Models of Naval Combat

[String]

Poor hawker, i kinda feel sorry for him.

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: String

Poor hawker, i kinda feel sorry for him.

Having you cherished illusions desstroyed is painful, but in the end he will be the better person for it.

Some day he wil thank us for this, I am sure. [:D]

[DeepSix]

We need more popcorn, methinks.

[Berkut]

The bane of the Bismark - a biplane made out of cloth.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: spence

Agreed!

Also agreed. My original post was on operations research studies! How did it take on a life of its own? Should I start a second thread to discuss doctrine based on Hughes, Fleet Tactics?

[hawker]

Poor hawker, i kinda feel sorry for him.

I can defend myself with ease String[;)].
About chasing Bismarck,she is not chased by all Brittish fleet,with how many ships she is chased,40,50,60. All that ships for that piece of scrap. According to "i know best" Mrdiehl, Rodney is enough to catch and sink Bismarck.
FACT is,Brittish was forced to move entire Home fleet wherever Tirpitz moves.WHY,that is only piece of scrap. Did Churchill go crazy and assign so many ships for the junk like Tirpitz.
Some folks spoke about Iowa radar range finders. Well,Bismarck would have those radar range finders in 1943,also she (if survived) will have AAA much better in 1943.
FACT IS:Never in history of warfare so many ships is assign to catch only one ship. WHY???
FACT IS:RN was so scared of Tirpitz that they keep major part of Home fleet in ports which are close to Tirpitz. WHY??
FACT IS:Hood is sunk in six minutes with Bismarck poor guns from 18000 yards. How is that possible??Lucky hit? I dont think so.
You dont give me any facts (except offense from some people).
As my fellow countrymen says:

and my daddy is stronger than yours...

Wildcats were far superior than Zeros

Shermans were better than Tigers...

and yes, you are right again - Bismarck was totally inferiour to British ships. Unfortunatly, Hood was sunk by Rodney (mistake, ups).

And Britts did not sent the whole fleet to chase this poor b*stard....actually, i'm suprised that you dont know the FACT!

US pigboat (SS-007) torpedoed Bismarck with one torpedo but it fails to detonate. Doesnt matter, this undergunned, under-armored ship with poor gun crew sunk right after that torpedo hit Bismarck....

All hail to all-knowing mrdiehl!

[Black Mamba 1942]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: spence

Agreed!

Also agreed. My original post was on operations research studies! How did it take on a life of its own? Should I start a second thread to discuss doctrine based on Hughes, Fleet Tactics?

At least they kept the thread going on an historical topic.[;)]

Usually a thread ends up talking about cats and beer.[:D][:D][:D]

[hawker]

Having you cherished illusions desstroyed is painful, but in the end he will be the better person for it.

Some day he wil thank us for this, I am sure.

You speaking for yourself,are you my young padawan.

[spence]

I know the RN had grog for the enlisted men and the officers could have pretty much whatever they bought for the mess. How about the Kreigsmarine? Did they have a daily issue for the crew like the RN?

I believe cats have already been introduced to this thread[:'(]

[mdiehl]

According to "i know best" Mrdiehl, Rodney is enough to catch and sink Bismarck.

According to "I can read a website composed by people who know about battleships that compares different designs" Mr. Diehl, HMS Rodney could not catch Bismarck, but if Bismarck caught Rodney, and chose to grasp that particular lion by the tail, then Bismarck would be in trouble.

Thanks for playing "You can try to put words in Mr. Diehl's mouth but all you do is make yourself look like you're tyring to put words in someone's mouth." For your next exercise, please explain again how sheeps' bladders may be used to prevent earthquakes, Sir Bedever, we're all hanging on your every word (and howling with laughter when you discharge).

[Big B]

Hmm, right where I left off last friday[:D]

Okay, so what did I miss?

care for some popcorn?

[spence]

Oh please you guys. Can we get back to the cat story at least[>:]

[mdiehl]

edit...

