Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Soviet Fleet

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Soviet Fleet Page: <<   < prev  5 6 7 [8] 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Soviet Fleet - 2/9/2005 1:10:23 AM   
Tankerace


Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline
The US, at least until the War of 1812.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to Lemurs!)
Post #: 211
RE: Soviet Fleet - 2/9/2005 4:01:21 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

I don't want to be insulting but....Wah!
The Soviet navy? Are you freaking kidding me?

The Soviets had 4 years of war in the West and never used their navy; what makes you think they would have used what little they had in the East? Plus, with Soviet ships in the east having at best skeleton crews they were not going to effective at all and they probably should all start with 25 sys damage and not be able to get better than that.

Seriously, what real country uses a drafted short term navy?

Mike


Hey. Seeing as we have a fully mobile modern Japanese Army (bicycles are amazing weapons!) capable of defeating modern mechanized armies in defensive positions...WTF? And now they can equip squadrons a year ahead of time with aircraft their industry was incapable of manufacturing...2xWTF?

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Lemurs!)
Post #: 212
Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/11/2005 2:20:23 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8171
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
Hi Ron




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 213
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/11/2005 2:46:25 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
Wow! Great stuff. Finding Canadian mercantile info is not easy. Where did you get this?

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 214
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/11/2005 2:56:20 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8171
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Wow! Great stuff. Finding Canadian mercantile info is not easy. Where did you get this?


http://fortships.tripod.com/

Not much data out there on these ships. This site has loss data (a few in the Pacific and Indian Ocean) and construction information. I "assumed" that some of those built on the West Coast would serve in the Pacific.

Does anyone have any data on the Canadian World War ONE building program??

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 215
RE: Soviet Fleet - 2/11/2005 8:59:44 PM   
CobraAus


Posts: 2322
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Geelong Australia
Status: offline
incase do do not pick up this ref check out this site supplied by Benway 9 in the warroom
its just what the doctor ordered OOB info tones of it all nations

http://www.niehorster.orbat.com/index.htm

(in reply to Tankerace)
Post #: 216
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/13/2005 6:57:46 PM   
Philbass


Posts: 34
Joined: 12/30/2004
From: London, UK
Status: offline
Don,

I've just sent the details for the British AR, AS and AD to your e-mail.

For everyone else, here is a list of those types I suggest should be added:

Resource AR
Wayland AR
Alaunia AR
Artifex AR
Ausonia AR
Ranpura AR
Assistance AR
Diligence AR
Mullian Cove AR
Dullisk Cove AR

Lucia AS
Wuchang AS
Maidstone AS
Adamant AS
Wolfe AS

Monclare AD
Woolwich AD
Tyne AD

I'm off to sulk (just lost rugby and cricket) and do the stats for the AOs and the AEs plus 2 15inch gun monitors.

Regards,

Phil Bass

_____________________________

Plan followed plan in swift procession,
Commanders went; commanders came,
While telegrams in quick succession
Arrived to douse or fan the flame

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 217
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/13/2005 9:35:18 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8171
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Philbass

Don,

I've just sent the details for the British AR, AS and AD to your e-mail.

For everyone else, here is a list of those types I suggest should be added:

Resource AR
Wayland AR
Alaunia AR
Artifex AR
Ausonia AR
Ranpura AR
Assistance AR
Diligence AR
Mullian Cove AR
Dullisk Cove AR

Lucia AS
Wuchang AS
Maidstone AS
Adamant AS
Wolfe AS

Monclare AD
Woolwich AD
Tyne AD

Tnanks - will get them in right away. We already had a few, glad to get the rest.

quote:


I'm off to sulk (just lost rugby and cricket) and do the stats for the AOs and the AEs plus 2 15inch gun monitors.

Regards,

Phil Bass


Great! Really looking forward to those RN replenishment ships. Hope you can find arrival times too. For the monitors, does anyone want to work up an icon for Abercrombie and Roberts????

(in reply to Philbass)
Post #: 218
RN Monitors - 2/14/2005 12:30:30 AM   
Philbass


Posts: 34
Joined: 12/30/2004
From: London, UK
Status: offline
Okay.

Here is my version of the Monitors which would have arrived in the Indian Ocean in September 1945 (they left Suez in mid August 1945).

I have guestimated several values (endurance, light AA load out, durability) and if anyone has the 'definitive' source: Buxton I L (1978) Big Gun Monitors (??:Tynemouth, England) then feel free to correct this. Red text = guestimate.

