Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

Part 2. Minelayers

Toshima

These ships represented in their 1944 configuration but without DTCs. In 1941 they should have 1x 3in/40 type 88 gun and 60 mines type 93, after refit in 1944 they should have 1x 3in/40 type 88 gun, 120 mines type 4, 4 DTC (18 depth charges type 2) and one twin 13,2mm AA mg.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

MINEKAZE

12/41
4 x 4.7in/45 3YT Gun [1 F + 2 C + 1 R]
4 x 25mm Type 96 AA Gun [2 twin L/RS]
6 x 21in Type 92 Torpedo [2 twin C + 1 twin F, 6 torps]
4 x Type 95 Depth Charge [2 twin R, 36 dc]

7/42 (APD CONVERSION)
Capacity – 250
2 x 4.7in/45 3YT Gun [1 F + 1 C]
12 x 25mm Type 96 AA Gun [4 triples R/LS ]

Akikaze, Hakaze and Tachikaze were converted to APDs in july 42 in Rabaul. when upgrade becomes possible, player converts those 3 ships (or more if desired, of course) to APDs, other ships in class skip this upgrade and pass thru series of two upgrades in 10/42 and remain destroyers. This gives player a possibility to convert APD ships back to DD with later upgrades, but this is unavoidable….

10/42
2 x 4.7in/45 3YT Gun [1 F + 1 C]
8 x 25mm Type 96 AA Gun [1 twin F + 2 twin L/RS + 1 twin R]
4 x 21in Type 92 Torpedo [1 twin C + 1 twin F, 4 torps]
4 x Type 2 Depth Charge [2 twin R, 36 dc]

8/43
2 x 4.7in/45 3YT Gun [1 F + 1 C]
12 x 25mm Type 96 AA Gun [1 twin F + 2 triple L/RS + 2 twin R]
4 x 21in Type 92 Torpedo [1 twin C + 1 twin F, 4 torps]
4 x Type 2 Depth Charge [2 twin R, 36 dc]

4/44
2 x 4.7in/45 3YT Gun [1 F + 1 C]
16 x 25mm Type 96 AA Gun [2 twin F + 2 triple L/RS + 2 twin, 2 single R]
4 x Type 2 Depth Charge [2 twin R, 36 dc]
1 x Radar type 13

3/45 (not 100% historical)
1 x 4.7in/45 3YT Gun [1 C + 1 R]
20 x 25mm Type 96 AA Gun [2 twin, 2 single F + 2 triple L/RS + 2 twin, 4 single R]
1 x 3in A/S Mortar [1x F Ammo -18]
4 x Type 2 Depth Charge [2 twin R, 48 dc]
1 x Radar type 13

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

I find it amusing that we have 3 incompatible sources. Which is why i get ticked when someone says 'I read it, so it must be true!'.

The amount of contradictary historical writing is just immense.
I did not help that between the fire bombing and then Japanese officials destroying documents before the surrender, most writing was based off of testimony after the war or Allied intelligence sources.

I don't know what to tell you Don. My sources say that Japan, as the Fubuki's came on line, converted the Minekazes to APDs which seems to be Matrixs assumption as well.
Friedman says all were converted by '38 or so to 2-4.7, 2-TT, 10-25mm, and 2 DC racks. 20kts, 9000nm range.

Mike

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

I'm having some problems with the data for the Minekaze. My sources, while few, agree that NO DEPTH CHARGES were carried prior to the 1941/42 "escort" conversion. Excepting those units converted to Patrol Boat or Target Ship, the class was still armed with 4 x 4.7in, 2 x 7.7mm, 6 TT, 20 mines and auxiliary minesweeping gear. The escort coversion removed 2 4.7 and the mines, reduced TT to 2, and added 10 x 25mm and 36 depth charges. The two remaining 4.7 were upgraded to 50 calibre. Additional AA upgrades are not detailed but there is no mention of subsequent alterations to number of torpedo tubes.

quote:

The Japanese in '35 were already looking at converting the Minekazes or the Momis to APD duty and the Minekazes were chosen first as they were larger than the Momis.

quote:

It is true that in '42 3 of the Minekazes were fitted with a ramp so they could launch landing barges while moving but these ships should be rated as APDs from game start since that is what they were used for.

quote:

