|
I don't see how the solo scout plane on the cruiser is supposed to work? Don't the returning scout planes have to do a waggle dance on the carrier deck to direct the air attack?
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 10:51 |
|
|
Rockopolis posted:I don't see how the solo scout plane on the cruiser is supposed to work? Don't the returning scout planes have to do a waggle dance on the carrier deck to direct the air attack? You're confusing them with honey birds again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2018 23:05
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:It's interesting that Japan developed a class of heavy cruisers specifically to carry floatplanes to do scouting for the aircraft carriers so that precious attack planes wouldn't be sullied with this duty. I always thought that was a rather sensible idea if you can't spare a CVL to do it. Load them up with plenty of AAA since they'll spend all their time supporting carriers though. A CAAA(V).
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:I always thought that was a rather sensible idea if you can't spare a CVL to do it. Load them up with plenty of AAA since they'll spend all their time supporting carriers though. A CAAA(V). Well, most cruisers and battleships did have a floatplane already - they were used mainly to help the ship's aim by observing the fall of shells and relaying corrected aiming instructions to the ship. The IJN was unique for specifically creating recon floatplanes to be launched from their capital ships for aerial search duty, due to their carrier doctrine making them very reluctant to spare legitimate combat aircraft for search duties. The USN's response to not having enough planes for aerial search in a given task force was to add another CVE to the task force and have it handle scouting duties.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:I always thought that was a rather sensible idea if you can't spare a CVL to do it. Load them up with plenty of AAA since they'll spend all their time supporting carriers though. A CAAA(V). I'd expect the CVL to cost slightly less and be more useful in operating with a carrier. At the very least, I don't think either of the other countries that operated aircraft carriers did this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 00:03
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:At the very least, I don't think either of the other countries that operated aircraft carriers did this. They did not. The USN and RN responded to not having enough aerial search assets by building another carrier and adding it to the fleet. Japan didn't have the shipbuilding industry, aircraft industry, or pool of trained pilots and crew necessary to do that, so the cruiser thing was making the best of a bad situation. Remember that the United States built one hundred and fifty-one carriers during WW2.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
Herv posted:IIRC MacArthur had almost a half a day to pull his thumb out of his rear end, but it felt too good and comforting to do so. IIRC it was even worse, when the word came that Pearl most of the fighters and bombers at the main US Air base at Clark Field took off to launch an attack on Formosa, but stayed in a holding pattern until they could get confirmation from MacArthur to launch the attack. By the time the confirmation came, it had been so long the planes had to land to refuel. Just as the planes were about to take off again, a Japanese strike showed up and effectively destroyed the Far East Air Force on the ground. Military History is more or less a comedy of errors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
Good old Dugout Doug, Military Science's very own Trofim Lysenko. Was there anything he didn't screw up apart from schmoozing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Good old Dugout Doug, Military Science's very own Trofim Lysenko. Was there anything he didn't screw up apart from schmoozing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Good old Dugout Doug, Military Science's very own Trofim Lysenko. Was there anything he didn't screw up apart from schmoozing? PR in general. The guy understood very well how to craft and maintain and image, and had an excellent sense of how to play the media and the public.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
Comrade Gorbash posted:Inchon, quite surprisingly. I mean, that succeeded because the North Koreans didn't think the US would be so foolish as to attack there, despite warnings from the Soviets that they were.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 03:46
|
|
|
Was the Pinkerton that worked as private intelligence for the Union during the ACW the same "Pinkertons" that are usually referred to as strikebreakers in the context of the American labor movement's struggles?Cyrano4747 posted:Man, feel no shame. I once dragged my wife on a six hour train ride in a country she didn’t speak the language of to see a relatively small museum for a gun factory that closed after WW2. In a small town no less where another gun factory down the road is pretty much the major employer now. She still gives me mild poo poo for it to this day, almost 8 years later. I asked my wife for one afternoon out of our honeymoon itinerary to visit a Cambodian war museum. It certainly wasn't a happy occasion, but it was worth it. bewbies posted:So today I learned that the Japanese had originally intended to deliver their declaration of war 30 minutes before the attack on Pearl Harbor but the embassy was retarded or something and didn't get it done in time. AFAIK, the Japanese embassy only had a single typist that was working on getting the message drafted, and he had to re-do enough times and he also worked slowly enough that it caused that delay.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 09:34
|
|
|
Here is an interview about the development of that gender thing I keep banging on about; specifically, that once the idea of a gender dichotomy develops in the 19th century it very quickly becomes tied to racism (which in the modern sense is also developing at the same time) with the claim that only white people have a full gender dichotomy. https://www.thenation.com/article/the-trouble-with-white-women-an-interview-with-kyla-schuller/
