In Defense of Galleons sinking Submarines

[Jerry Sindle]

The following news article caught my eye and made me think about cross-century naval battles...

"JANE'S DEFENCE UPGRADES -- The Chilean Leander-class frigate PFG
Lynch has emerged from a comprehensive modernization program that
will prolong its service life until 2012, reports Jane's Defence
Upgrades.


The 18-month refit included a complete overhaul of the existing
propulsion system, auxiliary machinery and communications systems.


Additionally, the original MRS 3 fire-control system for the twin
4.5-in guns was replaced by a new, locally developed Maiten system;
the Shorts Seacat surface-to-air missile launcher was replaced by a
20-mm Phalanx close-in weapon system."

Galleons can be upgraded just like any other ship.


With no engine noise to distract your sonarmen, a passive sonar installation would do wonders. You could put a helo platform on the fantail and presto you have a formidable Anti-Submarine Warfare vessle.

Every turn we pay upkeep costs on our military units under most governments. Included in these upkeep costs could be modernization costs as well?

Anybody outthere have other thoughts?

Very respectfully,

Jerry Sindle

[dunk]

Originally posted by Jerry Sindle
Every turn we pay upkeep costs on our military units under most governments. Included in these upkeep costs could be modernization costs as well?

No, upgrading is modernization. A galley can't hold a helicopter, the boat isn't large enough.

Maintenance is feeding the people, repairing, etc.

It seems silly to have a sub sunk by a galley, but it doesn't really matter to me.

[WarpStorm]

For Civ4 this would be cool. Actually keeping those ancient units around and upgrading them, so that you had galleons with modern arms, etc. You'd need something like a unit workshop to do it right though.

[twistedx]

The PFG Lynch was completed in 1974, so I don't believe it would really be classified as a Galleon...

Here is a picture of it before the refit.

-- twistedx

[twistedx]

Originally posted by twistedx
The PFG Lynch was completed in 1974, so I don't believe it would really be classified as a Galleon...

Here is a picture of it before the refit.

-- twistedx

Image didn't post correctly, so here's the URL...

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cave...s/pfglyn20.jpg

[Jerry Sindle]

Pardon my choice of words. I was referring to the fact that ships could be upgraded and used the Frigate Lynch as an example. I totaly agree with all of you - a frigate is not a galleon.

Having said that, with the right technology - a galleon can be a frigate.

Very respectfully,

Jerry Sindle

[Atahualpa]

nah sorry, a Galleon is made of wood and its huge body has a bulky size. Frigates are made of wood too, but with a slimer body. You can never make a Frigate out of a Galleon without redoing the whole body and thats redoing the whole ship.

Also you can never upgrade a wooden ship to a steel ship without redoing the whole ship.

You can however equip a Galleon with more cannons so that it has more firepower. But the downsides from the bulky body still apply.

[Grrr]

TwistedX "That page is not available"

[EvilKosh]

Originally posted by Jerry Sindle
the Shorts Seacat surface-to-air missile launcher was replaced by a
20-mm Phalanx close-in weapon system."

With a phalanx onboard, it ought to be of use against tanks!

Ok ok - it's a poor allusion to the spearman/tanks situation

[steelehc]

It is a very poor comparision. A better one would have been the refitting of the USS Merrimack into the ironclad CSS Virginia. It had a wooden hull, but was covered with iron plating.

Furthermore, Subs being attacked by Galleons, or any other ship prior to destroyers is not a good idea.

Steele

[twistedx]

Originally posted by Grrr
TwistedX "That page is not available"

Really weird -- it was up this morning... Anyway, just do a search for PFG Lynch on Yahoo if you really want to see a pic...

-- twistedx

[Spaced Cowboy]

I agree. There is no way anything less than a destroyer should even touch a sub.


However, what if the sub was on the surface and did not see the galley and the galley attacked and sunk the sub with a lucky hit???

Gotta be a 1 in 100 chance of that somewhere?

R:PM

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by RPMisCOOL
I agree. There is no way anything less than a destroyer should even touch a sub.

However, what if the sub was on the surface and did not see the galley and the galley attacked and sunk the sub with a lucky hit???

