Author Topic: Thoughts on Shipyards  (Read 2279 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • S
  • Posts: 7192
  • Thanked: 2241 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Thoughts on Shipyards
« on: October 02, 2007, 07:47:42 AM »
I am wondering whether to add a little more detail to shipyards, although I am concerned it may be unnecessary detail so I am interested in opinions. In the real world, shipyards are usually capable of handling ships up to a certain size and are set up for one particular type of ship. As an example, here is an extract from a report on Russian shipyards in 1995

Active Naval Shipyards

Sevmash/State Center for Atomic Submarine Construction, Severodvinsk (formerly Shipyard 402)
Severodvinsk is the primary shipyard for the Russian Navy, which is now responsible for all nuclear submarine production, as well as Russian Navy diesel submarines. (Export diesels may be built elsewhere.) It is extremely well-equipped, with large building halls dating back to the Stalin-era. In the past, Severodvinsk was the cradle of Soviet ballistic missile subs, building Yankees, Deltas, and Typhoons. Equipped with special titanium-welding facilities, it also built Alfas, the Papa, and the single ill-fated Mike class, along with Oscars. With the loss of the primary aircraft carrier shipyard to Ukraine, there have been rumors that this huge shipyard may undergo some conversions in order to service Admiral Kuznetsov and perhaps move the aircraft carrier program forward.
A recent press report (in May 1995) noted that even this mammoth facility is not immune to the economic crisis facing the Russian defense industry, however. Heating in Severodvinsk has been off in residences since April, and the shipyard itself was temporarily running in "emergency energy consumption mode."

Admiralty-Sudomekh/United Admiralty (formerly Shipyards 194 and 196), St. Petersburg
Made up of two shipyards sharing adjacent space in St. Petersburg, United Admiralty has been responsible for a number of submarines, including Victor II/IIIs, Alfas, Kilos, and a host of experimental designs. Today, Admiralty-Sudomekh builds export Kilos, and will be the home of the new Project 636 improved Kilo, should it go into series production. Absent export orders, United Admiralty may cease submarine operations.

Yantar/Kaliningrad (formerly Shipyard 820), Kaliningrad
Yantar is a surface vessel center, historically responsible for Krivaks, Alligators, Udaloys, and Ivan Rogovs. Today, the Neustrashimyy-class frigates are being built there.

Baltic Shipyard (formerly Shipyard 189), St. Petersburg
Responsible for nuclear surface vessels, the Baltic shipyard has built nuclear icebreakers, the Whiskey-class submarines, and the SSV-33 space support ships. Today, naval production centers around the fourth and last Kirov-class battlecruiser, Petr Velikiy.

Northern Shipyard (formerly Shipyard 190), St. Petersburg
The Northern Shipyard was called "Zhdanov" for most of its history, until a name change in 1989. Udaloys were once built here; today, Northern continues to build Sovremennyys.

Komsomol'sk (formerly Shipyard 199), on the Amur River (Far East)
Komsomol'sk is primarily a submarine facility, which once built the smaller SSBNs (earlier Yankees and Delta Is), but eventually had to turn over SSBN construction to Severodvinsk because its location (near shallows) prevented the larger vessels from being launched. The Akula SSNs were built here, as were some Victor IIIs and Kilos. President Y'eltsin made a much publicized announcement that Komsomol'sk will be out of the submarine business in 1996.

Krasnoye Sormovo (formerly Shipyard 112), Nizhny Novgorod
Krasnoye Sormovo produced Charlies, Victors, and Tangos; today, it is responsible for Sierra and Kilo production. An inland shipyard, nuclear submarines historically were shipped off to Severodvinsk via waterway for fitting out while the diesel subs went south through the Volga to the Black Sea. Submarines are no longer built here, the yard having phased out of submarine construction in 1993.

Former Soviet shipyards in Ukraine

Nikolayev North (formerly Shipyard 445), Nikolayev
The last of the Slavas remains incomplete here, to be finished and delivered to the Ukrainian Navy as their flagship. Apparently naval construction is to end with the delivery of Vilna Ukraina, for it is reported that Nikolayev North is going to be building floating hotels.

Black Sea/Nikolayev South (formerly Shipyard 444), Nikolayev
Once the heart of the aviation-ship program, Nikolayev South has been responsible for the Moskvas, the Kievs, and the Kuznetsovs. Today only the Varyag remains, last of the Kuznetsov class CVs, her fate undecided. Apparently some civil production has been undertaken in this yard; a decision on Varyag may be required soon in order to make room for merchant construction.

