South Africa´s Minister for Defence, Mr. Paul Hijmer, introduced a new 3-year plan for the Royal South African Navy which was developed by a panel of experts lead by Vice-Admiral (retired) Graaf Gerrit van de Haartlijners, K.D.T., who is Lord Administrator of the Navy and Commissary Extraordinary for Naval Affairs. According to this plan the reported reduction of old material within the RSAN will continue to free up resources otherwise bound for ships of questionable value. Accompanied by a plan to lay down more small and medium sized combatants it is expected these actions will support an ongoing process to reshape our navy, making her fit for modern needs.

The plan presented by Minister Hijmer includes

In 1926
- 12 ASW launches
- 2 minesweeper
- 6 torpedo boats
- 2 destroyer
- 2 light cruiser
- 1 armored cruiser
- 1 airplane carrier
- 4 coastal submarines
- 1 tender

in 1927
- 12 ASW launches
- 2 minesweeper
- 4 frigates
- 6 torpedo boats
- 5 destroyer
- 2 light cruiser
- 1 armored cruiser
- 4 coastal submarines

in 1928
- 12 ASW launches
- 4 minesweeper
- 4 frigates
- 5 destroyer
- 4 flotilla leader
- 2 light cruiser
- 1 coast defense ship
- 2 coastal submarines
- 1 floatplane carrier

In addition to the ships listed several others will be rebuild like the torpedo boats of the Cat-class or the battleships of the Koning-class.

As Mr. Hijmer pointed out this program will stretch South Africas resources to its extrems but in the light of recent international crises and growing tensions it seems more than reasonable to push the modernisation of the RSAN. Only if we are prepared for the challenges of the next decades we can hope to preserve peace in our part of the world.

And what designs might these vessels be???

Knowing the RSAN... it's a secret.

Looks like a solid program of coastal defence construction to deal with threats like submarines and mines.

Eight cruisers and a carrier won't hurt either.

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10
Knowing the RSAN... it's a secret.

Not really. It just wasn´t part of this news item.

If you browse through some of my older posts and the SAE section of the encyclopedia you may find most answers as I build more than one unit per class in most cases. So you can expect the CA laid down in 1927 to be a sister to the ship laid down in 1926 (which data is already revealed) and so on. Of course there will be some new designs too and you´ll get all informations once this becomes necessary.

Cheers,

HoOmAn

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
Looks like a solid program of coastal defence construction to deal with threats like submarines and mines.

Eight cruisers and a carrier won't hurt either.

Well, I´m currently focusing on fast combatants and escorts as well as coast defense forces. I will be prepared should SATSUMA (or dare I say Phillipines) aggression reaches the Indian Ocean...

Let them come and I´ll smash them left handed! And believe me, in such a scenario eight cruisers and a carrier will hurt. The other side of course. ;o)

[Seriously, I´m still trying to reshape the RSAN into something balanced and atid bit more realistic. That´s why I need so many light forces. This is not the first time I mention to not have enough...]

*whistling innocently*

Quoted

Seriously, I´m still trying to reshape the RSAN into something balanced

Same story here. As of 1/1/1921, Russia had 8 BB, 4 BC, with 4 BB under construction, and 8 light cruisers suitable for working with the battlefleet, and 4 heavy cruisers under construction. The Noviks and their derivitives are good destroyers, but the Bucharsky's and Sibirsky Streloks were old, weak, and slow. That's why Russia has been on a CL/DD binge.

And France was in about the same position, with a bunch of old 21-23 knot Armored Cruisers that would be easy prey for the torpedos of a modern CL.

Atlantis is short on heavy cruisers, all the older ones being too large to keep or far to old. I also need some smaller combatants as well.

Everyone seems to have their weak point in the fleet, its interesting to see what developes from the need to plug that particular hole in their navy.

You know, a navy like the RSAN needs many workhorses... We do not sim standard maintenance but one should expect about one third of ones fleet to be not at hand immediately should it become necessary.

I concur on the need for escorts and I also want to avoid block obsolesence. I'm just junking 2 cruisers and 6 DD now.

The trick is building upto a tempo and then maintaining it. I share Tirpitz's thoughts on this. At the moment I'm adding 3 DD a year but 10 Escorts.

