WW1 war at sea
- Thread starter stormbind
- Start date
napoleon526
Emperor
Do you mean ALL ships from ALL nations? That's a pretty big list. I'll see what I can do.
No, not everything that might have been used 
I meant, the distinctly different generations of ship. I know there were some tall ships, but I'm not sure what their roles were.
I wasn't thinking of unique/named ships, just their generic types. Was there such a thing as "Sloop of War"? It just sounded familiar, dunno what it might be!
Edit: typos, probably still missed some.
I meant, the distinctly different generations of ship. I know there were some tall ships, but I'm not sure what their roles were.
I wasn't thinking of unique/named ships, just their generic types. Was there such a thing as "Sloop of War"? It just sounded familiar, dunno what it might be!
Edit: typos, probably still missed some.
Fleet Destroyer, Escort Destroyer, Utility Destroyer
The commerce raiders could also be called Auxiliary Cruisers.
Light Cruiser?
Here is something for you Mr. Stormbind: WW1 The Maritime War
Cimbri
The commerce raiders could also be called Auxiliary Cruisers.
Light Cruiser?
Here is something for you Mr. Stormbind: WW1 The Maritime War Cimbri
Thanks all 
I'm trying to get them in cronological order for a Civ3 mod.
HMS Hood (1916) set the benchmark for it's time, and it was a Battlecruiser, not a Battleship.
It is all well and good to say that, but not when I do not know the technical difference between Battlecruisers and Battleships! Nor do I know how either of these relates to a Dreadnought ... ... 
Once I have them in cronological order, I must find the scientific observation that led to their respective designs - thereby creating a new set of scientific acheivements for the mod. I say this so you understand what I am looking for
Thanks for that link. I like the idea of a Q-Ship
I'm trying to get them in cronological order for a Civ3 mod.
HMS Hood (1916) set the benchmark for it's time, and it was a Battlecruiser, not a Battleship.
It is all well and good to say that, but not when I do not know the technical difference between Battlecruisers and Battleships! Nor do I know how either of these relates to a Dreadnought ...
... Once I have them in cronological order, I must find the scientific observation that led to their respective designs - thereby creating a new set of scientific acheivements for the mod. I say this so you understand what I am looking for
Thanks for that link. I like the idea of a Q-Ship
Originally posted by stormbind
Thanks all
I'm trying to get them in cronological order for a Civ3 mod.
HMS Hood (1916) set the benchmark for it's time, and it was a Battlecruiser, not a Battleship.
It is all well and good to say that, but not when I do not know the technical difference between Battlecruisers and Battleships! Nor do I know how either of these relates to a Dreadnought ...
This is a thread I started concerning the Battlecruiser. I will go find some info on the Dreadnoughts next (They were a new breed of battleships)
Dreadnoughts
With the new century, European rivalries (and hence naval building), convinced the Government that Britain could not afford the 2-power standard.
The South African ("Boer") War 1899-1902 had revealed a worrying isolation from the other European powers. In 1902, a 20-year treaty was signed with Japan, allowing the recall of many naval units, and their concentration in home waters and the Mediterranean. In 1904, the Entente Cordiale was signed with France, and another in 1907, with Russia.
"Dreadnoughts" are the generic name given to battleships designed on the principles of their namesake in 1905-6. The revolution in the British Navy refers to rather more than that. HMS Dreadnought was a product of the Naval Arms Race with Imperial Germany. At 17,900 tons, she was designed to render all other battleships obsolete, and to give Britain a lead in building capital ships which she could not lose.
Battleships were the main index of Great Power status. Battleship quality depended on the combination of armour protection, gunpower and speed.
In 1897, at the Spithead Review to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Victoria, the Navy had been made to look foolish by a small, fast demonstration craft called Turbinia (now in Exhibition Park, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.). Dreadnought had turbines.
To address the problem of gunnery-accuracy, she was an all big-gun ship. Ten 12" guns provided the main armament. Shell splashes would not be complicated by smaller calibre guns, although after Dreadnought, subsequent classes of battleship would re-instate smaller guns (6") to deal with torpedo boats. Admiral John Fisher, the First Sea Lord, also promoted greater proficiency in gunnery, and the centralization of gunnery control on battleships, high above the smoke and guns. [Gun directors and range-finders, plotting the trajectory of shells from several guns to a point where the enemy would be when they fell - speed, wind, direction etc - therefore represent an early form of computer!] In these matters, Fisher became embroiled in a conflict with Lord Charles Beresford, Admiral of the Channel Fleet. Beresford was the sort of Admiral of whom Gilbert & Sullivan might have been proud: impeccably well-connected, personal servants and good dinners on board; spit, polish and tradition. Fisher retired in 1910, tired of the hostility, but Beresford was sidelined, and the Navy's preparedness was the beneficiary in 1914, as the fleet concentrated at Scapa Flow.
