((Sorry for not being around. I was either asleep or at school, and my school computer has the paradox forums blocked))
-
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.
Comrade Teterev
Firstly congratulations on your appointment. However, there are a few things wyou will have to come up to speed with. The last time the late Comrade Hrynko had dealings with the day to day management of the NKVD, he experienced some major health issues.
Yours fraternally
NF Vatutin (Lt Gen)
NGSh
((SirktheMonkey, good to have another Australian in the Politburo.
Also to jeeshadow, sorry to hear about your communications difficulties. There is always next time))
Well, the tech plan and our new Commissar for Ideological Purity have both passed.
Still waiting on Foreign Affairs, and for Rakobolskaja to call a vote (at her choosing).
Still waiting on Foreign Affairs, and for Rakobolskaja to call a vote (at her choosing).
Dear Comrades
I have to go out into the field soon and I may not be back for several days.
I make the following comments regarding the Production proposal for the purpose of seeking the views of the rest of the Politburo and in particular, Comrade NK Rakobolskaja:
1. I have not problem with the continued production of Tank divisions.
2. I have no problem with some continued production of Factories but I do not think they should take up the balance of the Production budget, at least from March 1937 onwards. We will have a significant jump in production capacity once we shift to a War Economy in March 1937. I believe that part of this capacity should be used to start gearing up the units' TO&E.
3. I suggest that we start producing series of ART and AT for the Rifle Divisions. There are approximately 150 Rifle Divisions to be fitted out. I suggest a run of 30 of each of ART and AT with 4 repeat orders for each, to be produced as Reserves to minimise IC cost. We should be able to do 3 lots per annum (about 110 days each run) which should mean a full complement by about 1939.
4. I also suggest we start producing at least 1 run of INT's with repeat orders with a view to start building up the VVS. We should be able to produce 2 and a bit runs per annum. This will also improve our practicals for light aircraft.
I await your comments.
Yours fraternally
NF Vatutin (Lt Gen)
NGSh
I have to go out into the field soon and I may not be back for several days.
I make the following comments regarding the Production proposal for the purpose of seeking the views of the rest of the Politburo and in particular, Comrade NK Rakobolskaja:
1. I have not problem with the continued production of Tank divisions.
2. I have no problem with some continued production of Factories but I do not think they should take up the balance of the Production budget, at least from March 1937 onwards. We will have a significant jump in production capacity once we shift to a War Economy in March 1937. I believe that part of this capacity should be used to start gearing up the units' TO&E.
3. I suggest that we start producing series of ART and AT for the Rifle Divisions. There are approximately 150 Rifle Divisions to be fitted out. I suggest a run of 30 of each of ART and AT with 4 repeat orders for each, to be produced as Reserves to minimise IC cost. We should be able to do 3 lots per annum (about 110 days each run) which should mean a full complement by about 1939.
4. I also suggest we start producing at least 1 run of INT's with repeat orders with a view to start building up the VVS. We should be able to produce 2 and a bit runs per annum. This will also improve our practicals for light aircraft.
I await your comments.
Yours fraternally
NF Vatutin (Lt Gen)
NGSh
Last edited:
Gey pours himself a drink.
Congratulations on your appointment Comrade Teterev, I am sure you will do well.
~ NK K. I. Gey
Congratulations on your appointment Comrade Teterev, I am sure you will do well.
~ NK K. I. Gey
Comrade Teterev, congratulations on your appointment. The speed with which it all happened just shows the faith we have in you.
I have to concur with Comrade Vatutin and his complaints about the production budget. The increased state of mobilization, starting March 30th, will allow us to ramp up production, while keeping factory construction at a steady level. Remember that the production of airplanes especially relies heavily on our practical experience, and I believe that experience in manufacturing small arms will, when the time comes, allow us to churn out these weapons by the thousands.
Do not forget the Red Wall either - If I am correct, we still need a substantial amount of Infantry divisions to keep our Western borders sufficiently covered.