[DeepSix]

Well, I'm prepared to publicly and passionately argue that no more than 16 angels can stand on the head of a pin.[:D]

[Iridium]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl
Especially the ones that PM me about how great it is to hear me debunk axis fanboys' mythmaking but refuse to throw down in public.

Interesting that people view this as an Axis fanboy thing. I was under the impression that is was a Bismark fanboy thing. Especially since he refuses to discuss the Yamato class. It is also rather amusing to hear Allied mythmaking, have we had one lately?[:'(][:D]

[mdiehl]

Interesting that people view this as an Axis fanboy thing.

True enough. Fault me for imprecise language then. [;)]

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: hawker

Poor hawker, i kinda feel sorry for him.

I can defend myself with ease String[;)].

Not about defending yourself, it is about overcoming your fanboyism.

About chasing Bismarck,she is not chased by all Brittish fleet,with how many ships she is chased,40,50,60.

Dunno, you tell us? How many ships chased U-Boats?

Did you know that 8, EIGHT, P-38s were assigned to shoot down ONE single G4M Betty? Can you believe that?

Eight of them! The US Air Force MUST ahve been absolutely *terrified* of G4M Betties, since they sent EIGHT of them after JUST ONE! OMG!

Clearly, G4M Betties can shoot down P-38s en masse, if it took 8 to shoot down just one.

All that ships for that piece of scrap. According to "i know best" Mrdiehl, Rodney is enough to catch and sink Bismarck.
FACT is,Brittish was forced to move entire Home fleet wherever Tirpitz moves.WHY,that is only piece of scrap. Did Churchill go crazy and assign so many ships for the junk like Tirpitz.

Becuase of the potential damage the Tirpitz could cause if she got out into the North Atlantic and started sinking merchant ships, that's why.

Some folks spoke about Iowa radar range finders. Well,Bismarck would have those radar range finders in 1943,also she (if survived) will have AAA much better in 1943.

Nope, not talking about range finders, talking about radar guided fire control. Range finders are the simplest and most unspohisticated of radar assisted fire control. We are talking about using radar to aim, lay, and point the main armamnet, something that Bismark was simply incapable of, since all she could do was gross range estimation.

You should check out this website at

www.combinedfleet.com

SOme great stuff there.

FACT IS:Never in history of warfare so many ships is assign to catch only one ship. WHY???

Fact is, never in history of warfare have so many P-38s been assigned to shoot down just one Betty. WHY????????

FACT IS:RN was so scared of Tirpitz that they keep major part of Home fleet in ports which are close to Tirpitz. WHY??

Already answered, and fear did not enter into the question.

FACT IS:Hood is sunk in six minutes with Bismarck poor guns from 18000 yards. How is that possible??Lucky hit? I dont think so.

Well, yes, actually, that is exactly the correct answer. A lucky hit.

You dont give me any facts (except offense from some people).

But *I* HAVE given you many, many facts.

Like the fact that the Bismark had no radar controleld fire control, making her not particularly viable in night or heavy weather. And the fact that despite your claim to the contrary, the Bismark was not chased by the entire Navy, nor did she disperse the entire Navy.

I gave you the fact that she was in fact the CHASEE not the CHASER, and in fact ran, ran, ran util she could run no more and was destroyed - largely as a result of a silly biplane.

I gave you the fact that her armor protection was completely inadequate to deal with her contemporaries gunfre at long range. I gave you the fact the her own armament could not effectively take on some of the other heavies like the Musashi/Yamato, and would have trouble with the Iowa on NOrth Dakota class at long range.

There are all kinds of facts at your disposal at


www.combinedfleet.com

you should check it out sometime.

[hawker]

Dunno, you tell us? How many ships chased U-Boats?

Did you know that 8, EIGHT, P-38s were assigned to shoot down ONE single G4M Betty? Can you believe that?

