Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships...

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/8/2015 12:34:41 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Got your file John. THANKS. It makes for some fascinating reading and conjecturing.

I have to find my ship-building layout I did for BTS. Used the 7 slipways and juggled shipping with the construction times you have been showing above to make the Japanese ship-building schedule for that Mod and RA.

Would LOVE to hear either of the stories you allude to at the bottom of your last Post.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 61
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/8/2015 10:16:03 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon

Hi ya Bill. John’s premise is pre-war. What people did in the war environment is another subject entirely. But you have the right idea.

Comparing construction times is a bit like comparing apples, to radishes, to cabbages. Every nation had a different view as to what should be done on the building slip to make a ship ready for “launch”, and what could be done in a “fitting basin” and at a “fitting pier”.

Also, there are national differences between when a ship is “commissioned” as opposed to its “completion”. And, of course, this has huge variances between and among the various types and classes. A quickie example of national differences is the comparison between Yorktown and Shokaku classes of CVs. Built in moderately similar time periods, and having very similar block coefficients, they end up having damn near the same construction times, but allocated very differently among the various steps.

Yorktown: Keel, 21 May, ’34; Launch, 04 April, ’36 (23 months); “Commissioned”, 30 Sept., ’37 (18 months) – 41 months total.
Enterprise: Keel, 16 July, ’34; Launch, 03 Oct., ’36 (27 months); “Commissioned”, 12 May, ’38 (19 months) – 46 months total.

Shokaku: Keel, 12 Dec., ’37; Launch, 01 June, ’39 (19 months); “Completed”, 08 Aug., ’41 (26 months) – 45 months total.
Zuikaku: Keel, 25 May, ’38; Launch, 27 Nov., ’39 (18 months); “Completed”, 25 Sept., ’41 (22 months) – 40 months total.

This illustrates, more than anything else, the difference between Japan and the US as to their thoughts on where the “launch” boundary should go ON CV TYPES (other types were vastly different). Logically, the “complete” and “commission” dates for CVs would be rather close together because of the time required to do air-group work-ups, during which one could do the trials and work-ups on the ships themselves. So for Japan, the “complete” date, like the US “commission” date, is when you can “light the fires”.

Much more to say about CAs and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and the political tension between and among the Naval Districts (the NSY yards) and the Navy and Mitsubishi and Kawasaki, but that’s another subject. Woof !!

All in all, Japan had the knowledge, and applied it in their later construction programs. Warship construction was still subject to the ins-and-outs of IJN District Admiralty politics, but that’s still another story.

[ed] so in John 3rd terms, things do not look as ugly as one would think, or as ugly as one would like one to think.

Ciao. JWE



I was responding to DeltaV112's comments. He (or she) claimed Japan built carriers in 16-18 months, but the closest I could find was the Unryu (24 months). I used commission dates as a yardstick. I know launch dates are tricky as ships can get launched at many different points in construction. You can pretty much launch a ship as soon as you have a watertight hull, though I believe in most cases launch happens a little further into the process.

Pre-war build times were always much longer than wartime. I looked up the Essex class build times. They ranged from 13 to 20 months from laying of the keel to commissioning for the war builds (post war commissioned took longer).

Japan built almost all their cruisers pre-war and many of them were embroiled in design politics that slowed construction. The few completed after the war started had their build time disrupted by war time emergencies that put other builds ahead of them in the queue. Comparing Japanese cruiser and carrier construction times is a bit difficult because there was very little overlap in construction periods. I think the only time they had keel up carriers under construction at the same time as cruisers (without disruptions due to emergencies) was when the Hiryu and Soryu were being built. I think the Mogamis were done by the time the Shokakus were built and by the time the Taiho was built their construction program was in a mess because of the losses at Midway and the panic that caused.

Anyway, that was the only points/questions I was trying to raise. I wanted to know where the 16-18 months came from.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 62
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/8/2015 5:58:41 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson
Anyway, that was the only points/questions I was trying to raise. I wanted to know where the 16-18 months came from.

Bill

I know, Bill. The point of the post was to show where the IJ 18 months came from and why it isn't relevant, All things considered. Ciao. JWE

_____________________________

Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 63
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/8/2015 8:42:29 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I am playing with ideas and the numbers to create some sort of proposal for commentary.