HMS Dreadnought
(the dust jacket of the book published by Conway Maritime Press - an excellent source)
As non-participants in a European Naval Arms Race (in which the French and Russians had dropped out), the Americans took time out to consider the issues of battleship design from first principles. They discovered the "zone of immunity" ranges between which heavy shells cannot penetrate either side or deck armour. Longer ranges meant that shells plunged from above, increasing the hits on deck. Learning from Tsu-shima that where ships were unarmoured, shells tended to pass through without exploding; light armour by contrast, caused shells to explode and cause almost as much damage from splinters. From this, the Americans developed an "all or nothing" approach: armour at maximum thickness, or not at all. The USS Nevada and Oklahoma (1911) embodied these principles, and were as revolutionary as the Dreadnought.
After the dreadnoughts came super-dreadnoughts, with 13.5" or 15" guns, displacing up to 27,500 tons. Two of the latter guns can be seen outside the Imperial War Museum, in London. Fisher was also responsible for the development of the battlecruiser: a concept which evolved from the armoured cruiser of the 1890s: battleships of the time were slow, and could not fire their large guns with great frequency or accuracy. In the 1890s, the latest design of armour allowed ships to be protected with less weight, or to have more widespread protection. Developments in quick firing gunnery meant that smaller guns could fire as far as, and faster than those of battleships. The French Admiral Fournier envisaged a kind of "universal" ship that could fulfil several roles, and outfight a slow battleship with rapid fire, then deliver the coup de grace with one or two bigger (8"-10") guns.
Fisher proposed to improve rates of fire with A H Pollen's early computerised system of gunnery control, but the Admiralty jibbed at the cost of it. (Fisher seems not to have considered what would happen when other navies invented their own versions?) What was then left of Fisher's idea was a heavily armed, but lightly armoured vessel which could fight alongside battleships, but be fast enough to catch cruisers and destroy them. An idea looking for a role? Other navies eventually adopted vessels which were heavily armoured, but more lightly armed (Russians, Germans & USA in WW2), which were really "cruiser-killers". Both types of ship were called "battlecruisers".
Cimbri
With the new century, European rivalries (and hence naval building), convinced the Government that Britain could not afford the 2-power standard.
The South African ("Boer") War 1899-1902 had revealed a worrying isolation from the other European powers. In 1902, a 20-year treaty was signed with Japan, allowing the recall of many naval units, and their concentration in home waters and the Mediterranean. In 1904, the Entente Cordiale was signed with France, and another in 1907, with Russia.
"Dreadnoughts" are the generic name given to battleships designed on the principles of their namesake in 1905-6. The revolution in the British Navy refers to rather more than that. HMS Dreadnought was a product of the Naval Arms Race with Imperial Germany. At 17,900 tons, she was designed to render all other battleships obsolete, and to give Britain a lead in building capital ships which she could not lose.
Battleships were the main index of Great Power status. Battleship quality depended on the combination of armour protection, gunpower and speed.
In 1897, at the Spithead Review to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Victoria, the Navy had been made to look foolish by a small, fast demonstration craft called Turbinia (now in Exhibition Park, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.). Dreadnought had turbines.
To address the problem of gunnery-accuracy, she was an all big-gun ship. Ten 12" guns provided the main armament. Shell splashes would not be complicated by smaller calibre guns, although after Dreadnought, subsequent classes of battleship would re-instate smaller guns (6") to deal with torpedo boats. Admiral John Fisher, the First Sea Lord, also promoted greater proficiency in gunnery, and the centralization of gunnery control on battleships, high above the smoke and guns. [Gun directors and range-finders, plotting the trajectory of shells from several guns to a point where the enemy would be when they fell - speed, wind, direction etc - therefore represent an early form of computer!] In these matters, Fisher became embroiled in a conflict with Lord Charles Beresford, Admiral of the Channel Fleet. Beresford was the sort of Admiral of whom Gilbert & Sullivan might have been proud: impeccably well-connected, personal servants and good dinners on board; spit, polish and tradition. Fisher retired in 1910, tired of the hostility, but Beresford was sidelined, and the Navy's preparedness was the beneficiary in 1914, as the fleet concentrated at Scapa Flow.
