Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], NebulousAnswer and 14 guests

Changes in ship classification

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Changes in ship classification
Post by Maldorian   » Sun May 29, 2022 3:49 am

Maldorian
Commander

Posts: 246
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:54 am

Sorry if there is already a topic about this.

Well, we all know that the ships in Honorverse are classified by their weight.

And we also know, that Manticore has broken this classification system with building ships bigger as in the classification mentioned.

So, the Battleship is a death class! To old to be effective, so, no one build them ( yes, I know that the Republik Heaven had some, but we can count them as faild experiment).

Manticorian ship designs moved into the next bigger category.

Battlecruiser big as Battleships.
Heavy cruiser big as Battlecruiser.
Light cruiser big as Heavy cruiser.
Destroyer big as light cruiser.

Why not changing the system?

Replace the "Tag" of the "Battleship slot" with Battlecruiser!

The weight range of an the old Battlecruiser is the new definition of an Heavy Cruiser and so on.

The old Destroyer "Slot" would be now a frigate.
The old Frigate class would be now a Corvette.

We can say that that isn´t something new. Look how big a destroyer was in World War 2 and what size a Destroyer has nowdays. An american Arleight Burke Destroyer would be in WWII at least classified as a Cruiser. On the other hand, there were no Frigates and Corvettes in world War 2 ( There was a Corvette, but it was a very poor ship for escort duties, an absolutly bad design. I don´t count that).

Now there are Corvettes and Frigates in the Navies in the world, because the former smallest ship in the Navy, the Destroyer, became bigger and they needed a new class name for ships of WW2 Destroyer size.

What do you think of the Idea?
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by Jonathan_S   » Sun May 29, 2022 12:47 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 7769
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Maldorian wrote:Sorry if there is already a topic about this.

Well, we all know that the ships in Honorverse are classified by their weight.

And we also know, that Manticore has broken this classification system with building ships bigger as in the classification mentioned.

So, the Battleship is a death class! To old to be effective, so, no one build them ( yes, I know that the Republik Heaven had some, but we can count them as faild experiment).

Manticorian ship designs moved into the next bigger category.

Battlecruiser big as Battleships.
Heavy cruiser big as Battlecruiser.
Light cruiser big as Heavy cruiser.
Destroyer big as light cruiser.

Why not changing the system?

Replace the "Tag" of the "Battleship slot" with Battlecruiser!

The weight range of an the old Battlecruiser is the new definition of an Heavy Cruiser and so on.

The old Destroyer "Slot" would be now a frigate.
The old Frigate class would be now a Corvette.

We can say that that isn´t something new. Look how big a destroyer was in World War 2 and what size a Destroyer has nowdays. An american Arleight Burke Destroyer would be in WWII at least classified as a Cruiser. On the other hand, there were no Frigates and Corvettes in world War 2 ( There was a Corvette, but it was a very poor ship for escort duties, an absolutly bad design. I don´t count that).

Now there are Corvettes and Frigates in the Navies in the world, because the former smallest ship in the Navy, the Destroyer, became bigger and they needed a new class name for ships of WW2 Destroyer size.

What do you think of the Idea?
It depends on how you want to classify ships.

Though if you look at WWII there were two different classes of corvettes, the Flower and Castle classes. But yes, they were slow anti-submarine escorts for convoys; based off an existing commercial whale catcher and build in commercial yards to commercial standards; which allowed them to be build in more places and in greater numbers than a more capable military standard ship. (And for a ship you don't count, were critical to the war effort by forming the backbone of the vital escort screen for convoys as well as helping cover various amphibious landings). And they were operated by the Uk, Canada, US, Free French, India, Free Greek, New Zealand, and Norway.

And there were also frigates in WWII, being larger, faster, escorts (though still smaller and slower than a destroyer) and sometimes build to military standards; these were somewhat analogous to the USN's destroyer escorts (DE). I believe that the few DEs that were given to the RN were reclassified by them as frigates. The RN built the River and Loch classes of anti-submarine frigates and the Bay-class anti-aircraft frigate.

Also during WWII the USN reclassified its Tacoma-class patrol gunboats (PGs) to patrol frigates (PF); and those were based on the RN's River-class frigate, modified to American requirement for construction in American yards.

Still, the WWII frigates had nothing in common, beyond the name, with frigates from the age of sail. Their WWII counterpart would be heavy cruisers; while an age of sail corvette would probably be closer to a WWII light cruiser or large destroyer -- though of course those analogies are far from perfect.