The initial thinking is to create an RA and BTS variant based on no Yamato's and what that would mean. You could play normal or LITE RA/BYS.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 64
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 1:33:55 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Sent a proposal to Juan and John to get some feedback before throwing it out here. Stay tuned...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 65
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 3:23:14 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Sent a proposal to Juan and John to get some feedback before throwing it out here. Stay tuned...

Got your email. Sent response. Do you think it worthwhile for me to post it here? Or would it just open too many cans of worms?

Ciao. JWE

_____________________________

Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 66
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 3:34:07 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
I like worms!!

_____________________________


(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 67
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 4:00:03 PM   
Skyros


Posts: 1570
Joined: 9/29/2000
From: Columbia SC
Status: offline
You have to chew them before you swallow.

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 68
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 4:13:42 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
OK. We'll Post here. Give me a minute...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Skyros)
Post #: 69
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 4:15:50 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Mt original Email to John and Juan:

Hi Guys.

I have been going through the building times of the Fleet as well as John’s Yard Sizes sheet he sent and have a thought.

COULD the Japanese have built FOUR BBs in the time taken to build the two Yamato? I ask because of the following things:

1. If they went with a design already drafted and ready (such as the 3x3 16.1” layout) they might have saved some time.
2. The two slipways would not have need to be expanded (saving at least a year there).
3. More conventional sized BBs would have taken less time to actually build then the monster Yamato.

My thinking is a pair of BBs enter service in 1940 and the second pair come into service in late-42. I’ve crunched the numbers and it APPEARS possible. Is this stupid or semi-realistic?

Would like a little commentary please...
John


John's Response:

Not really, you would have to bump some things and make certain assumptions. The Yamatos were built surprisingly quickly, considering. But here’s my thoughts. Juan will very likely have some things to say, too.

The last evidence of BB build times were from 1918-1921. The two Nagatos each took approximately 24 months from Keel to Launch. Kaga and Tosa were both launched, but their condition was simply hull up to, and including, the weather deck. These two each took approximately 15-16 months, Keel to Launch. All 4 of them were in the 215-230m size range.

Yamato took 33 months, Keel to Launch, 32 months for Musashi. I don’t think 24 months to launch is unreasonable for a 230 some-odd meter BB. You could cut a few months off that (I’m guessing maybe 3-4), as Kaga and Tosa show, especially if you use whips and chains. BTW, that’s probably all you’re gonna get out of a 250m building slip.

The Launch to Complete times vary considerably. Yamato was 16 months, Musashi was 21 months, Nagato was 13 months, Mutsu was 17 months. I don’t think it is unreasonable to plan for 13-16 months.

Mitsubishi, Nagasaki #1 is pretty easy, all you will bump is auxiliaries and other fiddly bits; Tone launched 21 Nov. ’37, so with moderate slip prep time for a new ship type, you could lay a BB keel 01 Jan. ’38 and launch:

Best case, 15 Aug. ’39 – complete Sep. ’40 (20 + 13)

Nominal case, 01 Jan. ’40 – complete April ’41 (24 + 16)

No need for new slip prep, just a 2 week clean up and you can lay the next keel, and launch the second one:

Best case, 01 May ’41 – complete June ‘42

Nominal case, 01 Feb. ’42 – complete May ‘43

Kure NSY #1 is also pretty good. Again, all that needs be bumped are auxiliaries/tenders and other fiddly bits. Soryu launched 23 Dec. ’35, so there’s a two year push on the figures for Mitsu-Naga. There’s a 72 month period (from 01 Jan. ‘36 to 01 Jan. ’42) in which you can fiddle 33-40 month construction periods up the wazoo.

Yokosuka NSY #1 is also a candidate. Shokaku launched 01 June ’39. It is conceivable that they could complete a BB by April ’42, but Dec. ’42 is more likely.



All this requires absolutely crisp execution times, something Japan wasn’t noted for back then. But you wanted possibilities/potentials, so this is my best shot.



Ciao. John



< Message edited by John 3rd -- 3/12/2015 5:16:45 PM >


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 70
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 4:17:45 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Worm away fellas...

I looked at the idea of FOUR BBs as an extreme. Doing a pair of BCs or even CVs are also possible...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 71
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 5:08:44 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Worm away fellas...

I looked at the idea of FOUR BBs as an extreme. Doing a pair of BCs or even CVs are also possible...