Zaliv/Butoma (formerly Shipyard 532), Kerch, The Crimea
This yard is notable for producing Krivaks. Whether or not Ukraine will continue to build/complete/modernize Krivaks here is unknown.

-------------------------

As you can see from the above report, each shipyard concentrates on a particular type of ship and this is the type of thing I would like to bring into Aurora. I can see several options.

1) Have each shipyard be assigned a particular class of ship to build. This is per shipyard, not per population. Assignment of this class would involve some cost in retooling the yard. I am considering either the cost of one ship or perhaps half that. The cost of changing from one class to another would depend on the difference between the two ships and would either the refit cost (from the old to new class) or the cost of the new class, whichever was lower. The shipyard could then be given a production run so it would build several of the same type until ordered to stop or it completed the order. This would create a more realistic situation where deciding to build a lot of different ship types would have an additional cost, as it would in the real world.

2) This option is as above but in addition each shipyard would have a limit to the maximum size class it could build. In this case, you could build different size shipyards and expand them later, or more likely simply have a small shipyard component in the same way as maintenance facilities and allow multiple components per shipyard.

3) This is based on the above ideas but is a more radical change. Each population would have a single, total shipbuilding capacity based on multiples of a much smaller shipyard unit. For example, there could be a factory-sized unit that created a shipyard capacity of 10 (with bonuses for technology). Forty of these would cost the same as a current shipyard and create a capacity of 400. That population-wide capacity could then be devoted to certain classes using the same principle as option 1)

For example, assume you had a planet with a capacity of 2000. You might devote 400 of that capacity to building Kalinin II class freighters. The cost of the retooling would be equal to the capacity so in this case it would cost 400 to assign that chunk of the yard to building Kalinins. There would be a set time for retooling, probably six months but I would do some research to establish a reasonable figure. As the Kalinin costs 472 BP, you would produce one every 1.2 years. Another 400 might be dedicated to Udaloy II survey ships, which cost 531 and would be built every 1.32 years. Finally, the remaining 1200 could be dedicated to Sovremenny IIA class destroyers (886 BP), which would be turned out every 7.4 months.

Unassigning yard space would cost nothing but you would then pay cost and time to reassign it. While this would allow individual ships to be built faster than at the moment, it wouldn't increase the overall amount of shipbuilding. It would also allow smaller yards to be created, perhaps to build specific ships at a certain population. There would be a few complexities. For example, when additional yard space was created, either by building or technology improvement, that would have to be assigned and the player may want to assign it to existing ship types. I would have to track how much additional capacity was assigned and when it would become available. I think commander shipbuilding bonuses would be applied to each ship type, not to the overall capacity. So in the example above, a commander with a 20% bonus would increase the Kalinnin and Udaloy capacities to 480 each and the Sovremenny capacity to 1440. He wouldn't create 400 spare capacity.

I'm not sure if there would need to be some type of minimum build time. While a shipyard creating a warship every few weeks seems unrealistic, its likely that would really consist of multiple warships in a production line with one being delivered every few weeks. Perhaps after retooling, one option might be to simulate that by having the first 1 or 2 units build more slowly but I think that would probably be an unncessary complexity and could instead be simulated as part of the overall retooling time.

If any of the above options were used, there may have to be some alternative type of 'shipyard' for overhauls and repairs. Refits could be handled in shipyards set up to build the new class. I might even consider changing overhauls to be done by maintenance facilities. In that case, spare parts would be replaced over time when the ship was in orbit of a maintenance facility and the overhaul clock would slowly rewind. I would work out a formula for the additional costs and the rate of spare part replacement/overhaul rewind would depend on the size of the facilities compared to the size of the ship.

Comments and suggestions welcome

Steve
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Randy

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 119
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2007, 09:18:29 AM »
First question -

  Retooling costs what?  Build points? Money? Minerals??

I'd lean towards option one - its close enough to reality without going overboard in details.

  I'd also add an option to retool for "overhaul" (or whatever you want to call it) so that a spaceyard can be dedicated to the overhaul and repair tasks.

  Other than that, it looks good to me :-)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Randy »
 

Offline Erik Luken

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5159
  • Thanked: 117 times
  • Discord Username: icehawke
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2007, 09:39:02 AM »
I like option 1, with a small caveat.

