Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: warspite1

What was the name of the first Royal Navy destroyer lost to enemy action in WWII?

To my knowledge, that would be the Blanche, which was sunk on November 13th, 1939.

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

ORIGINAL: warspite1

What was the name of the first Royal Navy destroyer lost to enemy action in WWII?

To my knowledge, that would be the Blanche, which was sunk on November 13th, 1939.

Warspite1

...is the right answer [:)]

I should stop answering questions, I'm terrible at coming up with my own, so I'll resort to what allfree-thinking people do when stumped; plagiarize.


What was the first U.S. destroyer sunk by hostile action in WW2, and when did she go down?

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

I should stop answering questions, I'm terrible at coming up with my own, so I'll resort to what allfree-thinking people do when stumped; plagiarize.


What was the first U.S. destroyer sunk by hostile action in WW2, and when did she go down?

USS Reuben James in the North Atlantic - no idea when exactly other than it was before Pearl Harbor - guess September 1941.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

I should stop answering questions, I'm terrible at coming up with my own, so I'll resort to what allfree-thinking people do when stumped; plagiarize.


What was the first U.S. destroyer sunk by hostile action in WW2, and when did she go down?

USS Reuben James in the North Atlantic - no idea when exactly other than it was before Pearl Harbor - guess September 1941.

Well, October 41, but close enough. A U-boat took exception to her convoy guarding and expressed that dissatisfaction with torpedoes.


Your question.

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

I should stop answering questions, I'm terrible at coming up with my own, so I'll resort to what allfree-thinking people do when stumped; plagiarize.


What was the first U.S. destroyer sunk by hostile action in WW2, and when did she go down?

USS Reuben James in the North Atlantic - no idea when exactly other than it was before Pearl Harbor - guess September 1941.

Well, October 41, but close enough. A U-boat took exception to her convoy guarding and expressed that dissatisfaction with torpedoes.


Your question.

Warspite1

What was the name of the Italian submarine that, using one single salvo of torpedoes, sank the cruiser HMS Cairo, damaged the cruiser HMS Nigeria and also damaged the tanker SS Ohio during the Pedestal convoy?

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

ORIGINAL: warspite1




USS Reuben James in the North Atlantic - no idea when exactly other than it was before Pearl Harbor - guess September 1941.

Well, October 41, but close enough. A U-boat took exception to her convoy guarding and expressed that dissatisfaction with torpedoes.


Your question.

Warspite1

What was the name of the Italian submarine that, using one single salvo of torpedoes, sank the cruiser HMS Cairo, damaged the cruiser HMS Nigeria and also damaged the tanker SS Ohio during the Pedestal convoy?

HMS Cairo was sunk by the Axum. I didn't realize that it was one spread that hit her, the Nigeria, and a tanker though.

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge






Well, October 41, but close enough. A U-boat took exception to her convoy guarding and expressed that dissatisfaction with torpedoes.


Your question.

Warspite1

What was the name of the Italian submarine that, using one single salvo of torpedoes, sank the cruiser HMS Cairo, damaged the cruiser HMS Nigeria and also damaged the tanker SS Ohio during the Pedestal convoy?

HMS Cairo was sunk by the Axum. I didn't realize that it was one spread that hit her, the Nigeria, and a tanker though.

Warspite1

Yes - a rare success for the Italian submarine arm in WWII. There was I think, a Japanese sub that had an even better (luckier?) single salvo strike. Which boat was it and who did she hit?

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Orm

Congratulations to the Green Bay Packers who just won this years Super Bowl.


During the world war two, before Super Bowl begun, American fotboll had the NFL Championships. What team won the NFL Championships most times during the years 1939-1945?

When in doubt for sports trivia, always guess New York. Since there were no Jets until the AFL, I guess New York Giants.

No, not New York Giants. They were in 3 finals during this period but lost them all.

The team I am looking for has the nickname "Monsters of the Midway". They got it for their teams 1940 and 1941. But their incredible strong defence in the year 1985 might be the reason for that the nickname still has some use. The nickname was first used for the university in the same city as the football team.

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Orm

Congratulations to the Green Bay Packers who just won this years Super Bowl.


During the world war two, before Super Bowl begun, American fotboll had the NFL Championships. What team won the NFL Championships most times during the years 1939-1945?

When in doubt for sports trivia, always guess New York. Since there were no Jets until the AFL, I guess New York Giants.

Well looks like people have lost interest. After my guess I looked it up. The answer is Chicago Bears with 3 wins. The Giants could have had the same record but lost in all 3 of their appearances during that time.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

ORIGINAL: warspite1


Warspite1

What was the name of the Italian submarine that, using one single salvo of torpedoes, sank the cruiser HMS Cairo, damaged the cruiser HMS Nigeria and also damaged the tanker SS Ohio during the Pedestal convoy?

HMS Cairo was sunk by the Axum. I didn't realize that it was one spread that hit her, the Nigeria, and a tanker though.

Warspite1

Yes - a rare success for the Italian submarine arm in WWII. There was I think, a Japanese sub that had an even better (luckier?) single salvo strike. Which boat was it and who did she hit?

