Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

USS Nevada

 
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 >> USS Nevada Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
USS Nevada - 10/28/2019 12:05:13 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 807
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
I think it was John the 3rd's Signature pic that got me thinking on this. At Pearl, when Nevada impressively got up steam and started to move between raids 1 and 2, I don't recall what her intentions were? Attack the enemy fleet? Get out off Dodge and hide somewhere? Anyone know off the top of their head? Obviously ended up better to be sunk in Pearl than outside.

Curious.

Frank
Post #: 1
RE: USS Nevada - 10/28/2019 12:21:34 PM   
Trugrit


Posts: 802
Joined: 7/14/2014
From: North Carolina
Status: offline

Just to get moving.

A moving duck is harder to hit than a sitting duck.

Only theoretically; depending entirely on the speed of the duck.


(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 2
RE: USS Nevada - 10/28/2019 2:14:49 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 807
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Nevada was not a fast duck

(in reply to Trugrit)
Post #: 3
RE: USS Nevada - 10/28/2019 3:08:26 PM   
Buckrock

 

Posts: 505
Joined: 3/16/2012
From: Not all there
Status: offline
Nevada was attempting to sortie out from the harbor when she was disabled. Had she got out, she likely would have joined up with several USN cruisers and destroyers that did successfully sortie during the raid to operate in open waters southward of Pearl Harbor. Nevada possibly may have then accompanied that group in their late morning pursuit of enemy carriers that had been wrongly reported as operating near Barbers Point. Or Not. We'll never know.

_____________________________

This was the only sig line I could think of.

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 4
RE: USS Nevada - 10/28/2019 4:53:43 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16825
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

I think it was John the 3rd's Signature pic that got me thinking on this. At Pearl, when Nevada impressively got up steam and started to move between raids 1 and 2, I don't recall what her intentions were? Attack the enemy fleet? Get out off Dodge and hide somewhere? Anyone know off the top of their head? Obviously ended up better to be sunk in Pearl than outside.

Curious.

Frank


I love that painting that I use for art in my Posts! Wish is could but it. Have got a good one of the Arizona at her moorings just prior to the attack.

She was definitely moving to the sea to join-up with everyone who had or was sortieing...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 5
RE: USS Nevada - 10/29/2019 2:32:06 PM   
jagsdomain

 

Posts: 197
Joined: 7/4/2019
Status: offline
I dont know if there a plan per say other than get moving and see what happened.
It was a no win, sit and sink or try and do somthing and sink.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 6
RE: USS Nevada - 10/29/2019 3:23:38 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 15307
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jagsdomain

I dont know if there a plan per say other than get moving and see what happened.
It was a no win, sit and sink or try and do somthing and sink.


The common belief among naval officers in 1941 was that it would be very hard for aircraft to hit a ship at sea and maneuvering. The review of Billy Mitchell's successful sinking of captured German ships was not impressed at his hit rate on static ships and extrapolated that moving and maneuvering ships would be nearly impossible to hit. Almost no one in high command of the battleship navies kept an eye on development of aircraft, torpedoes and bombs into more effective weapons.

Similarly, the effectiveness of the Taranto raid by the British was largely considered to be because the Italian fleet was anchored and the Italians did not have good equipment for night time AA defence. The crippling torpedo hit on Bismarck was written off as a fluke. Fleet exercises with USN carriers would have shown that attacks on ships at sea were possible but there was little data to show a hit rate or hit effectiveness. Thus, the belief in 1941 that if the ships at PH could just get out of the harbour and get some "sea room" they would be much less vulnerable.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to jagsdomain)
Post #: 7
RE: USS Nevada - 10/29/2019 3:29:18 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4093
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
Admiral Furlong, Commander Mine Force Pacific Fleet aboard minelayer Oglala, witnessed the first bomb explosions, quickly realized that he was "SOPA" ("Senior officer presently afloat") and thus in command of the fleet and ordered by flag signal "All ships in harbor sortie" - to the relative safety of the open sea where they could maneuver to avoid torpedoes.