- Major General Feodor Vasilevich Sokolov
I have to concur with Comrade Vatutin and his complaints about the production budget. The increased state of mobilization, starting March 30th, will allow us to ramp up production, while keeping factory construction at a steady level. Remember that the production of airplanes especially relies heavily on our practical experience, and I believe that experience in manufacturing small arms will, when the time comes, allow us to churn out these weapons by the thousands.
Do not forget the Red Wall either - If I am correct, we still need a substantial amount of Infantry divisions to keep our Western borders sufficiently covered.
- Major General Feodor Vasilevich Sokolov
Dear Comrades
Some numbers to assist those members of the Politburo who do not have access to the current State of the Soviet Union papers ((ie the TFH save game)).
Potential Production IC in March/April
On Full Mobilization, allowing for the deployment of factories made up until that date and for the impact of further tech advances, the Total IC should be about 185IC, subtract IC from budget allocated to Reinfroce/Upgrade/Consumer Goods of 72IC, leaves nett 113IC for production.
If/when neutrality drops below 70 (late March/early April depending on the NKVD operatives), War Economy will produce Total IC of 214 (with assumptions noted above) less budget allocated non-production IC of 72IC, leaves nett IC of 142IC for production.
Costs/Time
Factory = 5.02IC for 12 months
Reserve Art= 1.39IC for 111 days
Reserve AT = 0.81IC for 108 days
Reserve Medium Tank Division = 7.56IC for 176 days
Reserve Rifle Division = 3.38IC for 11 days
INTerceptor Air Group = 14.91 IC for 149 days
Comments
The long build times for Tank Divs and INT's comapred to Rifle Divs means that the former should be done now as the latter can be done in 1939+.
With 8 factories in production, and allowing for another 2 with the 10IC sitting idle at the start of the year, we can produce 10IC per annum which also has the benefit of increasing construction practicals. These factories can be rolled over as they are made as there is still a time/cost benefit in 1937/38.
I suggest the Reserve ART and AT be ordered in 10 lots of ART (serial of 5) and the 10 lots of AT (serial 5) in seriatim 3 times to produce the 30 of each. The other production items would be elevated in priority to the ART and AT so that these are produced as additional production IC come on line rather than disrupt production of items with longer build times.
I would appreciate comments and suggestions regarding the above as I readily admit that I am not the best at maths or the intricacies of production.
Yours fraternally
NF Vatutin (Lt Gen)
NGSh
Some numbers to assist those members of the Politburo who do not have access to the current State of the Soviet Union papers ((ie the TFH save game)).
Potential Production IC in March/April
On Full Mobilization, allowing for the deployment of factories made up until that date and for the impact of further tech advances, the Total IC should be about 185IC, subtract IC from budget allocated to Reinfroce/Upgrade/Consumer Goods of 72IC, leaves nett 113IC for production.
If/when neutrality drops below 70 (late March/early April depending on the NKVD operatives), War Economy will produce Total IC of 214 (with assumptions noted above) less budget allocated non-production IC of 72IC, leaves nett IC of 142IC for production.
Costs/Time
Factory = 5.02IC for 12 months
Reserve Art= 1.39IC for 111 days
Reserve AT = 0.81IC for 108 days
Reserve Medium Tank Division = 7.56IC for 176 days
Reserve Rifle Division = 3.38IC for 11 days
INTerceptor Air Group = 14.91 IC for 149 days
Comments
The long build times for Tank Divs and INT's comapred to Rifle Divs means that the former should be done now as the latter can be done in 1939+.
With 8 factories in production, and allowing for another 2 with the 10IC sitting idle at the start of the year, we can produce 10IC per annum which also has the benefit of increasing construction practicals. These factories can be rolled over as they are made as there is still a time/cost benefit in 1937/38.
I suggest the Reserve ART and AT be ordered in 10 lots of ART (serial of 5) and the 10 lots of AT (serial 5) in seriatim 3 times to produce the 30 of each. The other production items would be elevated in priority to the ART and AT so that these are produced as additional production IC come on line rather than disrupt production of items with longer build times.
I would appreciate comments and suggestions regarding the above as I readily admit that I am not the best at maths or the intricacies of production.