I can't remember the number (all those 'I's look alike to me) though I think it was I-72. With one spread she sank the Wasp, damaged the battleship North Carolina, and sank a destroyer whose name escapes me.

Hows that for a partial, I can't remember cause I'm getting old, answer[:D]

ORIGINAL: ItBurns

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge





HMS Cairo was sunk by the Axum. I didn't realize that it was one spread that hit her, the Nigeria, and a tanker though.

Warspite1

Yes - a rare success for the Italian submarine arm in WWII. There was I think, a Japanese sub that had an even better (luckier?) single salvo strike. Which boat was it and who did she hit?

I can't remember the number (all those 'I's look alike to me) though I think it was I-72. With one spread she sank the Wasp, damaged the battleship North Carolina, and sank a destroyer whose name escapes me.

Hows that for a partial, I can't remember cause I'm getting old, answer[:D]

Warspite1

Adopts best school masterly manner [;)].

I cannot give you more than a third of a point for that. The sub number is someway out and the destroyer name is missing too.

Clue: Sub number is much lower and the destroyer could have been named after an Irishman.

Looks like no further takers so:

The sub was I-19 and the US destroyer was O'Brien.

Since there are naval experts here I thought I might ask a trickier question. In five related parts.

1) What is the reason that promted The First Sea Lord to say "the saddest naval action of the war"?

2) After the battle the German commander refused to take part of the celebrations and when represented with flowers the Admiral commented "these will do nicely for my grave". What was his name?

3) When news of this battle reached England naval forces were at once dispatched to hunt down the Germans. This lead to another naval battle were The Royal Navy were victorius. What is the name of this action?

4) What reason did the English belive that Germany had for this naval operation?

5) What was the true German reason for this operation?

Which war? This sounds like WW I - with the Battle of Coromel (sp? - not checking Wiki!) which led to the Battle of the Falklands. If so coal was involved in the second battle - I think as the actual reason for the Germans going to the Falklands. Was the Admiral Graf Spee?

I agree. From the clues I was trying to get the loss of the Hood in the Denmark Strait (and the subsequent search for, and destruction of, Bismarck thereafter). However had never heard that Lutjens spoke of flowers for his grave and the operation purpose and name were not mysterious...

Coronel and the Falklands seems a good guess - although are WWI.

It is indeed the WWI battles. I said I was tricky.

Coronel and Falklands were the two battles. And the Admiral was Graf von Spee.

Now. Do anyone have the answer to the other questions?

Edit: The knowledge here about naval history is awesome. Good work guys. [&o]

Edit 2: Coal was not the reason that Admiral Graf Spee was sent here with his ships, among them Gneisenau and Scharnhorst.

ORIGINAL: Orm

It is indeed the WWI battles. I said I was tricky.

Coronel and Falklands were the two battles. And the Admiral was Graf von Spee.

Now. Do anyone have the answer to the other questions?

Edit: The knowledge here about naval history is awesome. Good work guys. [&o]

Edit 2: Coal was not the reason that Admiral Graf Spee was sent here with his ships, among them Gneisenau and Scharnhorst.

Warspite1

Question 4: I'll guess commerce raiding
Question 5: The reason von Spee's squadron were in South American waters was because they were trying to get back to Germany after the Japanese had entered the war on the Allies side and made the Pacific too hot for them to handle.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm

It is indeed the WWI battles. I said I was tricky.

Coronel and Falklands were the two battles. And the Admiral was Graf von Spee.

Now. Do anyone have the answer to the other questions?

Edit: The knowledge here about naval history is awesome. Good work guys. [&o]

Edit 2: Coal was not the reason that Admiral Graf Spee was sent here with his ships, among them Gneisenau and Scharnhorst.

Warspite1

Question 4: I'll guess commerce raiding
Question 5: The reason von Spee's squadron were in South American waters was because they were trying to get back to Germany after the Japanese had entered the war on the Allies side and made the Pacific too hot for them to handle.

4) Yes. The English thought the purpose of the Germans was commerce raiding.

5) No, not quite anyway. The purpse for von Spee's squadron here was not to get back to Germany. The answer is suprisingly manure!?

Or rather Guano. This may sound weird but Germany had planned for a short war. When they realized that the war might be longer than expected they realized they would face a shortage of ammunition because they lacked the nitrate needed to make the ammunition. Guano has nitrate in it and Chile was a main supplier of Guano and hence nitrate. Germany had more than a hundred commercial vessels trapped in Chilean ports loaded with Guano. They could not sail through the Panama channel and crossing the Pacific and the Indian ocean to get back to Germany was deemed impossible due to the Royal Navy and the Japanese declaration of war. So von Spee was ordered to open a route around Cape Horn for the merchant vessles so they could sail that way to Germany.

As it turned out Germany never had any need for the Guano because soon after this german chemists Carl Bosch and Fritz Haber manage to make nitrate from atmosperic nitrogen.

Edit: I recently found out about that guano was the reason for the battles and thought it was so interesting that I wanted to share that piece of information so I thought I could make a evil question about it. [:)]

The same birdcrap that was the reason for an amazingly stupid war between Peru, Bolivia and Chile in 1879.