|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Before the advent of the catapult you needed the wind at your back to take off. You point a carrier INTO the wind. Lift is a function of airspeed. e: wait is this  ? am I dumb?
AlexanderCA fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Feb 25, 2019 |
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:02 |
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Well basically its for a character for a game project and I basically want to give her a sword that looks like regular sword but is more appropriate for her size and build and I don't like the look of fencing swords and rapiers seem a little too narrow. I'm guessing you want to stick to one handed swords? Off the top of my head: Viking- style sword, schiavona, mortuary sword, saber, jian, gladius, kopesh. Take a look around here and see if anything catches your eye. https://www.albion-swords.com/index.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:26
|
|
|
bewbies posted:How were the Japanese the only ones to crack the code on multi-deck carrier ops prior to the war? I know this is ex post facto but that seems like the kind of thing that should have been blindingly obvious to the USN and RN as soon as carrier planes started carrying enough stuff to threaten big ships. One of the big things seems to be that the Japanese were the first to twig to just how powerful carrier strikes could be against ships, which lead to them maximizing the potential of that weapon. Remember that a lot of carriers at the time had 5" guns because the thinking of the time was that they'd operate with a fleet primarily for their reconaissance function, with anti-ship striking being a secondary priority. The carrier as an instrument of war is a whole bunch of separate weapons and systems that happen to be parked in one hull, and it took the maturation of all those weapons and systems and the doctrine to employ them to produce the modern carrier task force.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
AlexanderCA posted:You point a carrier INTO the wind. Lift is a function of airspeed. No I’m the dumb one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
bewbies posted:How were the Japanese the only ones to crack the code on multi-deck carrier ops prior to the war? I know this is ex post facto but that seems like the kind of thing that should have been blindingly obvious to the USN and RN as soon as carrier planes started carrying enough stuff to threaten big ships. Are you sure they were? It's a little hard to Google supporting evidence, but as far as I can see the RN did practice multi-carrier operations during the 30s and envisaged operating them as a combined group; it just didn't end up panning out that way for the most part. Taranto was intended to be a combined strike by Illustrious and Eagle but the latter caught fire just before the battle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Well basically its for a character for a game project and I basically want to give her a sword that looks like regular sword but is more appropriate for her size and build and I don't like the look of fencing swords and rapiers seem a little too narrow. The transition period swords between a longsword and a rapier are arbitrarily called "sideswords." They are blades on the long and narrow end of the longsword spectrum with the beginnings of the complex hilt of a rapier. What do you mean by "normal" sword though? A one handed sword? That can mean everything from basket hilted broadswords the medieval arming sword to falchions to sabers, and that is just Europe. If you think the complex hilts look cool, the people in the british isles used them extensively on broadswords and backswords.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
Marxist-Jezzinist posted:They shot down a gazelle in 1990 Bad luck for the helicopter. They were actually bombing a British Army base and a helicopter was hovering 100 feet over the helipad. The mortar shell coincidentally sheared the tail off and the pilot had to crash land. 4 months later, another mortar attack on a base did the exact same thing. In both cases it was a complete accident with the shell just happening to land where the helicopter was hovering, and in both cases there were no deaths.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
AlexanderCA posted:Ofcourse! Oh man you ain't seen nothing yet. Behold the multi-decker designs of early experiments with carriers.  IJN Akagi had three decks.  HMS Glorious lacked ambition and had only two.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Are you sure they were? It's a little hard to Google supporting evidence, but as far as I can see the RN did practice multi-carrier operations during the 30s and envisaged operating them as a combined group; it just didn't end up panning out that way for the most part. Taranto was intended to be a combined strike by Illustrious and Eagle but the latter caught fire just before the battle. Actually not at all, I was retransmitting a line I read from Shattered Sword this morning. I really know very little about the RN during WWII aside from the uboat fight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Did IRA have good access to SAMs and was there ever attempted shootdowns of brit choppers? If not, why not? IIRC they never really got SAMs. I think there were some attempts to acquire them, but I don’t think they ever worked out, or at least led to them having any quantity of them if any at all. They definitely tried to shoot down helicopters, but rarely had any success at it. They got a number of DShK-type machine guns from Libya in the mid-80s that they used a few times to try and take down helicopters, but I think every attempt failed and ended with them having to abandon the gun because of size/placement issues. They also had RPGs, but I don’t think they tried to use them against helicopters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 17:56