I am surprised (or am I) that Matrix just modelled armour based on maximum sizes. Are torpedo bulges modelled into the 'Durability' rating? I assume that they aren't in the 'Belt Armour' Factor. Also, the type of armour (not just size) was important. It has been argued (Brown, D K (2000) Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Development 1923-1945 (London: Conway) p24) that:

...the armour of the King George V and later ships being about 25 per cent more effective than First World War armour. German developments were similar as shown by post-war tests on plates removed from the Tirpitz. The USN failed to achieve similar advances, and the armour of their Second World War ships was no better than those of the earlier war.

Looking at the King George V Class deck armour therefore could be 180-190 (vice 159 in the database) for Deck Armour, 430 (vice 360 in the database) and 133 (vice 108 in the database) for the Tower Armour. Only a thought, some real 'armour head' needs to think about this perhaps...

Of course, if I was to mess with the KGV then the endurance needs to be taken down from 15000. A realistic assessment would be:

... 6000 miles at 10kts or 5000kts at 20kts with 3770 tons of oil. (The small differnce between these these figures reflects the very heavy consumption of the auxiliary machinery.) In 1942 the USS Washington was operating with the Home Fleet and Admiral Tovey reported her fuel consumption was 39 per cent less than King George V at lower speeds and still superior at higher speeds which with a fuel stowage gave the US ship double the endurance of the British battleship.
Source: Brown, D K (200) p33

Also it may be overestimating RN warships by giving them the US Damage Control Advantage. The argument goes that the RN arrangement of boilers and engine rooms was inferior to the US at least until the late war cruisers and the post-war 'Weapon and 'Daring' destroyer classes. The RN ships were in greater danger of losing all power (as happen to HMS Warspite at Salerno). In addition, the small RN cruisers, particularly the 'Didos' were vulnerable to capsize due to outboard wing compartments that if hit by torpedo, " two or probably three main compartments would be flooded greatly reducing the stability so that the asymmetric buoyancy of the other wing compartment would cause a very large heel and , in all probability, capsize the ship". Source: Brown, D K (2000) p73. Also, a damage control school was only set up post the loss of HMSArk Royal(Nov 1941) and there was a lack of fire-fighting equipment, small pumps and alternative power sources. But perhaps by late-war it was much better, so it all comes out in the wash.

Any thoughts??

Regards,

Phil Bass




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Plan followed plan in swift procession,
Commanders went; commanders came,
While telegrams in quick succession
Arrived to douse or fan the flame

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 219
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/14/2005 7:52:35 AM   
CobraAus


Posts: 2322
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Geelong Australia
Status: offline
quote:

does anyone want to work up an icon for Abercrombie and Roberts????


here it is

Cobra Aus




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 220
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/14/2005 10:12:30 AM   
Philbass


Posts: 34
Joined: 12/30/2004
From: London, UK
Status: offline
Cool.

Looks like the Roberts to me. You can really see their whole purpose with the 15in guns. Mmmmm...15 inch guns...
I think the Abercrombie had more superstructure amidships but if we are going for it just one class then great.

Regards,

Phil Bass

PS what class are we going to make the monitors? Do we really want them assigned to surface combat TFs? Or don't we have a choice?

PPS It looks like you guys are tidying up the radar outfits of the US Navy, so I'll type up the stuff for the RN radar outfits. Can we have extra slots for new Radar Devices? Perhaps a total of 3 new Devices (Type 273, Type 286/291 and 281)

PPPS Do we fancy some Fighter Direction Ships? Specifically Ulster Queen and 3 converted LST. These were used with the 'Assault' escort carriers and carried lots of exciting radar and Ground Control Intercept (GCI) equipment for controlling CAP over invasion beachead.

_____________________________

Plan followed plan in swift procession,
Commanders went; commanders came,
While telegrams in quick succession
Arrived to douse or fan the flame

(in reply to CobraAus)
Post #: 221
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/14/2005 10:44:20 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
Yeah, I'm wondering about monitors and surface combat as well. I can just see these things beating the hell out of other BBs in big slugfests, which would be totally BS.

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Philbass)
Post #: 222
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/14/2005 11:19:20 PM   
CobraAus


Posts: 2322
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Geelong Australia
Status: offline
quote:

Looks like the Roberts to me.

Nop its is Abercombie done off line drawings and actual photo for the cameo

Cobra Aus

(in reply to Philbass)
Post #: 223
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/15/2005 12:52:45 AM   
Philbass


Posts: 34
Joined: 12/30/2004
From: London, UK
Status: offline
Many apologies Cobra Aus,

My only side view/picture I have of Abercrombie is a rather small one in the quasi-official history of the Director of Naval Construction and I'm probably half blind anyway.