_____________________________


(in reply to jagsdomain)
Post #: 8
RE: USS Nevada - 10/29/2019 11:30:34 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 24944
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

The common belief among naval officers in 1941 was that it would be very hard for aircraft to hit a ship at sea and maneuvering. The review of Billy Mitchell's successful sinking of captured German ships was not impressed at his hit rate on static ships and extrapolated that moving and maneuvering ships would be nearly impossible to hit. Almost no one in high command of the battleship navies kept an eye on development of aircraft, torpedoes and bombs into more effective weapons.

Similarly, the effectiveness of the Taranto raid by the British was largely considered to be because the Italian fleet was anchored and the Italians did not have good equipment for night time AA defence. The crippling torpedo hit on Bismarck was written off as a fluke. Fleet exercises with USN carriers would have shown that attacks on ships at sea were possible but there was little data to show a hit rate or hit effectiveness. Thus, the belief in 1941 that if the ships at PH could just get out of the harbour and get some "sea room" they would be much less vulnerable.

Over the weekend I listened to a few of the recent podcasts of the USNI. I don't remember which one this was, but in one an historian discussed that very fact. Some of the pronouncements you allude to were discussed, but his key point was different and I think very sharp. He said to understand how the US Navy really felt about something it's best to go to the US Naval War College archives and look at the war game rules then in effect.

He did that, and found that in the 1930's the US Navy took carriers and their aircraft very seriously indeed. nothing like the pat impression which has prevailed in the media and many histories.

_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 9
RE: USS Nevada - 10/30/2019 3:45:25 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 42642
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

The common belief among naval officers in 1941 was that it would be very hard for aircraft to hit a ship at sea and maneuvering. The review of Billy Mitchell's successful sinking of captured German ships was not impressed at his hit rate on static ships and extrapolated that moving and maneuvering ships would be nearly impossible to hit. Almost no one in high command of the battleship navies kept an eye on development of aircraft, torpedoes and bombs into more effective weapons.

Similarly, the effectiveness of the Taranto raid by the British was largely considered to be because the Italian fleet was anchored and the Italians did not have good equipment for night time AA defence. The crippling torpedo hit on Bismarck was written off as a fluke. Fleet exercises with USN carriers would have shown that attacks on ships at sea were possible but there was little data to show a hit rate or hit effectiveness. Thus, the belief in 1941 that if the ships at PH could just get out of the harbour and get some "sea room" they would be much less vulnerable.
warspite1

If that is true - and unforgivably some of the Admiralty thinking re the Far East suggests it was - then those Admirals were asleep during 1941 or simply not looking at what was going on in the Mediterranean.

The arrival of the Luftwaffe in the Mediterranean at the start of the year (Excess Convoy) and the withdrawal from Crete alone (not to mention Matapan) would have shown anyone even vaguely interested in naval air warfare, the damage that air attack could cause ships whether in port or not.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 10
RE: USS Nevada - 10/30/2019 2:21:10 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 807
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Taranto really should have woken people up. Roughly 20 Stringbags took out the Italian fleet. And not all of them were even carrying torps. But in regards to the Far East, Britian was really stretched. Pretty much alone and still worried about defending the Home islands. And a huge disrespect for Japanese capabilities (Buffs are good enough for Singers), but you have to deploy your assets as best you can. The POW/Repulse sortie was really not a good idea. If the Netties didn't get them I am not sure they would have fared well against a couple of Kongos with a pack of CAs and DDs in company.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 11
RE: USS Nevada - 10/30/2019 11:56:56 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5293
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
Although I concur that the sortie of PoW and Repulse was not a good idea one needs to consider that the very first torpedo hit on the Prince of Wales was a one in a million critical hit on that ship and that the Repulse dodged 19 torpedoes before being hit even though the IJN LBA pilots had received extra training in dropping torpedoes against ships (with the PoW/Repulse in mind).

