|
Saros posted:Boy do I have the thread for you. In WitP:AE, is weather historical beyond 1941-12-07? If not historical, does the weather randomly throw storms in certain places or can weather fronts sweep across an area? Are tropical storms possible? Are the Aleutians particularly hard to capture in winter?
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 06:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
How's the Japanese industry focused? Will we be seeing any cool planes ahead of time?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:In WitP:AE, is weather historical beyond 1941-12-07? If not historical, does the weather randomly throw storms in certain places or can weather fronts sweep across an area? Are tropical storms possible? Are the Aleutians particularly hard to capture in winter? Yes theres a generated weather system, im not sure exactly how it works but its seasonally affected with fronts etc but not really predictable at all. Weather is really only a factor in air ops, ships are largely unaffected except spotting ranges in surface combat. The artic in winter has a bunch of other factors and large ops of any kind are very hard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
There's also a malarial season in the tropics that affects troops not in a base.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Thanks for the info.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
   A sweep catches some enemy ships unaware.  The next task force has a little warning, and gets a few shots off before we obliterate them.  There are a lot of ships here.   Nothing of interest in the air, bit we did some damage with that raid.  That's a nice list.  We took a little damage, but it should be easy to repair.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
Nice sweep. Some small things but not bad ones!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
Today's historical warship loss: Destroyer HMAS Voyager went aground on Timor, was damaged by air attack, and had to be scuttled.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
Two big liner sinkings today. The RMS Arundel Castle entered service in 1921 for the Union-Castle Line that ran passenger and mail ships between Europe and Africa. When built, she and her sister ship the Windsor Castle were the only four-funnel liners not built for transatlantic service. In 1937 she was refitted: the ship was lengthened, given a more raked bow, her four funnels were reduced to two, and her speed was increased from 17 to 20 knots. At 19,000 tons she could carry almost 1,200 passengers. Arundel Castle served as a troop ship during the second world war in the Mediterranean, so I'm not sure what she's doing so far from home. She survived the war and was scrapped in Hong Kong in 1959.  Arundel Castle after her 1937 refit  The SS Moreton Bay also entered service in 1921 for the Aberdeen & Commonwealth Line to transport passengers between London and Brisbane. At 14,000 tons she could make 15 knots carrying around 550 passengers. She was converted to an armed merchant cruiser in 1939 and a troop ship in 1941. She participated in the Madagascar, North African, and European campaigns. Like the Arundel Castle, she survived the war and returned to passenger service before being scrapped in 1957. So these are two very good kills for Grey, big troop ships that historically survived the war. Though they were primarily in the European theatre so I'm not sure how much good it will do him in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Well I guess at least he is helping his Nazi buddies out
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
   Are you still down here?  Dammit!  These guys come under attack as well.   Our long range CAP hits some incoming bombers.   The game of Whack-a-mole continues.  Owch, that was a solid hit on our cruiser.  Hopefully she'll make it home.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
The only historical warship loss for 26 September 1942 was in European waters: Escort Destroyer HMS Veteran ate a torpedo in the North Atlantic and went down with all hands as well as perhaps 80 survivors of merchant ships. Is this interesting? September and October are kind of slow, loss wise. November will be hectic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Is Chokai stuck on the Great Barrier Reef or something? It's been in that same hex southeast of Cairns for three days now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Going inside the reef was possibly a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Dang, a single bomb hit hosed that ship up that much? Oh, right, Japanese CA design. At least it didn't hit the torpedoes. E: Oh, that's Chokai! The CA that got detonated by a single 5 inch gun hit to its torpedo tubes. It was blown up by a ESCORT CARRIER. In a gunfight.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Those are Banshees. that means 1000 lb bombs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:The only historical warship loss for 26 September 1942 was in European waters: Escort Destroyer HMS Veteran ate a torpedo in the North Atlantic and went down with all hands as well as perhaps 80 survivors of merchant ships. Yes, I enjoy hearing about historical warship losses, please continue 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:E: Oh, that's Chokai! The CA that got detonated by a single 5 inch gun hit to its torpedo tubes. It was blown up by a ESCORT CARRIER. In a gunfight. And that escort carrier is my lucky ship.  IJN damage control lol.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
That's less a matter of damage control and more 'Type 93 Oxygen Torpedo lol' Real good torpedoes unless something hits them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
That five inch gunner must've been really confused for a bit there. "That doesn't usually happen??"
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Note that Chokai didn't literally blow up. That's a situation mostly limited to British ships (and Taiho)  . Having her launchers explode just caused extensive damage to the middle of the ship and, most crucially, knocked out her engine and steering. That combined with taking a 500 lb bomb a few minutes later (and the IJN fleet leaving) basically made her unrecoverable though.She was actually still afloat hours later when she was scuttled by a destroyer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
Said destroyer also took all of Chokai's surviving crew aboard, and was sunk by air attack with no survivors soon afterwards. Chokai was a very unlucky ship.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Dunno-Lars posted:Yes, I enjoy hearing about historical warship losses, please continue I will do so, then! Probably slip some days since I'm moving soon, but eh, I'm not Grey. Lord Koth posted:Note that Chokai didn't literally blow up. That's a situation mostly limited to British ships (and Taiho) Also ammunition ships 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Note that Chokai didn't literally blow up. That's a situation mostly limited to British ships (and Taiho) Taiho's case was also completely avoidable and not even due to design flaws. The inexperienced and/or incompetent damage control crew basically did everything possible wrong in the situation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
There's been many times we've discussed these last several years how bad the Japanese were at damage control, but why were they so bad? They were perfectly capable of learning pretty much all other aspects of naval warfare (except submarine interdiction and treatment/transportation of PoWs) from Britain and on their own.