But as for size growth look at the post-war USS Norfolk, which the USN thought was the minimize size to fit all the necessary destroyer functionality for the post-war environment. At 5,600 she dwarfed the late-war destroyers like the Gearing-class (2,616 tons) and even the next USN destroyers the semi-experimental Mitscher-class (3,642 tons) which were followed by the even smaller Forrest Sherman-class (2,800 tons) and then by the first guided missile destroyers the 1958 Farragut-class (4,167 tons). It wasn't until 1972's Spruance-class (8,040 tons) that USN destroyers finally exceeded the size (and cost) of Norfolk. And then those were followed by the Arleigh Burkes; which, as you noted, at 8,100 - 9,500 tons are the size of a WWII cruiser. Heck, they're towards the upper end of the 10,000 tons allowed by the pre-war treaties. And then there's the 3 Zumwalt class desteroyers :D at 15,656 tons they fall between the tonnage of the USN's last two gun cruiser classes, the Oregon City (13,260 tons) and the Des Moines (17,255 tons)

And even today ship types don't mean the same things in all navies. The US considered a destroyer to be high-end an all around ship, capable of anti-air, anti-surface, and anti-submarine work. And our frigates (when we had them) were low-end primarily anti-submarine ships. But in the RN destroyers, Type 4x ships like the current Type 45, are dedicated anti-air escorts, with their Frigates broken into two types, the Type 2x ships like the current Type 26 being anti-submarine escorts, and the Type 3x like the current Type 31 general purpose (which lack the anti-submiarine capabilities of the Type 2x or the anti-air of the Type 4x). Their high-end all-around ships would be Type 6x but they don't have a current high-end all-around design in service.

And in the Honorverse the RMN has always classified ships by their role, with weight being secondary. Hence why they didn't reclassify old CLs as DDs once new DDs started exceeding their size. The Courageous-class CLs, like Fearless, came on the scene in 1820, and just 41 years later their new Havoc-class DD was nearly as large; and by 1872 the IAN introduced the larger Dolch-class DD, 1883 the RHN the larger Bastogne-class DD, even if the RMN itself didn't introduce a larger DD until the 1906 Culverin-class.
So I don't see them reclassifying old ships just because the size of new ones has ballooned. They'll instead replace those old ships with new ones as quickly as they can.
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by Guillaume   » Sun May 29, 2022 3:28 pm

Guillaume
Lieutenant (Junior Grade)

Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 7:13 am

Maldorian wrote:[...]
Well, we all know that the ships in Honorverse are classified by their weight.

And we also know, that Manticore has broken this classification system with building ships bigger as in the classification mentioned.

What do you think of the Idea?


Look at it another way :

Ship classification is what countries say they are...

Right now US Navy has DDG that have the displacement of CGs ( and FFG the size of DDGs ), Japan as DDHs that actually are more CVs than DD especially in the size domain and the new added ability to launch VSTOL planes.
In France we have Frigates ( FFG ) that fits the DDG role and size.

And I won't even go into the CVN domain where the French CVN Charles De Gaulle is about half the size of a Nimitz CVN. ( the only thing they in comming is that they are Carrier Vessels and are nuclear powered ) or the SSN/SSBN one ( there's more players in that domain but the size range between countries/models is enormous ).
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by kzt   » Sun May 29, 2022 3:46 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11070
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Like he said, the ship class is what the owner says it is.

Generally this role based, but sometimes it's because of things like the program budget document says that it's a destroyer.
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by Jonathan_S   » Sun May 29, 2022 3:58 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 7769
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

kzt wrote:Like he said, the ship class is what the owner says it is.

Generally this role based, but sometimes it's because of things like the program budget document says that it's a destroyer.
*cough* Fisher's large light cruisers? :D
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by Relax   » Sun May 29, 2022 4:29 pm

Relax
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3028
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:18 pm

Guillaume wrote:
Maldorian wrote:[...]
Well, we all know that the ships in Honorverse are classified by their weight.

And we also know, that Manticore has broken this classification system with building ships bigger as in the classification mentioned.

What do you think of the Idea?


Look at it another way :

Ship classification is what countries say they are...

Well, partially. Current ship types that is true, looking back at history, whatever dominant navy in said period of history and what THEY call said class of ships defining said era is what everyone looking backwards calls them.

