1920 Rules Changes (advanced draft)

[damocles]

That is actually realistic. Most militaries have to plan their procurement and maintenance around their units base.

For example for an air force designed like the one I plan, the forces would be purchased and maintained around the group based on four wings. All I have to do is change the nomenclature. I leave to others to argue points and costs, not my particular concern. I just like the units basis since it allows me to use %s for planning.

D.         

[Borys]

Ahoj!
The Warsaw Military Cemetery has a densely packed section for 1921-39 aviators.
Very easy to find, as it was the fashion to fix the propeller to the cross ...
Borys

[Walter]

*looks at own figures*

Uhm...

... 8100 army planes, 1000 navy planes. 5200 are older types.

Of my bases, 6 are mixed navy/army aerodromes and 4 are army aerodromes for a total of 10. Considering that a group is 600 planes and a type 3 base can house a full group, that would mean that with the assumption that my 10 aerodromes are type 3, I can support 6000 planes. The remaining 3100 planes would be there for spares should a frontline plane become damaged or backup should a frontline plane be lost. One out of three planes reserve/spares does not seem too unrealistic. Would give me an air force personnel size of... 0 actually since the planes are either army personnel or navy personnel. :)
(more seriously, 171,000 men, 0.14% of the total population, about the same as the Swiss)

Naval Aviation
Aircraft to be carried by or supported by ships are bought in units just as all other aircraft, and must be purchased separately from the ships they are planned to be operated from. Aircraft carried afloat do not require a shore base.

If you want to stick to that, then the miscellaneous weights attached to a ship for the planes should be subtracted from the total of the ship's light displacement. Miscellaneous weights on a ship for planes always includes the planes themselves.

I know how many where built during the war. But you are not at war...

... Which means that, unlike OTL, there is nothing to slow down the increasing size of canon fodder an air force. As I see it, the threat is there (especially with the Swiss being around in the region), but whenever something broke out, it was either somewhere else or other nations dragged those involved into a peace conference and the war came to an end before any damage could be done.

[damocles]

*looks at own figures*

Uhm...

... 8100 army planes, 1000 navy planes. 5200 are older types.

Of my bases, 6 are mixed navy/army aerodromes and 4 are army aerodromes for a total of 10. Considering that a group is 600 planes and a type 3 base can house a full group, that would mean that with the assumption that my 10 aerodromes are type 3, I can support 6000 planes. The remaining 3100 planes would be there for spares should a frontline plane become damaged or backup should a frontline plane be lost. One out of three planes reserve/spares does not seem too unrealistic. Would give me an air force personnel size of... 0 actually since the planes are either army personnel or navy personnel. :)
(more seriously, 171,000 men, 0.14% of the total population, about the same as the Swiss)

Naval Aviation
Aircraft to be carried by or supported by ships are bought in units just as all other aircraft, and must be purchased separately from the ships they are planned to be operated from. Aircraft carried afloat do not require a shore base.

If you want to stick to that, then the miscellaneous weights attached to a ship for the planes should be subtracted from the total of the ship's light displacement. Miscellaneous weights on a ship for planes always includes the planes themselves.

I know how many where built during the war. But you are not at war...

... Which means that, unlike OTL, there is nothing to slow down the increasing size of canon fodder an air force. As I see it, the threat is there (especially with the Swiss being around in the region), but whenever something broke out, it was either somewhere else or other nations dragged those involved into a peace conference and the war came to an end before any damage could be done.

May I respectfully disagree  to that item in red? There is not an aircraft operated from ship that does not at some point, when that ship is in homeport rotation, not operate from a naval air station or depot, if for no other reason for engine and airframe  work which is continuous and is often only possible at a depot or shofre station? Aircraft carriers have only so much capacity, as do ships that carry spotting aircraft. You also have to train.   

[Walter]

I would think that the planes you send to land for repairs and service are replaced on the ships with planes that are on land. So for example, you have a ship with 10 planes on it. You send those 10 planes to land. Sending 10 planes back to the ship will free up 10 spaces at that base which can be filled by those planes sent to land. Or at least I think that that's Guinness's logic behind it.

[damocles]

I would think that the planes you send to land for repairs and service are replaced on the ships with planes that are on land. So for example, you have a ship with 10 planes on it. You send those 10 planes to land. Sending 10 planes back to the ship will free up 10 spaces at that base which can be filled by those planes sent to land. Or at least I think that that's Guinness's logic behind it.

