Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
1. Mahanadi and Ramree Island class oilers. All built back at a time in which oil payload was specified as miscellaneous weight rather than additional bunkerage. High light displacement (thus, cost) for a limited payload. Low stability, too.
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
2. Repair ship Otta. The hull is actually almost 30 years old now, but she was a collier and then an experimental carrier before being refitted to a repair ship in the mid-twenties. I'm thinking it's time to retire the old girl.
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
3. Monitor Chandragupta. Is this shore bombardment/coastal defence unit still useful with three battleships and four armored cruisers available?
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
1. Mahanadi and Ramree Island class oilers. All built back at a time in which oil payload was specified as miscellaneous weight rather than additional bunkerage. High light displacement (thus, cost) for a limited payload. Low stability, too.
Quoted
2. Repair ship Otta. The hull is actually almost 30 years old now, but she was a collier and then an experimental carrier before being refitted to a repair ship in the mid-twenties. I'm thinking it's time to retire the old girl.
Quoted
3. Monitor Chandragupta. Is this shore bombardment/coastal defence unit still useful with three battleships and four armored cruisers available?
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
Now let's talk about newer ships - specifically, cruisers.
India laid down two Delhi-class ships in 1936. These units have a hull strength of 1.06. I'd like to know if it would be acceptable to go back and ret-con three specific aspects of this design to correct what I see as deficiencies:
-Increase the main battery shell count from 150 to ~250
-Increase miscellaneous weight to something greater than 50 t
-Increase freeboard to get a seakeeping value greater than 1.00.
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
India also laid down two units (or three, if one counts Khanda) of the Chapra class in 1940. These units are currently less than 50% complete. I'm personally not satisfied with this design; I think it tries for too much on too little displacement. I'm contemplating whether to cancel construction, or suspend and redesign the existing hull to take a smaller main battery - perhaps 12x15 cm. What are your views on this?
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
I'd be content to trade HS for misc weight and freeboard on the Delhis. I'm not looking to add several hundred tonnes - a total of 200 t would allow for the likely AC and flag facilities such a ship would have, plus some intentional room for future electronics or light flak or whatever.
Quoted
Originally posted by Brockpaine
I'd kinda prefer an 8x20cm or 9x20cm ship myself; it's about the right combination of displacement, protection, etc in my view. The 15x15cm would be my second choice, but I figure you could get a decent one on that hull.
Of course, you could be oddball and see if the Chinese quadruple 6" turret fits in 4x4 layout...
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
I'd be content to trade HS for misc weight and freeboard on the Delhis. I'm not looking to add several hundred tonnes - a total of 200 t would allow for the likely AC and flag facilities such a ship would have, plus some intentional room for future electronics or light flak or whatever.
I still feel very reluctant to address that issue using a retcon when a 15% Minor Refit will give the same result. :/
Quoted
Originally posted by HoOmAn
Yes.
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
I can find no record of their being discarded, but CL Port Blair and Cochin, and DD Johdpur, seemed to fall out of the Indian records after Perds took over. I'm going to assume they're laid up and awaiting disposal.
I can also find no record of the four initial Penner class minesweepers being discarded, despite the fact that Perds re-used the names for a new class of minesweepers. I think I'll assume the names were lifted and the four are laid up, awaiting disposal, too.
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
Nations in the past have occasionally been given significant increases in their factory count.
I'm not asking for that. I'm not asking for the various treaties or the isolated diplomatic position Bharat is saddled with to be undone. I'm not asking to delete ships such as the several jeep carriers of dubious value. I'm not even asking to change the armament, armor, or speed of the two ships in question. I just want to use excess hull strength to make them higher.
I did not think that was asking too much, but if that's the final verdict, then I will give up on the issue.
Quoted
Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
I haven't figured out why it sent 500 t to Bharat in Q1/41 and Q2/41, though. This will probably translate into some low key acquisition(s) in Q3/41; not an aircraft carrier.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH