Technology and Research changes

[snip]

I don't see any researchable levels there, which makes it a gutting of the tech. Sorry, that is not going to work.

[Tanthalas]

what I see is everyone wanting to change the engine tech to fit the exception that proves the rule, not the Rule.  As yet I havnt actualy seen any reason to go further than what snip proposed (btw since OTL examples of AQY dont work OTL examples of exceptions to this rule dont work either)

[KWorld]

There's nothing to research for direct drive turbines, they were invented in 1884.

Geared drives would have 2 levels, corresponding to their initial invention and later improvement, 1911 and 1932 or so.

Turbo-electric, 1 level, 1900, they were a well-understood technology, it's just the application that needed to be made.

Diesels, 1 maybe 2 levels, first available in 1915 second, if desired, around 1928.


SHP limits are separate, and frankly, if we're paying for fuel in some fashion, probably not really necessary.  As noted, Mauretania and Lusitania were laid down in 1904 but had SHP of 17,000+.

[Tanthalas]

Tell ya what if you want to use turbines pre engine year 1904 in Spring Sharp feal free, Seriously go for it.  there is a reason for every single rule in that list (and a person who abused the previous setup for every change)

No setup will be 100% acurate.  Nature of the Beast, this one however has the benifit of working and being for the most part acurate enough.

[KWorld]

<shrug>  Oh, I noticed in the N4.5 setup that turbines aren't worth it too early, not the idea I was trying to get across.

[Tanthalas]

<shrug>  Oh, I noticed in the N4.5 setup that turbines aren't worth it too early, not the idea I was trying to get across.

but it was part of the point I was trying to make.  In the past we had players who would have built Iowa or Bismark in 1900 had it been allowed, I refuse to speculate but I imagine we still have some, no clue who it is this time around but rest assured there is someone.  If you doubt it just dig through the arcives and look at some of the abuses that happend even with the restrictions in place... (or some of the people asking for exceptions so they could build them in say oh 1905)

[Nobody]

Ex nihilo nihil fit. (Nothing comes from nothing)
Therefore I cannot agree* to any system that gives free improvements. Aside from the 1917 engine tech, that includes developing a drive system once and then being able to use it even in very evolved forms feels wrong. Just because once can build a 500 or 5000 horsepower
electric drive or gearing does not mean he can do the same at 100k shp.

That being said I think sips proposal is a step in the right way, except that geared turbines are not heavier, but instead lighter and more efficient than direct-drive. The same is true for hydraulic drive. Anyway direct-drive is end of life in 1920 and should be limited to "Von der Tann" power levels (less than 30000 hp per shaft, it's the most powerful direct drive ship I could think of) and the base drive-train not requiring modifications should be the geared turbine.

For Diesels I propose (year is year to be used and probably engine year as well, because I don't know how much time research requires, haven't thought about the weight penalties yet):
1912: max 500-1000 hp per shaft, no weight modification, 3x range
1917: max 12000 hp per shaft, lighter than direct drive, 2.5x range
1930: max 26000 hp per shaft, x1% heavier than geared turbine, 2x range
1935: max 40000 hp per shaft, x2% heavier than geared turbine, 2x range
1940: max 55000 hp per shaft, x3% heavier than geared turbine, 2x range


*)not agreeing does not mean I won't respect them

[Tanthalas]

Nobody you are atleast trying to put in reasonable thoughts, my point was adressed to the people who keep saying we dont need engine year restrictions, or SHP restrictions.  Although now that I think about it, realy the thing your proposing dosnt matter for what 2 years? So I have to wonder if its even worth arguing about atm.

[snip]

OK, I get where you are coming from. I think we both want the same thing, just from different angles. The weight penalties I gave were just out-of-my-hat numbers and were not intended to be very serious. So I propose the folowing as a framework to move forward with. It is unfortunetly going to make the tech a bit more complex, but I think it will be workable in a way that makes the engineering plant a more realistic componate of design.

Naval Propulsion: Steam Plants
1895 Baseline(0): Complex Reciprocating Engines, Engine Year 1900
1902 Advanced (+1): Engine year 1905, Max. non-VTE power 5,000 HP/Shaft,
        Direct-drive Turbines
1905 Cutting Edge (+3) Engine year 1909, Max. non-VTE power 12,000 HP/Shaft
1909: Engine year 1912, Max. non-VTE power 20,000 HP/Shaft
1913: Engine year 1916, Max. non-VTE power 35,000 HP/Shaft
1917: Engine year 1920, Max. non-VTE power 40,000 HP/Shaft, Engine year = year laid down.

