• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
So to sum things up, Poland cannot into navy :p

Have to admire their ambition though...

I have to ask what Poland wanted to get out of a navy. The 9 year program seems way over ambitious and I can see why they scrapped it. Aside from that, would I be correct in assuming that Poland's goal was to secure Baltic shipping from neighboring powers and that's about it?
 
I have to ask what Poland wanted to get out of a navy. The 9 year program seems way over ambitious and I can see why they scrapped it. Aside from that, would I be correct in assuming that Poland's goal was to secure Baltic shipping from neighboring powers and that's about it?

Nope, far from it actually, they had colonial ambitions back then.... late dash in the scramble for Africa I guess.
 
Nope, far from it actually, they had colonial ambitions back then.... late dash in the scramble for Africa I guess.

the-matrix-whoa.jpg


So, about 10 minutes after being liberated, they were planning imperialism in Africa? That's, how shall I say, ambitious...
 
well, they did beat the soviet union and expanded their territory largely.

I lived in Warsaw for one year, from my experience I can also say such megalomania, this feeling of importance and the feeling they matter in the world (more than the do), is part of the polish psyche. Yes, they did beat the Soviet Union, but only because it was in the middle of a civil war and because a then little-known man we now know as the man of steel (Stalin) was a commissar in the Southern Army where he over-ambitiously decided he'd push through the poles into northern Italy.... didn't work out and these two things worked in the Poles' advantage.
 
I have to ask what Poland wanted to get out of a navy. The 9 year program seems way over ambitious and I can see why they scrapped it. Aside from that, would I be correct in assuming that Poland's goal was to secure Baltic shipping from neighboring powers and that's about it?

They wanted cruisers to fight the Germans and battleships to fight the Soviets in case of war. Though I think coastal battleships like what the Swedes were built would be enough and more plausible.
 
Default grey and the yellow dont show up at all. Thanks for changing. Actually I didnt realise he background could be changed!
 
I'm wondering what the Poles had in mind with that many submarines. They'd be limited to the Baltic Sea, which isn't too large. If they had been at war with really anybody, those subs would have such a limited range that they'd only be useful for extended home defense but I doubt that they would be able to be useful in trade interdiction or the such. And if they were intended for home defense, the Germans and Russians might want to tell them that minefield proved a much more cost effective solution for that during WWI.
 
They wanted cruisers to fight the Germans and battleships to fight the Soviets in case of war. Though I think coastal battleships like what the Swedes were built would be enough and more plausible.

Coastal BBs, that's the ticket. Something to keep those old-school Russian BBs from shelling Danzig.
 
Pretty much. In Poland's entry I mentioned what their overall strategy was, which basically came down to intercepting what merchant traffic they could in the Baltic and keeping enemy ships away from Poland's small coastline. Poland's navy wasn't meant to gain naval superiority, but rather perform coastal defense. Finland's, Sweden's, Norway's, Denmark's, Yugoslavia's, and China's navies had the same operational doctrine as Poland. Those countries couldn't build or afford large capital ships, so their navies were basically meant for coastal defense due to those limitations. I think the correct modern term that describes such a doctrine is Brown Water Navy.
 
Minor update. Cleaned up the USSR entry and added lists for what each of the 4 theaters' fleet might have looked like. Oh, and yes, from the sources I found 2 of the 6 carriers would've been in the Northern Fleet. The Soviets viewed the carriers not as strike platforms to use against enemy fleets, but as mobile airstrips that would operate in areas that would have inadequate land-based air coverage and provide support for the army. That's why the 2 light carriers would be split between the Baltic and Black Seas ( air coverage there wasn't deemed to be lacking), two of the big carriers would be in the north (not many air bases up there), and the other 4 big carriers out in the far east (nothing aside from Vladivostock). The 2 smaller carriers were eventually dropped because the Soviet leadership felt they weren't needed.
 
That's.... a lot of information, and none of it is in an easy form to summarize.

On a side note, I'm thinking about adding the Commonwealth navies, since some of them could build their own small ships. Is there any interest in me doing so? I made a note of the ships that the UK transferred to the Commonwealth in the UK entry, but didn't cover what Canada or Australia built themselves.
 
