WesWorld

Your thoughts appreciated on the following dilemmas:

(I would happily link to the design posts if I could figure out how to do that...)

Bassein/G-143 class destoyers

Eight Bassein class destroyers were built in 1925 and 1926. They were the first Bharati destroyers to ship the 125mm gun, and the last to include a well deck for a forward torpedo carriage.

The class has served in several actions, and are now due for a refit if they are to be kept in service.

Elements of the design are certainly lacking - the layout of the armament, including the torpedo carriage, as well as the bunkerage. Available miscellaneous weight is also limited. As I see it, the following options are available:

-25% Refurb: Replace engines, increase bunkerage, plate over well deck, add new sensors, increase ASW suite.

-15% Refurb and conversion to sloop: Remove CT armor and one gun. Add new sensors, increase ASW suite.

-Replace with new builds.

Vadodara class heavy cruiser

Two units were laid down in 1928. The second unit confirmed the tradition of Bharati CAs being sunk by Argentine-built ships.

Vadodara is an average Treaty cruiser; she is neither good nor bad. The most obvious drawback is, again, her lack of miscellaneous weight, which limits her possible sensor fit.

She is also an oddball. Bharat has nothing else comparable in service right now - it's either smaller light cruisers or larger armored cruisers. Personally, I don't anticipate further CA construction for Bharat.

Vadodara would be due for a refit around 1944 or so. As I see it, there are only two obvious options

-25% life extension refit. Lose one airplane and perhaps the forward 125mm DP, increase sensor fit and replace AA battery.

-Delete from service.

Shah Jahan Class Battleship

This near-sister to the Akbar class was laid down in 1929, and would be due for a refit around 1946.

When built, she was a useful vessel - sturdy and fast enough to require a Treaty-max battleship to decisively defeat. Now there are a crapload of much larger battleships floating around, and the aircraft carrier appears to be replacing the battleship as capital ship. Prospects for a replacement are dim.

Options:

-50% Refurb: Brings her more or less in line with the refurbished Akbar class battleships.

-25% Refit: Extends lfe. Misc. weight is adequate to support new sensors and a new AA battery.

-Delete from service.

Thoughts?

Here are the links to the individual designs:
- Bassein/G-143 class destoyers
- Vadodara class heavy cruiser
- Shah Jahan Class Battleship

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
Bassein/G-143 class destoyers
-25% Refurb: Replace engines, increase bunkerage, plate over well deck, add new sensors, increase ASW suite.
-15% Refurb and conversion to sloop: Remove CT armor and one gun. Add new sensors, increase ASW suite.
-Replace with new builds.

I kinda like the idea of a full 25% refurb for these ships. They're large enough that they'd make some pretty good antisubmarine frigates.

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
Vadodara class heavy cruiser
-25% life extension refit. Lose one airplane and perhaps the forward 125mm DP, increase sensor fit and replace AA battery.
-Delete from service.

I've been planning refits for ships of similar ages and qualities - France's Duquesne and Indochinie class cruisers as an example. I'd say she's worth keeping, but mind that I'm an unrepentent lover of heavy cruisers.

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
Shah Jahan Class Battleship
-50% Refurb: Brings her more or less in line with the refurbished Akbar class battleships.
-25% Refit: Extends lfe. Misc. weight is adequate to support new sensors and a new AA battery.
-Delete from service.

I don't think the 50% refurb job is actually worthwhile. A 15% refit to improve sensors, or the 25% refit you mentioned, might be cost effective. I don't think I'd see any reason to sell her; even though the ship's smaller than many of the current battleships, she matches up well with my ideal of the ""riskable battleship" idea I've proposed earlier.

My personal bias would be in favor of new construction suited to your current needs using up-to-date equipment, rather then attempting to retro-fit such into an aging hull.

Unless you have need to a number of escort sloops in short order, refitting the Basseins for that role woud not be effective IMHO. Better to sell them off to a friendly or well-heeled power.

The one-off cruiser is also problematic. I'd say that she is a candidate for sale.

Unless you want another Akbar, I would consider the possibility of converting the Shah Jehan as a training ship or otherwise disposing of her.

Bharat has new sloops planned, but a Bassein conversion would pre-empt them. The interest stems from prospects for a marginally larger fleet train, and more extensive interest in protecting trade to South Africa.

