Admirals Edition Naval Thread

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Cid,

Do you happen to recall the size of the shore party in your era? I know during Korea and beyond, it was 2 crews, each about 10-12 ratings and a PO, with a CPO-1 as shore Boss.

I think it was very similar during War-2 but not really sure.

Maybe you could shoot me a pm, since this may be getting OT.

It might be interesting generally though: not very different, TO&E would be 14 men - and theoretically some LTJG or so would be in charge but almost never present (as he has six other jobs). There would not have to be a chief - but if not a PO1 would be in charge - and there would be at least three PO2 - one for each team - of which there could be 3. Naval organization is task oriented - so it might act as one, two or three teams - and in my day the leader was not in any of the teams - but there would be a radioman with him - also not in any of the teams - because the radios were quite heavy - Korean era tube type radios with extra batteries - each of which weighed more than an entire radio today. If more men were required, they would be attached, either grunts from the boat division (on an APA this is about 80 strong, the biggest division on the ship) - or specialists from whatever division (say a signalman, a hospital corpsman, a gunners mate if you had to be armed and worry about supporting weapons - which ordinary sailors didn't do - the gunner's mate took care of weapons - or any other specialist of interest to the particular day's work).

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: mlees

"Malus" = negative modifier.

I figured that if a ship was in Dry Dock, it would be at a reduced manning level, it's ammo off loaded, and so on. Reducing it's effectivness or number of AA guns available in the event of an air attack.

Unless decommissioned, a ship would not normally offload ammunition. But it would do things like tear a boiler or turbine or diesel engine apart, allow major maintenance (or upgrade) of a radar set (or any other thing), stuff like that. The crew normally is partially ashore - on liberty - unless (like USS Yorktown) combat is expected. If a ship is on "24 hour sailing notice" it is trying to fix all these things ASAP - and if things are really bad it will sail regardless of who is around - what is down (like a few ships did at Pearl Harbor). But in that case - it might be that some capabilities are degraded: the ship is slower - it has less AA guns - or no radar of this or that sort - or maybe just that it cannot sustain combat as long - fewer men getting tired sooner and there is no relief - or maybe their skill level declines because of no relief.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Marc

I always wondered why the 5.5" gun from the Japanese CLs/BBs had so little penetration value in WitP. This gun can't even scratch the lightest armor in the game.

If I'm not wrong no one ever touched gun penetration values from day 1 of WitP (at least with CHS).
In search for some data I stumbled over this Internetsite with values for many Naval Guns of WWII. WWII NAVAL GUN PENETRATION TABLES

Perhaps this data can be used for the Admirals Edition if the team thinks the values are correct.

Anyway thank you for your effort.

Marc

The penetration of a high velocity gun (c 2700 fps mv) is approximately 1.75 times caliber in mm - at point blank range.
If actual penetration data is not available, and if the gun is not penalized for not being high velocity, this value is used by RHS. The 5.5 in 50 has 245 mm penetration value, while the 5.5 inch 40 QF has 221 mm penetration value. Both should matter - although this is only the maximum penetration at point blank range - and it is reduced in many instances.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Norm3

Any chance you want to elaborate on that? A horrific image of exploding fleet carriers, that have just made port with some damage after a major clash with the other side, has ruined my meal and beer.

Well - Mutsu did blow up sitting in port - and it was a relatively regular feature of captial ships of all nations in all eras. It was a minority issue - but it does happen. I like it.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Dixie

ORIGINAL:  Don Bowen
....ships falling off blocks in drydock (for two points, name that ship)...[snip]

USS Stewart fell off her blocks in the drydock at Surubaya (as opposed to Cassin which was blown off by a bomb)

A cargo ship - I forget her name - blew up while being loaded at Port Chicago - a major naval ammunition depot in California. It was the source of endless controversy - even a theory an atomic bomb was involved - and dozens of black seamen were courts martialed (apparently quite wrongly) and eventually exhonorated. In WWI a similar incident devastated Halifax, Nova Scotia.

[Ron Saueracker]

Weather related damage like typhoon damage might be cool...sure impacted the USN during WW2 and really tarnished Halsey's reputation.