HMS Dreadnought
(the dust jacket of the book published by Conway Maritime Press - an excellent source)
As non-participants in a European Naval Arms Race (in which the French and Russians had dropped out), the Americans took time out to consider the issues of battleship design from first principles. They discovered the "zone of immunity" ranges between which heavy shells cannot penetrate either side or deck armour. Longer ranges meant that shells plunged from above, increasing the hits on deck. Learning from Tsu-shima that where ships were unarmoured, shells tended to pass through without exploding; light armour by contrast, caused shells to explode and cause almost as much damage from splinters. From this, the Americans developed an "all or nothing" approach: armour at maximum thickness, or not at all. The USS Nevada and Oklahoma (1911) embodied these principles, and were as revolutionary as the Dreadnought.
After the dreadnoughts came super-dreadnoughts, with 13.5" or 15" guns, displacing up to 27,500 tons. Two of the latter guns can be seen outside the Imperial War Museum, in London. Fisher was also responsible for the development of the battlecruiser: a concept which evolved from the armoured cruiser of the 1890s: battleships of the time were slow, and could not fire their large guns with great frequency or accuracy. In the 1890s, the latest design of armour allowed ships to be protected with less weight, or to have more widespread protection. Developments in quick firing gunnery meant that smaller guns could fire as far as, and faster than those of battleships. The French Admiral Fournier envisaged a kind of "universal" ship that could fulfil several roles, and outfight a slow battleship with rapid fire, then deliver the coup de grace with one or two bigger (8"-10") guns.
Fisher proposed to improve rates of fire with A H Pollen's early computerised system of gunnery control, but the Admiralty jibbed at the cost of it. (Fisher seems not to have considered what would happen when other navies invented their own versions?) What was then left of Fisher's idea was a heavily armed, but lightly armoured vessel which could fight alongside battleships, but be fast enough to catch cruisers and destroy them. An idea looking for a role? Other navies eventually adopted vessels which were heavily armoured, but more lightly armed (Russians, Germans & USA in WW2), which were really "cruiser-killers". Both types of ship were called "battlecruisers".
Cimbri
Wow, Cimbri. I hope warships are your speciality because if they aren't... it's just not right for you to possess such knowledge! 
IMHO, and in light of the vast variety of ships, the final selection should to be modest. The original game includes only 10 classes of ship so I'll keep that figure for a target.
Given the practical limitations, do you think the following list is fair to naval history? Is the cronology correct, and has any fundamental type of ship been missed?
Slooth of War (no idea, but I want a tall ship to start with!)
Destroyer (bread and butter)
Submarine (sluggish U-Boats and similar)
Cruiser (reliable all-round performer)
Dreadnought (primarilly big floating-artillery)
Battlecruiser (all-round big and scarey, but costly)
Aircraft Carrier (covering all large flat-top carriers)
Nuclear Submarine (modern subs)
Assault Carrier (VTOL. anything from HMS Ocean to HMS Arc Royal)
Stealth Cruiser (small, fast and cutting edge)
IMHO, and in light of the vast variety of ships, the final selection should to be modest. The original game includes only 10 classes of ship so I'll keep that figure for a target.
Given the practical limitations, do you think the following list is fair to naval history? Is the cronology correct, and has any fundamental type of ship been missed?
Slooth of War (no idea, but I want a tall ship to start with!)
Destroyer (bread and butter)
Submarine (sluggish U-Boats and similar)
Cruiser (reliable all-round performer)
Dreadnought (primarilly big floating-artillery)
Battlecruiser (all-round big and scarey, but costly)
Aircraft Carrier (covering all large flat-top carriers)
Nuclear Submarine (modern subs)
Assault Carrier (VTOL. anything from HMS Ocean to HMS Arc Royal)
Stealth Cruiser (small, fast and cutting edge)
Slooth of War (no idea, but I want a tall ship to start with!)
Destroyer (bread and butter) Be the only one that can spot submarine.
Submarine (sluggish U-Boats and similar) Should have strong attack.
Cruiser (reliable all-round performer) Could add Light and Heavy Fleet Cruisers.