RA Rx fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Sep 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
RA Rx posted:There's been many times we've discussed these last several years how bad the Japanese were at damage control, but why were they so bad? They were perfectly capable of learning pretty much all other aspects of naval warfare (except submarine interdiction and treatment/transportation of PoWs) from Britain and on their own. A big part of it was that they believed in having a separate, specialized DC staff rather than training the whole crew to be able to help out if something was wrong. So you had only a few guys on board who were trained for damage control, and if they were wounded or killed you were in some serious poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
RA Rx posted:There's been many times we've discussed these last several years how bad the Japanese were at damage control, but why were they so bad? They were perfectly capable of learning pretty much all other aspects of naval warfare (except submarine interdiction and treatment/transportation of PoWs) from Britain and on their own. One theory I've heard was that the lower level of industry and mechanization of agriculture in Japan's economy led to a large number of sailors not having a lot of experience working with and repairing machinery. I mean, you can tell people the exact procedures to follow for damage control but not having a certain base level of skill would lead to a small problems being made worse if you can't recognize new things that crop up and you don't know how to deal with on the fly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
A lot of the Japanese war policies we wonder at have their root in Japan's war plan: a short war decided by one or two gigantic battles. Basically a repeat of the 1905 Russo-Japanese war. If that's the case, then you don't need to worry about damage control; the war will be over before a damaged ship can be put back into service anyway. You don't need a training program to quickly produce new pilots; the war will be over anyway. Submarine attacks on merchant shipping won't have time to make a difference. Things that Japan expected to be important, like torpedoes and night combat, they did very well. But they got exactly the opposite war they'd been planning on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Training so heavily for night battles only to enter war on the eve of practical, ship-mounted radar is some monumental bad times. Hello, Vella Gulf.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Note that Chokai didn't literally blow up. That's a situation mostly limited to British ships (and Taiho) It's pretty hard to actually sink a ship without a torpedo. There are many ways to make it useless but unless there's a gaping hole below the water line it's not going down quickly. All 5 carries sunk at Midway required a torpedo from a Japanese Submarine to sink.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Ah, so short term because they lacked people. Long-term due to strategic thinking focused on the short term. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:It's pretty hard to actually sink a ship without a torpedo. There are many ways to make it useless but unless there's a gaping hole below the water line it's not going down quickly. All 5 carries sunk at Midway required a torpedo from a Japanese Submarine to sink. Pretty much true. The point of a bomb vs a torpedo is that a bomb has more explosive per pound of stuff. Torpedos have the advantage of hitting the water line and producing flooding, bombs have the advantage of being well... bigger. Flooding literally sink ships, but lots of other things can happen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
Out of curiosity what are some examples of ships getting blow up by dive bombers? I imagine a 1000lb AP bomb isn't very nice to most things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
   The bombing of Munda continues.  The slower speed of the Chokai means she's still in range of the enemy bombers.  I got torpedoes working guys!  Out of nowhere Chunking flares into life! We gun the Chinese troops down in their thousands, with a 5-1 kill rate, and much more squads destroyed! My strategy of tying up all these troops may be working. It was not the original plan, but it seems to be working.  Well, we did some damage today! But we also took another hit to a damaged ship.  Cheap rear end kill.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
TehKeen posted:Out of curiosity what are some examples of ships getting blow up by dive bombers? I imagine a 1000lb AP bomb isn't very nice to most things. The kaga* and the Akagi* at midway are the big ones. Pretty much every American loss at okinawa if you count kamakazi as bombs. *they were actually sunk sunk by torpedos proving the earlier posters point, but they were killed by bombs and the resulting fires
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
Today's only historical warship loss takes us back to the Atlantic: The German merchant raider Stier bit off a little more than she could chew when she engaged a particularly plucky Allied merchant ship. I'll let Wikipedia explain further:Wikipedia posted:On 27 September 1942 Stier encountered the Liberty ship Stephen Hopkins en route from Cape Town to Paramaribo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
That's... That's so drat heroic.  Umm, it says the Japanese are the ones lacking supply.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 07:27
|
|
|
  The Cushing continues to live.  We actually cause casualties at Munda!  We take out a good number of enemy bombers here.  A nice day in the air, but not much else to talk about.  A ship kill is confirmed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
Today's historical warship loss is... nothing. No further losses in my source until 2 October.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:Today's historical warship loss is... nothing. No further losses in my source until 2 October.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:52
|
|
