East Africa 1930: An ORBAT Quest

If we were to look into the Madsen and so forth, we'd need to conduct trials. That takes up one of our four slots for half a year when we could be doing other things.

Yeah, but we currently don't really have anthing else to do in that category (or at least nothing urgent), so we might as well do the trials and get some more information before making a desision.
 
The problem with the BAR is that you basically have to do a bunch of mods to it to make it a worthwhile military gun in a post WW1 context (and a lot of countries did, to be fair - believe Sweden, Belgium, and Poland all did some neat things with it). The Lewis gun

My main beef with the BAR is the bottom load in his era. I prefer the top-load of the Czech ZB, basically.

WRT to the Lewis gun, the ZB is almost 33% lighter.
 
ZB's willing to give us a license, and it's not that difficult to rework the gun to a different cartridge. They basically did the same process when making the ZB vz. 33, which became the Bren. They also sounded... somewhat excited about the prospect of us buying from them, so I don't think our status would be a huge concern.

According to Wikipedia, the Type 11 is not good in dusty or muddy conditions due to the open feed, and 90% of Reewiin could be described as dusty and/or muddy for a significant part of the year. It also requires non-standard 6.5 mm ammunition, so it doesn't simplify our logistics much.

If we were to look into the Madsen and so forth, we'd need to conduct trials. That takes up one of our four slots for half a year when we could be doing other things.
From what I can see, the Type 11 used the standard rifle ammunition first, then had it's own developed for it later. I do agree that it's not one we should pick up though, and any consideration given to it would be worth more as playing politics to suck up and try to keep the Japanese from getting "hands on" for as long possible.

I don't recall seeing anything about ZB being particularly excited to work with us in the updates, but I'll take your word for it. My thinking was that since we're a really small market and aren't going to produce that many guns comparatively, ZB might charge an increased licensing cost to try to make back the money spent on developing the alterations for just us over the lower amount of guns we'll produce total, if they don't decide that it would be unprofitable to do it at all.

I don't think the Madsen in particular would need trials to procure though, at this point I think it's a pretty well proven gun thats seen multiple wars. The vz. 30 OTOH came out just last year. If anything I'd say the ZB vz. 30 needs a trial more than the guns that got used though WW1. And with the Madsen being produced in something like 13 different cartridges by this point, some of which are already 6.5mm, I don't think we'd have as much trouble asking for just one more.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but we currently don't really have anthing else to do in that category (or at least nothing urgent), so we might as well do the trials and get some more information before making a desision.
We've got a lot that we want to do in that category, though, it's just going to require writeins/is not listed yet. Starting production of a LMG, a HMG, possibly 50 mm mortars, grenades, and an improved version of the 13.2 mm AA/AT MG, purchasing 81 mm mortars and ~75 mm howitzers, making local ammunition production lines for all of the preceding, possibly developing and starting production of a SMG, etc. are all things we probably want to have done before a war kicks off. If the war is fairly late, we're also going to need to add in things like manufacturing heavier AA/AT autocannons. Reewiin's strengths are in our steel and our heavy industry, and leveraging that strength means turning that steel into weapons. If anything, it's the one category where we're most pressed for time; we don't have much to do with horses and we're making good progress on the Carabinieri reforms.

From what I can see, the Type 11 used the standard rifle ammunition first, then had it's own developed for it later. I do agree that it's not one we should pick up though, and any consideration given to it would be worth more as playing politics to suck up and try to keep the Japanese from getting "hands on" for as long possible.

I don't recall seeing anything about ZB being particularly excited to work with us in the updates, but I'll take your word for it. My thinking was that since we're a really small market and aren't going to produce that many guns comparatively, ZB might charge an increased licensing cost to try to make back the money spent on developing the alterations for just us over the lower amount of guns we'll produce total, if they don't decide that it would be unprofitable to do it at all.

I don't think the Madsen in particular would need trials to procure though, at this point I think it's a pretty well proven gun thats seen multiple wars. The vz. 30 OTOH came out just last year. If anything I'd say the ZB vz. 30 needs a trial more than the guns that got used though WW1. And with the Madsen being produced in something like 13 different cartridges by this point, some of which are already 6.5mm, I don't think we'd have as much trouble asking for just one more.
If we needed to do trials, then I'd be fine with it. However, 6 months to play politics is not something we can afford, especially when Japan should be happy that we're paying them for their rifle and ammunition as-is (and, if they get in a war and need to procure 6.5 mm LMGs, there's now a country that can sell them guns from a stockpile even if they're not the Type 11).
Yes. ZB would very much like to take your mon--er, sell you the finest weapons they have to offer, is there anything else you'd like while you're here? Perhaps some Mauser rifles? Maybe a staff car and some light trucks? What about a nice typerwriter for the secretary?
See above re. ZB being enthusiastic.
AIUI, rechambering the gun to 6.5 mm would not be complicated for an experienced company such as ZB, there'd be no tooling costs for them (we're licensing production, not buying guns outright, so we'd be paying for that anyways), and the one complication of a magazine that can accept rimmed rounds was done on the Bren anyways.