|
|
|
fartknocker posted:IIRC they never really got SAMs. I think there were some attempts to acquire them, but I don’t think they ever worked out, or at least led to them having any quantity of them if any at all. If IRA ever got manpads, wouldn't large RAF planes be a better target.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 18:15
|
|
|
vuk83 posted:If IRA ever got manpads, wouldn't large RAF planes be a better target. The RAF was not flying CAS over Northern Ireland. Wikipedia thinks they got 3 helicopters over the entire period of the troubles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 18:18
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Are you sure they were? It's a little hard to Google supporting evidence, but as far as I can see the RN did practice multi-carrier operations during the 30s and envisaged operating them as a combined group; it just didn't end up panning out that way for the most part. Taranto was intended to be a combined strike by Illustrious and Eagle but the latter caught fire just before the battle. I think the difference is in the scale of the multi-carrier operations. American Fleet Problems tended to pose the carriers against each other as far as I can tell, 2v2 or 2v3. British exercises were similar or smaller in scope, from memory. Neither country seems to have been contemplating the use of more than three fleet carriers together while the Japanese were feverishly working to finish CarDiv 5 so that they could combine six. I would guess that this is just a result of strategic situation. America needs to protect two long, widely separated coasts and provide security for its colonies in Asia. Britain has to stretch her forces even further to cover most of the world's oceans. Neither has enough carriers to meet all of their commitments and also practice sextuple combined operations. Even Japan could only do it in action once, as a surprise attack that took them years to plan fully.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 18:25
|
|
|
bewbies posted:How were the Japanese the only ones to crack the code on multi-deck carrier ops prior to the war? I know this is ex post facto but that seems like the kind of thing that should have been blindingly obvious to the USN and RN as soon as carrier planes started carrying enough stuff to threaten big ships. The story I remember reading, and this might have been in Shattered Sword so you may already know it, was that they were inspired by propaganda pictures of the US carrier fleet sailing together during one of the Fleet Problem exercises before World War II—something like this:  For the US, the purpose of the photograph was a simple "hell yeah look at all carriers, aren't we awesome," but Japanese admirals (Which may have included Yamamoto, I can't remember) recognized that by sailing carriers within visual range of each other, it would be much easier to coordinate operations and to achieve a concentration of force that would allow them to overcome other carrier based forces and even land-based air—which lead to the formation of Kidō Butai. As to why nobody else figured this out, I think it's sort of similar to the evolution in tank tactics in that regard—carriers (And tanks) are big, expensive, and individually powerful, so there's a big incentive to keep them dispersed so that they can't be lost in any one incident, and that no matter where the enemy attacks you'll likely have something in the area to stop them. It was the early age of naval aviation (And aviation in general), and it really took until the war began for the pre-war theories to really prove themselves out. FrangibleCover posted:Even Japan could only do it in action once, as a surprise attack that took them years to plan fully. Minor point of order, but Pearl Harbor didn't take years to plan, just months. And the post-Pearl Kidō Butai did embark on a few other operations before Coral Sea and Midway, including the Indian Ocean Raid where they kicked the poo poo out of the Royal Navy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
IJN also got some of the inspiration for Pearl Harbor from the British Navy's raid on Taranto
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:The transition period swords between a longsword and a rapier are arbitrarily called "sideswords." They are blades on the long and narrow end of the longsword spectrum with the beginnings of the complex hilt of a rapier. I'm a little confused as to why hilts came into this conversation twice.  but googling "sidesword" seems to give good results so thanks  Normal as in like most of the longswords used in "Game of Thrones" as a sort of standard idea as to what a European medieval "sword" is in popular culture. Plain, pointy, and can hack things from either way, pommel optional.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
