Matrix Games Forums

Come and see us during the Spieltagen in Essen!New Screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTYCommand: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTY is now available!Frontline : The Longest Day Announced and in Beta!Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues Page: <<   < prev  37 38 39 40 [41]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/21/2013 5:52:20 AM   
JeffK


Posts: 5180
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline
There seems to be some doubt as to whether she was carrying 3"/23 or 3"/50 AA guns

http://www.network54.com/Forum/594514/message/1286622517/Last+of+the+Sampsons

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to JeffK)
Post #: 1201
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/22/2013 3:49:24 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 2789
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: The deepest, darkest pit of hell
Status: offline
Some more glitches I stumbled upon while modding away - in stock resp. DaBigBabes we have the ships:

4239 / 4239 Canopus - Canopus class AS
7051 / 12051 Santa Ana - Lake Cargo class AK
7052 / 12052 Santa Elisa - Transmarine Cargo class AK
7054 / 12054 Santa Teresa - Transmarine Cargo class AK
8010/ 12343 Mount McKinley - C2 cargo AK (sunk date in editor 420311)

and not in stock, only in DBB there is 10788 Baranof - Yukon class AP.


It appears that - appart from Canopus - the classes and/or names are not correct.

All AKs should belong to the same class - which needs to be created from scratch as an AP class (Yukon class is close but no cigar).

Santa Ana should not be in the game at all since she saw no service in the PTO resp. when she was earmarked for the PTO in late 1945, she belonged to a class not modelled in the game (hospital ship).

Santa Elisa needs a name change and has a duplicate in DBB (Baranof).

Santa Teresa needs a name change (two actually), is available on day 1 in the game, but should enter later and needs a withdrawal date as converted to hospital ship for the ETO.


Here is what I have found on various websites (Naval Historical Center, Grace Line History etc.):


In 1916 Grace decided to institute a passenger service from New York to ports on the west coast of South America as far as Valparaiso, Chile, and contracted for five ships- SANTA ANA, SANTA LUISA, SANTA TERESA (By Cramp) and SANTA ELISA & SANTA LEONORA (by New York Shipbuilding). These 110-passenger ships were 376 feet long with a gross tonnage of 4800. They had four boilers each and quadruple expansion engine of 3300 hp. in the Cramp ships and 3400 in the others. Their service speed of 13 knots could be exceeded by a knot.


The United States Shipping Board took these five ships over for transport duty in 1918. By the time the troops had been carried back from France, Grace had decided that four would be sufficient for the intended service, and declined return of the SANTA LEONORA, which went to the Navy and became the submarine tender CANOPUS, ultimately lost in the Philipines early in 1942.


SANTA ANA (1) was returned to Grace Line in 1919 for the New York - Valparaiso service. She carried 110 passengers. She was transferred to the Panama Mail Line in 1928, and renamed Guatemala. When she returned to Grace Line in 1931, she became the Santa Cecilia, and was used on the New York - San Francisco coastal service. Santa Cecilia was laid up in 1934, and sold to Merchants & Miners in 1936 as the Irwin. In 1941 she was acquired by the War Department and served during and shortly after World War II as the Army's transport and hospital ship John L. Clem. Soon after her acquisition by the Army she was assigned the U.S. Navy hull number AP-36, but did not enter U.S. Navy service. She spent the war in the ETO as troopship and was converted to hospital ship in 1944 for duty in the western Mediterranean. She returned to the US in June 45 to begin preparations for service in the Pacific. However, Japan surrendered and the plans were cancelled.


SANTA ELISA was returned to Grace Line in 1920 for the New York - Valparaiso service. In 1931 she was transferred to the New York - San Francisco coastal service. Santa Elisa was laid up in 1934, and sold to the Alaska SS Co in 1936, renamed Baranof. In Seattle-Alaska service. Chartered by War Shipping Administration, 1942-1946.


SANTA TERESA was returned to Grace Line in 1920 for the New York - Valparaiso service. In 1931 she was transferred to the New York - San Francisco coastal service. Santa Teresa was laid up in 1934, and sold to Merchants & Miners in 1936 as the Kent. SS Kent was purchased by the U.S. Army in April 1941 and renamed Ernest Hinds. Converted to a troopship (750 troops), she had brief Army service before being transferred to the Navy in July 1941. Renamed USS Kent (AP-28), she carried passengers and cargo along the U.S. East Coast and in the Gulf of Mexico area (on Dec. 7th 1941 she was at NYC) until March 1942, when she was returned to the Army and again became USAT Ernest Hinds. During May 1942 - September 1943 Ernest Hinds operated as a transport, making a trip to Alaska in mid-1942 and thereafter carrying personnel and cargo between the U.S., Hawaii, and the south Pacific and within the latter region. The ship was converted to a hospital ship at San Francisco, California, between September 1943 and June 1944. She then steamed through the Panama Canal to begin service between the U.S. East Coast and the Mediterranean Sea. Ernest Hinds's hospital ship service ended in September 1945.