As to the assertion that these ships may not have fared well against a pair of Kongos with a bunch of cruisers and destroyers one in attendance has to remember that neither Kirishima nor Hiei fared all that well in their first surface engagement and the Kongo/Haruna failed to distinguish themselves quite prominently in their first surface engagement (off Samar in 1944). No Japanese BB had to fight a surface engagement with any belligerent prior to Dec 41 so any "experience" in game turns depends on how much one believes the highly scripted Japanese Fleet exercises prior to the war (both Pow and Repulse had fought in real surface engagements previously) . The cruisers and destroyers of the IJN may have pulled it out for the IJN in a surface engagement but they didn't do all that hot off Guadalcanal in November 42. In the game the Japanese will win but one can't help but wonder.

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 12
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 1:00:49 AM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7874
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Although I concur that the sortie of PoW and Repulse was not a good idea one needs to consider that the very first torpedo hit on the Prince of Wales was a one in a million critical hit on that ship and that the Repulse dodged 19 torpedoes before being hit even though the IJN LBA pilots had received extra training in dropping torpedoes against ships (with the PoW/Repulse in mind).

As to the assertion that these ships may not have fared well against a pair of Kongos with a bunch of cruisers and destroyers one in attendance has to remember that neither Kirishima nor Hiei fared all that well in their first surface engagement and the Kongo/Haruna failed to distinguish themselves quite prominently in their first surface engagement (off Samar in 1944). No Japanese BB had to fight a surface engagement with any belligerent prior to Dec 41 so any "experience" in game turns depends on how much one believes the highly scripted Japanese Fleet exercises prior to the war (both Pow and Repulse had fought in real surface engagements previously) . The cruisers and destroyers of the IJN may have pulled it out for the IJN in a surface engagement but they didn't do all that hot off Guadalcanal in November 42. In the game the Japanese will win but one can't help but wonder.


Interesting...but the Battle of Java Sea might be a better comparison. The long lances would have found targets, even if fighting at longer ranges.

Repulse dodging all those torpedoes seems like a fluke. They had an experienced captain.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 13
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 2:22:34 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5293
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
As mentioned before the IJN cruisers and destroyers may have pulled it out for the IJN BBs but it seems to me that the performance of the "long lance" was not consistently good. Java Sea, Savo Island and Tassaforonga were pretty much it. At Sunda Strait a few days after Java Sea and in which USS Houston and HMAS Perth were tremendously outnumbered and outgunned, the "long lace" mostly sank IJA transports. No "long lance" figured in finishing off the HMS Exeter. It didn't figure in the Battle of Cape Esperance at all. Although several hits with it were scored in The Naval Battle of Guadalcanal such hits did not in the end do anything to save either the battleships HIJMS Hiei or HIJMS Kirishima. In the 1943 battles in "The Slot" such hits as were scored did little to effect the pretty steady Allied advance and the American's DDs, with much less technically advanced torpedoes, gave as good as they got. At Surigao Strait and off Samar the "long Lance figured not at all.

I'm only of the opinion that the IJN BBs training was completely theoretical (as was that of the IJN CA's and DD's) whereas both Allied ships had real life experience with surface combat so dismissing their performance in that context might be giving the IJN more credit than they're due (although the 4 Allied DDs had no surface combat experience they had all been in various actions previously).

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 14
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 10:14:13 AM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 807
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
I know the POW squared off with the Bismarck, but who did the Repulse fight? Maybe the bombardment of Vichy ships (guessing here). Repulse seemed to be a much better manned and captained ship (than the POW), but she was from the same era as the Kongos, and more lightly armed. And those 4 Allied DDs were not exactly youngsters. That said, anything can happen once you engage, and I truly like the IJN torping their own ships (so the long lances did work!). And I guess long lances came back to haunt the IJN as I think a ship two went down off Samar due to the LL getting hit by US aircraft and going 'boom'.

Can't blame LL performance in the NBG. They killed the screen. If someone other then ADM Lee was in charge the Hiei might have lived. Or was it Kirishima? In any case Washington earned her pay that night.

As for US DDs - the 4 pipers at Bali and capt Burke's exploits are the only 'wows' I can recall - and not even close to what the IJN did at Savo. The Brits did also kill a CA late war with DDs, I think near Singers, but age has damaged my recall of details.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 15
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 10:15:53 AM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 807
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Now if Warspite is there the whole IJN should run. What she did in Norway was epic.