fartknocker posted:IIRC they never really got SAMs. I think there were some attempts to acquire them, but I don’t think they ever worked out, or at least led to them having any quantity of them if any at all. They did get Strelas from Libya but it's debatable if they were ever even used or considered for use.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm a little confused as to why hilts came into this conversation twice. Advances in hand protection was one of the main areas of advancement with later swords, especially in the context of the rise of sport fencing. (Like the distinction with fencing is that you aren't as concerned with carrying the sword with you all day, but you do really want to avoid losing fingers, so larger basket hilts become more preferable.) Fangz fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Feb 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm a little confused as to why hilts came into this conversation twice. Because otherwise the thing you are looking for is an arming sword for a one hander, or a longsword for a two hander. The main thing that changes after the medieval period is hilts get more complex, while some blades get longer in the rapier. For medieval swords, your best starting point for realistic looking stuff is to start with the Oakeschott typology and go from there  (big version here) https://www.albion-swords.com/articles/images/typology/oakeshott-typology-graphic.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakeshott_typology WoodrowSkillson fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Feb 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Advances in hand protection was one of the main areas of advancement with later swords, especially in the context of the rise of sport fencing. The gladius and spatha, for example, have little to no hand protection. It was expected that the soldiers would be fighting from the protection of a shield formation and thus only be exposing the bare minimum of their body for stabbing outward at the enemy. Heavy hand protection is more important if you're getting into a proper sword fight where you may have nothing but the sword itself to deflect attacks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm a little confused as to why hilts came into this conversation twice. Most of the swords in Game of Thrones are swords (or arming swords if you want). Yeah there are some longswords. Longswords are primarily two handed weapons. You don't use a longsword with a shield. Pommels are not optional. They are an important part of sword arts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm a little confused as to why hilts came into this conversation twice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:19
|
|
|
EvilMerlin posted:Most of the swords in Game of Thrones are swords (or arming swords if you want). Yeah there are some longswords. um how dare you slander the messer and the saber u binch
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:22
|
|
|
what was the most disastrous naval battle for the US in either WWI or WWII (excluding pearl harbor)? a second question being what are some US naval battles in the Atlantic that should be talked about more?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:24
|
|
|
My first thought is the first naval engagement in the Solomons. 4 cruisers caught unaware and lost during the night shortly after the landings. The Japanese fleet only took light damage in return
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
Tythas posted:what was the most disastrous naval battle for the US in either WWI or WWII (excluding pearl harbor)? a second question being what are some US naval battles in the Atlantic that should be talked about more? Can I count “The Second Happy Time” as a battle? I think I can if The Battle of Britain is a thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
Tythas posted:what was the most disastrous naval battle for the US in either WWI or WWII (excluding pearl harbor)? a second question being what are some US naval battles in the Atlantic that should be talked about more? I mean, by the time the US joined WW1 the German fleet was cooling its heels in Kiel (and Japan and Italy were both on the Allied side), so you're not going to see much in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:The stall speed on this thing is loving wild. Man you weren't joking. It's about 15 mph higher than the stall speed of the 1903 Wright Flyer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Can I count “The Second Happy Time” as a battle? what is "The Second Happy Time"
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
The period after the declaration of war on the US and the subs being cleared to operate off the US coast, I believe. The first one was near the start of the war before the convoy system was implemented again (Since it was apparently forgotten after WWI)
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
I'd nominate OkinawaWikipedia posted:Japanese kamikaze pilots exacted the largest loss of ships in U.S. naval history with the sinking of 38 and the damaging of another 368 Far from "disastrous" - the US accomplished its mission, and they knew they were in for a tough fight - but yeesh, the cost of it. Speaking of costs, Wikipedia also tells me that civilian casualties ran to 150k dead Okinawans, literally half the population of the island. I knew Okinawa was the first island hopping campaign that had significant numbers of civilians in the battle area and that they had a real tough time of it, I didn't realize that it depopulated the island by 50%. drat. e: I stand corrected (below) about Saipan being the first island battle with significant civilians around. FMguru fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Feb 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I mean, by the time the US joined WW1 the German fleet was cooling its heels in Kiel (and Japan and Italy were both on the Allied side), so you're not going to see much in that regard. The US lost three ships to enemy action in WW1. One cruiser which hit a mine off NYC, a destroyer torpedoed by a uboat while on convoy duty, and another DD cut in half by a merchantman that hit it while being escorted. I don’t know how that last one counts as enemy action but apparently it does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The RAF was not flying CAS over Northern Ireland. Wikipedia thinks they got 3 helicopters over the entire period of the troubles. Here's one of those events per an ITV documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rz87dxlveaE