It is only due to the fact that back to back nations, both speaking English, have defined the classes of ships for the last several hundred years(vast majority England). Everyone knows the English names for classes of ships, but do you know the French? Spanish? Last ship with lasting impactful importance, not named in English, was the Caravel 400 years ago. While the Destroyer was conceived by the Spanish, its name is the English version around the world.

Any other exceptions I do not know about? I am not exactly a age of sail history buff. Rather the opposite in fact.
_________
Tally Ho!
Relax
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by Relax   » Sun May 29, 2022 4:32 pm

Relax
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3028
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:18 pm

Maldorian wrote:Sorry if there is already a topic about this.

Well, we all know that the ships in Honorverse are classified by their weight.


Every topic gets rehashed at least 3-->5X or maybe 10X before finding itself on the dead horse topics list. You are in good company :lol:

PS: Welcome to forum, and no, HV ships are not classifed by weight. A good book to reread on the topic is the introduction of the SAG-C (SoSag) or the older PN of the mars class. Another would be DW discussing in AAC introduction of the BC(L). Next introduction is the Roland class in hrmmmm, mission of Honor? or was it in Storm from the Shadows? Or read up on House of Steel.

Or see the thread Theemile just made regarding ship roles which I have not responded to directly yet. Or his 1924 new build program when shipyards start to come back online and my responses.
_________
Tally Ho!
Relax
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by Jonathan_S   » Sun May 29, 2022 5:48 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 7769
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Relax wrote:Well, partially. Current ship types that is true, looking back at history, whatever dominant navy in said period of history and what THEY call said class of ships defining said era is what everyone looking backwards calls them.

It is only due to the fact that back to back nations, both speaking English, have defined the classes of ships for the last several hundred years(vast majority England). Everyone knows the English names for classes of ships, but do you know the French? Spanish? Last ship with lasting impactful importance, not named in English, was the Caravel 400 years ago. While the Destroyer was conceived by the Spanish, its name is the English version around the world.

Any other exceptions I do not know about? I am not exactly a age of sail history buff. Rather the opposite in fact.

While panzerschiffe is probably the best known Kaiserliche Marine or Kriegsmarine ship designation I suspect far more people know them by that the British press called them -- pocket battleships.

However the modern name yacht came from the 14th century Dutch 'jaghts' originally small fast boats for chasing pirates, smugglers and criminals, or sometimes to scout for the battle line. But of course by the time it morphed into English it was assigned to small fast pleasure craft, not small fast armed ships.

And wiki tells me that the word sloop (later sloop-of-war) came from the Dutch sloep ships. And brig, from brigantine, from the Italian brigantino ships. And the word corvette for a warship was used by the French for at least 50 years or so before the British co-opted it.

So I think, at least for age of sail, we tend to give the British too much credit for assigning the names we know the ships by; when a fair bit of it seems instead to be English's well known tendency to follow other languages down dark alleys and mug them for loose vocabulary. :D
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by Relax   » Sun May 29, 2022 6:19 pm

Relax
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3028
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:18 pm

Jonathan_S wrote:And wiki tells me that the word sloop (later sloop-of-war) came from the Dutch sloep ships. And brig, from brigantine, from the Italian brigantino ships. And the word corvette for a warship was used by the French for at least 50 years or so before the British co-opted it.

So I think, at least for age of sail, we tend to give the British too much credit for assigning the names we know the ships by; when a fair bit of it seems instead to be English's well known tendency to follow other languages down dark alleys and mug them for loose vocabulary. :D

Yes, English does love to grab any vocab it can.

I guess my point was not the minor classes of ships which as you point out come from all over the place, but rather the defining class of the period. In either case thanks for the info.
_________
Tally Ho!
Relax
Top
Re: Changes in ship classification
Post by Brigade XO   » Sun May 29, 2022 7:49 pm

Brigade XO
Admiral

Posts: 2954
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: KY

I keep seeing Frigate tossed around as a ship type lately with the conversation about what should be the new build ships. I thought Frigate was a non-starter for any serious navy (Torch is just starting and has been doing -that we see- mostly raids against slavers.

Are some of you proposing that some sort of below the present war-fighter DD in the RMN be built and called a Frigate as perhaps the nominal equivalent of a DE for things like light convoy or commerce protection. Kind of like sending the DD Hawkwing to Silesia? Just with present generations of weapons?
Top

Return to Honorverse