WesWorld

I'm just curious as to what ships Britain and the U.S. retained under the CT (cleito treaty)? Britain has 20 and the U.S. has 21 with no 16" guns.

...the US retained:

1. SHIPS WHICH MAY BE RETAINED BY THE UNITED STATES
Name: Tonnage
Maryland ................................................ 32,600
California .............................................. 32,300
Tennessee ............................................... 32,300
Idaho ................................................... 32,000
New Mexico .............................................. 32,000
Mississippi ............................................. 32,000
Arizona ................................................. 31,400
Pennsylvania ............................................ 31,400
Oklahoma ................................................ 27,500
Nevada .................................................. 27,500
New York ................................................ 27,000
Texas ................................................... 27,000
Arkansas ................................................ 26,000
Wyoming ................................................. 26,000
Florida ................................................. 21,825
Utah .................................................... 21,825
North Dakota ............................................ 20,000
Delaware ................................................ 20,000
-------
Total Tonnage ....................................... 500,650

On the completion of the two ships of the West Virginia class and the scrapping of the North Dakota and Delaware, as provided in Article II, the total tonnage to be retained by the United States will be 525,850 tons.

++++++

Our treaty gives the USA 640,000 tons, incidentally.

The US could have completed the Washington, though she and the rest of the Colorado class wouldn't be shipping 16" guns - probably the same 14" guns previous classes mounted.

They'd still have room for another two to three ships within their treaty limits - perhaps they'd finish one or two of the Lexington/Constellations?

As for the Brits, historically:

SHIPS WHICH MAY BE RETAINED BY THE BRITISH EMPIRE
Name: Tonnage
Royal Sovereign ......................................... 25,750
Royal Oak ............................................... 25,750
Revenge ................................................. 25,750
Resolution .............................................. 25,750
Ramilies ................................................ 25,750
Malaya .................................................. 27,500
Valiant ................................................. 27,500
Barham .................................................. 27,500
Queen Elizabeth ......................................... 27,500
Warsprite ............................................... 27,500
Benbow .................................................. 25,000
Emperor of India ........................................ 25,000
Iron Duke ............................................... 25,000
Marlborough ............................................. 25,000
Hood .................................................... 41,200
Renown .................................................. 26,500
Repulse ................................................. 26,500
Tiger ................................................... 28,500
Thunderer ............................................... 22,500
King George V ........................................... 23,000
Ajax .................................................... 23,000
Centurion ............................................... 23,000
-------
Total Tonnage ....................................... 580,450
On the completion of the two new ships to be constructed and the scrapping of the Thunderer, King George V, Ajax and Centurion, as provided in Article II, the total tonnage to be retained by the British Empire will be 558,950 tons.
+++

The Brits get 600,000 tons in our treaty but proceeding historically will leave them with twenty hulls, the maximum our treaty allows. So no new construction for them unless they junk more of the old dreadnoughts.

I agree with this analysis. The Americans surely will finish some of the Lexingtons while the British will maybe scrap some of the old ones to build Hoods sisters.

The brits seemed to abandon the Admiral class in favor of the G-3's. I think if the Americans built two Lexingtons the British would answer with 15" armed G-3's. Plus three of those older 13.5" gunned ships were sold to austrailia if i'm not mistaken before the treaty took effect. Britain would dump four of the 13.5" ships and build two G-3's and be within their tonnage limits. Without the 16" limit the nelsons won't get built so theres another reason to go for a 40,000 ton 15" version of the G-3.
That would leave the British with the following ships..

Royal Sovereign ......................................... 25,750
Royal Oak ............................................... 25,750
Revenge ................................................. 25,750
Resolution .............................................. 25,750
Ramilies ................................................ 25,750
Malaya .................................................. 27,500
Valiant ................................................. 27,500
Barham .................................................. 27,500
Queen Elizabeth ......................................... 27,500
Warsprite ............................................... 27,500
Benbow .................................................. 25,000
Emperor of India ........................................ 25,000
Iron Duke ............................................... 25,000
Marlborough ............................................. 25,000
Hood .................................................... 41,200
Renown .................................................. 26,500
Repulse ................................................. 26,500
Tiger ................................................... 28,500
G-3A......................................................40,000
G-3B.......................................................40,000

this would give them 20 hulls and 568,950 tons used leaving themwith 31,050 tons for refits.