Battlecruiser (all-round big and scarey, but costly) Should be able to outrun anything they cant outgun. Could also include Pocket Battleships or Fast/Light Battleships.
Dreadnought (primarilly big floating-artillery) The Dreads are battleships, stronger than the battlecruiser.
Aircraft Carrier (covering all large flat-top carriers)
Nuclear Submarine (modern subs)
Assault Carrier (VTOL. anything from HMS Ocean to HMS Arc Royal)
Stealth Cruiser (small, fast and cutting edge) The new British ones
In my upcoming WW2 mod I have Escort Carriers and Hybrid Carriers as well
Destroyer (bread and butter) Be the only one that can spot submarine.
Submarine (sluggish U-Boats and similar) Should have strong attack.
Cruiser (reliable all-round performer) Could add Light and Heavy Fleet Cruisers.
Battlecruiser (all-round big and scarey, but costly) Should be able to outrun anything they cant outgun. Could also include Pocket Battleships or Fast/Light Battleships.
Dreadnought (primarilly big floating-artillery) The Dreads are battleships, stronger than the battlecruiser.
Aircraft Carrier (covering all large flat-top carriers)
Nuclear Submarine (modern subs)
Assault Carrier (VTOL. anything from HMS Ocean to HMS Arc Royal)
Stealth Cruiser (small, fast and cutting edge) The new British ones
In my upcoming WW2 mod I have Escort Carriers and Hybrid Carriers as well
Yes, Dreadnoughts are Battleships. I just thought I would call them by the former to more clearly distinguish them from Battlecruisers.
I must have misread something because I was under the impression that the Dreadnought moved slowly (heavy armour), slow turning turrets (large bore).
Thin-faced armour dates to 1891, and Face Hardened armour (incl. Krupp) to 1895. I don't know what comes next.
I was also under the impression that battlecruiser HMS Hood was the benchmark for all other designs throughout both world wars. How could it possibly be the benchmark if it was outgunned?
Lastly, I thought I read that the battlecruiser had improved armour (lighter plus better protection) and smaller guns which offered quicker target acquisition and greater rate of fire.
Due to improved shells, oblong ballistics unlocked alternative means of attack that rendered pre-WW1 armour obsolete. After this, larger projectiles were no longer the more efficient means of penetrating armoured hulls which means cruisers became the serious threat... leading to the inovation of the battlecruiser (cruiserXbattleship rolled into one)
I must have misread something because I was under the impression that the Dreadnought moved slowly (heavy armour), slow turning turrets (large bore).
Thin-faced armour dates to 1891, and Face Hardened armour (incl. Krupp) to 1895. I don't know what comes next.
I was also under the impression that battlecruiser HMS Hood was the benchmark for all other designs throughout both world wars. How could it possibly be the benchmark if it was outgunned?
Lastly, I thought I read that the battlecruiser had improved armour (lighter plus better protection) and smaller guns which offered quicker target acquisition and greater rate of fire.
Due to improved shells, oblong ballistics unlocked alternative means of attack that rendered pre-WW1 armour obsolete. After this, larger projectiles were no longer the more efficient means of penetrating armoured hulls which means cruisers became the serious threat... leading to the inovation of the battlecruiser (cruiserXbattleship rolled into one)
In WWI the cruiser types were armored (or armoured, if you're talking about British cruisers) and light. There were also a few protected cruisers (protected as in having about 2"-4" or 1-2 cm of armor), but these were considered obsolete by 1914 and, but for the war, would have been scrapped.
A typical armored cruiser was HMS Black Prince:
Displacement: 13,500 tons
Length: 505 feet
Beam: 73 feet
Draft: 10 feet
Machinery: triple expansion reciprocating engines, 2 screws, 23,500 hp=23 knots
Armament: 6-9.2" (6x1), 10-6" (2x2 and 6x1), 12-16pdr QF (12x1) guns, 3-18" torpedo tubes
Armor: Belt 6", deck 1½"
Complement: 850
A typical light cruiser was HMS Dublin:
Displacement: 5,400 tons
Length: 458 feet
Beam: 48½ feet
Draft: 8 feet
Machinery: geared turbines, 4 screws, 25,000 hp=26 knots
Armament: 8-6" (8x1), 2-3" AA (2x1), 2-21" torpedo tubes
Armor: Belt 3"
Complement: 540
Source: H. M. LeFleming, Warships of World War I. London: Ian Allen, 1959.
