The Navy of God against Charis naval superiority

n7axw wrote:They did manage to steal one of Housymn's latest formulas for steal at the same time they got the description for steam engines, but I'm not sure how much it helps them out.

Don

Well, at least they have a starting point to work for. And don't forget - they KNEW ALREADY that the steam engine would work and work good. So they have more than Earth inventors have.

I agree, it would be a awful lot of work on standartisation and production, but i think they could produce at least the industrial-type steam engines - like early Watt or Polzunov machines - in a few years. True, they would be not ideal, but they would be an enormous help with the Church industrialisation.

After all, the Merlin main goal is to bring progress in minds of all Safeholdian' not just Charisian's. If the Church started to experimenting with steam engines, it would be so giant leap in the ultimately right direction, that he may even help them a little (after all, Charis already have a triple-expansion machines!)

lyonheart wrote:Hi Dilandu,

Mines have been discussed in threads before, but building them in the vast numbers needed, then deploying them against the watchful eye of the ICN, NTM OWL's SNARC's without a helpful seijin pointing them out or sabotaging them, will be difficult.

L

I have to agree with you: mines, while an interesting solution in itself, is probably not an efficient solution for the Church: they need something wich is totally waterproof (otherwise the blackpowder Inside the mine gets wet and won't detonate). This is really difficult to produce for a society which is just on the verge of an industrial society, especially since they still do not have a standard measurement system, unlike Charis. In those conditions, the massive production of efficient mines is out of question. In order to insure a waterproof mine, you'll need hours of a good artisan on one mine. To fully protect the coastal area, you would need millions of mine: they just do not have the Manpower. They could do it to protect very specific area, eventually (a channel, the entrance of a port,...) but even then it would probably be a misuse of manpower.

Armouring ships may be a better solution, however, against the new fully steam-powered ships with their much more efficient guns, they would still be in a losing position...

I think all of you are forgetting the crank driven galleys that Thirsk is having built in Dohlar. They are designed as coastal defense vessels and are armored. They should be entering service any time now.

We are not forgetting about them (at least, not me ). But, while they may have been useful against traditionnal galleon, they will have difficulties to pierce the armour or the new armored galleon, and they will be crushed by the King Haarald's like if they were nothing.

Against this last class of ships, they probably won't have the mobility advantage that they have over galleons, their artillery is probably useless and outranged and their armour is probably thinner and less effective than those of the KH (IIRC, they were armoured mainly on the front, and not on the rest of the ship).

Well, they COULD be a problem in shallow coastal waters, where the King Haarald's would be restricted in mobility and the distance of battle would be small. Effectively, there is the same argument that "Rendell"-type gunboats have against battleships; they were smaller, less vunerable due to their size, more maneuvrable and were able to operate in shallow waters. And they could carry guns pretty enormous for their size.

Personally, i think that the "King Haarald" is the worst possible warship for the coastal operations. It's big, had a deep draft, and undoubtely not too maneuvrable. The low-sides turret monitors would be a lot more effective.

After all, for what reason Charis need ocean ironclads AT ALL now? There is no other ironclad or even steam navy on all Safehold. The main operations is in the coastal waters.

Dilandu wrote:Well, they COULD be a problem in shallow coastal waters, where the King Haarald's would be restricted in mobility and the distance of battle would be small. Effectively, there is the same argument that "Rendell"-type gunboats have against battleships; they were smaller, less vunerable due to their size, more maneuvrable and were able to operate in shallow waters. And they could carry guns pretty enormous for their size.

Personally, i think that the "King Haarald" is the worst possible warship for the coastal operations. It's big, had a deep draft, and undoubtely not too maneuvrable. The low-sides turret monitors would be a lot more effective.

After all, for what reason Charis need ocean ironclads AT ALL now? There is no other ironclad or even steam navy on all Safehold. The main operations is in the coastal waters.

Seems to be for what they're using them now: coastal fort assault.

Also they know about Dohlar's screw galleys. Having galleons that are invulnerable to shell fire would be very useful when getting zerg rushed by them.

After all, for what reason Charis need ocean ironclads AT ALL now? There is no other ironclad or even steam navy on all Safehold. The main operations is in the coastal waters.

Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it. By building them now, they get experience in construction and operation, and can then work improvements into the next generation.

Dilandu wrote:Well, they COULD be a problem in shallow coastal waters, where the King Haarald's would be restricted in mobility and the distance of battle would be small. Effectively, there is the same argument that "Rendell"-type gunboats have against battleships; they were smaller, less vunerable due to their size, more maneuvrable and were able to operate in shallow waters. And they could carry guns pretty enormous for their size.

Personally, i think that the "King Haarald" is the worst possible warship for the coastal operations. It's big, had a deep draft, and undoubtely not too maneuvrable. The low-sides turret monitors would be a lot more effective.

After all, for what reason Charis need ocean ironclads AT ALL now? There is no other ironclad or even steam navy on all Safehold. The main operations is in the coastal waters.

Well, I doubt that they mount guns much bigger than what was available on Claw island (which was totally useless against armoured gallion, and KH are even better protected).

KH would not be at its best in shallow water and small channels, indeed, but all the coastal areas that have sufficient depth and are not enclosed won't trouble them at all.

And while the screw galley may be able to turn faster than the KH (lower inertia), they won't be faster than the KH, so their mobility advantage is pretty balanced in my eyes...

IMO, the interest of pre-dreadnought-style warships (which is what the KH are, more or less), is the ability to move them quickly from one place to another (sailing through an ocean is no big deal for them), while being aroured enough to withstand the actual and the next generation of the Church artillery and shells. They may even have a moral and dissuasive impact: as long as the Church do not have something able to match the KH, any ship it could send is deadmeat. So why bother building/sending them if the results is pointless anyway?

In the US Navy the destroyers defend the carriers, they have to take the torpedos if necesary. The riverboats would play the same part they could go inshore and deal with the ironclad screw galleys and the larger ships could stay further offshore and add their firepower where needed.

Better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it. By building them now, they get experience in construction and operation, and can then work improvements into the next generation.

Well, currently they are prettu useless. For coastal assaults, they are mostly ineffective (remember Franco-Prussian war, were the powerfull ocean-going french navy couldn't even reach most of the Prussian ports?). They are more vunerable and have a greater draft than monitors, so they couldn't come near most fortresses, and the long-range bombardment of coastal fortresses is usually a waste of ammunition (example: the Alexandria attack).

It may be logical to build PROTOTYPES of ocean ironclads, but currently the monitors and coastal ships should be much more important.

IMO, the interest of dreadnought-style warships (which is what the KH are, more or less),

They aren't; they are the 1880th type sea-going ironclads, as i could see. And i'm not shure they are wery practical even in that function.