The U.S. would get the following

Colorado...................................................32,600
West Virginia.............................................32,600
Maryland ................................................ 32,600
California .............................................. 32,300
Tennessee ............................................... 32,300
Idaho ................................................... 32,000
New Mexico .............................................. 32,000
Mississippi ............................................. 32,000
Arizona ................................................. 31,400
Pennsylvania ............................................ 31,400
Oklahoma ................................................ 27,500
Nevada .................................................. 27,500
New York ................................................ 27,000
Texas ................................................... 27,000
Arkansas ................................................ 26,000
Wyoming ................................................. 26,000
Florida ................................................. 21,825
Utah .................................................... 21,825

this would leave them 114,150 tons to build with which would get them two 40,000 ton Lexingtons and 34,150 tons for refits or three 35,000 ton Lexingtons and 9100 tons for refits and they would be at thier max number of hulls. With three Lexingtons built they have little spare tonnage for upgrades but the Florida and Utah are ageing fast so once they were able to be scrapped the U.S. would get 43,650 extra tons to use for refits or another battleship. Personally I would build a pair of lexingtons and wait till Utah and Florida could be scrapped and build two more ships.

Quoted

The Americans surely will finish some of the Lexingtons while the British will maybe scrap some of the old ones to build Hoods sisters.

Build Hood's sisters ? Are you sure ? Hood does happen to be 1200 tons over the limit. So either use increased range to bring the displacement down to 40,000 tons, throw something off it to get the displacement under 40,000 tons, or scrap the ship.

Perhaps something like this. It's based on the design in the Springsharp database. it's 0.3 knots slower, has less coverage for the belt (only that what is needed) and bigger range to get the displacement under 40,000 tons.


HMS Hood, Royal Navy Battlecruiser laid down 1916

Displacement:
37,925 t light; 39,998 t standard; 42,678 t normal; 44,652 t full load
Loading submergence 1,786 tons/feet

Dimensions:
860.00 ft x 104.00 ft x 28.50 ft (normal load)
262.13 m x 31.70 m x 8.69 m

Armament:
8 - 15.00" / 381 mm guns (4 Main turrets x 2 guns, 2 superfiring turrets)
12 - 5.50" / 140 mm guns
4 - 4.00" / 102 mm AA guns
Weight of broadside 14,626 lbs / 6,634 kg
4 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm above water torpedoes, 2 - 21.0" / 533.4 mm submerged torpedo tubes

Armour:
Belt 12.00" / 305 mm, upper belt 5.00" / 127 mm, end belts 5.00" / 127 mm
Belts cover 81 % of normal area
Main turrets 15.00" / 381 mm
Armour deck 3.00" / 76 mm, Conning tower 11.00" / 279 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 162,929 shp / 121,545 Kw = 30.70 kts
Range 10,600nm at 12.00 kts

Complement:
1,484 - 1,930

Cost:
£6.076 million / $24.303 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 1,828 tons, 4.3 %
Armour: 12,278 tons, 28.8 %
Belts: 4,090 tons, 9.6 %, Armament: 4,427 tons, 10.4 %, Armour Deck: 3,470 tons, 8.1 %
Conning Tower: 291 tons, 0.7 %, Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0.0 %
Machinery: 6,070 tons, 14.2 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 17,749 tons, 41.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 4,753 tons, 11.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

Metacentric height 6.3

Remarks:
Hull space for machinery, storage & compartmentation is excellent
Room for accommodation & workspaces is excellent

Estimated overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Relative margin of stability: 1.09
Shellfire needed to sink: 56,143 lbs / 25,466 Kg = 33.3 x 15.0 " / 381 mm shells
(Approx weight of penetrating shell hits needed to sink ship excluding critical hits)
Torpedoes needed to sink: 4.1
(Approx number of typical torpedo hits needed to sink ship)
Relative steadiness as gun platform: 56 %
(Average = 50 %)
Relative rocking effect from firing to beam: 0.55
Relative quality as seaboat: 1.13

Hull form characteristics:
Block coefficient: 0.586
Sharpness coefficient: 0.38
Hull speed coefficient 'M': 7.53
'Natural speed' for length: 29.33 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 49 %
Trim: 50
(Maximise stabilty/flotation = 0, Maximise steadiness/seakeeping = 100)