All of my sources say that all Minekazes were rearmed with 2-4.7" guns, 10-25mm AA, 2-TTs and 2 depth charge throwers by '39.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

34th DesRon destroyers (Akikaze, Hakaze Tachikaze) were used as fast transports for the first time only after their APD refit, when sqn. was transferred to the South fleet in late june ‘42, before that, these ships were used for crew training, supplying destroyers of 1st and 2nd fleets with qualified navy specialists, their organic crews were only 30-50 men big. The lack of combat experience and skeleton crews were the main reasons why these ships were chosen for the conversion. They should start as ordinary destroyers, not APDs.

quote:

All of my sources say that all Minekazes were rearmed with 2-4.7" guns, 10-25mm AA, 2-TTs and 2 depth charge throwers by '39.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser
Part 2. Minelayers

Sokuten

Hirashima, Sokuten and Ajiro types were in fact one ML class – Sokuten. In wartime Japanese classification table they were all listed as Sokuten class ships (different replacement programs 3,4,5), multipurpose kaidai auxiliaries, capable to lay mines and nets of all types. If Hirashima class vessels are supposed to be refitted in game, why Sokuten class refit is not modeled? Sokutens were refitted in the same time as Hirashima class. In 9/43 configuration these ships should not have mines and instead should be equipped with 2 DTC (36 depth charges type 2).

quote:


Kamishima Class

Simplified version of Ajiro/Sakuten type, only 1 was built, order for 18 additional ships under 43/44 replacement program, was canceled.

Kamishima – commissioned 06/12/1945, Sasebo Arsenal K

quote:


Transport-minelayers

Two standard transports completed as minelayers.

Eijo - (2-DRS class conversion) - commissioned 3/45, Kiangnan Dock, Shanghai
Mino - (2-DT class conversion) - commissioned 8/45, Naniwa Dock, Osaka

3224 / 5118 tons, 12 knots, 1 x 120mm/40 gun, 14 x 25mm AA cannons; 380 mines type 93.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
I have a second one, named Awashima, completed 1945 (probably late). Ceeded to USA in 1947.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Philbass

Don/anyone working on the Combined Scenario,

As requested, I’ve been working on the Eastern Fleet/East Indies Fleet/British Pacific Fleet (going rather slow due to work and ill-health). I’m basically looking at all vessels that were serving or were slated to serve with a cut-off of arrival in theatre of December 1945.

quote:


Please have a look at the random comments below, and let me know if I’m going along the right lines. Any advice/instructions/comments are welcome so that I don’t end up wasting anyone time.

You asked for the auxiliaries/minor war vessels in particular, but I’m unsure to what level you would want including.

I’ve assumed that you are particularly interested in:

• Destroyer depot ships (HMS Woolwich, Montclare, Tyne) ;
• Submarine depot ships (HMS Adamant, Maidstone, Wolfe, Montclare);
• “Large” repair ships (HMS Resource, Wayland, Ausonia, Artifex, Alaunia);
• Hull repair ships (HMS Mullion Cove, Dullisk Cove)
• Mine issuing ship (Prome)

I’ve ignored destroyer and submarine tenders, accommodation ships, escort depot ships, minesweeper/motorcraft/escort maintenance ships, assorted specialised repair ships (such as air component, radar, electronics etc). I’ve also excluded the X-craft (midget sub) depot ship, HMS Bonaventure.

quote:



Other changes I’d suggest (when I’ve worked out the exact details):

• Reduce the number of escort carriers that have full airgroups (many were used as replenishment and ferrying carriers only)

quote:


• Add in the cruiser minelayers (HMS Apollo, Adriane and Manxman) – useful as fast transports

quote:


• Remove the submarines Vigorous and Vivid as these were used for ASW training only

quote:


• Change the submarines Clyde, Rorqual and Porpoise to their correct classes (Clyde was a high speed ‘Thames’ class boat, and the other two were minelayers of the ‘Porpoise’ class)

quote:



More suggestions as and when I get to think about them.

