![capital ship slipways ijn capital ship slipways ijn](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DWOYiEqVQAEFwFL.png)
They Can't afford to purchase and run them in addition to the rest of their fleet and other Military forces. If the Naval General Staff/"big gun" Teppon Ya faction of the IJN really wanted these battlewagons, and with no treaty to limit them, they most probably would have gotten them, with budget constraints being the only consideration. Japan from the 1930s onward would seek to meet its economic needs through outward expansion and conquest of neighbouring nations such as what later became Manchukuo for a while, as well as a large part of China proper. I doubt that post-Meiji period Japan would really see these peasants enfranchised or even capable enough of mounting such a rebellion just yet. Either way the US has a huge numerical superiority. You'd have to delete the #13s and two Kii's to give Japan a fighting chance to avoid an outright rebellion of starving peasants.
![capital ship slipways ijn capital ship slipways ijn](https://64.media.tumblr.com/d445f451aa39d7c5e9ebbd360ddbf4da/7e7e5547df5c6ab0-9a/s2048x3072/8db93212a160ea1a6f86ec054c6c2b17e3b5d560.jpg)
You'd have to give the US DEFINITELY the Big 5 for their Pacific fleet, maybe giving the prior Standards to the east coast. Washington was financial reality for Japan, and really only the US was limited by the treaty (although gaining the advantage of ending the Anglo-Japanese alliance.) I could see the IJN retaining the four Kongo class perhaps, along with the USN retaining the last five 14" gunned standards, but those for the purpose of this scenario are assigned to the East Coast Fleet, while the four Kongo class are currently in their second rebuild.įinances wise, the Japanese can't afford the #13s, much less those, the Kagas, the Kiis, and the Amagis. I don't see the USN holding on to all of their 14"ers to keep the 16" gunned ships in top fighting form, same for the IJN. Well, I would like to see just a little bit of realism for this scenario, finances wise. However what happened to the Kongo's, Ise's ,Fuso's, and all the other Standards? I doubt the IJN would get rid of the fast Kongo's when which would give the USN 6 Lexingtons which outnumber the IJN's 4 Amagi CB's and I doubt the USN would allow itself to be outnumbered by the IJN whench both sides would be holding onto their older ships. You have the IJN & USN meeting in equal numbers the USN would always have a numerical advantage over the IJN if your talking about the total strength of battlefleets now if your just talking about the USN Pacific Fleet versus the IJN that would be different. I'm interested in hearing your opinions on this battle, but IMO even with the 18" guns on the #13s, the USN is the most favoured to emerge victorious from this battle. The IJN has a battleline of four #13 class, four Kii class, two Kaga class, two Nagato class, and four Amagi class battleships/cruisers. So the USN has a battleline of Four Colorado class, Six South Dakota class, and six Lexington class battleships/cruisers. With the rash of recent threads in the Designing board in regards to the Washington and subsequent treaties either being modified or done away with all together, this question just came to mind and I find it interesting enough speculation wise to throw out on the forums, particulary being that, I'm staying in a hotel in Rapid City, SD with crappy Wifi, I don't have the time or resources to accuratly research the scenario right now., I'll just go ahead and lay out the scenario, and see how you fine gents respond to it in kind.īasically, the scenario assumes that the treaties don't happen, and the US and Japan somehow manage to find the time, money, and resources to construct all of their originally planned post-war toys.