Estimated hull characteristics & strength:
Underwater volume absorbed by magazines and engineering spaces: 80.5 %
Relative accommodation and working space: 190.5 %
(Average = 100%)
Displacement factor: 109 %
(Displacement relative to loading factors)
Relative cross-sectional hull strength: 1.01
(Structure weight / hull surface area: 200 lbs / square foot or 977 Kg / square metre)
Relative longitudinal hull strength: 1.00
(for 24.50 ft / 7.47 m average freeboard, freeboard adjustment 4.26 ft)
Relative composite hull strength: 1.00



Walter

They can cheat. I doubt anybody will notice those 1200ts... but in the other hand we know the British were very serious about staying within a treatys restrictions so maybe your alt-Hood is more likely.

The Hood was 6200 tons over the Washington treaty limits but was retained anyway and her sisters were cancelled in 1917 so its unlikely they would be built. This increases the chance that the british would build G-3's. The Nelsons borrowed alot of design features from the G-3's and were built to the 35,000 ton limit so imagine an extra 5000 tons on a Nelson. Perhaps she would get a more conventional layout for her main guns and a decent speed.

"The U.S. would get the following

Colorado...................................................32,600
West Virginia.............................................32,600
Maryland ................................................ 32,600
California .............................................. 32,300
Tennessee ............................................... 32,300
Idaho ................................................... 32,000
New Mexico .............................................. 32,000
Mississippi ............................................. 32,000
Arizona ................................................. 31,400
Pennsylvania ............................................ 31,400
Oklahoma ................................................ 27,500
Nevada .................................................. 27,500
New York ................................................ 27,000
Texas ................................................... 27,000
Arkansas ................................................ 26,000
Wyoming ................................................. 26,000
Florida ................................................. 21,825
Utah .................................................... 21,825

this would leave them 114,150 tons to build with which would get them two 40,000 ton Lexingtons and 34,150 tons for refits or three 35,000 ton Lexingtons and 9100 tons for refits and they would be at thier max number of hulls. With three Lexingtons built they have little spare tonnage for upgrades but the Florida and Utah are ageing fast so once they were able to be scrapped the U.S. would get 43,650 extra tons to use for refits or another battleship. Personally I would build a pair of lexingtons and wait till Utah and Florida could be scrapped and build two more ships."

With the said arrangement for the American Fleet, wouldn't the Navy wish to finish the 32,600 ton U.S.S. Washington (BB47) and finish one 40,000 ton Lexington, or two 35,000 ton Lexingtons with the Washington, then just let Utah, Florida, Wyoming, and Arkansas age out together in 1932 so they can build three or four new 35,000 ton battleships? (or a lesser number of 40,000 ton ships) They would be short one ship after they are complete, but that would just place them even with Great Britain while having heavier ships.

Or am I missing something?

And since the United States, to comply with the Treaty, would have to make the Colorados slightly improved Tennessees with the same 12x14" guns, wouldn't the BuOrd attempt to come up with a superior 14" gun and/or shell instead of making a 15" gun? Or would they spend the time and effort to create an long barreled 15" gun with super heavy shells? Or would they attempt to alter the treaty later to allow for 16" guns which they already have tested?

I know this is an older thread, but I have much catching up to do.

The American fleet has been posted,Minus Washington and with two Lexington class BC's. their fleet is in the infrastructure board.

Quoted

Or would they attempt to alter the treaty later to allow for 16" guns which they already have tested?

Looking at the thread formerly known as the 'Design rules of us Gentlemen...' (it is still called that but due to various reasons, the current post are a bit off topic), Russia/France have a max of 420mm / 16,54" on their wish list, Atlantis has a max of 406mm / 16" on their wish list, Philippines has a max of 410mm / 16.14" on their wish list, and Japan (=me) wishes to keep it at 381mm / 15".
So I do not think that the US needs to attempt to alter the treaty because other nations already wish to change the main gun caliber. You mentioned '16" guns which they already have tested', so I think it could be that the US will support those nations that wish a larger caliber main gun and build their replacement BBs in the 30s with the 16 inch guns.
All speculation though and that is if the treaty gets altered.

Well so far we have 4 players who would like some changes made so I think its a very good possibility that a change will happen.

Quoted

Well so far we have 4 players who would like some changes made so I think its a very good possibility that a change will happen.