But I have some questions:

1) What about the Aircraft Maintenance carriers – HMS Unicorn, Perseus and Pioneer? I would probably argue for including Unicorn, as she operated a full air group during the Salerno landings (AVALANCHE) in September 1943 (and bizarrely conducted NGS during the Korean War). On the other hand we probably want to exclude Perseus and Pioneer, as:
‘all flying arrangements were deleted, making space available for the new equipment and the men to man it...Aircraft were embarked by crane from lighters and an extra crane was fitted for that purpose.’ Source: Brown, David (2000) Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Development 1923-1945 (London; Chatham Publishing) pp147-149.

quote:


2) What about the Fleet Train? I suggest limiting the BPF Fleet Train (the AEs) to what the British called ‘Armament Stores Issuing Ships’. Perhaps we only want a selection of these, as I can identify 16 of these that either reached the theatre, or were on route/nominated. Perhaps limit this to only 5 or so, to reflect the taut logistics that the BPF operated under. I suggest ignoring the ‘Naval Store Issuing Ships’ and the ‘Victualling Stores Issuing Ships’ for the purposes of the game.
As for oilers (AO), again I suggest that we only include a selection of these, to reflect the difficulties the Brits had in at sea refuelling.

quote:


3) What about the large numbers of frigates and sloops either on the way to, or nominated for the Pacific? These would take up a lot of slots, and I can’t imagine there would be many Jap subs to hunt. So I suggest we exclude most of these (although a lot of them were Canadian).

quote:


4) Alas, I suggest we also exclude,
‘that uniquely British contribution’ to the Fleet Train concept, the amenity ship Menestheus. She had a theatre seating 350, quiet rooms, a large NAAFI, a chapel and bars. The latter needed a brewery and one was designed which could brew 250 barrels a week. Source: Brown (2000) Nelson to Vanguard p149.

Of course we could include this floating brewery and have some house rules for it. Every time a ship is in port with the Menestheus roll a D6 and apply:

Result 1-2: The stars of ENSA perform all the contemporary music hall hits, the cinema show the latest Ingrid Bergman films and CPOs John Smith, Whitbread and Tetleys brew a particular potent batch of beer. Add +10 to morale of all crews.

Result 3-4: The Royal Artillery Concert Party play the theatre, Errol Flynn reruns grace the silver screen and a bunch of Aussies and Canadians brew up Dominion beers. No change to morale.

Result 5-6: The Royal Marines of ‘X’ turret perform the Ballet Nonsense in drag, In Which We Serve is on constantly in the cinema and Lt (jg) Brewski the USN liason officer has persuaded the brewery to produce American beers. Lose -10 morale from all crews.

quote:


Please give me a steer as to how you want to proceed with the research.
Regards,
Philip Bass

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

A little confused, as AD and AS are in both the include and exclude lists (we do want them). Plus all the ships Woolwich thru Prome in your list.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

Part 2. Minelayers

Toshima

These ships represented in their 1944 configuration but without DTCs. In 1941 they should have 1x 3in/40 type 88 gun and 60 mines type 93, after refit in 1944 they should have 1x 3in/40 type 88 gun, 120 mines type 4, 4 DTC (18 depth charges type 2) and one twin 13,2mm AA mg.

Watts indicates that the Toshima (actually Natsushima) class carried depth charges PRIOR to the 1942 (or so) removal of the after 3" - perhaps as early as world war I. Matrix gives an armament of 1 3in, mines, no DC. I suspect they may have started the war with 2 3in, mines (60 on rails and 60 more stored below) and "a number" of depth charges.

Could you please check your sources for this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

34th DesRon destroyers (Akikaze, Hakaze Tachikaze) were used as fast transports for the first time only after their APD refit, when sqn. was transferred to the South fleet in late june ‘42, before that, these ships were used for crew training, supplying destroyers of 1st and 2nd fleets with qualified navy specialists, their organic crews were only 30-50 men big. The lack of combat experience and skeleton crews were the main reasons why these ships were chosen for the conversion. They should start as ordinary destroyers, not APDs.

I like the idea of splitting these three off as a separate class with an upgrade path to APD - perhaps for convenience sake to merge with PB 1/2.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
I have a second one, named Awashima, completed 1945 (probably late). Ceeded to USA in 1947.