Thanks John. I wasn't sure how much of my blithering you would want to show. FYI, I did consider where the fiddly bits could get moved to, so you won't lose fleet train assets (such as they were), or auxiliary conversions, like Hiyo/Junyo (but there's an interresting story about those two).

The universe of Japanese warship construction looks like a ball of yarn after it's been played with by a couple of very aggressive Siamese cats. Just figuring out the results is an exercise in frustration. And planning? Ah, planning ! Nan Deska ! One does not get there from here ! All because of the proclivities of the principal players. All documented and all understood. Coulda, shoulda, woulda been different, except for certain particulars in peculiarly Japanese decision making.

Know you asked for those storys, and they are highly relevant to these discussions, so I might post those. Are they relevant here? Or would you like a new thread? Up to you John. Ciao. JWE

_____________________________

Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 72
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 11:35:21 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I think a new Thread would be best due to the amount of commentary that will probably occur.

Cannot wait to learn something new!

I figured there would be 5-8 new Posts on this after I went to work. Very depressed about the lack of commentary from the 'can of worms' of this AUGUST assembly!


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 73
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 11:42:00 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Options for the building:

1. Two pairs of new BBs. One set already in operation starting Dec 7th and the second set coming roughly a year later.
2. One pair of new BBs and then a pair of Command Cruisers (4x3 8" or 3x2 14") nearing completion.
3. The BBs and then a pair of CVs nearly completed and operational.

OPTION 3 would also necessitate and further spreading of Japanese pilots pulling down XP levels at war's start or REALLY low XP for the starting Daitai on the CVs.

Thoughts?

Is there a 4th Option?


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 74
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/12/2015 11:48:53 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

OPTION 3 would also necessitate and further spreading of Japanese pilots pulling down XP levels at war's start or REALLY low XP for the starting Daitai on the CVs.


This my preferred option. Maybe have some of the late war (43 and beyond) come in with just TWO pilots and force the Japanese player to pull from his pool of trained pilots to fill out. Many Allied reinforcement air groups come in with just a few pilots and planes. You have to fill them out yourself.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 75
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/13/2015 12:40:06 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
OK. That is ONE idea and vote. Others....


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 76
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/13/2015 4:13:10 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline
Oh, gosh and Hootz Gazotties! Mike is right, of course, but he's looking at things from a Western viewpoint. Pre-war IJN military philosophy would not accept that approach. In any scenario that attempts to accurately model "Life, the Universe, and Everything" in pre-war Japan, one MUST think Japanese.

OK, gonna have to open that "Japanese Ball-of-Yarn" thread. You can't, simply can't, port Western thoughts and philosophy and doctrine and usage, on top of the Japanese experience.

Japan would never institute the Option 3 pilot program. Never, never, ever. One needs to understand the Naval politics of the period and understand that Combined Fleet was nothing more than a tactical HQ. It was subordinate to the Navy Section of Imperial GHQ. Also note that it had no command authority over the Naval Districts, China, or any "Fleet" not designated as part of "Combined Fleet". i.e., 1st, 2nd, 3rd Southern, 4th, 8th, the Area Fleets, etc..

[ed] i.e., Yamamoto had lots of political influence, but in absolute terms he was little more than the bottom half of Nimitz and the top half of Spruance/Halsey. He didn't have anywhere near the command authority that modern wargamers think. His influence, however, was elsewhere and was part and parcel of the philosophical B-of-Y of the command structure.

Combined Fleet had no window at all on what was happening with expansion of airgroups or training or any else, other than having a CV become operational. Japanese command structure was very different from US command structure and any attempts to impose US doctrinal results will (unfortunately) fail miserably. You gotta think Japanese, my friend. You can't think American. But if you think Japanese, I can find a few places where your doctrine is superior and you can get some push.

[ed] this is of some interest to me, since the whole idea of "special attack" (aka Kamikazes) was in response to the failure of the training programs to provide acceptable replacement pilots, and forced Adm Onishi Takajiro to institute offensive tactics that had been used very often, before. All he did was institutionalize the concept. Okay, enough. This stuff is good enough to go in a separate thread. Hope we have enough Japanese forum folks to keep things Kosher.