Say you have a shipyard tooled to build a Ship O Doom BC. Down the line, you upgrade the class (better engines, fire control, etc). Are the SOD BC yards capable of builing SOD II's?

My preference in this case is a smaller retooling cost, or possibly none, depending on the "severity" of the upgrades.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Erik Luken »
 

Offline Þórgrímr

  • BTS! Playtesters
  • Rear Admiral
  • **
  • Posts: 863
    • The World of the Gunny
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2007, 09:45:25 AM »
Steve, I like the idea, and maybe now would be the right time to introduce the concept of Slipways. Each shipyard would be the overall complex and would have a further 'component', if you will, call slipways. Each slipway could then be a generic slipway able to build anything the power could, or it could be configured to produce a specific design. Then maybe give a slight production bonus for specific configured Slipways.

This would simulate the way most shipyards are configured, Those Russian SY examples would be considered a shpiyard with all their Slipways configured for one design.  :D

The nautical term ways is an alternative name for slipway. A ship undergoing construction in a shipyard is said to be on the ways. If a ship were scrapped there, she is said to be broken up in the ways.




Cheers,
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Þórgrímr »
Sic vis pacem, para bellum
If you want peace, prepare for war
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • S
  • Posts: 7192
  • Thanked: 2241 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
(No subject)
« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2007, 11:24:22 AM »
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
I like option 1, with a small caveat.

Say you have a shipyard tooled to build a Ship O Doom BC. Down the line, you upgrade the class (better engines, fire control, etc). Are the SOD BC yards capable of builing SOD II's?

My preference in this case is a smaller retooling cost, or possibly none, depending on the "severity" of the upgrades.

The cost of changing from one class to another would depend on the differences between the two ships and would be either the refit cost (from the old to new class) or the cost of the new class, whichever was lower.

Steve
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • S
  • Posts: 7192
  • Thanked: 2241 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
(No subject)
« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2007, 11:31:51 AM »
Quote from: "Randy"
Retooling costs what?  Build points? Money? Minerals??
For option 1, I would set it up as a shipyard task based on the same BP, money and minerals as building a ship of that class. Makes it nice and straightforward. If that seems too much, then maybe half of the full build cost.

Quote
I'd lean towards option one - its close enough to reality without going overboard in details.
OK

Quote
I'd also add an option to retool for "overhaul" (or whatever you want to call it) so that a spaceyard can be dedicated to the overhaul and repair tasks.

I think that whatever I end up doing with shipyards, I am going to change overhauls to a non-shipyard task that is handled automatically by maintenance facilities. It should reduce micromanagement and will allow smaller populations to carry out maintenance without having to commit to building shipyards. I'll post on this in the mechanics forum. However, I really like this idea in principle so I will use it for shipyards dedicated to repair operations.

Steve
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Randy

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 119
(No subject)
« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2007, 03:52:31 PM »
Quote
For option 1, I would set it up as a shipyard task based on the same BP, money and minerals as building a ship of that class.


I'd say go for he BP and money, forget the minerals. You mostly need to just re-adjust the machinery (and reprogram robots, etc)  to build the new design.

  If you want it to cost minerals too, base it on the same minerals you use to build a SY in the first place and use some fraction of those.

  The cost needs to stay as a very low fraction of ship cost. Otherwise eg. that Ship O Death SD will take 10 years to configure the SY before you can even begin building the first one...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Randy »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • S
  • Posts: 7192
  • Thanked: 2241 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
(No subject)
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2007, 05:17:46 PM »
Quote from: "Randy"
Quote
For option 1, I would set it up as a shipyard task based on the same BP, money and minerals as building a ship of that class.

I'd say go for he BP and money, forget the minerals. You mostly need to just re-adjust the machinery (and reprogram robots, etc)  to build the new design.

  If you want it to cost minerals too, base it on the same minerals you use to build a SY in the first place and use some fraction of those.
That all sounds reasonable.

Quote
 The cost needs to stay as a very low fraction of ship cost. Otherwise eg. that Ship O Death SD will take 10 years to configure the SY before you can even begin building the first one...

Unfortunately, if it is a very low fraction of ship cost then no decision is required and I might as well not bother. The decision to change the type of ship that a shipyard can build should be a significant one and that means the cost has to be significant too. As in the real world, retooling to build one ship should be expensive in per unit cost terms.