WW1 U-Boats were eliminated by Q-Ships (aka Mystery Ships). I was going to add these but as Civ3 doesn't allow one unit to masquerade as something else the concept, from gaming point of view, is fundamentally flawed 
Thanks for clearing up the light vs heavy cruisers. As the concept of cruiser is to be fast moving and hard hitting, I think the light cruiser is more important than it's heavy cousin. As you said, the heavy quickly became obsolete... my mod puts more emphasis on the technology race than the actual inventory present in WW1.
Thanks for clearing up the light vs heavy cruisers. As the concept of cruiser is to be fast moving and hard hitting, I think the light cruiser is more important than it's heavy cousin. As you said, the heavy quickly became obsolete... my mod puts more emphasis on the technology race than the actual inventory present in WW1.
A note on battlecruisers.
Admiral Sir John Fisher believed that the two most important attributes of a warship were speed and armament, with protection (armor) a distant third. He caused the battlecruiser to be designed on the concept that anything they couldn't outfight they could outrun and anything they couldn't outrun they could outfight. Unfortunately, if it looks like a battleship and is armed like a battleship, the temptation is to use it as a battleship.
At the Battle of Jutland, four of the five capital ships sunk were battlecruisers (Indefatigable, Invincible, Queen Mary and Moltke). The fifth ship, the predreadnought Pommern, was obsolete and had no business being in the German battleline.
Admiral Sir John Fisher believed that the two most important attributes of a warship were speed and armament, with protection (armor) a distant third. He caused the battlecruiser to be designed on the concept that anything they couldn't outfight they could outrun and anything they couldn't outrun they could outfight. Unfortunately, if it looks like a battleship and is armed like a battleship, the temptation is to use it as a battleship.
At the Battle of Jutland, four of the five capital ships sunk were battlecruisers (Indefatigable, Invincible, Queen Mary and Moltke). The fifth ship, the predreadnought Pommern, was obsolete and had no business being in the German battleline.
http://www.hazegray.org/features/nara/naracru.jpg
I found me a funky looking ship!
I'm not sure but I think "hulk" ships are obsolete vessels used to transport unimportant cargo. Am I right?
What do you think of the pictured ship which dates to the very late 1800's. Some similar ships saw action in WW1 or even as reserves during WW2, I think!
I found me a funky looking ship!
I'm not sure but I think "hulk" ships are obsolete vessels used to transport unimportant cargo. Am I right?
What do you think of the pictured ship which dates to the very late 1800's. Some similar ships saw action in WW1 or even as reserves during WW2, I think!
MadScot
Brandy's back!
Originally posted by stormbind
WW1 U-Boats were eliminated by Q-Ships (aka Mystery Ships). I was going to add these but as Civ3 doesn't allow one unit to masquerade as something else the concept, from gaming point of view, is fundamentally flawed
I wouldn't worry about not being able to depict Q-ships. In the grand scheme of things they were pretty useless. U-boats were - eventually - defeated in WW1 when the allies adopted convoy for merchant shipping, forcing the (undetectable) U-boats to approach near concentrations of merchant and military(escprt) ships to do their work. That exposed them to counterattack - usually following a sinking. It also made finding a target much harder - it's not much easier to find a convoy than a single ship, and much harder than to find one of 20-30 individual sailing ships.
About all the Q-ships did of lasting value was to encourage the U-boats to attack without warning, and repeated unretsricted warfare tactics eventually brought the US into the war.
Siegmund
King
For Civ-inclusion purposes, Q-ships and Auxiliary Cruisers both share the trait not necessarily of concealing their nationality, but of pretending to be merchant ships until they are in range of their intended victim. This will be hard to include in a Civ variation unless you also include merchant shipping, which isn't much needed given CivIII's trade model.
As to specific types of ships in use in WWI, I'd point you to Warships of the World, at www.warships1.com - it's intended to eventually include all of them, though for now, only the lists of battleships and cruisers are complete for some navies. For England and Germany, at least, though, the record is pretty complete for smaller types too.
As to specific types of ships in use in WWI, I'd point you to Warships of the World, at www.warships1.com - it's intended to eventually include all of them, though for now, only the lists of battleships and cruisers are complete for some navies. For England and Germany, at least, though, the record is pretty complete for smaller types too.
Similar threads