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 16
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 10:55:54 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4093
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence
...Kongo/Haruna failed to distinguish themselves quite prominently in their first surface engagement (off Samar in 1944)...


Kongo was actually one of the better performers at Samar, she is being credited with numerous hits on Gambier Bay, Heermann, Hoel, Johnston and Samuel B. Roberts.


I think the experience levels of the IJN in the game reflect the difference in training compared to the USN, not compared to the training and war experience of the RN.

While the IJN trained "8 days a week" (and nights), often in rough northern waters and regardless of weather, the USN preferred to train in the Caribbean in the calmest possible conditions and rarely at night (according to Morison IIRC).

_____________________________


(in reply to spence)
Post #: 17
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 11:57:29 AM   
Macclan5


Posts: 1021
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

The common belief among naval officers in 1941 was that it would be very hard for aircraft to hit a ship at sea and maneuvering. The review of Billy Mitchell's successful sinking of captured German ships was not impressed at his hit rate on static ships and extrapolated that moving and maneuvering ships would be nearly impossible to hit. Almost no one in high command of the battleship navies kept an eye on development of aircraft, torpedoes and bombs into more effective weapons.

Similarly, the effectiveness of the Taranto raid by the British was largely considered to be because the Italian fleet was anchored and the Italians did not have good equipment for night time AA defence. The crippling torpedo hit on Bismarck was written off as a fluke. Fleet exercises with USN carriers would have shown that attacks on ships at sea were possible but there was little data to show a hit rate or hit effectiveness. Thus, the belief in 1941 that if the ships at PH could just get out of the harbour and get some "sea room" they would be much less vulnerable.
warspite1

If that is true - and unforgivably some of the Admiralty thinking re the Far East suggests it was - then those Admirals were asleep during 1941 or simply not looking at what was going on in the Mediterranean.

The arrival of the Luftwaffe in the Mediterranean at the start of the year (Excess Convoy) and the withdrawal from Crete alone (not to mention Matapan) would have shown anyone even vaguely interested in naval air warfare, the damage that air attack could cause ships whether in port or not.



As indicated previously Pearl Harbor was attacked Feb 7 1932

Source is military.com but there are plenty of references / insights / studies in books with many and various opinions.

The USN "should have absolutely" understood the danger.

Judgement was clouded by cultural assumptions / Battleship devotees / "conventional wisdom" which is generally a euphemism for stupidity

--

Yarnell achieved total surprise. The airfields were put out of commission, with not a single plane getting airborne during the attack. The attacking force scored multiple hits, they dropped sacks of white flour to simulate bombs, on the battleships. The umpires declared that Yarnell's attack had been a complete success and declared him the winner. The Army and Navy brass, however, would have none of it. They complained that Yarnell had cheated. He had attacked at dawn on a Sunday morning, a time considered "inappropriate" for an attack. His attack vector from the north-northeast had mimicked planes arriving from the mainland. Most importantly, the Navy argued, low level precision bombing of battleships at anchor was unrealistic since "everyone knew that Asians lacked sufficient hand-eye coordination to engage in that kind of precision bombing."

Pressured by the War Department, the umpires reversed their decision and declared that the defenders had won the exercise. The Navy and its "battleship admirals" ignored Yarnell's contention that Pearl Harbor was vulnerable to an attack by naval air power. The exercise was widely reported in the press and was observed by Japanese naval officers at the Japanese consulate on Oahu. Some 10 years later, the Japanese Navy would launch an almost carbon copy attack on Pearl Harbor, utilizing six carriers and double the air power used by Yarnell.



_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 18
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 12:11:44 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 807
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Now off topic - but wasn't there an exercise maybe 15 years ago where the umps were over ruled to give the USN a win? And does not say much for readiness when our DDs keep running into things. Condolences to the friends and families with the ultimate losses.

