OU ships...was:Re: SG actions rule clarification

> At 22:20 10/06/98 +1100, you wrote:

I think that what the OU has sort of depends on how you look at things in the
past which from what I can see is broadly the case with the FB fleets.
Italians and French tended to have faster warships those of other nations
of the same size (1919-1945 period here) and several class breached the
Naval limits treaty (then again who didn't). German ships had good armament
and better overall protection than the British and American (IIRC so no flames
please). Russians I don't know but I can see some paralels of the ESU with the
USSR navy of the 70's and 80's. So if you take Australias naval history as a
basis for the OU, you'll find that we've had 2 carriers (CVL's admittedly) one
battle curiser (HMAS Australia our first flagship) about a dozen crusiers and
i think 2 dozen destroyers and frigates (as well as 60 Bathurst class
corvettes IIRC). All these were in service sometime between 1919 and 1948(?).
If my library was all here in Sydney I'd be able to name them all for you. In
FT terms I think the OU fleet would be mostly crusiers and destroyers, with
large numbers of smaller escorts having to double in battle as well as patrol
roles, backed up by a small number of big fleet units though not the size of
ships of the major powers. Mostly Battleships, Battlecrusiers, Light Carriers
with perhaps one Battledreadnaught or Fleet Carrier as flagship. If not
entirely of local bulid then all ships will be at least modified for what the
OU wants. So a range of OU ships huh? Damn thats more money I'm going to have
to
send to Nic. I hope they turn out better than the "Humpty-Dumpty" PA
suits (to which my first reaction was that it was an egg on legs).