Cheers,

The Philippines finds itself seriously short on Light Cruisers...and serious relief won't be coming until 1931...

Roger - can you elaborate on Tirpitz's thoughts?

Swampy - I had the same thought about cruisers when I was looking at your Q3 report. It puzzles me that they seem to be so low on the Filipino priority list when the nature of your geography would seem to favor such a type. Not to mention that you've got various capital ships that could use an escort or two...

India's currently focused on building up its light and medium forces. This means submarines, mine warfare, sub chasers, motor torpedo boats, destroyers, and light cruisers. So many, in fact, that my factories can't keep up with demand, and I'm having to make up the difference with recycled scrap. Expect the trend to continue into 1927.

Quoted

India's currently focused on building up its light and medium forces. This means submarines, mine warfare, sub chasers, motor torpedo boats, destroyers, and light cruisers. So many, in fact, that my factories can't keep up with demand, and I'm having to make up the difference with recycled scrap. Expect the trend to continue into 1927.

Well, I tend to swap the materials around a lot. Removing some tons from one project just to make sure I can easily start on a hull from another project. I also need to take care that I return those tons I pulled away from that one project. With a building plan that runs well into 1932, I sometimes end up adding and removing tons up to 1932. Good thing I use a spreadsheet which makes all the swapping of those tonnages so much easier. With that spreadsheet, I make sure that I do not go over the limits that I have set for each quarter.

I tend to do the same thing, thats why my training ship is taking soooooo long to complete building. I'm tending to focus on smaller ships now so when one program is winding down I find I now have the opposite problem, what to do with the extra tonnage.

Quoted

I'm tending to focus on smaller ships now so when one program is winding down I find I now have the opposite problem, what to do with the extra tonnage.

If you are desparate to ditch some tons, you could always build something that would fall into the unlimited category. After all, it is a waste to lose those tons.
Another idea is to stockpile them and use those tons next quarter and stockpile newly created materials and so on. As long as you spend more tons building ships that stockpiling, it should not be a problem.

Looks like we´re following different procedures to bring our fleets to live. Í´m prefering to have a fixed plan based on what I think is necessary and I don´t swap material around. The material necessary per ship is equally spread across the minimum time necessary to build it. Then things cumulate and tell me how many factories are necessary. Material produced but not used is automatically transfered into the next quarter.

The way I work is "If I have some tons left, I will put this into a ship. Should I need those tons the next quarter or the quarter after that, I will remove the same number of tons from that one ship."
Sometimes I only put a few tons into a design for a certain quarter and the next quarter I add additional tons so that I am back on or above the average needed per month for a vessel. Using that trick, I can start the construction of a ship one quarter earlier.
This way I am trying to get the maximum out of my production.

I try to keep things as simple as possible, but I do tend to put extra materials into new ships, usually tenders. Thats how my two sub support ships have come to life.

I also try to keep the ammount of tons put into a project at a consistant setting. If I put 300 tons into a sub in Q1/26 chances are that same ammount is going to be put in near the end of its build time. Wartime will change all that though as speed of build wil become imperative.

Quoted

Swampy - I had the same thought about cruisers when I was looking at your Q3 report. It puzzles me that they seem to be so low on the Filipino priority list when the nature of your geography would seem to favor such a type. Not to mention that you've got various capital ships that could use an escort or two...

I'm following a priority list similar to the pre-WW1 USN: build the expensive stuff first. The CEs I currently have can act as escorts for the BBs (except for Presidente Malvar, but the one CL I do have can escort that).

Nevertheless, the two CL27 type were a late addition - after I decided not to build that 12th factory - to help fill in the Cruiser Gap.

My current cruiser programme looks like this:

1927 - 2 CL (6 x 155mm)
1928 - possibly one "minelaying cruiser"; rebuild 1 CE
1929 - 2 CM (8 x 130mm) + 3 DL (5 x 130mm); possibly 1 CA (8 x 210mm)
1930 - 2 CA (12 x 210mm)

Then:
4 x CL31 (9 x 155mm)
4 x CL34 (12 x 155mm)
1 x CH35 ("seaplane cruiser"; 6 x 155mm + 7-10 planes)
4 x CL37 (15 x 155mm)
8 x Flakkreuzer-38 (10 x 100mm)
2 x CA41 (12 x 240mm)