Eight of them! The US Air Force MUST ahve been absolutely *terrified* of G4M Betties, since they sent EIGHT of them after JUST ONE! OMG!

Clearly, G4M Betties can shoot down P-38s en masse, if it took 8 to shoot down just one.

BS answer,we are talking about ships,not planes. Do you know diference?

Well, yes, actually, that is exactly the correct answer. A lucky hit.

Extreme BS answer,do you actually beign there to know that or you read that "fact" on combinedfleet.com

But *I* HAVE given you many, many facts.

You didnt provide any fact except "what if",i was telling you facts from RL and you try to beat that by "lucky hit" etc...
You stick with combinedfleet.com,"very" reliable source indeed.
So,do little researching my young padawan and maybe you learn some facts.

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: hawker

Dunno, you tell us? How many ships chased U-Boats?

Did you know that 8, EIGHT, P-38s were assigned to shoot down ONE single G4M Betty? Can you believe that?

Eight of them! The US Air Force MUST ahve been absolutely *terrified* of G4M Betties, since they sent EIGHT of them after JUST ONE! OMG!

Clearly, G4M Betties can shoot down P-38s en masse, if it took 8 to shoot down just one.

BS answer,we are talking about ships,not planes. Do you know diference?

Of course, for example it was a cloth covered biplane that was resposnible for the skinging of the BESTEST BB EVER!

But your calim relies on this idea that since the Brits sent so many ships after the Bismark, they MSUT have been terrified of her.

The US sent 8 P-38s to shoot down Yamamotos Betty, that means they must think it takes 8 P-38s to take on one Betty, right?

Is that not EXACTLY the logic you are using? Identically the same??

The simple FACT is that the Brits were not terrified of meeting the Bismark in a BB vs. BB encounter - they tried like crazy to arrange just that. They were terrified that Bismark would get into the shipping lanes.

Well, yes, actually, that is exactly the correct answer. A lucky hit.

Extreme BS answer,do you actually beign there to know that or you read that "fact" on combinedfleet.com

What if I did? Combinedfleet is considered an excellent and reliable source of data - more importantly, unlike yourself, it is an *objective* source of data, where the author has not particualr desire to "prove* that his favorite hunk of metal is TEHBESTESTEVER!!!!

But *I* HAVE given you many, many facts.

You didnt provide any fact except "what if",i was telling you facts from RL and you try to beat that by "lucky hit" etc...
You stick with combinedfleet.com,"very" reliable source indeed.
So,do little researching my young padawan and maybe you learn some facts.

I've don e my research, and keep providing you with all kinds of data, You have not responded, and continue to engage in this rather sophomoric personal responses rather than even attempting to refute the data provided to you.

Is there some reason you find combinedfleet an unreliable source, OTHER THAN the fact that it does not agree with your hero-worship of the Bismark?

[el cid again]

Like the fact that the Bismark had no radar controleld fire control,

It may be a matter of terminology, but as a radar technician (later engineer), I must say this statement appears false on its face. German radar is not the same as our (later) radar - so direct comparison is not possible. But German radar was PRIMARILY focused on tactical issues - including tactical rangefinding for targeting purposes. This was the big unknown. Optical equipment produces superior bearing but inferior range. Radar - even today - produces superior range but inferior bearing.
The German idea was probably SUPERIOR to ours! Anyway, when designed, it was clearly superior to the radar we didn't have yet. Since it was used for gunnery control - and compromised to optimize for that - I regard the above statement as misleading and false. Bismarck and Prinz Eugen each had two radars - each with 180 degrees of coverage (forward or aft arc). The forward radar on the Prinz was out, so Bismark was leading - to insure full coverage - and it mattered because it confused the British - who assumed the similar looking ships would be in a more standard formation. That error also probably meant they used the wrong ship lengths and generated self imposed range errors. Meanwhile, Bismarck used radar for the range and clearly got it right. And so did the Prinz - which scored as well.