Matrix Games Forums

Bullwinkle58, Long time no see. Have you been hanging out with a squirrely character around Frostbite Falls visiting some wild relatives?

Never understood the 'Ranger is too slow for the Pacific' logic. She and Wasp had the same speed and they were limited to the speed of the fast BBs in any case. End of 42 the USN could use every CV available. Anyone have better insight on this? Less belt armor than Wasp, but at the end of the day belt armor ended up not really mattering. anti-torp protection did, as the Wasp learned. And deck armor as well. Curious. Sort of like why Hellcats were generally not used on CVEs. Avengers were much bigger and heavier yet they operated from the CVEs.

It seems that few have heard of 'Operation Leader' where the USS Ranger (CV-4) conducted air strikes against shipping along the Norwegian coast.

http://www.airgroup4.com/operation-leader.htm

ORIGINAL: spence

Never understood the 'Ranger is too slow for the Pacific' logic. She and Wasp had the same speed and they were limited to the speed of the fast BBs in any case. End of 42 the USN could use every CV available. Anyone have better insight on this? Less belt armor than Wasp, but at the end of the day belt armor ended up not really mattering. anti-torp protection did, as the Wasp learned. And deck armor as well. Curious. Sort of like why Hellcats were generally not used on CVEs. Avengers were much bigger and heavier yet they operated from the CVEs.

It seems that few have heard of 'Operation Leader' where the USS Ranger (CV-4) conducted air strikes against shipping along the Norwegian coast.

http://www.airgroup4.com/operation-leader.htm

Ranger started the war on the East Coast and stayed in the Atlantic for most of it. As urgent as the need for carriers was in the Pacific, the Atlantic needed carriers too, to deal with the U-boats raiding shipping on the East Coast. That situation did not change until enough CVEs were available. Ranger was almost 15,000 tons, about twice as big as the smallest CVEs and 1.5 times as big as the larger ones - so she likely carried more aircraft. The report on the raid on Norway mentions both fighters and bombers from the US carrier.

After participating in the attack on Casablanca in late 1942, Ranger spent December 42 - February 43 in refit. This suggests she needed major improvements before she could enter service in the Pacific - likely AA and air defence radars/directors/computers. I think that is one of the reasons she was not used in the Pacific in 1942. I suspect steaming range was another issue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Ranger_(CV-4)

There are quite a few historical named/cancelled Essex, Baltimore & Cleveland class ships that were ordered (and some completed post war). Most of the carriers have been mentioned above.

Also some Tacoma PFs received smaller city names (Sacramento, Annapolis etc) that might have been used on CLs or CLAAs. And there are a few US state capitals that missed out - including Hartford, Pierre ... and Bismarck.

You might also rename some of the -II DDs for any KIA Admirals you have, other than ones that are already in there (Kidd, Callaghan, Norman Scott).

Ranger's operational capability was incompatible with what was required in fleet carrier actions.

Though 70+ aircraft could in theory be spotted, on 14575 tons displacement (overgrown from her treaty dictated designed 13800t) things were cramped. That meant the pace of flight operations and availability rate was slower/lower than the larger carriers.

In 1939 her captain reported that in rough seas she pitched too much to conduct flying operations (i.e. sea states which did not stop flight ops on the larger carriers, or the Wasp).

The USN learned from the mistakes made with Ranger when they designed the Yorktown, and later the Wasp to use their remaining treaty tonnage.

Also, with only 54000 SHP, 25 knots was about her best speed at full load. Wasp was built with 70000 SHP.

See discussion here:

tm.asp?m=994449

For the replacement US CVs, I took inspiration from the Wasp and Hornet and added the new CVs Yellowjacket, Bumblebee, and Tarantula Hawk.

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Bullwinkle58, Long time no see. Have you been hanging out with a squirrely character around Frostbite Falls visiting some wild relatives?

Yes, that's it exactly. [8D]

Moose meat is delicious . . .

HMS Insipid
HMS Intransigent

HMS Inebriated

HMS Incontinent (avoid her wake at mess hour)

Wouldn't that be the HMAS Incontinent?

Bismarck.

Doubtful the U.S. would have used this name during WWII.

When I play Rule the Waves, I use the "Pathogen" class DDs. Ebola, Malaria, Salmonella, etc.

ORIGINAL: dcpollay

When I play Rule the Waves, I use the "Pathogen" class DDs. Ebola, Malaria, Salmonella, etc.

Doesn't the Geneva Convention prohibit use of biological named ships?

The motor launch HMS Inconsequential

There was an HMS Terrible (a Majestic class CVL). Build suspended in 1945, acquired by the RAN in 1946, and renamed HMAS Sydney (III) on completion in 1948.

In my mod all the RN light fleets turn up in 45/6/7, including Hermes II. I also put the Audacious class in - Eagle II, Ark Royal II (which is actually about Ark Royal VII) and the third one arrives as Pegasus II. Pegasus was one of the original names used for aircraft carrying ships in the RN. A projected Colossus class was assigned the name, but when the balance of that class was re-ordered as Majestic class, it slipped out of use.

Roman trireme Incontinentia Buttocks

Maclan5: I like your thinking on naming DDs after famous beermen. Also, I think Bismarck, state capital or not, might not have been on any list of potential CA/CL names.

Cheers,
CB

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Roman trireme Incontinentia Buttocks

Good one, I thought of that name when i saw the Incontinent.
A few others could form a Monty Python class of ships.

I have a gweat fwiend in Wome...