(in reply to Macclan5)
Post #: 19
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 1:01:47 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 15307
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Now off topic - but wasn't there an exercise maybe 15 years ago where the umps were over ruled to give the USN a win? And does not say much for readiness when our DDs keep running into things. Condolences to the friends and families with the ultimate losses.

I wouldn't extrapolate the tragedies of those collisions to equal ineptitude in all situations. It seemed to me the collisions were the result of complacency about threats, inexperienced green crewmen and distractions that took their attention away from watchkeeping.

I suspect in a real threat situation with war readiness conditions in place, USN warships would fight well. The professional navy seems to have few illusions about threats from actual hostiles since the suicide attack on the DD in port. (Shaw?).

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 20
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 1:13:05 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5293
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

but who did the Repulse fight?


Sorry apparently confused her with HMS Renown that fought KMS Scharnhorst and KMS Gneisnau. BTW Capt Tenant of Repulse was the RN's on scene commander at Dunkirk.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 21
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 1:29:38 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 807
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
USS Stark perhaps? And IIRC Renown got upgraded in the 30s while Hood and Repulse did not (mostly because they were busy showing the flag).

As for readiness - hopefully.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 22
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 5:24:43 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 42642
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

I know the POW squared off with the Bismarck, but who did the Repulse fight?

And IIRC Renown got upgraded in the 30s while Hood and Repulse did not (mostly because they were busy showing the flag).

warspite1

HMS Repulse was just one of those ships - HMS Queen Elizabeth was another - that always seemed to miss out on the action. I believe the last (only?) time she fired her main armament at a ship was in 1917.


Repulse underwent modernisation between 1930-1936 but this was of only limited value, certainly by 1941. At least her sister got more of an overhaul a few years later, but time, dockyard space and money ran out before Hitler did his thang which meant many of the RN battleships/battlecruisers were screwed in terms of meaningful improvements; Nelson, Rodney, Hood, Repulse, Barham, Malaya and all five R-class .....

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 23
RE: USS Nevada - 10/31/2019 5:40:06 PM   
jagsdomain

 

Posts: 197
Joined: 7/4/2019
Status: offline
Had the fast BB been broken of like they were suppose to be it would have been both epic and tragic.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 24
RE: USS Nevada - 11/1/2019 8:55:14 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 42642
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jagsdomain

Had the fast BB been broken of like they were suppose to be it would have been both epic and tragic.
warspite1

Sorry jagsdomain, what were you referring to here?


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to jagsdomain)
Post #: 25
RE: USS Nevada - 11/1/2019 11:04:02 AM   
obvert


Posts: 14039
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Although I concur that the sortie of PoW and Repulse was not a good idea one needs to consider that the very first torpedo hit on the Prince of Wales was a one in a million critical hit on that ship and that the Repulse dodged 19 torpedoes before being hit even though the IJN LBA pilots had received extra training in dropping torpedoes against ships (with the PoW/Repulse in mind).

As to the assertion that these ships may not have fared well against a pair of Kongos with a bunch of cruisers and destroyers one in attendance has to remember that neither Kirishima nor Hiei fared all that well in their first surface engagement and the Kongo/Haruna failed to distinguish themselves quite prominently in their first surface engagement (off Samar in 1944). No Japanese BB had to fight a surface engagement with any belligerent prior to Dec 41 so any "experience" in game turns depends on how much one believes the highly scripted Japanese Fleet exercises prior to the war (both Pow and Repulse had fought in real surface engagements previously) . The cruisers and destroyers of the IJN may have pulled it out for the IJN in a surface engagement but they didn't do all that hot off Guadalcanal in November 42. In the game the Japanese will win but one can't help but wonder.


Interesting...but the Battle of Java Sea might be a better comparison. The long lances would have found targets, even if fighting at longer ranges.

Repulse dodging all those torpedoes seems like a fluke. They had an experienced captain.


Repulse dodging torps was not a fluke. It was the result of having an experienced crew, a fast ship, and being the secondary target in this strike.

At Java Sea the Japanese launched two massive long lance strikes (92 total fish) during daylight that achieved exactly one hit on Kortenaer, which did sink. The Exeter was hit by an 8" shell which crippled her.