Okay I agree with this, but I suggest you need the land bases and that reserve to support the ship-based air. I suggest that because of this actual logistics that you brought up it shows that you may need at least as many navy air bases to handle at least 1/2 of your ship based air force-certainly I could argue enough bases to handle ALL of your ship based air forces ashore. The attrition to 1920s 1930s naval aviation makes WW I accident loss rates look benign! You need that huge reserve or your brand new navy air force shrinks a good 10% a year from accidents alone. I expect that realistically that attrition will be a part of my budget, if and when I get naval aviation.

D.      

[The Rock Doctor]

I do not support converting airstrips between rule sets based on how many aircraft a player has at each airstrip.  If I have ~100 aircraft per airbase, and another person has ~800 aircraft per airbase, we have both invested precisely the same amount of cash and BP into those airbases.  I just happen to have a more reasonable ratio of aircraft to airstrips.

My suggestion is to consider the 1910/14 tech airbases as Type 0 airstrips, and 1913/16 airstrips as Type 1.  This makes up part of the BP expenditure on 1913/16 airstrips - the rest can be considered to have gone towards the aircraft themselves.

I don't think anybody has gotten round to building 1917/18 airstrips, but they'll count as Type 2 if they do exist.

[ctwaterman]

Ok I was looking at the updates I was going to make with BP left over in my 1919 HY2 report.   Updating several airfields was definetly considered in the not yet completed HY Report.  Should I just use the 1920 Rules to build the new Airbases ??

Also what about Floatplanes ????  I know I have and will continue to deploy an ever larger increasing number of Float Planes at Naval Bases for Maritime Reconisance rolls.  I will assume we simply need to build an airfield at every single one of the Ports expensive but realistic.

But how about Aircraft deployed with Float Plane Tenders ???

Charles

[ledeper]

2  1913 AIRFIELDS

1910/14 tech airbases

:
(Berlin-Tempelhoff/Carlstad-Kastrup):
200 single-engine aircraft
100 multi-engine aircraft
all 1913.

[Logi]

My suggestion is to consider the 1910/14 tech airbases as Type 0 airstrips, and 1913/16 airstrips as Type 1.  This makes up part of the BP expenditure on 1913/16 airstrips - the rest can be considered to have gone towards the aircraft themselves.

I don't think anybody has gotten round to building 1917/18 airstrips, but they'll count as Type 2 if they do exist.

I disagree. If we are to go with converting airfields not based on airforce size, all 1913/16 Airstrips should be Type 2s rather than Type 1. All 1910/14 Airbases are Type 0.

As it stands, I have 12 913 airfields, which comes to a total of 6 BPs worth pounded in. If we went with the conversation to Type 1s, I would have wasted 3 BPs. 3 BPs is no small amount. And adding the cost for my airforce, I still lose about 1 whole BP's worth.

[The Rock Doctor]

Sure, but if we make it Type 2, you're saving $1.50 on each airstrip.  Type 1's a better overall balance.

[Logi]

I'll pay back the money if need be. Cash is easy to find, BP, not so much (for the RRC).

[ctwaterman]

I believe the point of this is to put some controls on the costs and sizes of Airforces...?????   This is to keep  people from deploying simply huge amounts of Aircraft with little or no cost.   The cost isnt so much the aircraft even with BP cost added to the aircraft which I actually agree with. 

The Cost of aircraft is the cost of the Equipment and manpower to maintain and repair them.  In an age where historically the majority of all Farms accept int he US are run by use of Horse Power and not a Diesel Tractor mechanics take time and effort to train.   Machinest take even more time and take directly away from you countires industiral capability.

A Single Aircraft single engines that does a 2 hour patrol along someones border probably used up 20 or more manhours of maintenance for that single flight.  Now multiply that to a single sortie by a 4 Engined Aircraft or even 1000 Single Engine Aircraft.

Manpower Usage is tracked because when you add up the manpower of your Army, Your Navy and your Airforces no matter where you assign them you are supposed to be under the 5%-7% of your Population.  If you remove more then that from you economy into the Military you really damage your economy.  Scarry as that is I havent seen to many Military forces that approach those levels..

As and Example Italia with 27 Legion/Corp deploys 1,350,000 Troops durring a total call up.   This is 3.5% of the Italian Population and 2.5% of the Empires population.   This Does not honestly represent the number of personal dedicated to maintaining the Italian Navy which while not as large as some is still not what I would call Small..   Add another 5 Groups and thats like adding another Corp to my Military.

[Walter]

Cash is easy to find, BP, not so much (for the RRC).

I agree. It's easy for someone who controls a nation like GC or France or Rohan to say "Oh, a few BPs is not so bad. I can live with that."

[Jefgte]

I agree completly with Walter.

Medium countries must count each BP used.

I remember the hard work to used as better as possible the few Peruvian BPs dispo...



Jef