RHS files on RHS website?

[Pascal_slith]

Hello El Cid,

am I correct in assuming all the most recent updates to RHS are available on the RHS website?

Regards

[Historiker]

He told me, that Cobra seems to be inactive.
As soon as he has sent me the files, I'll upload them to my webspace.

[Pascal_slith]

Thanks, Historiker.

[Pascal_slith]

Thanks, Historiker.

[el cid again]

I don't know Cobra's situation, but last I heard his system was down hard, and presumably that is part of the situation.

Generally, Cobra posted file links to Sendspace in the RHS Download Thread - and that is not happening at this time. The RHS site gets files later in time - it cannot update very often. When we finally freeze everything, I will ask Mifune to post to the site.

Meanwhile our German compatriot says he can post the files - so I will send them to him after work - and presumably he will advise where to find them.

Also, meanwhile, I have been sending directly - except when the ISP won't let me - to anyone who asks.

Having got a set of eratta reports - I will work in one more update - so we freeze at a clean point. I also have just updated CVO/BBO Mizuho and Nisshin to upgrade differently: both will gain light AAA and radar - neither will go to CVL - although I am not sure that is "realistic" I cannot proove they would have done.

I am running long game tests - and so far it is looking pretty good.

[Mifune]

The latest RHS files are currently being posted on the RHS site. Level 7 is already done. With a bit of paitence all versions wil be soon.

[John 3rd]

El Cid:
 
You know that the Japanese would have made them into CVLs like Chiyoda and Chitose but they were sunk by 1/43.  We talked about this in my thread a day or two ago.  PLEASE give us Japanese fans the opportunity of doing this!
 
John
 

[Historiker]

Sid?
I created you an own ftp account, so you can upload new files yourself from now on.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

El Cid:

You know that the Japanese would have made them into CVLs like Chiyoda and Chitose but they were sunk by 1/43.  We talked about this in my thread a day or two ago.  PLEASE give us Japanese fans the opportunity of doing this!

John

Well - one of them starts as a CVL in EOS and AIO - and both in EEO (not yet released).

Will think about this for CVO and BBO - I just made em update light AAA and radar.

[John 3rd]

Let them become Chitose Class.  Nisshin was planned for that exact conversion but couldn't due to getting sunk.  The Mizuho could of the same class since she was laid out pretty close to the other three.  Only problem is her speed but that could still work if she was hooked up with the CVEs.

I haven't given this any thought....

[Don Bowen]

Just for accuracy, CS is not the correct classification for the Chitose, Nisshin, Mizuho class ships.   Under the US type designation in effect during World War II, these ships should be classed as CVS.   Who's for changing it??
 
Most of the classifications match the US standard system - a very complete system by the way.    Other types at odds with the system are:
 
AG - Used for Japanese Barges.  AG is Miscellaneous Auxiliary in the US system.  Ocean going barges of the various types know as Daihatsu would be either LCsomething, or perhaps the British LB (Landing Barge).
MSW - An apparent abbreviation.   Should be AM
ML - Another abbreviation.   Should be CM, or CMc for the small ones.
MLE - A made up type to facilitate and control mine usage - lest WITP become MITP (Mines in the Pacific)
 
 
 
 

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Let them become Chitose Class.  Nisshin was planned for that exact conversion but couldn't due to getting sunk.  The Mizuho could of the same class since she was laid out pretty close to the other three.  Only problem is her speed but that could still work if she was hooked up with the CVEs.

I haven't given this any thought....

They actually changed the engines for the Chitose's - destroyer sets I think - and certainly that is a possibility. But in game conversion (other than hard code) is way too fast - and I am loth to include an engine change to do it. What is more logical I think is to change over with the slow speed - and call it a CVE. Still thinking.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Just for accuracy, CS is not the correct classification for the Chitose, Nisshin, Mizuho class ships.   Under the US type designation in effect during World War II, these ships should be classed as CVS.   Who's for changing it??

REPLY: IF this is a query re changing it officially - at Matrix - in code: I am. I used the term because in WITP it is being used that way. WITP seems pretty much to use USN ship nomenclature - and that is a widely understood nomenclature system and certainly much of the Matrix market knows it - so being consistent with it is good form IMHO.




Most of the classifications match the US standard system - a very complete system by the way.    Other types at odds with the system are:

AG - Used for Japanese Barges.  AG is Miscellaneous Auxiliary in the US system.  Ocean going barges of the various types know as Daihatsu would be either LCsomething, or perhaps the British LB (Landing Barge).