No harm, no foul, Skyros, NY59Giants, just gonna have to build a different ballpark, where we can all play. Ciao. JWE

< Message edited by Symon -- 3/13/2015 5:42:26 PM >


_____________________________

Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 77
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/13/2015 6:35:06 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
While option number 3 might sound nice, I don't think it would be ideal, and as Symon has also pointed out, not really in line with Japanese thinking. Even in the RA storyline where Yamamoto does have more power, it would seem a little farfetched. There's also the fact that another two carriers in '42 might be really bad for the allies, and require more reactive changes to their construction and thinking.

As for other options, one thing that occurred to me is that if there is a 3x3 16in BB design capable of 30 knots in service, I wonder if the B-65's make sense anymore. One possible option might be to have two pairs of these 16in BBs, and instead of the B-65's build another pair of CV's - these might need to be a smaller design than the Shokaku-kai's, depending on exactly what yards are being used. These could arrive mid-late '43, and need to be filled out with pilots as was mentioned. Not sure what the larger yards would build after the second pair of BB's.

< Message edited by JuanG -- 3/13/2015 7:35:33 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 78
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 4:06:00 AM   
Skyros


Posts: 1570
Joined: 9/29/2000
From: Columbia SC
Status: offline
Would love to learn more.. Please start the threads and open up the discussion.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon

Oh, gosh and Hootz Gazotties! Mike is right, of course, but he's looking at things from a Western viewpoint. Pre-war IJN military philosophy would not accept that approach. In any scenario that attempts to accurately model "Life, the Universe, and Everything" in pre-war Japan, one MUST think Japanese.

OK, gonna have to open that "Japanese Ball-of-Yarn" thread. You can't, simply can't, port Western thoughts and philosophy and doctrine and usage, on top of the Japanese experience.

Japan would never institute the Option 3 pilot program. Never, never, ever. One needs to understand the Naval politics of the period and understand that Combined Fleet was nothing more than a tactical HQ. It was subordinate to the Navy Section of Imperial GHQ. Also note that it had no command authority over the Naval Districts, China, or any "Fleet" not designated as part of "Combined Fleet". i.e., 1st, 2nd, 3rd Southern, 4th, 8th, the Area Fleets, etc..

[ed] i.e., Yamamoto had lots of political influence, but in absolute terms he was little more than the bottom half of Nimitz and the top half of Spruance/Halsey. He didn't have anywhere near the command authority that modern wargamers think. His influence, however, was elsewhere and was part and parcel of the philosophical B-of-Y of the command structure.

Combined Fleet had no window at all on what was happening with expansion of airgroups or training or any else, other than having a CV become operational. Japanese command structure was very different from US command structure and any attempts to impose US doctrinal results will (unfortunately) fail miserably. You gotta think Japanese, my friend. You can't think American. But if you think Japanese, I can find a few places where your doctrine is superior and you can get some push.

[ed] this is of some interest to me, since the whole idea of "special attack" (aka Kamikazes) was in response to the failure of the training programs to provide acceptable replacement pilots, and forced Adm Onishi Takajiro to institute offensive tactics that had been used very often, before. All he did was institutionalize the concept. Okay, enough. This stuff is good enough to go in a separate thread. Hope we have enough Japanese forum folks to keep things Kosher.

No harm, no foul, Skyros, NY59Giants, just gonna have to build a different ballpark, where we can all play. Ciao. JWE


(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 79
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 4:12:42 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
I like these type of discussions. I learn a lot from you guys.

(in reply to Skyros)
Post #: 80
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 4:33:21 AM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 2244
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Options for the building:

1. Two pairs of new BBs. One set already in operation starting Dec 7th and the second set coming roughly a year later.
2. One pair of new BBs and then a pair of Command Cruisers (4x3 8" or 3x2 14") nearing completion.
3. The BBs and then a pair of CVs nearly completed and operational.

OPTION 3 would also necessitate and further spreading of Japanese pilots pulling down XP levels at war's start or REALLY low XP for the starting Daitai on the CVs.

Thoughts?

Is there a 4th Option?



What was the original premise for the current makeup of the Japanese fleet in this mod? I mean if, in this altered history, you have justified more carriers to the Japanese fleet then perhaps you need to continue down that direction for the first set of ships. If the altered history of BTS drives more towards more/better BBs then you probably need to continue down that direction for at least the first set of ships.

The second set of ships could be selected based on a change in direction by Japan. As an example - say the first set were BBs cuz they were the king of the line and every expert from every navy would bet their souls that a navy was only as good as it's battle line. And the second pair might-could be a CV and Heavy Cruiser after Japanese high command sees the new possibilities of a fleet based on carriers during their 'war games'...