This part is just the first secton of the N3 tree. It stays as is for all direct-drive steam plants. Diesels would get there own tree, and Nobody's looks like a good starting place. (We dont need it pre-start I think, so can we back-burrner it until we get the sim rolling?)

Naval Propulsion: Drive Systems
1895: Baseline(0): Direct drives.
1902: Experimental non-direct drives. 85% of direct drive SHP. Electric OR Geared OR Hydraulic
1909: First generation non-direct drives. 100% of direct drive SHP. Electric OR Geared OR Hydraulic
1913: Second generation non-direct drives. 115% of direct drive SHP. Electric OR Geared OR Hydraulic
1917: Third generation non-direct drives. 130% of direct drive SHP. Electric OR Geared OR Hydraulic

For this tech, each drive option (Electric, Hydraulic, Geared) would have to have each level researched separately. I only want one tree in total, and all levels would function like the 1910 Reserves tech. Each drive class would have a set % for weight penalties (if applicable) and range bonus (if applicable) regardless of level. All numbers are out of my hat, and are just there for comparative reasons. I feel that allowing for experimental drives earlier at less SHP then DD-turbines will help show the techs in there infancy and increase the amount of time that DD-turbines remain a viable option.

The rememder of Engine tech then looks like this.

Miscellaneous propulsion technology:
1900 Underway Recoaling
1906 Oil-firing boilers: Allows bunkers with larger than 10% percentage for oil
1915 Underway Oiling

This leaves the matting of turbines (and eventually diesels) and there drives-to-shaft up to both levels, which I feel is a bit more logical then having differing engine years for each type of drive. Thoughts?

[Tanthalas]

Functional, but just like I have said before keeping track of bonuses and who has what one is going to be a pain.

[Delta Force]

SHP limits need to be looked at, since RMS Mauretania had a designed SHP of 17,000 when laid down in 1904, and was at 19,000 in 1909 during her record runs.

Many ships greatly exceed their designed power output during their trial runs. We might want to consider accounting for the higher speeds achievable while under forced draught (as opposed to natural draught).

[Tanthalas]

We already did that in N3 there was a tool on the board somewhere (no clue where now) that told you a ships trial vs service speed.

SHP limits need to be looked at, since RMS Mauretania had a designed SHP of 17,000 when laid down in 1904, and was at 19,000 in 1909 during her record runs.

Many ships greatly exceed their designed power output during their trial runs. We might want to consider accounting for the higher speeds achievable while under forced draught (as opposed to natural draught).

[snip]

For DDs only. Other then that, the SS speed will be the maximum speed of the vessel outside of stories about the ship's trials.

[KWorld]

Mauretania's record run was across the Atlantic and back, with a load of passengers.  Not quite the same as a destroyer's trial run over a measured mile.


Anyway, TE & Diesel aren't likely to replace direct drive propulsion, both of them are too heavy for short-ranged ships, the payback isn't there (which is historically accurate).  They're only valuable in longer-ranged vessels, where their advantage in fuel efficiency outweighs their weight penalty.  Geared drives WILL kill direct drive, as they should.  Hydraulic..... don't know, we'll have to see the numbers.  One thing that DOESN'T work is giving a tech a weight subtraction, SS3 doesn't let you put in a negative weight into the miscellaneous weights area.

[KWorld]

> 1906 Oil-firing boilers: Allows bunkers with larger than 10% percentage for oil

Should probably be 1903 or 1904, given that HMS Dreadnought carried 1120 tons of fuel oil in addition to almost 2900 tons of coal, the various Russia battleships that were totally oil fueled, and assorted destroyers as I pointed out in the setup period for N4.5.  Of course, there's a downside to oil fueling: if you don't have a domestic oil industry (like Russia did), oil fueling requires imports, which could be interrupted in the event of a war.

Or have the transition be more gradual:

1901: Mixed firing: allows bunkers with up to 25% percentage of oil.
1905: Oil firing: allows bunkers with over 25% percentage of oil.