The ZB vz.30 is just a ZB vz. 26 with some minor modifications, by now it's a fairly proven gun.

The Madsen has a really fiddly mechanism from what I've heard. Yes, the gun works, but it'll probably be difficult to produce.

Ofc I'm basing this on us being able to jump right into negotiating licenses and not needing to do any significant work before, which may not be true, but that's not the impression I've gotten.
 
Czechoslovakia were zb is located is pretty much were a lot of nations are shopping at right now for quite a few weapons and not weapons.
 
AIUI, rechambering the gun to 6.5 mm would not be complicated for an experienced company such as ZB, there'd be no tooling costs for them (we're licensing production, not buying guns outright, so we'd be paying for that anyways), and the one complication of a magazine that can accept rimmed rounds was done on the Bren anyways.

The ZB vz.30 is just a ZB vz. 26 with some minor modifications, by now it's a fairly proven gun.

The Madsen has a really fiddly mechanism from what I've heard. Yes, the gun works, but it'll probably be difficult to produce.

Ofc I'm basing this on us being able to jump right into negotiating licenses and not needing to do any significant work before, which may not be true, but that's not the impression I've gotten.
I figured that ZB would still be doing the design work so that we would be licensing the finished 6.5mm design. I don't think it would be a simple job like a barrel change either. The Arisaka cartridge is almost 7.5mm shorter than the 7.92, so that will probably need to muck around with the action's internals if we don't want to risk the round rattling around inside.

I'm seeing different things about the Madsen personally, the Wikipedia page says it was considered expensive to produce (for a machine gun in 1902), but was known for it's reliability.

The Madsen also comes with a higher magazine capacity than the vz. 30, meaning less time spent reloading and more time putting fire downrange. We could always make larger magazines for it ourselves, but that would take actions that could be spent on other things we need to work on.

If I had to compare the Madsen, vz. 30, and something like the Lewis, I'd put them like this.

Madsen LMG:
+Magazine capacity
-Fire rate
+Cheaper(possibly)

ZB vz. 30:
+Fire rate
-Magazine capacity

Lewis Gun:
+Magazine capacity
+Fire rate
-Weight
 
I figured that ZB would still be doing the design work so that we would be licensing the finished 6.5mm design. I don't think it would be a simple job like a barrel change either. The Arisaka cartridge is almost 7.5mm shorter than the 7.92, so that will probably need to muck around with the action's internals if we don't want to risk the round rattling around inside.

I'm seeing different things about the Madsen personally, the Wikipedia page says it was considered expensive to produce (for a machine gun in 1902), but was known for it's reliability.

The Madsen also comes with a higher magazine capacity than the vz. 30, meaning less time spent reloading and more time putting fire downrange. We could always make larger magazines for it ourselves, but that would take actions that could be spent on other things we need to work on.

If I had to compare the Madsen, vz. 30, and something like the Lewis, I'd put them like this.

Madsen LMG:
+Magazine capacity
-Fire rate
+Cheaper(possibly)

ZB vz. 30:
+Fire rate
-Magazine capacity

Lewis Gun:
+Magazine capacity
+Fire rate
-Weight

The ZB 30 was also chambered for 7.65 Mauser, which is 7.65x53mm. The Bren also ended up chambered for the 7.65x51 NATO. So shortening the round isn't an obstacle we can't overcome.

Regarding mag capacity, we can probably make our own mags with higher round capacity. The Bren, which is basically this gun, had a thirty-round magazine after all.
 
The ZB 30 was also chambered for 7.65 Mauser, which is 7.65x53mm. The Bren also ended up chambered for the 7.65x51 NATO. So shortening the round isn't an obstacle we can't overcome.

Regarding mag capacity, we can probably make our own mags with higher round capacity. The Bren, which is basically this gun, had a thirty-round magazine after all.
Yes, none of my post was meant to imply that such a thing couldn't be done. My point was that doing so would be a significant amount of work that ZB will be wanting us to pay for through the licensing agreement, if the business doesn't run the numbers and decide that making variant for our very specific cartridge that nobody else really uses would not be profitable.