Well Canada could only build small ships: Destroyers and smaller ones, but around and after ww1 there were plans to build 3 modified Queen Elizabeth class BB for the RCN but the Canadian parliament voted no. They probably would not have the manpower to operate those BB's.
There were some discussions at the admiralty to transfer the HMS New Zealand BC to RNZN but this was abandoned too.
Australia sure got the HMS/HMAS Australia BC and used it as a flagship until scrapped. They have the industrial output to build destroyers and even cruisers as their largest shipyard the Cockatoo island naval yard designed a CA after ww1 which is like a very improved Hawkins class, more of a mix of the Hawkins and to the later County class CA's. Around at the end of ww2, in 1944 Australia again designed (maybe this was a British design for Australia) a cruiser this time an AA cruiser with 4x3 5.25inch guns and the ship would be similar to the cruisers of that period, the Swiftsure/Minutaur and Crown Colony classes.
And last, if there were more Vanguard class BB's to be built, these surely would ended up in the RAN service.

Of course during the war the RN transferred many cruisers and destroyers to the commonwealth navies.

This is all I know of the Commonwealth proposals
 
Last edited:
The number of ships that the Canadians built is impressive, though. Unfortunately, it's practically impossible to represent them in HOI3, because most of them would be classified as convoy escorts and the UK cannot use Canadian ships for convoy protection duties in HOI3, while Canadian convoys are unimportant due to the way the game mechanics works.
 
Spain, 1936 Fleet
* 2 Espana-class dreadnoughts (I hesitate to call these BBs, because they were very short; when designed, Spain didn't have shipyards large enough to construct full-sized BBs. 3 were built in total, but the original Espana was lost in a storm before the war)
* 2 Canarias-class heavy cruisers (3 planned, 2 completed)
* 3 Cervera-class light cruisers
* 1 Méndez Núñez-class light cruiser
* 1 Reina Victoria Eugenia-class light cruiser
* 14 Churruca-class destroyers
* 3 Alsedo-class destroyers
* 6 B-class submarines
* 6 C-class submarines
* 5 torpedo boats

Spain, ships lost during the Civil War
* The dreadnought España (ex-Alfonso XIII), struck by a mine
* The dreadnought Jaime I, sunk by an internal explosion
* The heavy cruiser Beleares, sunk by the destroyer Lepanto and light cruiser Libertad
* The destroyer Almirante Ferrándiz, sunk by the heavy cruiser Canarias

Spain, '38 Plan
•4 battleships
•4 heavy cruisers
•2 aircraft carriers
•12 light cruisers
•48 destroyers
•48 "torpederos" (small destroyers)
•50 submarines

Spain, '39 Plan (revision of '38 plan)
•4 battleships
•2 heavy cruisers
•12 light cruisers
•54 destroyers
•36 "torpederos" (small destroyers)
•50 submarines
•100 torpedo boats

Spain, '43 Plan (revision of the '39 plan)
•4 battleships
•4 aircraft carriers
•8 light cruisers
•12 "exploradores" (kind of fast cruisers)
•72 destroyers
•36 small destroyers
•50 submarines
•100 torpedo and anti-submarine boats

I got my sources for Spain's Plan Imperial from here: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=131453

More info from TZoli:
Ships of spanish navy with orders of construction in 1936
- 3 submarines (D1,D2,D3) completed in 40´s
- 6 Minelayers (Marte, Jupiter, Vulcano, Neptuno, Eolo and Triton) completed before 1940
- 2 destroyers (Alava, Liniers) completed in 50´s
 
This should be a sticky
 
Well, if you do a search on "naval plans", with quotes, in Google, this very thread is the #5 hit. I for one think that says something positive :) Now, in regards to stickies, forum moderators tend to only make announcements and rules stickies in the main forum. That said, there's a "MEGATHREAD: major thread links" sticky with a massive list of 8 threads in it :rolleyes:, so perhaps this thread could be linked there to increase the link count to an almighty 9?
 
Last edited: