Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land

[mariandavid]

Warspite: You have picked the most accepted version of the death of the Hood. Since the account is so detailed maybe add why the magazine blew up. It was added when the AA was improved and placed outside the main protection - it blowing up was not the problem but the pressure wave caused a sympathetic explosion of a nearby 15" magazine. 

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: mariandavid

Warspite: You have picked the most accepted version of the death of the Hood. Since the account is so detailed maybe add why the magazine blew up. It was added when the AA was improved and placed outside the main protection - it blowing up was not the problem but the pressure wave caused a sympathetic explosion of a nearby 15" magazine. 

Warspite1

Thanks - happy to expand upon this - the final paragraph could be fleshed out a bit more too and I will work on this later today. One question though, what do you mean by "It was added when the AA was improved and placed outside the main protection"?

[mariandavid]

The original AA guns (and magazines) were sized for four guns with 150 rounds each; by 1940 this had increased to fourteen with 250 rounds per gun. The earlier increases were taken care of by using part of the aft 5.5" magazine - but in 1940 they added three twin mounts aft and it seems that some of their ammunition was treated as 'ready use' and the rest stored in improvised ammunition spaces. Apart from this British cordite was still fast burning, which may have contributed to the problem.
 
In passing the RN (rather many of its gunnery specialists) seems to have been dangerously complacent about risk - for example it is now almost certain that the detonations of the battle-cruisers at Jutland were the fault of very, very sloppy procedures rather than poor design.
 
Perhaps the wording could be: "the ammunition for the 4" guns added in 1940 was dangerously exposed and when hit exploded, in turn detonating the main magazines."

[mariandavid]

Territorial versus Militia: I am working on the multiple territorial/militia Indian units. What do people consider to be the distinction/difference between these two classes in WiF terms? Input gratefully received!

[warspite1]

I have re-written the end of the write-up further to Mariandavid`s comments:

.P It is believed that the first hit on the battlecruiser came from the 8-inch
shells of Prinz Eugen rather than from Bismarck, whose first three salvoes
missed. A hit on Hood started a fire that spread across the boat-deck and reached
the ready-use ammunition lockers. The boat-deck soon became an inferno as 4-inch
shells and 7-inch UP rocket mines began detonating. Holland ordered that the
fire be left until the ammunition had all detonated in order to ensure the safety
of the damage control parties. Although this fire was intense, it is not thought
that the tragic events that followed a few minutes later were caused by this fire.
A shell also passed through Hood`s spotting top and this further reduced her
ability to accurately fire back.
.P Bismarck used her secondary armament against the Prince of Wales, but kept
her main guns ranged against Hood. Prinz Eugen switched fire to Prince of Wales
after her 6th salvo. Prince of Wales meanwhile continued to fire at Bismarck.
As mentioned previously, it cannot be certain which ship Hood was firing at, but
her shells were still missing both enemy vessels and the RN ships were now in
serious trouble. The enemy had found their range and so as soon as he believed it
safe to do so, Holland gave the order to turn his ships to port and allow the
rear guns into action. The moment the turn began, disaster struck. According to
Captain Leach, Bismarck’s 5th salvo had hit around the base of Hood`s mainmast.
Within a second or two, a thin, funnel shaped flame shot out from the boat-deck.
This was followed by Hood being covered in smoke, although witnesses surprisingly
speak of no great noise accompanying the explosion.
.P The pride of the Royal Navy, HMS Hood, for so long the largest warship afloat,
was suddenly no more. Her once elegant hull had been broken apart in a matter of
seconds by the violence of the explosion. In a sad act of defiance, her forward
main guns fired for the last time as her bow section pointed briefly skywards,
then rolled over and disappeared beneath the waves. What remained of her stern
section was contorted and broken beyond recognition, and it too very quickly
disappeared from view. It was less than nine minutes since the battle had
commenced.
.P Meanwhile, the Prince of Wales had completed her turn to port and now found
herself sailing directly for what remained of the Hood. She took immediate
evasive action to avoid the wreckage, ceasing firing momentarily as she did so.
Because the two RN ships were sailing so close, the Bismarck was easily able to
switch fire accurately to Prince of Wales, and the battleship was lucky to
survive a 15-inch hit underneath her armour belt, when the shell failed to
explode. She also took a direct hit against her bridge that killed all men there
with the exception of two, one of whom was Captain Leach.
.P However, Bismarck was not having it all her own way and the Prince of Wales
scored three hits, one of which was against a forward oil tank and this was to
later force Lütjens to cancel his mission and head for France. Prince of Wales
laid a smoke screen and broke off the engagement as she was having problems with
her main armament. Lütjens refused to allow his ships to pursue the battleship,
and at 0609hrs, the German guns ceased firing.
.P The exact cause of the loss of the Hood will probably never be known. The
most likely explanation is that a 15-inch shell from the Bismarck penetrated her
4-inch magazine. As a result, the cordite there ignited. This caused a huge build
-up of gas that firstly, caused the funnel shaped flame that exited the vents
around the mainmast as the gas followed the path of least resistance, but then
secondly, blew the magazine bulkheads leading to the "X" and "Y" 15-inch
magazines. The three aft magazines contained well over one hundred tons of
cordite between them at that time; more than sufficient to destroy the Hood.
Regardless of the exact cause, the fact remains that out of a crew of 1,418 men,
only three survived. A tragic end to a most famous ship.
.P With Hood gone and the Bismarck about to enter the North Atlantic, the task of
destroying the German raider now consumed the men of the Royal Navy; she had to
be sunk. The mighty Bismarck would have just three days left to live...(see HMS
Rodney).

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Norman42



I think we are reading too much into a simple term. The main reason they are called Territorials, is that the majority of them appear in *territories* of the Major Powers and need a term to seperate them from the regular forces of said MP, since they have different rules.

Many major powers besides Great Britain have territorials for their colonies, so even though GB had a specific identity of Territorial Forces, the game itself uses the term for a larger picture: Locally Raised Irregular Forces and Militias; ie French Foreign Legion, Kings African Rifles, Afrikaaners Defence Guard, Philipene Army, Manchukuo Army, Rhodesian Scouts, Libyan Blackshirts, etc etc.

Territorials is just a catch all term. Just like "Militia" covers British Homeguard, US National Guard, German Volksturm, Soviet Worker Corps, Chinese Warlords (depending on game version), etc

Warspite1

Mariandavid - this was a comment made by Norman 42 on the subject of Territorials and Militia last year. Hope that helps...

[Caquineur]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Norman42
...
Many major powers besides Great Britain have territorials for their colonies, so even though GB had a specific identity of Territorial Forces, the game itself uses the term for a larger picture: Locally Raised Irregular Forces and Militias; ie French Foreign Legion, Kings African Rifles, Afrikaaners Defence Guard, Philipene Army, Manchukuo Army, Rhodesian Scouts, Libyan Blackshirts, etc etc.
...

Warspite1
Mariandavid - this was a comment made by Norman 42 on the subject of Territorials and Militia last year. Hope that helps...

I don't know about the other units listed, but the French Foreign Legion is definitely NOT a Locally Raised Irregular Force or a Militia... [:@]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Caquineur

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Norman42
...
Many major powers besides Great Britain have territorials for their colonies, so even though GB had a specific identity of Territorial Forces, the game itself uses the term for a larger picture: Locally Raised Irregular Forces and Militias; ie French Foreign Legion, Kings African Rifles, Afrikaaners Defence Guard, Philipene Army, Manchukuo Army, Rhodesian Scouts, Libyan Blackshirts, etc etc.
...

Warspite1
Mariandavid - this was a comment made by Norman 42 on the subject of Territorials and Militia last year. Hope that helps...