She was completed in april ’46 in “demilitarized configuration”, so she's out

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subchaser

34th DesRon destroyers (Akikaze, Hakaze Tachikaze) were used as fast transports for the first time only after their APD refit, when sqn. was transferred to the South fleet in late june ‘42, before that, these ships were used for crew training, supplying destroyers of 1st and 2nd fleets with qualified navy specialists, their organic crews were only 30-50 men big. The lack of combat experience and skeleton crews were the main reasons why these ships were chosen for the conversion. They should start as ordinary destroyers, not APDs.

I like the idea of splitting these three off as a separate class with an upgrade path to APD - perhaps for convenience sake to merge with PB 1/2.

So be it. What about arrival dates? right from the start or they should arrive by summer ‘42? I think the latter is more reasonable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Philbass

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

A little confused, as AD and AS are in both the include and exclude lists (we do want them). Plus all the ships Woolwich thru Prome in your list.

Don
Sorry for the confusion. What I meant was that there are a bunch of base, depot, accommodation and maintenance ships that are on station in the East Indies. I assume that these are factored into the port ratings of Colombo and Trincomalee (otherwise they are probably way too high - at least for the early years. Don't forget that once Singapore falls, there is no British dock capable of taking a battleship or fleet carrier closer than Durban in South Africa, until one is completed in Sydney in 1945). These ships tended to be static. Therefore I assumed we could disregard these in order to save ship slots. These ships are rather a rag-bag of ex-WW1, merchantile conversion and new build. Of course, I think that India as a base is overrated, but that's another story.

The named ships from the list are ones that moved around (at least as far as I can identify), and therefore are additional capacity. I was trying to simplify, but I'll include everything if wanted.

Regards

Philip Bass

quote:


Where is japanese transport submarine fleet?

28 IJN transport submarines are missing, (since IJA vessels are completely ignored there is no wonder why 26 army transport submarines also weren’t included).

The number of transport submarines Japanese built during the war and the number of subs converted ito undersea transports actually deserves additional ship type – SST, transport submarine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

quote:


Where is japanese transport submarine fleet?

28 IJN transport submarines are missing, (since IJA vessels are completely ignored there is no wonder why 26 army transport submarines also weren’t included).

The number of transport submarines Japanese built during the war and the number of subs converted ito undersea transports actually deserves additional ship type – SST, transport submarine.

I considered adding these (or at least the larger ones) but did not as I always play against the AI and I did not know if the AI could handle transport subs. Thought it might send them on patrol with no weapons. Can someone comment on this.

Regarding the transport subs: Assuming the AI would not use them correctly, consider upping the capacity of the other Japanese subs to compensate for the transport subs?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

quote:


Where is japanese transport submarine fleet?

28 IJN transport submarines are missing, (since IJA vessels are completely ignored there is no wonder why 26 army transport submarines also weren’t included).

The number of transport submarines Japanese built during the war and the number of subs converted ito undersea transports actually deserves additional ship type – SST, transport submarine.

I considered adding these (or at least the larger ones) but did not as I always play against the AI and I did not know if the AI could handle transport subs. Thought it might send them on patrol with no weapons. Can someone comment on this.

Regarding the transport subs: Assuming the AI would not use them correctly, consider upping the capacity of the other Japanese subs to compensate for the transport subs?

Good point. Now that I think about it, I believe cargo capacity of subs is controlled by the program. The capacity exposed in the editor is for aircraft. Can anyone comment?? If true, it would make transport subs seem almost impossible.

Don

quote:

ORIGINAL: janushm

i actually only know stuff about the dutch so. here it goes.

quite a number of ships missing.

PG Soemba
ML willem van der zaan
ML Soemenep
ML Jan van brakel
5 ABC class aux minesweepers
6 higgins ASW boats arriving december41 january42
repairship Castor
AV poolster

quote:

ORIGINAL: janushm

would there be the possibility to give all dutch subs upgrades?
or Java [sumatra was put out of service origionally in 1940 iirc but taken back] maybe the possibility to convert em into AA Ships for convoy duties. replacing most/all guns and putting on alot of 40mm's 20mm's.


ive found another ship.

Soerabaja.
pre dreadnought ship used as an traning ship/ AA battery in ...soerabaja. until 1933 know as the zeven provincien.

smeroe class aux minesweepers 2 escaped to australia. 2 destroyed and not recovered 1 recovered and used by the japs

repair ship barentz

supply ship janssens.

btw i thought serdang was a torpedo repair ship? it also served as an MTB and Seaplane depot ship.