SANTA LUISA was returned to Grace Line in 1920 for the New York - Valparaiso service. She was transferred to the Panama Mail Line in 1928, and renamed El Salvador. When she returned to Grace Line in 1931, she became the Santa Ana (2), and was used on the New York - San Francisco coastal service. Santa Ana (2) was laid up in 1934, and sold to the Alaska SS Co in 1936, renamed Mount McKinley. Chartered by War Shipping Administration 1941 and accidently lost in the Aleutians on 11 March 1942, wrecked near Scotch Cap.


And another nitpick:

7053 / 12053 Santa Rita - Isthmian Cargo class AK

This seems to be either

1) a duplicate of AP-6 William Ward Burrows (slot 5139 in stock and DBB), since the 1929-built Grace Liner "Santa Rita" was converted to AP-6 in 1940, or - less likely - 2) wrong class for C2 cargo ship "Santa Rita" completed in September 1941 which *may* have served briefly in the PTO before being sunk July 9th 1942 700 miles NE of Puerto Rico (so would need a withdrawal date for ETO service).








_____________________________

Carpe Cerevisiam



WitP AAR "Six Years of War"

(in reply to JeffK)
Post #: 1202
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 4/5/2014 6:36:43 PM   
msieving1


Posts: 462
Joined: 3/23/2007
From: Missouri
Status: offline
I’ve been doing some reading on the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) in World War II and thought I’d make some notes on RFA ships in WITP-AE, particularly the DALE class oilers.

There are five DALE class oilers in the stock scenarios:
ABBEYDALE (arrives October 1944 in Aden)
BISHOPSDALE (starts war in Sydney)
BROOMDALE (arrives January 1944 in Aden)
DINSDALE (arrives June 1945 in Aden)
ENNERDALE (arrives June 1945 in Aden)

All are wrong.

In October 1944 ABBEYDALE was in two pieces being towed to Taranto, Italy.  She was torpedoed by a German U-boat off Algeria in June 1943, and broke in half.  Both parts stayed afloat and were towed to Algiers, before later being towed to Taranto.  The pieces were re-attached after the end of the war in Europe and she was returned to service in July 1946.

In December 1941, BISHOPDALE was in the Caribbean.  She arrived in Balboa on January 20, 1942, and sailed the next day for Henderson Island in the Pitcairn group.  There she refueled HMS Warspite on February 6, and Queen Elizabeth on February 15, before sailing to Sydney, where she arrived April 6, 1942.

BROOMDALE arrived in Cape Town March 17, 1942, and then sailed for Bombay.  She stayed in the Indian Ocean, mostly operating out of Colombo, until sailing January 31, 1945 for Aden and then going back to the UK.  She returned to the Far East in November 1945.

DINSDALE was torpedoed May 31, 1942 in the South Atlantic by an Italian submarine and sank the next day.

ENNERDALE spent most of the war in the Mediterranean, but arrived in Aden on April 24, 1945.

There were several DALE class oilers that served in the Indian and Pacific Oceans during the war that aren’t included in the stock scenarios.

ARNDALE arrived in Cape Town June 9, 1942 and operated between South Africa and Mombasa for over a year before sailing to Bombay, arriving there September 14, 1943.  She spent the rest of the war servicing the British Eastern Fleet and Pacific Fleet.

CEDARDALE sailed from Cape Town December 5, 1941 and operated in the Indian Ocean until she sailed from Aden to the Mediterranean May 25, 1943.

DEWDALE was converted to a Landing Ship Gantry (LSG) in June 1943.  In this conversion, she retained her capability as a tanker but was equipped with four large gantry cranes for unloading LCMs.  She carried 15 LCMs loaded with vehicles, which she could unload in 30 minutes.  DEWDALE sailed from Aden May 28, 1945 to join the British Pacific Fleet.

DINGLEDALE sailed from Balboa February 2, 1945 for Manus in the Admiralty Islands to join the British Pacific Fleet.

EAGLESDALE arrived in Cape Town May 19, 1942 and spent the rest of the war in the Indian Ocean.

EASEDALE arrived in Cape Town April 19, 1942 and spent the rest of the war in the Indian Ocean.  Both EAGLESDALE and EASEDALE spent most of their time servicing African ports in 1942, and EASEDALE was used in operations against Vichy French in Madagascar.