Gotta be a 1 in 100 chance of that somewhere?

R:PM

Much less than 1/100 I think. However, there is a significant chance of a mistake on board the sub leading to catastrophic failure; anything from running aground to a torpedo exploding on board.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by steelehc
Furthermore, Subs being attacked by Galleons, or any other ship prior to destroyers is not a good idea.

Steele

I agree. Subs should be totally invisible to galleys, unless the sub is attacking (pre-sonar subs temporarily surface to find their targets), then it should have a potentially lethal bombard, and a retreat.

[Zachriel]

A valiant attempt Jerry Sindle!

[PhoenixPhlame73]

Another idea is that it could be because one ship name was being kept for several ships. In Corpus Christi there is a carrier from world war II that had been turned into a museum. I remember reading in a pamphlet that it was the fifth in a series of ships named Lexington. Though I know that names do not come into play anywhere in Civ3, the idea still holds. In addition, I do not believe that he was trying to turn a Galley into a frigate, I think that he was trying to say that if a gally had modern weapons and engines, a fight between a sub and a galley would be more even.

[Chronus]

With no engine noise to distract your sonarmen, a passive sonar installation would do wonders. You could put a helo platform on the fantail and presto you have a formidable Anti-Submarine Warfare vessle.

A valiant attempt Jerry Sindle!

This has got to be THE MOST hysterical thread I've read in a long time! But then again, this is why we visit this place, no?

[twistedx]

Originally posted by RPMisCOOL
I agree. There is no way anything less than a destroyer should even touch a sub.


However, what if the sub was on the surface and did not see the galley and the galley attacked and sunk the sub with a lucky hit???

Gotta be a 1 in 100 chance of that somewhere?

R:PM

Maybe the sub could accidently try to surface under the galleon...

-- twistedx

[Cyclotron]

Nah, we tried that strategy with a Japanese fishing boat and there wasn't a scratch.

[Coracle]

This thread is at about the same level of ignorance Firaxis always is at.

Galleons were never frigates.

A modern "frigate" is akin to a small destroyer. It is not a refitted wooden sailing frigate from nearly two hundred years ago. You want to see one of them go to Boston harbor and check out the U.S.S. Constituion, Old Ironsides.

Sheeez.

[Willem]

Originally posted by twistedx


Image didn't post correctly, so here's the URL...

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cave...s/pfglyn20.jpg

Well you're certainly batting 1000, the URL doen't work either.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by twistedx
Maybe the sub could accidently try to surface under the galleon...

-- twistedx

IIRC, it took out the captain.

[dawidge]

What about the Edward L. Beach classic _Run Silent, Run Deep_?
The sub hunter is a Q-ship made from a junk packed with cork to make it unsinkable. Of course it is working in conjunction with another vessel while doing its subhunting, but there's no reason you couldn't take your galleon, pack it with cork , and fit a few depth-charge launchers onto it without changing the fact that it is still a galleon. Modernizing the equipment on a vessel doesn't mean that you have to perform a complete Civ3-like upgrade on it to change it into another kind of ship.

It's the same thing with barbarians causing damage to modern-age units. It's entirely possible that they've exchanged their clubs and bearskins for trnechcoats packed with dynamite. I view the unit types as more a description of their tactics and abilities, not necessarily what equipment they're armed with. The US Army cavalry units were still armed with sabers at the onset of WW2. They had a certain preference for using their colts and springfields when it came time for combat, but they still had the saber.

[Jerry Sindle]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Atahualpa
nah sorry, a Galleon is made of wood and its huge body has a bulky size. Frigates are made of wood too, but with a slimer body. You can never make a Frigate out of a Galleon without redoing the whole body and thats redoing the whole ship.

Also you can never upgrade a wooden ship to a steel ship without redoing the whole ship.

Actually, you can upgrade a wooden ship to do the job of a steel ship. That's the key point in all of this. A Galleon is a large wooden ship. It's rear deck can be reinforced. It could carry a helicopter. It could carry a passive "tail sonar".