_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 81
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 1:45:10 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Good Question and thoughts 1Eyed. I'll pull up the Scenario Description and add it in a minute.

DOCUP is spot-on. I LOVE these threads where there is serious substantive work going on in the discussion. Juan and John are the BEST! Big B has done excellent work as well (I'm probably missing a couple of others) but these two have been so much help to me and my design crew I cannot overstate my respect.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 3/14/2015 2:48:26 PM >


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 82
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 1:47:39 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
This is the RA description but it works since the Treaty Mod additions are done in the 20s. Combine those and RA and you get a 20 year-long ALTNAV history:

The Reluctant Admiral is a Japanese 'what if' scenario based upon a greater contribution by Adm. Yamamoto Isoroku to the development of the Kaigun in 1936-1941. The premise of the Mod is that Yamamoto exerted a much greater influence first on the Japan Naval Aircraft Industry, then as Deputy Navy Minister, and finally as Navy Minister itself. Yamamoto chooses, at great risk to his life, to forego command of the Combined Fleet and dedicate himself to preparing Japan for a war he didn't want. He adds two new slipways for Fleet construction to facilitate a different, final pre-war expansion of the Kaigun. New and expanded Naval Yards, Heavy Industry, and Armaments are added at tremendous cost for the Japanese economy as the Admiral attempts to prepare Japan for a possibly long war. In so choosing to do this Yamamoto then changes the 4th Circle Building Plan replacing the 3rd and 4th Yamato-Class Battleships with improved Shokaku-Class CVs and a pair of Kawachi-Class fast Battlecruisers, two Tone-Class CAs, an accelerated Light Cruiser deployment, and additional destroyers. Quick, reasonably cheap carrier conversions are moved forward seeing all of the pre-war CVs/CVLs deploy by December 7th or at slightly earlier dates in 1942. Though only a few of these new ships are ready on December 7th, these additions shall make the Kaigun a force to be reckoned with well into 1944.

The Japan Naval Air Arm is changed so that everything is staked to the Zero Airframe with a specialization of the Zero into a Land-Based Interceptor as well as CV-Based Fighters. Research and production expansion is achieved by streamlining the air industry (cutting several models) while bringing forward second generation aircraft: Judy, Jill, etc… By great effort the IJNAF deploys nearly all new aircraft on December 7th.

On the ground Yamamoto reorganizes the SNLF units into a Brigade-Sized offensive force and—knowing it will be a war of attrition—converts many Naval Guard into enhanced units with Coastal Defense artillery (using guns taken from refitted warships) for a stronger defensive unit. Additional small units are added to the IJN’s Troops and support units better reflecting Yamamoto's foresight into base building, defense, and expansion needs. While all these units are small and not in great number they promise to help the Japanese war effort.

The foresight of the Admiral pays off during late-1942 and 1943 as new ships, aircraft, and ground units enter into the Japanese Order-of-Battle, however, the cost is steep. Though expanded and using modern aircraft many Japanese Naval Air units start with their experience lowered to reflect the dilution of the experienced pilots into new units that start in Japan or arrive during 1942-1943.

Supply and fuel reserves start at a much reduced state. The Japanese MUST take the DEI as fast as possible!

Once war begins RA postulates Yamamoto’s influence upon the wartime Kaigun. Several more Shokaku CVs are ordered as well as another pair of CAs, and the conversion of several CLs into CVLs. First class destroyers are accelerated and emphasis is shifted to the AA Akizuki-Class at the expense of the more balanced Yugumo’s. Manpower is at a premium within the Fleet so Submarines, Escorts, and ASW forces all see a major retooling reflecting the Japanese quality over quantity belief. Yamamoto chooses the immediately useful projects, large APs converting to CVEs, better 2nd-class destroyers, fast transports and coastal defense fleet.

It should be noted that not all the changes are for the Japanese. RA 6.4+ brings major additions and more choice for the Allied Player. The Allies see continued major changes in their starting locations, new air units, the addition of Training Squadrons on mainland USA to allow for an American pilot training program, enhanced aircraft production numbers, additional Allied FP groups, several ground units, a French Squadron at Noumea, the use of CLV Charlotte (a Flightdeck Cruiser), a CLAA conversion for the Omaha-CL, an additional pair of CVLs, and optional conversion of the Kittyhawk Class AKV, Tangier Class AV, and Cimarron Class AOs into CVEs. The added warships reflect a ‘stopgap’ counter to the increased Japanese strength found at war’s start.