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Was the Pinkerton that worked as private intelligence for the Union during the ACW the same "Pinkertons" that are usually referred to as strikebreakers in the context of the American labor movement's struggles? He founded the agency, yes. They did other stuff though, think of them as a proto Blackwater.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:They did other stuff though, think of them as a proto Blackwater.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 13:03
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:nah, they were just private detectives, just working in a large group instead of working alone like the rest of them did They also did what we would describe as private security today, and said “security” was pretty robust. They might not be full black water merc status, fighting foreign wars for pay, but they’re also not simple gumshoes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 14:10
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:They also did what we would describe as private security today, and said “security” was pretty robust. They might not be full black water merc status, fighting foreign wars for pay, but they’re also not simple gumshoes. I mean that's not what Blackwater did either, they weren't invading Iraq off their own bat or anything, but 'armed private security who might well shoot you dead' about fits the bill.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 14:57
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I mean that's not what Blackwater did either, they weren't invading Iraq off their own bat or anything, but 'armed private security who might well shoot you dead' about fits the bill. Right, but "armed private security who might shoot you dead" also applies to my grandfather, who was the night watchman at a steel plant during WWII. It's a pretty big category.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 15:04
|
|
|
in a world where the actual cops could legally beat confessions out of you until the 1930s, "private detectives" doesn't imply nonviolent the late 19th and early 20th centuries were not only more violent than we are now, but I have a theory that the culture of the US has always been more violent than that of the UK. this is based on interacting with brits and i would be interested to hear other takes on this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 15:07
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I mean that's not what Blackwater did either, they weren't invading Iraq off their own bat or anything, but 'armed private security who might well shoot you dead' about fits the bill. Blackwater also provided private paramilitary security inside the US, to great controversy. During Katrina, they and other similar contractors were hired by private individuals to provide security using automatic weapons, armored vehicles, and helicopters on dubious legal grounds. In the early days of the labor movement in the US the Pinkertons did the same thing. Large groups of Pinkertons armed with rifles would break strikes with violence; famously at Homestead Pennsylvania 300 "detectives" exchanged fire with thousands of striking workers before being forced to surrender. A different detective service killed 50-100 workers in West Virginia a generation later in the Battle of Blair Mountain.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 15:15
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:in a world where the actual cops could legally beat confessions out of you until the 1930s, "private detectives" doesn't imply nonviolent I think it goes back to the very founding cultures of both as modern nations. The US is still a newcomer to the world scene, and it was founded on war, slaughter of natives, and village militias where every farmer was expected to have a gun and know how to use it. That kind of dangerous environment for settlers didn't end until not a lot more than a century ago - and even then, large parts of the US have very dangerous purely animal predators that can warrant going armed. The English on the other hand had completely subdued the British Isles centuries before the US came along, and the need for militia forces of archers and whatnot are much longer in the past than the American frontier mentality. Britain is also much smaller than the US, so the English subdued their domain far more quickly and thoroughly than the Americans, and I think an internally secure nation also tends to be a peaceful one. The US is an order of magnitude more vast, and I don't think approaches the British level of a tamed countryside anywhere, not even in New England or the tidewater that have been inhabited the longest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:the late 19th and early 20th centuries were not only more violent than we are now, but I have a theory that the culture of the US has always been more violent than that of the UK. this is based on interacting with brits and i would be interested to hear other takes on this. There's definitely a much higher tolerance for the use of lethal force by the police, not just compared to the UK but compared to pretty much any other European country. But I think if you're talking about state violence against civilians by the British in the 19th century, you really have to think about the use of police and paramilitary violence against colonised people, rather than just on Great Britain itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
Mr Enderby posted:There's definitely a much higher tolerance for the use of lethal force by the police, not just compared to the UK but compared to pretty much any other European country. The racial diversity of the US compared to European nations is definitely something to bear in mind. I'm not familiar enough with European countries to talk about them with any confidence, but a great deal of the police violence in the US is between white cops and non-white civilians. The US has a long, long history of using its police forces to violently suppress racial minorities - entire towns have been wiped off the map in race riots in the US.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