Noise kills in modern ASW. If the hunter (Galleon) is quieter than its prey (nuclear submarine), the Galleon will detect the submarine first, it can vector the torpedo-armed helo to it, one homing torpedo in the water later, and its bye, bye submarine.

Galleons can sink submarines in the game. If the civ owning the galleon has discovered electronics, than the game is correct.

[Jerry Sindle]

Originally posted by RPMisCOOL
I agree. There is no way anything less than a destroyer should even touch a sub.




R:PM

Actually, the job of modern naval frigates is Anti-submarine Warfare protection. They are generally slower and less well-armed than a destroyer, hence less-costly. They require less men than a destroyer.

In World War II, frigates were akin to the Destroyer Escort, whose primary job was protecting convoys and sinking submarines. Destroyer Escort designation in the US Navy was changed to Frigate in 1974, in deference to the fact that other navies had been calling Destroyer Escorts "Frigates" all along.

Very respectfully,

Jerry Sindle

[Jerry Sindle]

Originally posted by Coracle
This thread is at about the same level of ignorance Firaxis always is at.

Galleons were never frigates.

A modern "frigate" is akin to a small destroyer. It is not a refitted wooden sailing frigate from nearly two hundred years ago. You want to see one of them go to Boston harbor and check out the U.S.S. Constituion, Old Ironsides.

Sheeez.

The whole point of this discussion is not, repeat not, to say that a Galleon is a Frigate, the point is a Galleon could be upgraded to do the job of a modern frigate. The "Old Ironsides" you refer to could be upgraded with modern electronics and cruise missiles and do quite well in a naval engagement.
She's made of wood, wood reflects radar waves much less than steel warships. In our experience in the Persian Gulf, we were very concerned about Arab dhows. They were made of wood and made very poor radar targets.

A modern state can sometimes be at a disadvantage against nations of less technological prowess. The modern state relys on its sensors. If it sees nothing on the sensors, it thinks it has no problems...

Very respectively,

Jerry Sindle

[Jerry Sindle]

Originally posted by dawidge
What about the Edward L. Beach classic _Run Silent, Run Deep_?
The sub hunter is a Q-ship made from a junk packed with cork to make it unsinkable. Of course it is working in conjunction with another vessel while doing its subhunting, but there's no reason you couldn't take your galleon, pack it with cork , and fit a few depth-charge launchers onto it without changing the fact that it is still a galleon. Modernizing the equipment on a vessel doesn't mean that you have to perform a complete Civ3-like upgrade on it to change it into another kind of ship.

It's the same thing with barbarians causing damage to modern-age units. It's entirely possible that they've exchanged their clubs and bearskins for trnechcoats packed with dynamite. I view the unit types as more a description of their tactics and abilities, not necessarily what equipment they're armed with. The US Army cavalry units were still armed with sabers at the onset of WW2. They had a certain preference for using their colts and springfields when it came time for combat, but they still had the saber.

Sir,

You are living-proof that people actually do read postings. You read the postings and then formed your conclusion yea or nea. You did not read half a sentence and come to a knee-jerk, emotion-charged conclusion. Well done.

Very respectfully,

Jerry Sindle

[Akka]

the point is a Galleon could be upgraded to do the job of a modern frigate.

Actually, you can upgrade a wooden ship to do the job of a steel ship. That's the key point in all of this. A Galleon is a large wooden ship. It's rear deck can be reinforced. It could carry a helicopter. It could carry a passive "tail sonar".

Noise kills in modern ASW. If the hunter (Galleon) is quieter than its prey (nuclear submarine), the Galleon will detect the submarine first, it can vector the torpedo-armed helo to it, one homing torpedo in the water later, and its bye, bye submarine.

Galleons can sink submarines in the game. If the civ owning the galleon has discovered electronics, than the game is correct.

Hope you were joking ?

[steelehc]

Jerry: You made a valid point, but now you are really reaching for it.

If you tried to land a helicopter on the deck of a woden sailing ship, you would run the risk of crashing through the deck to the decks below, or chopping up the sails and rigging with the blade. Neither of these would make the ship a viable ASW platform.

If you mounted cruise missiles on a wooden sailing ship, you would have problems with the missiles tearing holes in your sails, or catching things on fire.