That said, one imagine there might be a couple of potential buyers for the class.

Ditto Vadodara. A past trading partner had expressed interest to Perds, but no cash has changed hands.

If it weren't so frickin' expensive, I'd consider yanking out the 21cm twins and swapping in triple 150mm; the result would then be broadly similar to the current Bharati CLs.

I've actually given thought to deleting all three battleships without replacement. Akbar and Jahangir have at least had their mid-life refit already, but a refit of Shah Jahan is extensive funding that results in a ship that is still outclassed by modern battleships.

I can't say I've thought about the Riskable concept, but it's something to think about.

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
I can't say I've thought about the Riskable concept, but it's something to think about.

It's just the idea I've been working on whenever I go to design possible capital ships, whether for France or elsewhere. I don't see any need to match the various Mongo BBs like the Yamatos, the Admirals, etc; I'm always interested more in the ship's usefulness (particularly in conjunction with my other ships) than in having the biggest and bestest.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
I can't say I've thought about the Riskable concept, but it's something to think about.

It's just the idea I've been working on whenever I go to design possible capital ships, whether for France or elsewhere. I don't see any need to match the various Mongo BBs like the Yamatos, the Admirals, etc; I'm always interested more in the ship's usefulness (particularly in conjunction with my other ships) than in having the biggest and bestest.

You could throw the Sachsens into that Mongo category if you want. They are far larger than I would have ever designed a capital ship, and they're being completed solely to finish them off and recoup something from the investment - I considered them too far along to scrap. In retrospect, perhaps I should have.

Very true.

I'd say the best course of action is to sell them off...

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
I'd say the best course of action is to sell them off...

Said the most likely buyer.

Not necessarily the only buyer, though...

Yep ... the possible buyer list is may be longer than expected

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
Yep ... the possible buyer list is may be longer than expected

So saith the other most likely buyer...

My thoughts are;

Bassein/G-143 class destoyers
A 15% refit might be worth it given the low cost and the modernisation. They'll make good patrol craft for a few more years to tide you over. I don't think its worth spending more than that though on vessels this old.

Vadodara
A singleton is hard to deal with, if you want a CA then refit her if you think it has 5-10 years effective life left. If not then get rid, generally I've made my CAs do longer than intended just because replacements are expensive (IMO too expensive given the high-end designs current these days). The armament switch plan is an interesting one. Again remaining effective life will determine if its worth it.

Shah Jahan Class Battleship
I'd back the 25% refit, unless you really need new engines etc to free up weight and/ or more speed. The 25% will cover the main elements of the refit and extend the life enough. I back Brock it that Capital Ships don't have to be super-jobs. Anything with big guns and thick armour is a threat and refitting these will give some added credence and keep them fresh.

My take:

Get rid of the DDs and get something modern. I know that our springsharp/rebuild rules alow them to be altered extensively. However, from a roleplaying point of view I expect their hulls to be severed by stress more than you would expect from a ship without well deck. Even if you patch over the well deck, stress impact might remain almost identical due to the general construction of the original hull.

The heavy cruiser is a solid design that is worth the "money" to keep her up-to-date. She is a powerful, balanced, fast unit and a tough nut to crack for any CL or CA around, although she is not treaty-max. Only the latest super-cruisers or true capital ships are clearly superior - and chances she will ever encounter one of those are dim. I also think she is just the right size to be used for showing the flag duties and ferrying politicians around - not to big to be taken as an aggressive statement, but big enough to be noted. Finally, her large and roomy superstructure (large for the era of her design) comes in handy for flag facilities and enlarged crews due to altered AA and electronic equipment. By removing a/c facilities you gain even more space and if you decide to go for a 50% rebuild instead of a 25% refit, new engines will allow for increased range, probably even more speed and additional misc weight.

If you really don't want to keep her the RSAN might be interested to buy her. Since the ABS war the RSAN inventory is down one CA which has not yet been compensated.

The BBs I would keep too. Think of the political statement you would make by taking them out of service. In your neighborhood they still represent a key factor to project power. Used defensively they are still a good match for anybody with nasty thoughts on your convoys and supply ships. Liberately giving up these vessels does not make sense at all. Carriers have yet to proof they can replace big gun ships and be the nucleus of a powerful fleet. So if you don't want to use too much hindsight India can not forgo his battleships. I think you cannot avoid to spend at least 25% on them.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
Carriers have yet to proof they can replace big gun ships and be the nucleus of a powerful fleet.