Yours fraternally
NF Vatutin (Lt Gen)
NGSh
1-Year Plan for Weapons, and/or other investments made to secure our nation and the spread of world revolution
Revision 1
This proposal is top secret. Any leakage to unauthorized persons will be punished by Comrade Yagoda.
--
BLOCK A:
Position 1: 10x IC*
Position 2: 2x Armor^
Position 3: 2/5x ART+
Position 4: 2/5x AT+
Position 5: 1/2x INT-
^: Composition ARM/MOT/TD/ART | LARM/MOT/TD/ART already in queue count as armor | reserve unit
*: after the current IC queue is finished, there are 10 IC to be produced at top priority
+: both to be produced as Reserves | 2 till we have War Economy, 5 after
-: 1 till War Economy, 2 after
--
BLOCK B:
Position 1: 1/10 Rifle*
Position 2: 2/10 Armor^
Position 3: 3/10 INT
Position 4: 4/10 CAS+
*: Composition INF/INF/ART/AT | reserve unit
^: Composition ARM/MOT/TD/ART | reserve unit
+: till CAS is researched, shift IC to Position 3
--
APPENDIX:
Block A is to be on top of the queue all times.
Block B is meant to fill the remaining IC - according the ratios in italic:
If 100IC would be available for Block B, 10IC would went into rifle divisions, 20IC into armor divisions, 30IC into interceptor squadrons and 40IC into CAS squadrons (till CAS is researched, the 40IC will be shifted to interceptor squadrons, so that they would've 70IC available).
Signed, NK Julia Rakobolskaja - People's Commissariat for Defense
Revision 1
This proposal is top secret. Any leakage to unauthorized persons will be punished by Comrade Yagoda.
--
BLOCK A:
Position 1: 10x IC*
Position 2: 2x Armor^
Position 3: 2/5x ART+
Position 4: 2/5x AT+
Position 5: 1/2x INT-
^: Composition ARM/MOT/TD/ART | LARM/MOT/TD/ART already in queue count as armor | reserve unit
*: after the current IC queue is finished, there are 10 IC to be produced at top priority
+: both to be produced as Reserves | 2 till we have War Economy, 5 after
-: 1 till War Economy, 2 after
--
BLOCK B:
Position 1: 1/10 Rifle*
Position 2: 2/10 Armor^
Position 3: 3/10 INT
Position 4: 4/10 CAS+
*: Composition INF/INF/ART/AT | reserve unit
^: Composition ARM/MOT/TD/ART | reserve unit
+: till CAS is researched, shift IC to Position 3
--
APPENDIX:
Block A is to be on top of the queue all times.
Block B is meant to fill the remaining IC - according the ratios in italic:
If 100IC would be available for Block B, 10IC would went into rifle divisions, 20IC into armor divisions, 30IC into interceptor squadrons and 40IC into CAS squadrons (till CAS is researched, the 40IC will be shifted to interceptor squadrons, so that they would've 70IC available).
Signed, NK Julia Rakobolskaja - People's Commissariat for Defense
Comrade People's Commissar Teterev,
I must write to congratulate you on your appointment, Comrade. Events in Tbilisi are keeping me from representing the SSR in moscow; and may continue to do so in the future.
In solidarity,
A. P. G.
Dept. Chair. CEC Trans. SSR
((Basically that we won't be seeing much of Gevorg as he is busy plotting. Life can be boring for a candidate member
))
I must write to congratulate you on your appointment, Comrade. Events in Tbilisi are keeping me from representing the SSR in moscow; and may continue to do so in the future.
In solidarity,
A. P. G.
Dept. Chair. CEC Trans. SSR
((Basically that we won't be seeing much of Gevorg as he is busy plotting. Life can be boring for a candidate member
))
((Admin note: In your final drafts of plans, please don't use any bolding or formatting marks -- I use notepad for printing. shierholzer, could you increase the size of your font?))
Thank you comrades for your show of trust. It is only in a society of true equals that the son of a Monarchist Reactionary can prove himself to be a true Revolutionary and rise to sit on the governing body of the Communist Party and oversee the purity of our Socialist Thought.