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:55
|
|
|
FMguru posted:I knew Okinawa was the first island hopping campaign that had significant numbers of civilians in the battle area It wasn't. That would be Saipan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:55
|
|
|
Tythas posted:what is "The Second Happy Time" Second Happy Time, AKA "American Shooting Season". 609 ships sunk, with 3.1 million tons of cargo, in exchange for 22 U-boats.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 19:56
|
|
|
FMguru posted:I'd nominate Okinawa yeah I had to do a series of briefings on "subterranean warfare" last year (ask my what my qualifications were. spoiler: I have none) and I used Verdun and Okinawa as my two case studies. The Okinawa one was a situation where a plussed infantry company was dug into a hillside with a couple of light AT guns and a couple of heavy machine guns. Two regiments were assigned to subdue whatever was in the hill. One regiment charged roughly ten times over two days, accomplishing nothing and losing around a third of their men. The second regiment did the same thing the next day, with the same result. The stupid hill didn't fall until god himself moved the ONLY company of flamethower tanks halfway across the island and burned the Japanese out of the hill while shrugging off the AT shots. poo poo makes me mad just typing it out but that was the story on every inch of that island.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 20:01
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The RAF was not flying CAS over Northern Ireland. Wikipedia thinks they got 3 helicopters over the entire period of the troubles. But how would’ve SAMs against choppers changed that dynamic? In western parts of Norhern Ireland, like county tyrone, helicopters were used for everything from transporting food to ferrying soldiers due to the avoidance of all foot patrols. Shoot one down with a Strela or a Redeye, and the British stance would’ve perhaps become more aggreasive? I have conflicting books, other mentioniing no MANPADS launches, other mentioning two that missed. In any case brits rigged makeshift flage dispensers and exhaust vents, so it must’ve been a concern.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 20:05
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:The US lost three ships to enemy action in WW1. One cruiser which hit a mine off NYC, a destroyer torpedoed by a uboat while on convoy duty, and another DD cut in half by a merchantman that hit it while being escorted. I don’t know how that last one counts as enemy action but apparently it does. The Black Tom sabotage isn’t a naval battle by any real definition of the term, but if the bottom of the barrel must be scraped to produce three incidents, I would be remiss not to mention it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 20:11
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Minor point of order, but Pearl Harbor didn't take years to plan, just months. And the post-Pearl Kidō Butai did embark on a few other operations before Coral Sea and Midway, including the Indian Ocean Raid where they kicked the poo poo out of the Royal Navy. I was going for the 1937 laying down of Shokaku but fair enough :P Post Pearl Harbor the only time that all six carriers of the Kido Butai were in the same place was 29th December 1941 - 5th January 1942 per combinedfleet.com and therefore per Anthony Tully. Kaga was in drydock getting her bottom scraped for the Indian Ocean Raid, the attacks on Rabaul didn't include CarDiv 2, the raid on Darwin and the invasion of Java didn't include CarDiv 5 and then they went and got themselves smacked at Coral Sea meaning that it was only CarDiv 1 and 2 at Midway, at which point they all sink and the force cannot reassemble short of deliberate scuttling. I would also take exception to the idea that the loss of two heavy cruisers and an elderly light carrier was a poo poo-kicking considering how badly that could have gone. An unpleasant loss, certainly, but not really commensurate return for the commitment of five fleet carriers and change.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:02 |
|
|
darthbob88 posted:Second Happy Time, AKA "American Shooting Season". 609 ships sunk, with 3.1 million tons of cargo, in exchange for 22 U-boats. I'll go with this one, our ASW response right after our entry into the war was abysmal and got a lot of people killed. Savo Island is a close second, but we can partly blame that on an Australian admiral. Four heavy cruisers sunk and over a thousand dead right at the start of a campaign that would rely heavily on cruisers was really bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2019 20:19
|
|