I'd tend to agree with this, even though I've been one of the main carrier proponents to date.

Gentlemen,

I tried to sim the CA with our current SS version. Would you consider this a good sim of the Vadodara as built?

Note that I concentrated on the given 1,05 for stability when setting trim - although steadiness 75 is probably too high.

Vadodara, Indian Heavy Cruiser laid down 1928

Displacement:
11.196 t light; 11.700 t standard; 12.657 t normal; 13.423 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
658,32 ft / 646,33 ft x 65,94 ft x 21,65 ft (normal load)
200,66 m / 197,00 m x 20,10 m x 6,60 m

Armament:
8 - 8,27" / 210 mm guns (4x2 guns), 282,57lbs / 128,17kg shells, 1928 Model
Breech loading guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline ends, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts - superfiring
10 - 4,92" / 125 mm guns (5x2 guns), 59,59lbs / 27,03kg shells, 1928 Model
Dual purpose guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 1 raised mount
12 - 1,38" / 35,0 mm guns (8 mounts), 1,31lbs / 0,59kg shells, 1928 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, 8 raised mounts
8 - 0,59" / 15,0 mm guns in single mounts, 0,10lbs / 0,05kg shells, 1928 Model
Machine guns in deck mounts
on side, evenly spread, all raised mounts
Weight of broadside 2.873 lbs / 1.303 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 150
8 - 21,7" / 550 mm above water torpedoes

Armour:
- Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
Main: 5,12" / 130 mm 410,43 ft / 125,10 m 12,14 ft / 3,70 m
Ends: Unarmoured
Main Belt covers 98% of normal length

- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 5,12" / 130 mm 3,15" / 80 mm 4,72" / 120 mm
2nd: 1,18" / 30 mm 1,18" / 30 mm -
3rd: 0,79" / 20 mm - -
4th: 0,79" / 20 mm - -

- Armour deck: 1,97" / 50 mm, Conning tower: 5,12" / 130 mm

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 93.834 shp / 70.000 Kw = 32,02 kts
Range 10.000nm at 12,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 1.724 tons

Complement:
596 - 775

Cost:
£4,210 million / $16,838 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 359 tons, 2,8%
Armour: 2.710 tons, 21,4%
- Belts: 1.066 tons, 8,4%
- Torpedo bulkhead: 0 tons, 0,0%
- Armament: 569 tons, 4,5%
- Armour Deck: 1.016 tons, 8,0%
- Conning Tower: 60 tons, 0,5%
Machinery: 2.921 tons, 23,1%
Hull, fittings & equipment: 5.155 tons, 40,7%
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1.461 tons, 11,5%
Miscellaneous weights: 50 tons, 0,4%

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
14.809 lbs / 6.717 Kg = 52,4 x 8,3 " / 210 mm shells or 1,8 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1,05
Metacentric height 3,0 ft / 0,9 m
Roll period: 16,1 seconds
Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 75 %
- Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0,65
Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1,14

Hull form characteristics:
Hull has a flush deck
Block coefficient: 0,480
Length to Beam Ratio: 9,80 : 1
'Natural speed' for length: 25,42 kts
Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 66
Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 20,00 degrees
Stern overhang: 3,28 ft / 1,00 m
Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
- Stem: 23,95 ft / 7,30 m
- Forecastle (20%): 19,69 ft / 6,00 m
- Mid (50%): 19,69 ft / 6,00 m
- Quarterdeck (15%): 19,69 ft / 6,00 m
- Stern: 19,69 ft / 6,00 m
- Average freeboard: 20,03 ft / 6,10 m
Ship tends to be wet forward

Ship space, strength and comments:
Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 97,6%
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 151,3%
Waterplane Area: 27.892 Square feet or 2.591 Square metres
Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 110%
Structure weight / hull surface area: 118 lbs/sq ft or 575 Kg/sq metre
Hull strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0,97
- Longitudinal: 1,24
- Overall: 1,00
Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform

The distribution of weights suggests heavier side/top protection for the armament, and less height on the belt, but it looks reasonable as an approximation.

How would you sim her?