As for making changes and extending the magazines ourselves, I agreed that it would be possible. It would just take up investment Points and time we could spend doing everything else that needs to get done.
 
Yes, none of my post was meant to imply that such a thing couldn't be done. My point was that doing so would be a significant amount of work that ZB will be wanting us to pay for through the licensing agreement, if the business doesn't run the numbers and decide that making variant for our very specific cartridge that nobody else really uses would not be profitable.

As for making changes and extending the magazines ourselves, I agreed that it would be possible. It would just take up investment Points and time we could spend doing everything else that needs to get done.
ZB's already done the work on the magazines - in 1929, they filed a patent for the magazine design that we'd want to use: Espacenet – search results
In November of 1930, according to Wikipedia, they'd also modified a ZB vz. 30 to fire .303, so they've got it working with rimmed ammunition in general. It's good that you're voicing concerns, but personally I think it's not gonna be a serious barrier.

(also, regardless, I'm thinking we should focus on making a knockoff Hotchkiss HMG first because we can sell that abroad and get money).
 
ZB's already done the work on the magazines - in 1929, they filed a patent for the magazine design that we'd want to use: Espacenet – search results
In November of 1930, according to Wikipedia, they'd also modified a ZB vz. 30 to fire .303, so they've got it working with rimmed ammunition in general. It's good that you're voicing concerns, but personally I think it's not gonna be a serious barrier.

(also, regardless, I'm thinking we should focus on making a knockoff Hotchkiss HMG first because we can sell that abroad and get money).
Ethiopia and China would buy them at least.
 
also, regardless, I'm thinking we should focus on making a knockoff Hotchkiss HMG first because we can sell that abroad and get money).

My concern with that is that we don't exactly have a surfeit of experienced, modern gunsmiths. How long is that going to take? I do think it's a good idea, though.

In general do we have thoughts on a ship name?
 
My concern with that is that we don't exactly have a surfeit of experienced, modern gunsmiths. How long is that going to take? I do think it's a good idea, though.

In general do we have thoughts on a ship name?
While we don't have a surfeit of gunsmiths, we do have heavy industry that employs some locals, which means Reewiin has at least a few toolmakers that have been making "precision" equipment for Kismayo Steel and associated industries (and who are likely looking for work given the economic downturn that just hit). We're not designing this gun from scratch, but instead preparing new drawings by taking apart and measuring the Type 3s we already have (and probably bribing the Japanese to let us take photos of the drawings/instructions they got from Hotchkiss). This is basically the kiddie pool of "designing our own gun"; we're making a knockoff Hotchkiss now that the terms of patent have expired. Once we've got toolroom prototypes working, we can dabble in making some minor modifications (the gun, after all, is over 30 years old by now, and there may be things the soldiers would like to have changed), but overall this is only slightly more involved than setting up production after purchasing a license, and saves us the hassle of having to negotiate it.

That said this is speculation and we'd need to get the QMs' input.

As for names, uh... coming up with names in non-English languages (and especially languages that are lacking prolific articles on wikipedia) is difficult for me. That said, I'd like for us to pick a naming scheme and stick with it.
Perhaps we could copy the Japanese naming scheme? Mountains, rivers, weather phenomena for vessels of decreasing size? Should be fairly easy to come up with name lists for that.
 
I like the idea of using geographical features. The main problem is that the description of our borders is a bit vague so I'm having trouble workin out what mountains are inside our borders.
 
If we end up trying to produce our own heavy machine gun, I'd personally prefer to do what we can based off what we can get away with taking from the 13.2mm MGs we just got, rather than making a MMG and calling it our HMG.
 
Well, heavy and light machine gun doesn't usually refer to the actual caliber of the gun (though that use has gotten more popular in the modern era) but to the weight of the gun itself and the way in which it's meant to be used.
 
After looking at the options and the needs of our armed forces, this is how I think we should move forward for this turn. These are just my suggestions.

What Is To Be Done With The Chikuma
[ ] Dock her and assess her alongside.
By docking her in port, we can directly assess the capabilities of her, it's condition, and gain information to decide what do we want to do with it.
Taking her out for sea trials with a scratch crew is just asking for a disaster. We may be lucky, but the unknowns of her are making the risks too great to get chosen.

[ ] Write in: Koritaan
"Koritaan" meaning "growth" or "development" in the Somali language. It is hoped that with the ship being named "Koritaan", it would signify the eventual growth of the Reewiin Naval Service, grown from the former IJN ship Chikuma as a foundation of it's existence.
Though if we're using the Japanese convention, she might just be the single outlier out of them all. And I would give it that recognition, being the first true ship that Reewin ever owned.

