AHC: "And the Battleship of the Year award goes to..."

So, give up ideas for having an earliest possible international competition for Battleships, starting off with just a single 'fleet chanpion' type event, and developing into ever more and more extensive "Naval Games".

When do motion pocture theaters hit the scene, how much public interest can one generate? Can you have high priced tickets to be aboard a camera ship at the competiton? What about a "spectators gallery" aboard the firing ship?

Target ship providers contracts, fees and operations?

Trying to get ideas for how to have "Naval Games" become an accepted 'sporting event', with big franchises for movie goers and in person fans.

(The reasons to have this are perhaps not to obvious, but lets just go with it and see where it leads).

Any thoughts?
 
Over 100 views, but not a single reply.:(

I'm looking for ideas for nations to send their best battleship to an international 'top gun' type of competition, say around 1900 or so, with cash prizes for the top three ships entered. Make this a yearly competition, that starts off with just a single BB, and then evolves into a much more comprehensive set of games.

Of course, with the benifit of hindsight, we all know that lack of actual combat was the bane of ship and weapons designers, and many problems managed to slip by that probably shouldn't have, especially in WWII. But what if there was an internation competition that allowed one to fire at a moving target, for points, with great prestige and cash to the top place ship?
 
Why would the RN invite the rest of the world to its summer exercises ?

(this is 1900 ;))

Small point but cash prizes will be insignificant v the cost of the ships. (we think of the World Cup as the bigest prize in a rich sport and in 2006 the winners got $21 million that's nice but it costs $12.8 billion + $4.7 billion R&D for a USN CVN so its really not that good.)

Why would navy's really show off the best technology for a fraction of the cost of developing it ?
 
Why would the RN invite the rest of the world to its summer exercises ?

(this is 1900 ;))

Small point but cash prizes will be insignificant v the cost of the ships. (we think of the World Cup as the bigest prize in a rich sport and in 2006 the winners got $21 million that's nice but it costs $12.8 billion + $4.7 billion R&D for a USN CVN so its really not that good.)

Why would navy's really show off the best technology for a fraction of the cost of developing it ?

Yep, the main benefits would be the prestige, followed by the expertise, followed by the reliability earned increases, and lastly the cash. I was thinking that the cash would be for the winning crew, rather than the government that owned the ship, as an incentive to make it to the competition.

The guys that make the shells and guns are going to be the ones that make the big bucks, because no matter who wins, each country is going to be doing allot more shooting than OTL, and this means orders for replacement guns and extra ammo.

Also, if contracts for target ships are part of the process, then there is money there, as well. And of course, each nation gets to see what effect their bombardment had before the next nation gets it's turn.

Historically, how many torpedoes failed because of a lack of 'live fire' exercises? Get these types of "Naval Games" to the point where all major weapons systems are getting their chance to be demonstrated and...
 
Yep, the main benefits would be the prestige, followed by the expertise, followed by the reliability earned increases, and lastly the cash. I was thinking that the cash would be for the winning crew, rather than the government that owned the ship, as an incentive to make it to the competition.

You do know, ofc, that a battleship is owned by government, not the crew?
 
You do know, ofc, that a battleship is owned by government, not the crew?

1925-battleship-potemkin.jpg
 
Good one. Well, I'll correct my statement to: 'Most battleships are owned by their respective governments.'
 

Sideways

Donor
It seems unlikely, given that arms treaties in the mid-twentieth century often aimed to limit battleships, IIRC.

But maybe if Germany or France had a ship that they felt could challenge British designs they would make a film of it. This could lead to a British film in response, and maybe a long standing tradition of battleship contests in the media. In a way this might be easier to keep going if the World Wars didn't happen but there was a long stand-off between central and allied powers, leading to another stand-off between communist and allied powers.

I doubt they'd have a central "games" through. The cost involved and risk of espionage/mishaps would be too high.
 
So, early silent films made it into theaters in 1895 or so, but sound not till the 1920's, and color even later.

OTOH, we all have taken such things as a matter of course, so perhaps our ancestors would be interested enough to watch such films.

I would not think that the competitions would draw much interest unless the hit percentage was more important than total number of hits scored, at least until everyone had their own Dreadnoughts to compete with.
 
Navies would like this because they would get more 'live fire' exercises, and the armaments guys would love it, just need someone with 'vision' to find a way to market it to audiences.
 
Top