I don't know about the other units listed, but the French Foreign Legion is definitely NOT a Locally Raised Irregular Force or a Militia... [:@]

Warspite 1

Okay - don`t shoot the messenger [;)]

[mariandavid]

My thanks: Following the 'ranking'suggested for the Indians the territorials would be the territorial battalions of the various regiments; the militia the second-rank units of the various rajah's etc, the railway battalions and the european groups like the Calcutta Light Horse. ie the latter highly unlikely to see service and not very good when they do!
 
Caquineur: be fair to Warspite - the French after all know how difficult it is to classify the legion! - mercenaries (not quite they cannot drop guns if not paid), while not part of either the Metropolitan, l'Afrique or La Coloniale! Seriously though - do you know who was their most senior authority - in the sense that who could decide that a legion battalion would be first assigned to some force or other?

[Caquineur]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Caquineur

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Warspite1
Mariandavid - this was a comment made by Norman 42 on the subject of Territorials and Militia last year. Hope that helps...

I don't know about the other units listed, but the French Foreign Legion is definitely NOT a Locally Raised Irregular Force or a Militia... [:@]

Warspite 1
Okay - don`t shoot the messenger [;)]

Ooops ! Sorry if I made myself misunderstood with the "[:@]" - it was in no way intented towards you (or Norman42), only about the sentence that I quoted.

Alain, the bad-tempered bear with a headache and a very short fuse (sometimes) [;)]

[Caquineur]

ORIGINAL: mariandavid
...
Caquineur: be fair to Warspite - the French after all know how difficult it is to classify the legion! - mercenaries (not quite they cannot drop guns if not paid), while not part of either the Metropolitan, l'Afrique or La Coloniale! Seriously though - do you know who was their most senior authority - in the sense that who could decide that a legion battalion would be first assigned to some force or other?

David,

The French Foreign Legion is a part of the regular French army - they are in no way mercenaries !

About the assignment of forces among the French army, I don't have the foggiest, sorry [:(] [&:]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Caquineur

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Caquineur

I don't know about the other units listed, but the French Foreign Legion is definitely NOT a Locally Raised Irregular Force or a Militia... [:@]

Warspite 1
Okay - don`t shoot the messenger [;)]

Ooops ! Sorry if I made myself misunderstood with the "[:@]" - it was in no way intented towards you (or Norman42), only about the sentence that I quoted.

Alain, the bad-tempered bear with a headache and a very short fuse (sometimes) [;)]

Warspite1

Not a problem Caquineur!

[warspite1]

Does anyone know what/who USS Monterey would have been named after?

[ItBurns]

Its a town in California that contains a military base - both Navy and Marines if I remember correctly.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: ItBurns

Its a town in California that contains a military base - both Navy and Marines if I remember correctly.

Warspite1

ItBurns - thanks, can I ask you to confirm your source please? The reason I ask is that most of the Independence-class were named after battles. There are one or two exceptions (as with all US carrier classes) and I want to ensure I have the right Monterey.

Many thanks [:)]

[warspite1]

I had nothing to say - I just did not like my former "number of posts" number [X(]

[ItBurns]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: ItBurns

Its a town in California that contains a military base - both Navy and Marines if I remember correctly.

Warspite1

ItBurns - thanks, can I ask you to confirm your source please? The reason I ask is that most of the Independence-class were named after battles. There are one or two exceptions (as with all US carrier classes) and I want to ensure I have the right Monterey.

Many thanks [:)]

You are of course correct. The first thing that came to my mind was the base but once you mentioned battles I remembered a little dust up during the Mexican-American war by that name: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Monterey.

Oh, and congrats on avoiding THE BEAST!

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I had nothing to say - I just did not like my former "number of posts" number [X(]

Let those of wisdom calculate the number and the number is that of a man, and the number is not really known to man. [;)]



((The number may have changed during the ages since it was first written. Some claim that the number to be 616. And most scholars seem to think that the number was ment to refer to the roman emperor Nero. Both 616 and the classical number could be seen as writing "Emperor Nero" with numbers.))

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Here are some revisions/new writeups from David.

Post 1 of 2.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

2nd and last post in the series.