Shipbucket

In terms of slowing down convoy's, I would disagree. All the ships have a cruise speed of 15 knots, which is at least as fast as a fast convoy (a convoy that makes 9-13 knots). They obviously make slow convoys, which got at about 6 knots. The destroyers have the range for the mid Atlantic, which is as far as escorts in WW2 made it (hence the mid-Atlantic gap).

I didn't know that about turbines and torpedoes. Thank you kindly.
Nor did I know about springsharp being interesting for smaller ships. thanks.

I am going to keep this going, honest
Would someone be willing to chat with me about the sail-steam ear and the beginnings of the pre-dreadnought era. I mianly need someone to bounce ideas of and see how things work out.

Fire away.
I've done a fair amount of reading on the steam and sail era for my own AU recently.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

So here is what I'm thinking:
By the time of the turn of the century, I'm expecting the company to have set up three main stations and four or more secondary ones around the world. The three major ones would most likely be India, the UK and Canada, with minor stations in the Caribbean, East Africa, the Mediterranean and maybe Chile or another pacific locale... maybe Singapore as well.
The major stations would contain a Company flotilla, lead by a flag ship (one of the light cruisers). Minor stations would only have a minimal company presence, but would still be main points of trade.

In terms of strength I expect the company's fleet to expand as it changes from the EIC to the GTC, with a much large fleet even with the beginning of the steam age. However with the turn of the century and expanding costs the fleet would begin to shrink again, with the company in the modern day being a ghost of its former self, much like the RN is... but with very different priorities.

I do have a few questions:
Armed and armoured merchantmen. Easily done in the age of steam? I'm thinking of something like Broadside ironclads but with a much reduced number of heavier guns so as to give as much cargo space as possible.
Of course, they would run pure cargo ships, but being able to put a couple of armed ships with them in the 1860's would be useful...

I think the company would switch early onto breech loading guns. Fewer guns, firing faster gives a higher rate of fire without taking up as much space.

Anything wrong with any of the above?

While that's true, it's important to note that breachloaders weren't available before 1855 and while they had higher rates of fire and required less handling space, they were considered inferior to muzzleloading guns due to the much lower pressures they could handle.
The RN adopted the 110lb Armstrong gun in the late 1850ies but it was superseded by the muzzle loading 7in Woolwich Rifle in 1865.
In 1863 the Armstrong and Whitworth Committee (WHich were responsible for deciding which gun the RN should use) stated that both systems: "could be loaded and worked with perfect ease and abundant rapidity" but that they "considered the BL arrangement complicated, the stores required too numerous, and the cost of gun and ammunition too expensive..."

Additionally, since your "navy" is part of a company that is expected to show a substantial profit I find it hard to believe they'd be willing to take the risks a new weapons system represents.
I can see them adopting the smaller cailbres like the 4.75in and especially the 20 pounder, but only as and when the RN does it.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

Makes sense. I don't really know much about the early changes.
So maybe light calibres (those mounted on armed cargo ships) changing earlier, but the warships sticking with muzzle loaders till much later?

Did the rest make sense?

Also, I'll try and come up with some figures today at some point

Given the role you've assigned it in relation to the RN I doubt you'd adopt anything the RN didn't.
Remember, your navy is expected to turn in a profit. That means it's run by the pursers.
That means you're going to want to avoid risks as much as possible. That means you'll be slow to adopt new systems, because if an experimental system fails it'll cost a fortune. And unlike navies who in most cases can go tut-tut and quietly sack someone, you've got investors to satisfy. Rich, powerful and well connected investors.

In as much as the setting itself makes sense.
India I get, but why UK and Canada? Sure, they're major trading ports, but they're low-threat areas and they're right on the doorstep of the worlds biggest and, in your case, friendliest navy.
It would make more sense to have your major naval units stationed in more dangerous areas. Singapore would be an excellent choice, Hong Kong another. Jamaica or Bahamas wouldn't be out of the question either.

Makes sense

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

That's a very good point. So maybe instead of being ahead of the curve they lag. Adopting technologies only after there has been some sort of proof of concept such as adoption by the RN or another major navy. I don't think it's the most unbelievable I'm glad someone is being sensible Singapore it is then, along with... Jamaica I think. Minor bases in the other ports then (UK, Canada etc).

So I suppose at the time of the Mutiny in the OTL the company is mainly made up of Indiamen. Sailing ships armed with broadside muzzle loaders as they have been for a couple of centuries.
Then Steam broadside ironclads by 1870-80. Armed merchantmen as well.
Turret ships by 1890
Shrinking ships at the turn of the century and by the first world war the largest ship in the fleet is a light/scout cruiser. They never had the biggest ships but they certainly don't have pre-dread's.
1st world war see's the construction of new armed merchants and long range escorts. Would it be possible to build destroyer sized vessels (or even cruiser) that could cross the Atlantic in one go?
Inter war period sees the fleet reduced in size to its smallest yet, but the merchant fleet grows.
2nd world war sees crash construction of ASW escorts and AA escorts for the Med.
Post war again the fleet shrinks.
I think by modern day the fleet is reduced to a few old and almost obsolete frigates or corvettes at most stations. A couple of near up to date flagships (90's construction) but mostly older to save costs...

Has anyone got any good pictures/drawings of 1840-1920 era cargo vessels?

Ships changed a lot in that time.
You're looking at everything from the Great Eastern to the Selandia via ships like the Uganda
Also, you're likely to operate clippers like the Cutty Sark, since they're the closest to a successor to the East Indiamen.
Indeed, you're likely to operate a fair number of sailing ships in the 1840ies and 50ies since coal was very expensive. Indeed, steamers capable of crossing the Atlantic on engines alone were still a new thing by 1840, the first purpose built Trans-Atlantic steamship the Great Western weren't built before 1838.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.