They did sink Java and De Ruyter at night and of course the long lance was the best torpedo in the world at the time. IJN doctrine failed to use it as effectively as they might, though, since many attacks were made at extreme long range and the Allies had enough time to assess and comb the torpedo lanes. The Kortenaer is even thought to have possibly intentionally "taken" the hit to screen the cruisers here.

If fighting the PoW and repulse in daylight the RN would have had a good chance to cause some serious damage and disrupt the Japanese covering force, but that's assuming air strikes would not have been possible at all, which is unlikely unless weather intervened. The RN most likely would not have been able to do anything to the invasion fleet and transports though, and even then the sortie was more of a show of defiance and force than a serious threat to what the Japanese were doing.

I've been reading about this period in Rising Sun, Falling Skies, by Jeffrey Cox. A pretty good and incredibly detailed account of this early period of the war. I've tried to play the first turn a number of times in game with LR CAP for Force Z and the Japanese always get through, and in 4 of 5 attempts so far have sunk both PoW and Repulse. I haven't yet turned off the air strikes to see what Force Z does if it runs into the Japanese covering force. It would have to be on turn 2 anyway as their one phase movement wouldn't allow them to reach the the IJN ships the first night.

< Message edited by obvert -- 11/1/2019 11:49:11 AM >


_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 26
RE: USS Nevada - 11/1/2019 5:04:08 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 15307
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: jagsdomain

Had the fast BB been broken of like they were suppose to be it would have been both epic and tragic.
warspite1

Sorry jagsdomain, what were you referring to here?


I think he is talking about the BB TF that Halsey created administratively but never ordered to go and guard San Bernardino Strait. The word of should be "off".

Had the US BBs met Kurita's fleet both sides would have suffered a lot of death and damage. Kurita would have had an advantage in CAs, but Musashi had already been sunk, Halsey had at least one more fast BB and excellent radar fire control on them. He would also have been able to cross the "T" at the mouth of the strait.
I think the US BBs would have been busy dealing with the IJN BBs and the IJN CAs would have pressed close enough to launch torpedoes. We can only speculate whether the US ships could maneuver enough to dodge the flocks of torps the IJN could launch.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 27
RE: USS Nevada - 11/1/2019 5:56:35 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 24944
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Can't blame LL performance in the NBG. They killed the screen. If someone other then ADM Lee was in charge the Hiei might have lived. Or was it Kirishima? In any case Washington earned her pay that night.


It was Kirishima.

_____________________________


(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 28
RE: USS Nevada - 11/1/2019 6:09:35 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5293
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

We can only speculate whether the US ships could maneuver enough to dodge the flocks of torps the IJN could launch.


Supposedly Kurita th0ught he was engaged with Halsey's carriers and cruisers when he was fighting Taffy 3's baby flattops and DE/DDs. It would seem that the IJN cruisers and DDs would have launched their Long Lances - if they did they missed with their "flocks" since none of Taffy 3's ships were hit with any.

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 29
RE: USS Nevada - 11/1/2019 8:31:18 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 15307
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

We can only speculate whether the US ships could maneuver enough to dodge the flocks of torps the IJN could launch.


Supposedly Kurita th0ught he was engaged with Halsey's carriers and cruisers when he was fighting Taffy 3's baby flattops and DE/DDs. It would seem that the IJN cruisers and DDs would have launched their Long Lances - if they did they missed with their "flocks" since none of Taffy 3's ships were hit with any.

Taffy 3 was not arrayed in a battle line broadside to the Japanese ships like the BBs would have been off San Bernardino. Taffy 3 was running away like hell and using smoke/rain squalls to hide. A torpedo attack would not have been likely to hit anything in those conditions.

My comment about flocks of torps imagined a line of big ships with relatively low maneuverability sitting broadside to the torpedo track when the Japanese launched. Just how much maneuver room and launch warning was available would make a difference to the outcome but I would expect some hits if the launch was coordinated well.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> USS Nevada Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.184