Well you sound rather optimistic.
4 players, five nations in all of how many?

Player nations wishing for change:
France
Russia
Atlantis
Philippines
Japan

Player nations who have not mentioned their opinion:
SAE
India
Greece
Iberia
Italy
Nordmark
Netherlands

Non treaty player nations:
Germany
Denmark

Non player treaty nations (not sure what they would do):
US
UK

Total 'important' nations: 16
Percentage wishing change: 31.25%

Well even with this arrangement, the US Navy will be short one or two hulls after it finishes new costruction.

Even with the removal of Washington (BB-47), and building two 35,000 ton Lexingtons, by 1935 the United States will be able to build seven treaty hulls (after the holiday of course), but even with all battleships up to and including Texas deleted, the Americans can only really field five new hulls of any decent size. Or else six Tennessee sized hulls. (unless it would like to build seven new Nevadas).

This is just my observation of the situation. Even short two hulls the American Battleline is second only to Britain. I've not gone over the British numbers yet for the mid 30s, so the Americans might still be largest if the British can't build to the maximum number of hulls either.

That still leave every nation from Greece on up with at least a few battleships, many armed with 15 inch guns. And most faster than 21 knots. This against an American Fleet of likely 12 slow battleships, two battlecruisers and 5-7 new builds ranging from slow battleships to battlecruisers, depending on the direction the Americans decide to take. All likely armed with 14 inch guns.

It would be odd to see 6 Tennessee like ships built in 1935, all armed with 15 inch guns. A very slow, less armored, 9x15" in three triples is possible on the Tessessee's displacement (and hull size). Slow as in 21 knots still. The 12x14" arrangement is likely the better buy.

But that is what, ten sim years from now? And for the players/NPC runners to decide. I'm just watching right now.

Heres a link to the list of what the Americans would have.....

http://wesworld.jk-clan.de/thread.php?th…a6f7cc241c2f104

The Lexingtons will replace the Delawares, and the U.S. will still have tonnage left should they choose to build a third lexington, or if the don't they could also ditch the Utah class BB's as well and use the left over tonnage to build another new class of ships.

Is it stands the Delaware class replacement dates are 1928/29 and the Utah's in 1929/30, but thanks to this clause....

VI.

Each Contracting Power that under Part 3, Chapter A, Article V above, (that) retains at least one capital ship laid down prior to January 1st 1911, and has not given up capital ships laid down after January 1st 1911, shall be permitted to lay down two capital ships in replacement of two existing capital ships that would otherwise be retained under the treaty, which are to be disposed of as per Part 3, Chapter H,

That means the Delawares can hit the scrap heap, and the Lexingtons take their place, leaving the U.S. one ship under the hulls limit. Given the fact that in the wesworld the U.S. is terribly isolationist, its not likely the Utah's will get replaced as soon as they are eligeble due to a stingy congress, but who knows. There are still a few years to go by and if someone designs a ship that completely outclasses anything the U.S. has, they surely will build to counter the threat as I'm sure player nations will as well.

I'll modify the list to include tonnage figures for each ship and make it a sticky post.

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10

Quoted

Player nations who have not mentioned their opinion:
SAE
India
Greece
Iberia
Italy
Nordmark
Netherlands

Is not hard to try and guess this one. Netherlands places (always has done it) staying power over weapons. As you know all the BBs and BCs currently in commission in the Dutch navy prioritize armor over weapons, and only the just started Utrechts will be armed with weapons of 15''.

So is just natural to think that, if in the future there are talks held to put amendments to the CT,Netherlands will strongly side with any nation wishing to keep the 15'' guns as a limit, or even downgrade the limit to 14'' for new builds.

So that means that you will support me on the main gun caliber limit.
^_^

Hmmm seems so .

Not really sure which thread to respond to, so this one wins the coin toss.

India would be inclined to agree with its South African allies: if the point of the treaty is to promote peace, scaling everything up to allow greater numbers of more powerful warships is not the way to do it.

India sees no benefit at this time in changing any definition of warship size or maximum armament; some tinkering with overall tonnage allotments can be considered - more destroyer tonnage, for example would be appropriate. India would also point out that its collective BB+CV+CA/CL tonnage (80 + 44 + 132 = 256,000 t) is somewhat lower than Greek BB/CV/CA?CL tonnage (120 + 30 + 120 = 270,000 t) and would to have that amended.