Many thanks for the good work,

Regards

Philip Bass

_____________________________

Plan followed plan in swift procession,
Commanders went; commanders came,
While telegrams in quick succession
Arrived to douse or fan the flame

(in reply to CobraAus)
Post #: 224
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/15/2005 6:40:02 PM   
Tankerace


Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CobraAus

quote:

does anyone want to work up an icon for Abercrombie and Roberts????


here it is

Cobra Aus





Awsome art Cobra, but could you scale it down please? Right now, they will make the Repulse look like a puny destroyer. I applaud all the new art coming in, but we need to keep it reasonably to scale if all possible.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to CobraAus)
Post #: 225
RE: Something for Ron Saueracker - 2/15/2005 9:42:48 PM   
CobraAus


Posts: 2322
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Geelong Australia
Status: offline
quote:

we need to keep it reasonably to scale if all possible.

done and sent

Cobra Aus

(in reply to Tankerace)
Post #: 226
Two Additional Task Forces - 2/25/2005 4:12:42 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8171
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
After a couple of questions about the location of HMAS Kanimbla and HMAS Vampire on Dec 7, 1941 - I broke out the Official RAN history and looked it up.

1. Kanimbla was enroute Singapore from Penang. I had her in port at Padang (well - it sounds a little like Penang, doesn't it). I'll create a task force enroute Singapore and one day out.

2. HMS Repulse, escorted by Vampire and HMS Tenedos, had left Singapore enroute Darwin on December 5th. They turned around and returned as soon as the Japanese attacked. I'll place them one day out instead of two as they steamed at "cruising speed" before the war but returned at full speed.

Both of these two Task Forces could be signigicant. Kanimbla could be in trouble as the Japanese AI loves to attack shipping in the Malacca Strait. And having Repulse at sea instead of in-port at Singapore means the Prince of Wales/Repulse task force can not move to attack the Japanese Landings on the first day.

As always - any thoughts??

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 227
A point brought up by Nikademus - 3/3/2005 12:22:02 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
Steve (Nikademus) made me aware of the following when he asked if I'd participate in a test PBEM with him regarding a mod he has done.
quote:



Japanese heavy cruiser turrets only had splinter protection (1 inch) however several sources got it wrong and reported 5 inches. There was a long flap about this on warships1.com several years ago. (Tironu was involved) I was initially resistant but after comparing the sources that stated 1inch vs 5 inch and examining photos, I had to conceed that 1 inch sources (including Conways) were the more accurate. You may recall i reported this change 5 times in the internal OOB thread but it's never been changed.

The common sense argument won too....part the reason the USN cruisers used tripples was to save weight and increase armor protection for the guns.....The Japanese went for dispersed armament with more turrets (and more weight) and consequently less armor per turret.


Interesting or what!?!

< Message edited by Ron Saueracker -- 3/2/2005 5:22:55 PM >


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 228
AGPs Hilo and Jamestown - 3/3/2005 1:44:03 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
Farting around, I found that USS Hilo was available at San Diego June 1942, yet is slated to arrive over a year (turn 393) into the game. By July 42 she was tending the PT boats at Palmyra Island.

Jamestown was available at San Diego Aug 1942, yet is slated to arrive 398 turns into the game.

< Message edited by Ron Saueracker -- 3/2/2005 7:48:52 PM >


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 229
Early US Reinforcements and the Panama Canal - 3/8/2005 6:28:52 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8171
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
Now that we have the Canal entry point I am reviewing the arrivals of US reinforcements. I intend to eventually review all US warships to determine which came through the canal - and when. Big job and it will take a while - compounded by periodic fits of excessive laziness. All ships will arrive at Panama City (301) as the canal is not navigable. For now:

Yorktown force (December 23, 1941):
Yorktown
Sims
Hughes
Russell
Walke


Mississippi Force (January 14, 1942)
Mississippi
Idaho
Anderson
Hammann
Mustin
O'Brien
Warrington
(Actually not with the Mississippi Force, arrived at the Canal about the same time and used for local patrols)

Hornet Force (March 12, 1942)
Hornet
Nashville
Meredith
Grayson
Monssen
Gwin


Wasp Force (June 10, 1942)
Wasp
North Carolina
Quincy
San Juan
Wilson
Sterett
Lang
Buchanan
Farenholt


There's some contradiction in reports as to when ships passed the canal and as to the ships in company. One account, for instance, indicates Yorktown was escorted by six destroyers but I can only find four. Sometimes the dates at the canal are estimates - the Yorktown force left Norfolk on 16 December 1941 and reached San Diego, Calif., on 30 December 1941. Time at the Canal is a wild ass guess on my part.

Any additional information would be appreciated.

