MTB Tech

[Valles]

I would very much like to see one. They seem to me to be much more suited to the Maori conception of a torpedo craft's role, being smaller, more expendable, and possibly faster than destroyers. I had originally intended to use motor boats and their motherships rather than actual destroyers, but gave up on it because I couldn't get Springsharp to give me anything remotely reasonable.

A separate tech, with fixed performance and abilities, would suit me very well. Unfortunately, I don't know very much at all about the history of such craft; it's only because I feel obligated to offer something to start discussion with that I suggest...

Torpedo Boat Technologies

1900 - 1 ton payload, 10 knots
1905 - 2 tons payload, 20 knots
1910 - 2 tons payload, 25 knots
1915 - 3 tons payload, 30 knots
1920 - 4 tons payload, 32 knots
1925 - 4 tons payload, 35 knots
1930 - 6 tons payload, 38 knots

[Desertfox]

With something like that NS would have 1925 tech, Siam and New Zion would have 1915. You could be really really really nice to NS and get Turbinas from them. Or be nice to the other two countries and get the Turbinias smaller sisters.

OTL Italian MAS boats would beabout 1910-1920 so that chart is about right.

[P3D]

Desertfox,

you way off with your assessment of NS MTB capability. May I mention lack of suitable engines?

Valles, you could try to look around this site for MTB/TB models.
http://www.warshipsww2.eu/staty.php?language=E&period=1

[The Rock Doctor]

With something like that NS would have 1925 tech, Siam and New Zion would have 1915.

...if the Moderators agreed with you.

I agree that a tech may be required, and would certainly appreciate the contributions of Valles and others in its development.

[Korpen]

Wikipedia is our friend:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAS_(ships)#World_War_I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastal_Motor_Boats

[Desertfox]

There are other problems involved, but engines is not one of them. Strange isn't it, but the first seaborne turbine engine just happens to be the right size and weight for MTB sized ships.

[The Rock Doctor]

Bump.

Players, please consider whether:

A)  MTBs need a separate tech

B)  Valles' suggestion at the top of this thread is a reasonable progression for MTB development.

C)  What might need to be added to Valles' suggestion.  I'm thinking a line about generic gun armament.

[Desertfox]

A) Definately.

B) Looks good, but again, based on that NS would be 1925.

C) Size, min and max, how much are we going to be paying for them? No need for gun limits, the Italian 15 tonners had a 47mm cannon!

[Guinness]

For C:

If we are defining payload by a matrix (as in Valles example), could we not SS the gun armament to get it's weight (with ammunition), and add that to the weight of any Torpedo armament?

As an experiment using the 1915 boat tech, I SS'd just a single CSA style twin 1" MG mount with 1000 rounds. Armament weight came out at 0 tons, ammunition weight came out at 1 ton. So, that boat could carry that gun, plus 2 torpedoes.

For a similar hypothetical boat, but with a 57mm QF and 500 rounds, armament weight came out at 1 ton, ammunition at 3 tons, so that boat (obviously) would be over.

So this seems reasonable, at least from these examples.

Also, I think whatever chart we adopt, it needs to also include some sort of range as well.

[The Rock Doctor]

Looks good, but again, based on that NS would be 1925.

We can deal with specific exceptions - if any - later.  I'm interested in whether it works for the world as a whole.

There's a need for gun limits - if I have to tell somebody they can't put a 4" gun on their MTB, I will be displeased at the waste of my time.  Guinness' approach is an option, as is a basic generic limit.

Agreed on operational range requirement.

[Korpen]

I do not see any suggestion about what sort of size of the MTBs we are talking about?

[Guinness]

Well, using the British MTB example, somewhere between 25 and 55 feet, I guess? The 55 footer of 1917 carried 2 18 inch torpedoes and was good for 40 knots.

I think ~ 45 to 55 feet seems like the reasonable place to start today in the Nverse, at least for nations with current tech, scaling up to near the 80 foot size of the Elco PT Boats in the late 30s, maybe?

[miketr]

Size...  speed x2 in tons perhaps?  As to range the WW2's had some fairly impressive range so we would have to think about it.  Anyone have a copy of Conways 1906-1921?  

Michael

[Blooded]

Hello,

I don't know about early boats but the basics sound good to me. generic loadouts may be a simpiler option.

We may also want to have larger patrol boats included, maybe a slower large one(Fairmile type) verses small and quick(PT type). Where would s-boats go? Maybe multi-choice chart like the sub chart would be nice(ie. 4x 1910 models).

See drazki TB in wiki, also coastal motor boat in wiki.

I think the inclusion of small torpedo boats in the pacific war was a mistake that should be swept under the rug. Identifying a need then immediately exploiting it was abused. The Pacific is not a good place for Small Vessels. PTs were successful later on due to doctrine, limited use(exploiting their good qualities minimizing the bad) and large jumps in technology. Small, powerful and reliable engines were not common at this time. The 1914 engine tech would have been more appropriate. NS had 1905 IC engines in 1908.

The MAS boats were a 'Perfect storm' of timing, ability, need, suitability, motivation, daring, and tech. As usual NS cherrypicked the worlds inventory and claimed it for itself.

[miketr]

I agree a chart like the one for Subs would be best but I don't have the data to create it...  :(

Looking at these things they were smaller than I expected 5 to 30 ton in our current time frame.  The Germans S Boats were a different animal all together nearly 100 tons in size and good open sea range and speed.

Michael