Hi Guys,
I'm surprised this keeps coming up but most of the comments are newbies, and we can all forget what we know from time to time.
First we need to review the textev, especially the early stuff where we learn that the peeps had built a navy up to a quarter of the size of the SLN.
From the 1904 fleet comparison chart [in the TSVW appendix] the PRHN had 2106 warships, including 460 SD/DN's; from some of the comments in the early books that total may have actually been closer to ~1900 before RFC beefed it up for his various purposes [1945 would have been only 20% larger than the RMN].
Of course according to some, a 'quarter' could mean anything roughly between 22.5-27.5%, ie as only a ballpark reference.
Still its a starting point that the SLN in RFC's mind then had around 8424 active warships in 1904 when the war started.
I have also suggested in past posts here and at the bar that the active BF was indeed closer to 1840 in 1904 than the 2000+ active not counting 300+ in the refit yards that Rajampet refers to early in MoH [Dec 1921] but the numbers could indicate the rate of increase in 17 years, or about 30 per year, representing 2/3 of BF's annual commissioning SD's [a third goes directly into the reserve] for 46-7 annually [ie 5 battle squadrons plus 15%] or a policy change that delayed 'retirement' or 'transfer to the reserve' of similar numbers of BF SD's since BF admirals can command squadrons with no one aboard to accrue the time needed for their career etc, or some combination.
Coming back to 1840 SD's leaves 6584 active for FF back in 1904, since we have had no guidance, I have often proposed the various ship class lobbies within the FF, being far removed from actual galaxy conditions and requirements, would seek rough number parity, for something around ~1596 of each class despite the different costs of each class so the respective ship lobbies are mostly satisfied with their share of the FF ship construction budget, which is never big enough, of course, largely thanks to BF hogging the vast majority of it.
Past threads at the bar and here have involved working theories revolving around construction costs being roughly M$5000/ton [apparently a figure evidently determined from some of the pearls before I joined the bar], at least back at the beginning of the first Havenite war, to give some idea of the relative costs involved, thus FF BC's cost approximately 11-12 times as much as FF DD's, about 3 times that of a FF CA and 9-10 times that of a FF CL; the bigger ship lobbies again getting the lion's share of the construction budget.
Naturally there ought to be more lighter units than heavier in the FF, but we have the delightful pearl also mentioned in later textev IIRC, that FF alone out massed the whole RMN in 1904, including all the SD/DN's; and as some will recall the 1905 chart includes tonnage which in the RMN's case totals 2318.6 Million tons, which you can't reach if there aren't that many BC's, CA's, etc.
Indeed using the 4 rough quarters of ~1600 each, and the RMN class averages from 1905, its impossible; the total's about 1945 million tons, barely 5/6 of the RMN's tonnage; which assumed the RMN could afford to model its classes closely on the nominal best navy in the galaxy, ie the SLN, which is not exactly confirmed by HoS.
Adding the extra 20% brings FF up to ~7900 in 1905 [which only matches the RMN's tonnage], and ~9740 total warships for the SLN before the reserve [which is rather new in the textev] and reduces the 1905 PRHN to 21.62% of the active SLN, which many would consider close enough.
The latter textev, post AAC, uses figures above 8000 FF active ships, which is current with the pearl, and again could be from new construction since 1905 of just over 82-89 warships annually [the lower figure's is just the 20% increase to 7900], while the higher would still give BF at least 3 times the construction tonnage budget, or again delayed retirement or some combination of both might answer.
From CoS we learned there were then 1784 in the SL, with out the 'several hundred' protectorates, however many that is, for something over 3 active FF warships per SL system, since the FF is the "neighborhood cop and enforcer".
Given refits at 15%, ships in transit to or from their respective stations, single ships could be the norm, though having pairs of ships or divisions shifting through a number of systems, as Dubroskaya's BC squadron was is probably preferred.
There is also the problem of ship class inflation; in SoS, SFtS until SoF etc, the largest force Thurgood had was a division of heavy cruisers, but his flagship and main force became BC's in SoF so as to be more impressive, though CA's would have far greater reasons to flee Tenth Fleet, but the FF BC's have been deeply diminished relative to the RMN's BC's despite the Gladiator CA's appearance in TSotS back in 2003.
The recent books have given the FF CA's the fewest ships in the various TF's, TG's FF contingents, but we don't know if all the BC's numbered were strictly from FF {ie part of BF], or demanded by BF because they see greater prestige in having more BC escorts etc, or that FF was able to argue successfully they needed the CA's to stay where they were, especially when taking so many BC's away from their respective sectors.
So for the above reasons I conclude FF has well over 8000 warships of roughly equal numbers of all 4 types, whose losses to the GA so far are only around 2.5% far less than BF's 25%, though I expect that to change rather soon when the GA visits all the FF bases in the not too distant future.
If there are only around 50 FF bases beyond the core, ie less than 40 LY's radius for each, though there might be another ~50 FF stations on the perimeter or boundary of the verge; then only a couple dozen or more TF's with just a pair of SDP's etc could easily deal with all of them rather quickly in a few month's, possibly faster given all the wormholes the RMN now controls.
L
PS: Then there's the question of what happened at Beowulf, any wish suggest how it went?
A lot smaller than it used to be and every time it battles the Manties is gets smaller and smaller and smaller.