ECHODALE sailed from Aden March 16, 1944 bound for Abadan, and spent the rest of the war in the Indian Ocean.


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 1203
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 4/5/2014 7:12:53 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 2789
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: The deepest, darkest pit of hell
Status: offline
Interesting - thanks for posting!

*Leaving to start the editor*

_____________________________

Carpe Cerevisiam



WitP AAR "Six Years of War"

(in reply to msieving1)
Post #: 1204
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 4/7/2014 12:05:52 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8147
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

This is good data. Got anything else on the RFA?

(in reply to msieving1)
Post #: 1205
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 6/10/2014 8:27:21 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 2917
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
A RFA webpage is here: http://www.historicalrfa.org/

_____________________________


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 1206
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/10/2014 9:55:55 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 2917
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
For those interested Shiratsuyu and Hatshuaru classes were disappointing for IJN due to low range, it is probable that Hatshuaru had even less then nominal 4000nm range due to modifications. In game they have 6000nm.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 1207
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/11/2014 5:34:32 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 2955
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Possible issue here. When looking at upgrades, I'm noticing that the Nevada class (Nevada and Oklahoma) lose almost all of their Tower armor in their 12/42 upgrades - from 400 down to 38. No other old BB that I have looked at loses this armor. What's going on here? Did they really remove a lot of the superstructure armor on these ships during the war? Why these ships and not others?

Or is this an error?

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 1208
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/11/2014 6:25:14 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14806
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Possible issue here. When looking at upgrades, I'm noticing that the Nevada class (Nevada and Oklahoma) lose almost all of their Tower armor in their 12/42 upgrades - from 400 down to 38. No other old BB that I have looked at loses this armor. What's going on here? Did they really remove a lot of the superstructure armor on these ships during the war? Why these ships and not others?

Or is this an error?

I've seen this asked before, and apparently yes, they did actually remove it. They needed to save a lot of topside weight to handle the modern AA, etc.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 1209
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/11/2014 7:09:11 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 2955
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Possible issue here. When looking at upgrades, I'm noticing that the Nevada class (Nevada and Oklahoma) lose almost all of their Tower armor in their 12/42 upgrades - from 400 down to 38. No other old BB that I have looked at loses this armor. What's going on here? Did they really remove a lot of the superstructure armor on these ships during the war? Why these ships and not others?

Or is this an error?

I've seen this asked before, and apparently yes, they did actually remove it. They needed to save a lot of topside weight to handle the modern AA, etc.


Ah, makes sense. I just didn't see any notes about it, but I was just going off of a quick google. The ships were very light on AA on December 7...

So, not sending these ships anywhere near surface combat, then. Heh.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1210
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/12/2014 1:35:32 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 2917
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
IRL in some situations the tower armor was more of a problem than an advantage.

< Message edited by Dili -- 7/14/2014 12:56:06 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 1211
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/22/2014 8:07:30 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 2789
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: The deepest, darkest pit of hell
Status: offline
xAK "Admiral Y. Williams" (actually "Admiral Y. S. Williams") starts the war at San Diego in stock scen 1 and DBB (and probably most other scenarios and mods).

In fact the ship was drydocked at Hong Kong when the war started. It was taken over by Japan and renamed Tasutama Maru. She survived the war.

Modders may want to correct the starting location - or put her in as Japanese ship.

http://home.comcast.net/~cshortridge/MERSHIPHIS/AMERSHIPL/SS_ADMIRAL_Y.S._WILLIAMS_SINKING_LOST_CREW.pdf

_____________________________

Carpe Cerevisiam



WitP AAR "Six Years of War"

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 1212
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/13/2014 3:53:45 PM   
Jace11

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 8/23/2012
Status: offline
Should USS Trevor not be named USS Trever, I don't remember, but I think it might be this ship or maybe another DMS was missing from one of the starting TFs in the Guadalcanal scenario. Actually now I think, pretty sure it is Hovey or Hopkins that is missing from one the tf 62 groups.

Ship Etorofu ( not class, actual ship name) has typo also I reckon. Is listed at Etoforu. Can someone check this...? Names are tricky. Searching both names give the same escort, but the former gives more official sources while the latter is mainly fan sites, modellers and this forum, where the typo appears to have propagated into mainstream usage. Seeing as the ship is most likely named after the kurile island I think the former is correct, the same as the Escort's class in the database.

< Message edited by Jace11 -- 9/13/2014 5:04:36 PM >

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 1213
Page:   <<   < prev  37 38 39 40 [41]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues Page: <<   < prev  37 38 39 40 [41]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.098