How well can YOU do to use these new tools OR how well can you stop the Japanese Navy in its tracks as the Allies?

In addition to its own special modifications, The Reluctant Admiral 6.0+ has been made fully compatible with DaBabes and thus has more ship classes than stock, and many more of the smaller vessels comprising these classes for both sides: yard oilers, coastal minesweepers, auxiliary subchasers, patrol boats, minefield tenders, and many others designed to give a more robust and realistic feel to the development, population, capabilities, and logistical support of bases and rear and operational areas. The Reluctant Admiral 6.0 also incorporates several database modifications that are designed to give a more robust and realistic feel to several combat modes. Database elements have been modified to provide more realistic results for AAA (flak) combat, ASW combat, and certain minor, but nevertheless fun, aspects of naval combat, like land bombardment and coastal defense fire and new modifications to ATA combat. The modifications include lining-up and unifying data elements within certain fields, so that things interface more smoothly, as well as substantial changes to the data elements themselves.



Garrison requirements have been raised in China as well as India to, hopefully, better reflect the political environment of the regions.




_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 83
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 3:39:19 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline
I sorta like 1EyedJacks idea. Two BBs and then a CV and CA. Why? Dunno really, just a feeling and an opinion.

Umm, It’s very hard to opine on a subject that you, John’, have given so much thought to. Opinions come from the perspective of the holder, and if that isn’t quite your perspective, then those opinions should be taken with a great deal of booze. Maybe some of us can help inform the details, but I really like that you have defined the premise, and have done so with such specificity and attention to historical detail.

It is an intellectual feast working with you on this; and the inputs from people like JuanG, 1EJ, 49Gs, FatR, Skyros, and others, are very thought provoking and there’s some great stuff out there. But never forget that you are the Deity. All we can do is help you achieve your goals and perhaps have enough left over for a nice evening of sushi, noh, and geisha, at the Heavenly Gate in Kyoto.

Speaking for people I have no right to do so for: Thank you for your confidence and your kind attention to our opinions. Ciao. JWE


_____________________________

Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 84
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 3:45:44 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Thanks John. I know it is my decision at the end of this but I too love these sorts of discussions and all the great thoughts that come from it. We have a mutual admiration society with everyone listed above.

OK. I think the BBs have to be built due to the Gun Lobby. When they are completed Yamamoto has taken control as Navy Minister. He still has to juggle the Gun Club with the Air-Minded Faction so how about a compromise similar to what you mentioned? Japan builds two BBs, Yamamoto moves into the Ministry and he gets a CV and a B-65 or a 3rd BB put in. One for each faction. What do you think?

The CV could be a 'quickie' like Hiryu or another Shokaku. Thoughts with that?

Not wedded to this--just 'tossing' it out.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 3/14/2015 4:46:07 PM >


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 85
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 4:26:25 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
I'm going to go so far outside of left field, I've left the stadium for this next idea. Was there 'ever' any thoughts to have a 'super-CA' with 10" guns?? In may not even go into this mod, but since we are discussing 'what ifs' I thought I throw it out there.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 86
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 7:00:58 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
There was a design for a 4x3 8" CA then they jumped up to the B-64 (12" w/TTs) or B-65 (14").

I was just thinking with a 3rd BB there might be some economy since they had already built two. Build time might come down a little.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 87
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 7:01:59 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Real thought is do you go for a Hiryu (cheaper and quicker) or a Shokaku (bigger, more rugged, and larger air group).


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 88
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 9:04:17 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
As I understand it B-64 is the designation for the series of designs that became the Amagi class BC, both the 12in and 14in 'Super Cruiser' designs shared the B-65 designation.

One option for building after the first pair of BB's could be a 'new' CV design built on the hull of the new BB class - somewhat along the lines of the design studies for converting the Iowa hulls. Not sure if this would be a 'conventional' CV or an armoured deck one, but both would probably be possible on a hull of this size, and 30 knots with the original powerplant would still be workable for a CV.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 89
RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... - 3/14/2015 10:11:23 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
B10 or bust!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to JuanG)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.438