REPLY: Yes indeedy - and I dives a USN oriented person slightly nuts to see AG used in this way. Not sure who thought AG was a good idea - or why?

MSW - An apparent abbreviation.   Should be AM

REPLY: I think you have this one right: MSW is often used as an abbreviation, particularly in British English usage. But it isn't consistent with USN nomenclature - why mix systems?

ML - Another abbreviation.   Should be CM, or CMc for the small ones.

REPLY: I think this is also correct - the same abbreviation system as used for MSW. Perhaps whoever did this was used to reading some British reference materials?

MLE - A made up type to facilitate and control mine usage - lest WITP become MITP (Mines in the Pacific)


REPLY: I don't think you are correct here: An MLE is a type, and in particular a IJN type. It just was not a USN type, so we might need to add it to the list. And - I confess - I am guilty of the charge of WANTING MITP - if wanting realistic mine warfare is to be guilty. I see no reason whatever to have a system permitting high speed minesweeping (still impossible) - forbidding air minelaying by any bomber - making sub minelaying way too easy - permitting paravanes on a few ships but not most (my 10,000 ton APA had paravanes) - or a long list of others. Whatever reasons we use to change this or that - let no fear of MITP be one of them: more correct ought to be our only standard.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Sid?
I created you an own ftp account, so you can upload new files yourself from now on.

I don't understand this yet - I am too tired to learn - and I have a long list of those wanting an upload. I will

1) sleep

2) do a few more identified eratta

3) do a general upload to a now doubled list

4) investigate this offer - and either master it - or let Historiker do it this time - and master it in a day or two.

[DuckofTindalos]

MLE is a made-up classification in WitP. No such thing in real life.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Just for accuracy, CS is not the correct classification for the Chitose, Nisshin, Mizuho class ships.   Under the US type designation in effect during World War II, these ships should be classed as CVS.   Who's for changing it??

REPLY: IF this is a query re changing it officially - at Matrix - in code: I am. I used the term because in WITP it is being used that way. WITP seems pretty much to use USN ship nomenclature - and that is a widely understood nomenclature system and certainly much of the Matrix market knows it - so being consistent with it is good form IMHO.

No Sid, nothing official. Just a query to see how the forum folks thought about it.

For those that are interested, Volume IV of Dictionary of Naval Fighting Ships has an appendix with a complete list of all US designations. That's the printed one, not any of the on-line versions (that I can find).

Anyone know what a CF is?? How about DA?? Or APC (not APc, capital C)??

[treespider]

CF - Flying Deck Cruiser
DA - Destroyer (1933)
APC - Cavalry transport and/or Small Coastal Transport
 

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

MLE is a made-up classification in WitP. No such thing in real life.

Not sure where this idea comes from - and possibly people at Matrix even believe it - but it is real enough.
An MLE is a minelayer fitted with sensors and weapons to serve as an escort ship. Several classes of these were designed and built BEFORE WWII by IJN. Some were not fitted for their wartime role as escorts until 1942 or so, others always had dual fitting - but they were all so intended - and so designated. MLE is certainly a classification you will find in my data bases and writing going back at least 30 years.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: treespider

CF - Flying Deck Cruiser
DA - Destroyer (1933)
APC - Cavalry transport and/or Small Coastal Transport

Real good!

DA actually meant heavy destroyer, in the same way CA meant heavy cruiser. It was created for the large destoyers of the Porter class, but never used.

APC was cavalry transport thru World War II. Again, never used but intended to be a special purpose transport with a mixture of people and horse accomadations. The existance of APC forced coastal transport to use a small "c" until after WWII (APc). Then Cavalry Transport was retired and APC became Coastal Transport. The lower case third-letter "c" was common during the 1930-1940 time frame as a size designation. APc, PYc, AMc, probably others but there's that old memory problem...

(edit) and apparently a developing problem with speelling.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: treespider

CF - Flying Deck Cruiser
DA - Destroyer (1933)
APC - Cavalry transport and/or Small Coastal Transport

Real good!

DA actually meant heavy destroyer, in the same way CA meant heavy cruiser. It was created for the large destoyers of the Porter class, but never used.

REPLY: I like it - because it is consistent with CA. I always thought we should call Porters DL or something special.