Germany has no opinion on the treaty itself, but notes that the point of disarming it so thoroughly was to start the disarmament process around the world. Thus far, nobody else has taken any steps to disarm - leaving Germany to scratch its head.

Since Germany's limits are somewhat different than the rest of the world, Germany could produce some vessels that other nations may have some difficulty in countering: panzerschiffe with 12" guns and heavy armor or CAs with 9.4" guns are two ways in which I could use my capital ship tonnage...the question then, as it was in real life, would be whether the rest of the world would prefer this to more conventional ships and a place for Germany in the CT.

However, India's concerns, at least, will have to wait until "eight years from the coming into effect of the treaty".

So how do we split this between Britian, Australia, and Canada?:

Royal Sovereign ......................................... 25,750
Royal Oak ............................................... 25,750
Revenge ................................................. 25,750
Resolution .............................................. 25,750
Ramilies ................................................ 25,750
Malaya .................................................. 27,500
Valiant ................................................. 27,500
Barham .................................................. 27,500
Queen Elizabeth ......................................... 27,500
Warsprite ............................................... 27,500
Benbow .................................................. 25,000
Emperor of India (?) ........................................ 25,000
Iron Duke ............................................... 25,000
Marlborough ............................................. 25,000
Hood .................................................... 41,200
Renown .................................................. 26,500
Repulse ................................................. 26,500
Tiger ................................................... 28,500
G-3A......................................................40,000
G-3B.......................................................40,000

(Note: Princess Royal could still be listed here as she is in Filipino service on lease.)
(Note 2: Was the Emperor of India replaced by Princess Royal in terms of hulls? And wasn't Emperor of India named Canada in Wesworld...since HMS Canada was never built by the UK (but by Nordmark instead and delivered to Chile on schedule.)

Quoted

As for the Brits, historically:

SHIPS WHICH MAY BE RETAINED BY THE BRITISH EMPIRE
Name: Tonnage
Royal Sovereign ......................................... 25,750
Royal Oak ............................................... 25,750
Revenge ................................................. 25,750
Resolution .............................................. 25,750
Ramilies ................................................ 25,750
Malaya .................................................. 27,500
Valiant ................................................. 27,500
Barham .................................................. 27,500
Queen Elizabeth ......................................... 27,500
Warsprite ............................................... 27,500
Benbow .................................................. 25,000
Emperor of India ........................................ 25,000
Iron Duke ............................................... 25,000
Marlborough ............................................. 25,000
Hood .................................................... 41,200
Renown .................................................. 26,500
Repulse ................................................. 26,500
Tiger ................................................... 28,500
Thunderer ............................................... 22,500
King George V ........................................... 23,000
Ajax .................................................... 23,000
Centurion ............................................... 23,000
-------
Total Tonnage ....................................... 580,450
On the completion of the two new ships to be constructed and the scrapping of the Thunderer, King George V, Ajax and Centurion, as provided in Article II, the total tonnage to be retained by the British Empire will be 558,950 tons.
+++

The Brits get 600,000 tons in our treaty but proceeding historically will leave them with twenty hulls, the maximum our treaty allows. So no new construction for them unless they junk more of the old dreadnoughts

.

Obligitory unsolicited ideas & comments... ;-)

Since PR still counts against British tonnage and hull limits...one of the ships in that list had to be "demil'd". Marlborough as a training ship, perhaps? Deleting M and adding PR = 20 hulls, 561,700 tons used.

How would I split 'em up? Lemme see...

-Britian-
Royal Sovereign ......................................... 25,750
Revenge ................................................. 25,750
Resolution .............................................. 25,750
Ramilies ................................................ 25,750
Valiant ................................................. 27,500
Barham .................................................. 27,500
Queen Elizabeth ......................................... 27,500
Warsprite ............................................... 27,500
Benbow .................................................. 25,000
Hood .................................................... 41,200
Invincible................................................40,000
Inflexible................................................40,000

-Canada-
Canada* .............................................. 25,000
Iron Duke ............................................... 25,000
Princess Royal ......................................26,500 (if retained after Filipino lease expires)

-Australia-
Royal Oak ............................................... 25,750
Malaya .................................................. 27,500
Renown .................................................. 26,500
Repulse ................................................. 26,500
Tiger ................................................... 28,500

* - OTL Emperor of India