< Message edited by Don Bowen -- 3/12/2005 11:59:40 AM >

(in reply to Tankerace)
Post #: 230
RE: Early US Reinforcements and the Panama Canal - 3/8/2005 6:39:58 PM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline
Hi Don,

It might be easier to subtract a certain number of days for ships arriving in SF or SD. For example. If we assume it takes 10 days for the average ship to move from Panama Canal to SF, then just subtract 10 days arrival time for all ships that arrive at SF and subtract 8 days for ships arriving at SD or LA. (assuming they traveled through the PC and were not built on the west coast).

I realize that this may not be exactly historic, but I think it gets us pretty close with a lot less work.

I'm ok with this method. I'm not sure if others might think this would be a travesty.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 231
RE: Early US Reinforcements and the Panama Canal - 3/8/2005 6:44:33 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8171
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Hi Don,

It might be easier to subtract a certain number of days for ships arriving in SF or SD. For example. If we assume it takes 10 days for the average ship to move from Panama Canal to SF, then just subtract 10 days arrival time for all ships that arrive at SF and subtract 8 days for ships arriving at SD or LA. (assuming they traveled through the PC and were not built on the west coast).

I realize that this may not be exactly historic, but I think it gets us pretty close with a lot less work.

I'm ok with this method. I'm not sure if others might think this would be a travesty.


I just used the old "split it down the middle" technique. Norfolk on the 16th, San Diego on the 30th = Canal on the 23rd. With no precise information, it's good enough. If anyone has better data I'd love to have it.

Don

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 232
Brit MTB - 3/11/2005 12:54:28 AM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1904
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline
Not sure if this has been asked or not but in Matrix scen15 there are 4 or 5 US PT boats in SE Asia which might need to be Brit MTB. My questions are - are Brit MTB gonna be added, I think it's Power class MTB (don't have my scen notebook changes with me) & are the US PT's correct or should they be moved somewhere else?

(in reply to Tankerace)
Post #: 233
RE: Brit MTB - 3/11/2005 12:57:08 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8171
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Not sure if this has been asked or not but in Matrix scen15 there are 4 or 5 US PT boats in SE Asia which might need to be Brit MTB. My questions are - are Brit MTB gonna be added, I think it's Power class MTB (don't have my scen notebook changes with me) & are the US PT's correct or should they be moved somewhere else?


The British 2nd Motor Torpedo Boat Flotilla has been added at Hong Kong. I was not able to find any additional British MTB in the Pacific or IO. US PT's have been removed from India.

(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 234
RE: Brit MTB - 3/11/2005 1:03:19 AM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1904
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline
Just what I wanted to know, thanks Don

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 235
RE: Brit MTB - 3/12/2005 7:02:19 PM   
Platoonist


Posts: 875
Joined: 5/11/2003
From: Kila Hana
Status: offline
Took a stab at drawing up silhouettes for the Medium Auxiliary Floating Dry Dock.
Not sure if the scale is correct though. Plus my reference picture was a little difficult to read so I'm not sure how accurate it is either.


(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 236
RE: Brit MTB - 3/12/2005 8:03:23 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8171
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

Took a stab at drawing up silhouettes for the Medium Auxiliary Floating Dry Dock.
Not sure if the scale is correct though. Plus my reference picture was a little difficult to read so I'm not sure how accurate it is either.


Not sure if we'll implement all the ARBs but I'd love to have these icons - could you please send the bmps to me??

(in reply to Platoonist)
Post #: 237
RE: Floating Drydock Ships - 3/12/2005 9:09:12 PM   
Platoonist


Posts: 875
Joined: 5/11/2003
From: Kila Hana
Status: offline
They're on their way.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 238
RE: Brit MTB - 3/12/2005 9:11:32 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

Took a stab at drawing up silhouettes for the Medium Auxiliary Floating Dry Dock.
Not sure if the scale is correct though. Plus my reference picture was a little difficult to read so I'm not sure how accurate it is either.




These look great. A needed addition for 1943 on.

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Platoonist)
Post #: 239
USS Argonaut conversion to APS-1 - 3/13/2005 10:36:38 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
Hmmmm....something wrong here. Nobody converts the ship on Feb/42 from minelayer to transport that I'm aware of unless by accident. I did it in my games as I tend to play historically but have never loaded it until today. The load total is 24! This can't be right as it is the lowest of all USN subs and marginally more than Dutch and British 18 cap. I believe I gave it a load total of 60. Did I miss something when entering the refit details in the dbase?




Attachment (1)

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 7 [8] 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Soviet Fleet Page: <<   < prev  5 6 7 [8] 9   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

0.305