A wooden ship does not have much of a radar signature by itself, true, but when you consider the sails on it, then it has an enourmous signature.

My point is simple. You could do a few things to a galleon to make it ASW capable, but nothing near what you are describing. It could be fitted with a sonar, and possibly a depth charge launcher, but thats it. Saying that a ship will be in commission for over 400 years (roughly the length of time from when galleons were in common use to today) only to be fitted with modern weapons stretches the limits of my imagination.

Steele

[Jerry Sindle]

Originally posted by steelehc
Jerry: You made a valid point, but now you are really reaching for it.

If you tried to land a helicopter on the deck of a woden sailing ship, you would run the risk of crashing through the deck to the decks below, or chopping up the sails and rigging with the blade. Neither of these would make the ship a viable ASW platform.

If you mounted cruise missiles on a wooden sailing ship, you would have problems with the missiles tearing holes in your sails, or catching things on fire.

A wooden ship does not have much of a radar signature by itself, true, but when you consider the sails on it, then it has an enourmous signature.

My point is simple. You could do a few things to a galleon to make it ASW capable, but nothing near what you are describing. It could be fitted with a sonar, and possibly a depth charge launcher, but thats it. Saying that a ship will be in commission for over 400 years (roughly the length of time from when galleons were in common use to today) only to be fitted with modern weapons stretches the limits of my imagination.

Steele

OK Mr. Steele,

I agree, you make some valid points and I'll back off a little.

But, just a little. Sitting beside me here at work is a retired U. S. Navy P-3 maritime ASW patrol plane pilot. He agrees with me. Canvas sails and wood masts and freeboard do not reflect radar very well. He hated going on searches for wooden boats. They were just too hard to see on radar.

Sitting across from me is a retired weapons officer on an amphibious vessle. The harpoon missile can be programmed to launch in one direction, clear the ship, and then turn to a totally different heading to proceed down range.

My point being - place the launchers on the stern or the bow facing in a direction , where the hot missile exhaust would not ignite anything aboard. That's some tricky engineering but it could be done. Program missile waypoints to proceed to its target after it clears the ship, and position deck hands to put out any fires that happened despite your great engineering. That is possible, not saying anybody in their right mind would ever do it, but it's possible.

Everytime we mothballed the battleships, we said, "That's it, we'll never see them again." But, we did see them again, and each time they were even more formidable than they were in their previous incarnation.

A Galleon was a big wooden ship. USS Constitution is a pipsqueak compared to a Galleon. Her rear deck could be reinforced with steel. We have aluminum frigates whose decks must be reinforced with steel to make them helicopter capable. Why not a Galleon?

The sails and the rigging would be a definate impediment to helicopter operations. But must they go from stem to stern, like on the original Galleon?
Couldn't some arrangements be made to use less sail area? She might not be as fast as an original Galleon, but does she need to be? Helicopters like to have 30 knots of relative wind 30 degrees relative off the bow of the ship to land and take off. That's a NATO standard operating procedure. But they could take off and land with less wind (and have).

The last point you made is the most difficult to refute. How does a wooden ship last 400 years? Yes, that's a tough one to answer. USS Constitution is 230 years old and taking her to see takes all sorts of other ships standing by, just in case she falls apart. I would definately surmise that the upkeep on a 400 year old ship would be tremendous. The player owning the Galleon would be replacing hard-to-fashion, expensive wooden parts on a regular basis...

The game doesn't reflect this very well. In the game, it's cheaper to keep an old galleon around than it is to upgrade it to a modern transport. Players generally upgrade Galleons because they need, or think they need, the increased capability that having a transport gives them - more speed and more carrying capacity.

I don't have a suggestion to fix this dichotomy that would not seriously affect game playability. After all Trireme type vessels last 3000 years in the game. That would produce some serious repair issues... In the early game, where each turn is 40 - 50 years, players would be faced with the prospect of building Triremes one turn, only to have them fall apart from rot the next. That's not fun, and they would not be happy.

Anyway, I appreciate the time you took to discuss my little explanation. Thought provoking discussion causes all sides of the issue to become wiser.

Very respectfully,

Jerry Sindle