I have done some quick research on the internet to try and find some retooling times. I couldn't find much but here are a couple of examples

In 1941, a shipyard called the new
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Doug Olchefske

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • Posts: 29
(No subject)
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2007, 06:03:39 PM »
I like the idea of the variable sized shipyards. You just need to decide on the granularity. Maintenance facilities may be a bit too coarse.

Rather than costing BP or minerals to switch designs, you may want to just use time. Having to wait three months (or more/less) to set up the supply chain to produce a design in a given yard would be a good incentive to build it somewhere else.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Doug Olchefske »
 

Offline Kurt

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 993
  • Thanked: 125 times
Re: Thoughts on Shipyards
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2007, 06:20:32 PM »
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
I am wondering whether to add a little more detail to shipyards, although I am concerned it may be unnecessary detail so I am interested in opinions. In the real world, shipyards are usually capable of handling ships up to a certain size and are set up for one particular type of ship. As an example, here is an extract from a report on Russian shipyards in 1995

<snip>

Steve


Steve -

I like this concept.  One of the variants I played around with for Starfire was different sized yards - Capital Ship Yard, Escort Yard, Cruiser Yard, Commerical Yard.  One can be refitted to any of the others for a price, kind of like converting a mining installation to an automated mining installation.  

Or, alternately, the yard type could be treated just like research bonues are for research installations.  In other words, if a commercial yard works on a warship it does so at a certain basic rate, if it works on a dedicated commerical ship then it does so at its maximum rate.  This would allow the player to have some flexibility, albiet at a price.  

I also liked
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Kurt »
 

Offline Erik Luken

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5159
  • Thanked: 117 times
  • Discord Username: icehawke
Re: Thoughts on Shipyards
« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2007, 08:00:45 PM »
Quote from: "Kurt"
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
I am wondering whether to add a little more detail to shipyards, although I am concerned it may be unnecessary detail so I am interested in opinions. In the real world, shipyards are usually capable of handling ships up to a certain size and are set up for one particular type of ship. As an example, here is an extract from a report on Russian shipyards in 1995

<snip>

Steve

Steve -

I like this concept.  One of the variants I played around with for Starfire was different sized yards - Capital Ship Yard, Escort Yard, Cruiser Yard, Commerical Yard.  One can be refitted to any of the others for a price, kind of like converting a mining installation to an automated mining installation.  

Or, alternately, the yard type could be treated just like research bonues are for research installations.  In other words, if a commercial yard works on a warship it does so at a certain basic rate, if it works on a dedicated commerical ship then it does so at its maximum rate.  This would allow the player to have some flexibility, albiet at a price.  

The biggest issue I see here is the fact that there are no real set ship types in Aurora, though I do like that idea. Possibly something along the lines of a HS range? I.E. Under 100 HS, 101-200HS, 201-400HS, etc.
Quote from: "Kurt"

I also liked
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Erik Luken »
 

Offline sloanjh

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 2726
  • Thanked: 64 times
(No subject)
« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2007, 12:32:09 AM »
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "Randy"
The cost needs to stay as a very low fraction of ship cost. Otherwise eg. that Ship O Death SD will take 10 years to configure the SY before you can even begin building the first one...
Unfortunately, if it is a very low fraction of ship cost then no decision is required and I might as well not bother. The decision to change the type of ship that a shipyard can build should be a significant one and that means the cost has to be significant too. As in the real world, retooling to build one ship should be expensive in per unit cost terms.

I think Steve's right here - I remember reading that one of the the things the Royal Navy is very good at is building "one-offs", i.e. ship classes with only one unit.  The problem is that the unit cost is MUCH larger than for series production, since none of the design etc. work is amortized over multiple units.  As much as I hate the thought, I think the retooling time should be 50% - 100% of the total build time (this would also simulate the time needed to do the actual design work - somehow I think it should take longer than hitting F5 and clicking on a few components :-)

John
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by sloanjh »
 

Offline Randy

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 119
(No subject)
« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2007, 12:35:53 PM »
John wrote:
Quote
I think the retooling time should be 50% - 100% of the total build time


I was thinking in the 25-50% range (closer to the 25% - maybe 33% would be about right)

  Randy
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Randy »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • S
  • Posts: 7192
  • Thanked: 2241 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
(No subject)
« Reply #13 on: October 04, 2007, 06:37:36 AM »
[quote="
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline wildfire142

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • w
  • Posts: 37
(No subject)
« Reply #14 on: October 04, 2007, 11:34:02 AM »
Would the extra slipways speed up production of the ships or just incresae the number under construction at anyone time?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by wildfire142 »
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54