I must express disappointment in myself and my lack of knowledge of how the industry and economy of the Union operates. Expanding our industrial base sounds like the best long-term strategy for the advancement of Socialism but I have seen those associated with the military arguing for an expansion of our armed forces. Am I correct in the assumption that the argument for military ahead of industry is based on short-term concerns such as extending the protection of the Union to our weaker neighbours and protecting Socialism against the growing threats of Fascism?
While I am discussing industry, where are our new factories being constructed? Although it is no longer my remit, I still remain curious as to what their security concerns will be based on their location within the Union.
I must express disappointment in myself and my lack of knowledge of how the industry and economy of the Union operates. Expanding our industrial base sounds like the best long-term strategy for the advancement of Socialism but I have seen those associated with the military arguing for an expansion of our armed forces. Am I correct in the assumption that the argument for military ahead of industry is based on short-term concerns such as extending the protection of the Union to our weaker neighbours and protecting Socialism against the growing threats of Fascism?
While I am discussing industry, where are our new factories being constructed? Although it is no longer my remit, I still remain curious as to what their security concerns will be based on their location within the Union.
Comrade Teterev,
I too am interested in where Defense intends new factories to be constructed. Comrade Rakobolskaja, could you perhaps include some locations in your plan?
Stalin
Good morning comrades. I believe that the NK for defense had previously stated that as long as the factories were built east of the Urals, it didn't matter where they were built. A policy I support, as long as we don't put them too far east....ie close to Manchuria.
NK Yagoda
NK Yagoda
Well, I stated, that exact placement of factories is not my business, but STAVKA's. If STAVKA tries to deploy the factories right on the polish border, I'd intervene - otherwise it's mostly irrelevant. ((technical note: factories are best placed in high infra regions - simply because they repair faster there, and therefore provide their capacity faster))
((While true, putting them in the Urals means that once they start producing you never have to worry about them again.))
((Just to let everyone know that I'm back from a week-long skiing trip, and now am able to access reliable Internet I'm looking forward to having the time to be more involved.))
I'm looking forward to having the time to be more involved.))
Dear Comrades
As responsibility for placing factories seems to have devolved to Stavka, I indicate that my first preferences are Perm, Omsk and Novosibirsk (1 each until all factory slots are full), then Ufa and Sverdlovsk (1 each until all factory slots are full) and then Kazan, Kuybyshev and Irkutsk (1 each until all factory slots are full).
Comrade Teterev, in answer to your query, whilst increase in industrial capacity is important, it is the means to an end, not an end in itself. The construction of factories is subject to the law of diminishing returns. Whilst fine at the present, those factories will soon have to start turning out large volumes of equipment to bring hte 150 Rifle Divisions up to full strength - this process may take 3 to 5 years of artillery production just to fit out the Divisions which we have at the present let alone adding new Divisions so we cannot afford to put this process off for too much longer by diverting IC to factory building. Also tank and aircraft prodcution and personnel training is a lengthey process (about 1 unit per 6 months) so this cannot be left until the enemy is at our doorstep but must be begun years in advance.
I have read Comrade NK Rakobolskaja's revised plan. I understand Block A. I take it the plan is to focus on the aircraft production because it has a longer build time and to then switch to increasing artillery production in later years when the practicals will be better, and because this can be done faster.
On a second reading, I understand the reasoning of Block B but wonder whether this may be too complex for Stalin to implement in its present form. On my calculations, the first stage of Block A production will leave a small excess of approximately 16IC pre-economic mobilisation for use on Block B. If the first stage of Block A is applied after Economic Mobilisation (but before War Economy), there is an excess of approximately 100IC - if stage 2 of Block A is applied then (before War Economy), then the excess is 79IC. Once War Economy applies and stage 2 of Block A is in effect, there is an excess of approximately 108IC. On my rough notes (which I confess do not include the cost of CAS, and makes rough roundings up) it works out to the proportions of 3 Reserve Rifle Divisions (2 Rifle Regts, 1 ART and 1 AT), 3 Reserve Tank Divisions (3 Medium Tank Regts, 1 TD and 1 ART), 2 INT's and 2 CAS for every 100IC. This could be queued up in 3 groups of orders with 1 Rifle/1 Tank/1 INT/1 CAS for the first 2 groups and every third group being 1 Rifle/1 Tank only. Obviously a new unit of the same type is ordered as soon as a unit is produced and moved up in the queue to maintain priority.
