Looking for a way to improve Naval Aviation prewar in the 1930's.

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: After 1900' started by Naval Aviation Fan, Aug 26, 2019.

Loading...
  1. CV12Hornet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Overall, I'd agree with the tanker suggestions; they were the major limitation on the US Navy early in the war, arguably more so than the numbers of carriers themselves. The Wake relief, which involved only two carriers, pretty much wiped out all the tanker-supplied fuel in the Pacific, and even by the end of the Guadalcanal campaign the US Navy was left with only the ability to sustain five "capital" units in the theater, which at the time worked out to the carriers Saratoga and Enterprise and battleships Washington, North Carolina, and Indiana.
     
    Spencersj345.346 and McPherson like this.
  2. HB of CJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2018
    Location:
    42N-123W Kinda SW Oregon USA
    The world and national economic situation during the early to mid 1930's was very grim. There was no extra money anywhere. The politics pretty much reflected the economic situation. Considering little budget money the world's various navies had to work with, they did a very good job. Money and treaties had a very restraining effect. Just me.
     
    Zheng He likes this.
  3. marathag Well-Known Member with a target on his back

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2013
    When Rich, you're just eccentric.;)

    But he didn't go really nuts until the XF11 crash that nearly killed him
     
  4. NOMISYRRUC Rostrum Camera Ken Morse

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Is this of any use?

    US Naval Acts.png

    The above are the tonnages of ships that the US Navy was allowed to have under US Law.
     
    Naval Aviation Fan and McPherson like this.
  5. NOMISYRRUC Rostrum Camera Ken Morse

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Text of the 1934 Act

     
    Naval Aviation Fan likes this.
  6. McPherson McPherson; a guy who needs a shave.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2017
    Location:
    Somewhere where rockets fly.
    Ah yes! Make it so, make it so. That doubles an aircraft carrier's strike below efficiency.
     
  7. Naval Aviation Fan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2019
    Ok, so probably something I should have done in the OP, lets do now.:cool:

    In this thread, I'm looking to outline the vague ideas I currently have, for writing a series of very short ATL's, that will all feature Howard Hughes Jr doing a variety of fictional adventures, basically deciding that he wants to be the first to accomplish this or that feat of daring do. These will be inspired by the recent "X Prize" competitions, for private sector folks to achieve space exploration goals.

    To that end, I'm going to make a thread w/poll, that will ask what kind ideas were there historically, that HH Jr and his contemporaries were actually doing in those days, and what other things could have been done, that would lead us to earlier development of technologies. Keep in mind, that although my main focus is the earlier development of technologies useful for Naval Aviation, I need a pretty good list of ideas that help me write the ATL's.

    My personal health is NOT good, and I cannot make any promises for when I'm going to be writing these stories, but I am looking forward to some lively and spirited discussions.

    Here is the first thread.
     
  8. sonofpegasus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    One interesting link is that Doxford Marine diesels were licensed for construction by the sun oil ship yard in Pennsylvania, So have your character involved in the oil business and have him/her order a number of oil tankers fitted with a pair of 6500hp, two stroke opposed piston direct drive diesel engines. Ideal for use as naval supply ships and as the basis for an aircraft carrier. Very fuel efficient, good for the Pacific campaign. At economical cruising speed these engines would burn only about 12/15 tons per-day each from the figures I have seen for their smaller three cylinder version of the same engine.
     
    perfectgeneral likes this.
  9. McPherson McPherson; a guy who needs a shave.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2017
    Location:
    Somewhere where rockets fly.
    10 engines and 10 electric motor generator sets?



    Not too sure that is warship grade.

    McP.
     
  10. Astrodragon Coffee-seeking Dragon

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    UK - Oxfordshire
    1936 treaty. Earlier, there is simply no credible threat that needs large carriers or CVL's
     
  11. Astrodragon Coffee-seeking Dragon

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    UK - Oxfordshire
    A 26-kt auxiliary would be illegal under the treaties. IIRC. limited to 20kt
    Of course, if its just a merchant ship, that's fine. But I qu estion who would believe you need a tanker that fast, especially under and American flag
     
  12. Astrodragon Coffee-seeking Dragon

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    UK - Oxfordshire
    The 1936 treaty allowed the USN to build more carriers up to 23kt if they wished.
    Domestic policy limits are easier to change than international treaties
     
  13. Astrodragon Coffee-seeking Dragon

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    UK - Oxfordshire
    The big liners would have made poor carriers, with a surprisingly low aircraft capacity for their size. 80-odd planes
     
  14. McPherson McPherson; a guy who needs a shave.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2017
    Location:
    Somewhere where rockets fly.
    You lie and run it at 10 m/s (19.5 knots) until you cut in those 6 extra diesel electric motor generator sets y0ou installed and did not tell anyone about. The USN would need them since 10 m/s battle speed for CTFs past 1935 is normal. 15 m/s would be ideal.
     
  15. Astrodragon Coffee-seeking Dragon

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    UK - Oxfordshire
    Yeah, and when everyone else points out the cheating?
    The USN gets pilloried by certain parties in Congress for lying and breaking armament treaties. America was big on these, so its likely to cause a major shitstorm.

    Now allowing space to plug in those diesels later is quite a different matter! :)

    But the issue remains - where is the money coming from, and why is the USA happy about spending more on the Navy? You cant just reallocate existing budgets, there were fully needed
     
    perfectgeneral likes this.
  16. McPherson McPherson; a guy who needs a shave.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2017
    Location:
    Somewhere where rockets fly.
    How would they know? You think a "derated diesel plant" is going to stand up and say; "I'm really a 45,000 kW plant cranking out only 25,000 KW? That is why you lie.

    Since the FDR Administration is already busy replacing 500 US merchant marine hulls (2.5 million GWT) under the Maritime Construction Act, what's a dozen more oil tankers?
     
  17. Astrodragon Coffee-seeking Dragon

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    UK - Oxfordshire
    The trouble with lying in the USA in peacetime is that someone will notice and talk. Its hardly subtle that the ships have 2-3 times the stated power available.
    Why do that when there isn't a need? Just allocate extra space in the engine room for some more diesels, build them and store them. Then you just have to fit them
     
  18. McPherson McPherson; a guy who needs a shave.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2017
    Location:
    Somewhere where rockets fly.
    Because a 1935 5000 kW US diesel/electric motor generator set is built around a 2 stroke opposed piston diesel engine design that is unit machinery (a marine power egg)? It is as big as a freaking locomotive. Cutting a pass through hole is not too smart. You need 6 of them to add to the 6 you have built and sealed in. Plus all that added plumbing. Just install 12 sets and tell the workers that it is a 2,500-3,000 kW setup. And, if you needs must, seal off the 6 engine rooms for the 6 wartime sets so Nosy Norbert doesn't wander in there.
     
  19. Astrodragon Coffee-seeking Dragon

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    UK - Oxfordshire
    "Why do you need another 6 diesel generators?"
    "To power the ice cream makers of course!"

    :D
     
  20. NOMISYRRUC Rostrum Camera Ken Morse

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    I'm not sure if you're reinforcing the part I highlighted or saying I had overlooked an important point.
    True.

    FWIW this is the text of the Second Vinson-Trammel Act, which AIUI it took the Panay Incident and the Japanese Third Fleet Replenishment Programme to persuade Congress to pass.

     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2019
Loading...