Mr Enderby posted:There's definitely a much higher tolerance for the use of lethal force by the police, not just compared to the UK but compared to pretty much any other European country.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 15:47
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:but a great deal of the police violence in the US is between white cops and non-white civilians. Definitely true, but it's worth noticing that even just the number of white people killed by police in the US is considerably higher on a per capita basis than total police shootings in Europe. There were 574 white people killed by police in 2015, according to this project by the Guardian's US team: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-map-us-police-killings Compare that to the rate of police shootings in European countries. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries None of this is to disagree with the idea that the roots of this societal tolerance of police violence isn't racial in nature, but it doesn't just relate to non-white people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:not just state violence against civilians, what civilians do to one another. Kind of hard to judge that empirically tbh. The murder rate in the US is much higher, but you can probably ascribe a lot of that to access to handguns. On a side note, I remember a Spanish friend of mine claiming that until very recently, there were no Spanish cop shows on TV, because no-one could imagine the police as heroes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
And just to restate my thesis, in case it isn't clear, any romantic notion of British "policing by consent" go out of the window if you look at Ulster, let alone Burma or Kenya.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
Mr Enderby posted:And just to restate my thesis, in case it isn't clear, any romantic notion of British "policing by consent" go out of the window if you look at Ulster, let alone Burma or Kenya. I'd just say Ireland in general, Britain's first great experiment in colonialism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:I'd just say Ireland in general, Britain's first great experiment in colonialism. <A Welshman stares at you, then shakes his head sadly and goes back to the mines>
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:12
|
|
|
I'd say while the scale of the violence is certainly in favor of the US but the brutality us more or less still the same with the UK, just enclosed in smaller pockets behind doors, communities, class and certain situations like colonial policing.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:13
|
|
|
Do a lot of people still fall down the stairs UK police stations?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:I'd just say Ireland in general, Britain's first great experiment in colonialism. That's Wales, arguably.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
Is there a distinction between colonialism and conquest leading to incorporation?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:16
|
|
GotLag posted:Do a lot of people still fall down the stairs UK police stations? There are sadly still cases of 'accidental' suffocation during holding and other things the police have certainly been guilty of. But yeah pretty much all Celtic nations have felt the English fun time of colonialism through the whole of the UK.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:17
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Is there a distinction between colonialism and conquest leading to incorporation? Far as I can tell, its boats. So Britain taking over India, say, is colonialism, because you have to use a boat. The Mughals ruling India wasn't, because they came in on horses.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Is there a distinction between colonialism and conquest leading to incorporation? Time, more or less.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I'd say while the scale of the violence is certainly in favor of the US but the brutality us more or less still the same with the UK, just enclosed in smaller pockets behind doors, communities, class and certain situations like colonial policing. One startling thing that comes you see in19th century English novels is that it is quite normal for a gentleman to tip a policeman.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:That's valid, the Navy can afford boats but not ships, because it spends all of its money on missile boats. A good friend was a then very junior member of the British negotiating team that sold them to Canada. Many years later I mentioned the (new to him) subsequent controvery about the subs and he got genunially irate and was very insistant they were fine when we sold them.  He also told me, this is entirely anecdotal and unofficial, how it was rumoured that 4 almost brand new subs came to be sold in the first place. The story goes, at the time we were having one of our periodic defence reviews. Each service (Navy/Army etc) had to come up x value of stuff that could be cut for budget savings. So the Navy decided to box clever and put up these newly commissioned subs on the chopping block daring anyone to cut these basically brand new, very expensive pieces of kit. So the Treasury told them to stop loving about and make some real choice. The Navy were "No. We've looked everywhere, including for small change behind the sofa. These are the only things we can afford to lose". The Treasury were "No. We're not kidding here, find something sensible." N : "It's these or nothing" T: "OK, we'll cut them then". N: "Well go ahead". T: "No we're not bluffing. We'll cut them". N: "I know you are, but what am I" T: "Fine. We'll cut them then."  N: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
Mr Enderby posted:One startling thing that comes you see in19th century English novels is that it is quite normal for a gentleman to tip a policeman. It's normal to bribe a policemen in this century, though?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 10:51 |
|
|
No you'd go to prison unless you are a rich and or famous. And then eventually you'll go to prison.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:35
|
|