I believe that this is a very balanced and well thought out plan for the coming year, and I therefore support the new Production plan subject to any comments regarding my calculations or assumptions (and subject to Comrade Stalin's request regarding bigger font).
Yours fraternally
NF Vatutin (Lt Gen)
NGSh
As responsibility for placing factories seems to have devolved to Stavka, I indicate that my first preferences are Perm, Omsk and Novosibirsk (1 each until all factory slots are full), then Ufa and Sverdlovsk (1 each until all factory slots are full) and then Kazan, Kuybyshev and Irkutsk (1 each until all factory slots are full).
Comrade Teterev, in answer to your query, whilst increase in industrial capacity is important, it is the means to an end, not an end in itself. The construction of factories is subject to the law of diminishing returns. Whilst fine at the present, those factories will soon have to start turning out large volumes of equipment to bring hte 150 Rifle Divisions up to full strength - this process may take 3 to 5 years of artillery production just to fit out the Divisions which we have at the present let alone adding new Divisions so we cannot afford to put this process off for too much longer by diverting IC to factory building. Also tank and aircraft prodcution and personnel training is a lengthey process (about 1 unit per 6 months) so this cannot be left until the enemy is at our doorstep but must be begun years in advance.
I have read Comrade NK Rakobolskaja's revised plan. I understand Block A. I take it the plan is to focus on the aircraft production because it has a longer build time and to then switch to increasing artillery production in later years when the practicals will be better, and because this can be done faster.
On a second reading, I understand the reasoning of Block B but wonder whether this may be too complex for Stalin to implement in its present form. On my calculations, the first stage of Block A production will leave a small excess of approximately 16IC pre-economic mobilisation for use on Block B. If the first stage of Block A is applied after Economic Mobilisation (but before War Economy), there is an excess of approximately 100IC - if stage 2 of Block A is applied then (before War Economy), then the excess is 79IC. Once War Economy applies and stage 2 of Block A is in effect, there is an excess of approximately 108IC. On my rough notes (which I confess do not include the cost of CAS, and makes rough roundings up) it works out to the proportions of 3 Reserve Rifle Divisions (2 Rifle Regts, 1 ART and 1 AT), 3 Reserve Tank Divisions (3 Medium Tank Regts, 1 TD and 1 ART), 2 INT's and 2 CAS for every 100IC. This could be queued up in 3 groups of orders with 1 Rifle/1 Tank/1 INT/1 CAS for the first 2 groups and every third group being 1 Rifle/1 Tank only. Obviously a new unit of the same type is ordered as soon as a unit is produced and moved up in the queue to maintain priority.
I believe that this is a very balanced and well thought out plan for the coming year, and I therefore support the new Production plan subject to any comments regarding my calculations or assumptions (and subject to Comrade Stalin's request regarding bigger font).
Yours fraternally
NF Vatutin (Lt Gen)
NGSh
Last edited:
Comrades,
Just to say, I DEMAND that 5 IC is been spended for Naval Production, like debated a long time ago.
V.G. Zaitsev
Just to say, I DEMAND that 5 IC is been spended for Naval Production, like debated a long time ago.
V.G. Zaitsev
Comrade Zaitsev,
As you state, it was debated at the time. However no proposal that included IC for Naval production passed. I might be wrong in this, but I cannot recall any proposal, that in fact included this. Furthermore it is up to the Comrade NK Rakobolskaja to distribute the budget assigned to her by me in this case. In addition, you are not in any position to outright demand something, and she can choose to ignore your demand.
V.M. Sakharov, NK Finance
As you state, it was debated at the time. However no proposal that included IC for Naval production passed. I might be wrong in this, but I cannot recall any proposal, that in fact included this. Furthermore it is up to the Comrade NK Rakobolskaja to distribute the budget assigned to her by me in this case. In addition, you are not in any position to outright demand something, and she can choose to ignore your demand.
V.M. Sakharov, NK Finance