Industry and Logistics
  • Armaments
[ ] Production Licensing: Machine Guns
-[ ] Write in: ZB vz. 30 re-chambered to 6.5x50 mm Arisaka
I suggest that we procure the production license of the ZB vz. 30. As the original producer of the ZB vz. 30, ZB is quite excited about the prospect of us buying the license for one of their guns, they might be able to re-chamber it to the 6.5×50 mm Arisaka spitzer cartridges currently in use by the army. Also, it creates a market for the Japanese as well, as an alternative to their current Type 11 light machine gun when used in muddy or dirty conditions.

  • Breeding and Working
I don't know how to go for this part. The others might have a better idea.

Doctrine and Organisation
  • Reforming the Carabinieri
[] Organisational Reform: Police Force - While the Carabinieri is responsible for internal security, its position as a military force can compromise that. Each Region should have a specialist policing force subsidiary to its larger military formation. (9-Month Investment.)
Creating a specialist policing force for the Carabinieri would help keep people from committing crimes and help the Carabinieri protect our vast lands.
 
If we end up trying to produce our own heavy machine gun, I'd personally prefer to do what we can based off what we can get away with taking from the 13.2mm MGs we just got, rather than making a MMG and calling it our HMG.
Do we even need a 12/13 mm MG? They were of limited use during WW2, as their intended targets (tanks and aircraft) had either become too durable for the weapon to do anything or at least so durable that doing anything required ludicrous ammount of ammunition expenditure, so that the US were the only ones to really use them in large quantities thanks to their industrial capacity allowing them to not care about the ammo requirements and them already having the M2 lying around.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv1bPQe4CmI

I think our best bet for a machine gun would actaully be to do what the germans did and get the MG30, so that we can reverse engineer it and try to develop our own knock-off versions of the MG34 and MG42. Getting it re-chambered into 6.5 Arisaka could be an issue, but the 7.92 Mauser is visually destinct and widespread enough that keeping it until we make the aformentioned MG34 or MG42 knock-off shouldn't be that much of a problem.
 
Last edited:
Do we even need a 12/13 mm MG? They were of limited use during WW2, as their intended targets (tanks and aircraft) had either become too durable for the weapon to do anything or at least so durable that doing anything required ludicrous ammount of ammunition expenditure, so that the US were the only ones to really use them in large quantities thanks to their industrial capacity allowing them to not care about the ammo requirements and them already having the M2 lying around.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv1bPQe4CmI

I think our best bet for a machine gun would actaully be to do what the germans did and get the MG30, so that we can reverse engineer it and try to develop our own knock-off versions of the MG34 and MG42. Getting it re-chambered into 6.5 Arisaka could be an issue, but the 7.92 Mauser is visually destinct and widespread enough that keeping it until we make the aformentioned MG34 or MG42 knock-off shouldn't be that much of a problem.

That video explains why a 13.2 mm machine gun is useful, although Ian's a bit incorrect about why you'd opt for a 20 mm instead. 13.2 mm is large enough for an explosive charge (see the Japanese and Italian 12.7 HEI rounds, or the Belgian/Swedish 13.2 mm Balle Explosive Traçante). Also, time fuze ammunition was practically not effective for 20 mm ammunition as a way of increasing the likelihood of kills (the lethal radius of a shell bursting being so small that it would be pointless, and no 20 mm cannon that I'm aware of having a time fuze setter in this period), but instead was to allow firing of explosive shells over areas where you didn't want them coming back down. Time setting equipment didn't really show up until you hit 37-40 mm guns, and arguably (this is complicated) isn't useful until you get to 57-75 mm guns. The primary advantage of the bigger gun is better ballistics and a greater effective range, but that can also be handled by using a powerful round like the 13.2x99.

Anyways, a 13.2 mm is IMO right in the sweet spot of something you can churn out in large quantities and throw on the back of a truck/donkey while still being able to punch a significant hole in a metal-skinned aircraft wing. The actual effectiveness for any "cheap" AA is poor (the best way to shoot down attacking planes is having your own planes), but the knowledge that any given column of guys you're diving on could start shooting back with a gun that won't just put a 7 mm hole in your wing but instead actually knock you out of the sky will make pilots be more cautious. For a heavier autocannon, we can jump right to 37-40 mm, which follows the same choices that everyone else except Japan made during the war.
 
Last edited:
I like @ToadLicker's name suggestion. I know we are considering getting a home-built Hotchkiss... do we want to write in that AND the ZB or just go for one or the other? Or do we want to try and miniaturize the 13.2mm?

That seems to be the main question.
 
Back
Top