[VSWG]

How many AK / AP classes does AE have? CHS introduced many new transport classes, is AE more/less complex? IIRC someone already mentioned that Aquitania is in, are there any other 1 ships AK/AP classes?

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: VSWG

How many AK / AP classes does AE have? CHS introduced many new transport classes, is AE more/less complex? IIRC someone already mentioned that Aquitania is in, are there any other 1 ships AK/AP classes?

Bunches and bunches ... JWE can elaborate ...

[NormS3]

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea as a historian and I can't wait for my first incident. However I know that I will no doubt be using and creating words that should not be heard by mortal ears.

Everytime something has been added or updated for this game, I am thankful for the new joy it has provided me and no doubt others. I just wanted to be the first to "gripe" about it.

I have not played any of your versions, but have been reading your posts and have enjoyed the experiance. I am somebody who tries to learn something new everyday and loves attention to detail, so I am thrilled at the prospect of this new feature.

Please keep up your hard work.

[Terminus]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Dixie

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
....ships falling off blocks in drydock (for two points, name that ship)...[snip]

USS Stewart fell off her blocks in the drydock at Surubaya (as opposed to Cassin which was blown off by a bomb)

A cargo ship - I forget her name - blew up while being loaded at Port Chicago - a major naval ammunition depot in California. It was the source of endless controversy - even a theory an atomic bomb was involved - and dozens of black seamen were courts martialed (apparently quite wrongly) and eventually exhonorated. In WWI a similar incident devastated Halifax, Nova Scotia.

NO?? Really??

[spence]

Unless decommissioned, a ship would not normally offload ammunition. But it would do things like tear a boiler or turbine or diesel engine apart, allow major maintenance (or upgrade) of a radar set (or any other thing), stuff like that. The crew normally is partially ashore - on liberty - unless (like USS Yorktown) combat is expected. If a ship is on "24 hour sailing notice" it is trying to fix all these things ASAP - and if things are really bad it will sail regardless of who is around - what is down (like a few ships did at Pearl Harbor). But in that case - it might be that some capabilities are degraded: the ship is slower - it has less AA guns - or no radar of this or that sort - or maybe just that it cannot sustain combat as long - fewer men getting tired sooner and there is no relief - or maybe their skill level declines because of no relief.

The number and type of jobs that can be performed by the ship's crew while in port is quite extensive: rebricking a boiler and replacing tubes therein, overhauling a main turbine (for a steam plant) are a couple of the jobs that would ordinarily happen while in port and be carried out by the ship's engineering department without outside assistance (except parts). The Coast Guard District (Naval District) would put the ship in some time specific "Standby" status (48 hour, 24 hour, 12 hour, 6 hour, 2 hour). Any of the later 3 would preclude jobs such as were mentioned above since part of the plant would have to be hot.

In the field of ship's maintenance I feel that the US should probably enjoy an advantage just from the higher level of mechanical awareness virtually every American had from the very culture he/she grew up in. I'm not trying to denigrate the Naval Rating Specialists of other navies but even the lowliest Fireman Apprentice/Recruit could generally be counted on to have had his head under the hood of a car and have a basic understanding of what allowed the systems to work. In Imperial Japan, relatively few citizens owned or drove a car or truck. For them things mechical were entirely foreign to their experience and they required training just to reach a basic level. Thus while a Japanese crew might perform the same sort of maintenance operations that a US crew performed the engineering personnel actually performing useful work towards the goal would be restricted to those specialists who had received the necessary training. This American "mechanical advantage" has been commented upon in the context of the US Army's mechanization and in aviation support by many noted historians and should carry over no less to ship's maintenance.

Speaking of Naval Districts, are these Naval HQs whose principle mission was maintenance support now going to be included for the US?

[SargeantTex]

Will Kaiten torpedos be included or will that fall under midget subs

[mlees]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

A cargo ship - I forget her name - blew up while being loaded at Port Chicago - a major naval ammunition depot in California. It was the source of endless controversy - even a theory an atomic bomb was involved - and dozens of black seamen were courts martialed (apparently quite wrongly) and eventually exhonorated. In WWI a similar incident devastated Halifax, Nova Scotia.

From Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor

On May 21, 1944, the tank landing ship LST-353 exploded at West Loch while handling ammunition. In a short space of time six LSTs were so damaged that they sank. Two others were severely damaged. 163 sailors were killed; 396 wounded. This was the second worst incident in the United States during World War II.

[Terminus]

ORIGINAL: SargeantTex

Will Kaiten torpedos be included or will that fall under midget subs

The Kaiten are in, as torpedo devices.

[ChezDaJez]

In the field of ship's maintenance I feel that the US should probably enjoy an advantage just from the higher level of mechanical awareness virtually every American had from the very culture he/she grew up in. I'm not trying to denigrate the Naval Rating Specialists of other navies but even the lowliest Fireman Apprentice/Recruit could generally be counted on to have had his head under the hood of a car and have a basic understanding of what allowed the systems to work. In Imperial Japan, relatively few citizens owned or drove a car or truck. For them things mechical were entirely foreign to their experience and they required training just to reach a basic level. Thus while a Japanese crew might perform the same sort of maintenance operations that a US crew performed the engineering personnel actually performing useful work towards the goal would be restricted to those specialists who had received the necessary training. This American "mechanical advantage" has been commented upon in the context of the US Army's mechanization and in aviation support by many noted historians and should carry over no less to ship's maintenance.

This is a good point, Spence. But take it a step further... any man can be trained to perform routine maintenance and do it well. That's normally not the issue however. The issues come into play when something unusual occurs that isn't covered by the book, say a major malfunction or battle damage. That is where that "American mechanical advantage" really paid off. The ability to improvise, to jury-rig, to cobble together with chewing gum and bailing wire was a hallmark of the American serviceman.

That is not to say it was the exclusive ability of American mechanics but it certainly was a widespread ability with them.

Chez

[Brady]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

In the field of ship's maintenance I feel that the US should probably enjoy an advantage just from the higher level of mechanical awareness virtually every American had from the very culture he/she grew up in. I'm not trying to denigrate the Naval Rating Specialists of other navies but even the lowliest Fireman Apprentice/Recruit could generally be counted on to have had his head under the hood of a car and have a basic understanding of what allowed the systems to work. In Imperial Japan, relatively few citizens owned or drove a car or truck. For them things mechical were entirely foreign to their experience and they required training just to reach a basic level. Thus while a Japanese crew might perform the same sort of maintenance operations that a US crew performed the engineering personnel actually performing useful work towards the goal would be restricted to those specialists who had received the necessary training. This American "mechanical advantage" has been commented upon in the context of the US Army's mechanization and in aviation support by many noted historians and should carry over no less to ship's maintenance.

This is a good point, Spence. But take it a step further... any man can be trained to perform routine maintenance and do it well. That's normally not the issue however. The issues come into play when something unusual occurs that isn't covered by the book, say a major malfunction or battle damage. That is where that "American mechanical advantage" really paid off. The ability to improvise, to jury-rig, to cobble together with chewing gum and bailing wire was a hallmark of the American serviceman.

That is not to say it was the exclusive ability of American mechanics but it certainly was a widespread ability with them.

Chez

Something thats missing from this, not that I disagree mind you, is that your not taking into acount just how much time was lost arguing over how do it by all those who knew just what was neaded to be done...., something not unique to our culture either[:)]

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Dixie




USS Stewart fell off her blocks in the drydock at Surubaya (as opposed to Cassin which was blown off by a bomb)

A cargo ship - I forget her name - blew up while being loaded at Port Chicago - a major naval ammunition depot in California. It was the source of endless controversy - even a theory an atomic bomb was involved - and dozens of black seamen were courts martialed (apparently quite wrongly) and eventually exhonorated. In WWI a similar incident devastated Halifax, Nova Scotia.

NO?? Really??

There is a web site dedicated to this matter - and they sell books. But while they tell an almost convincing tale, when you try to run it back to source, they suddenly have zip to say, show. No documents, photographs, depositions, nada. OTH there is a fine USNI book about the black sailors and their legal problems. It devastated parts of 12 counties, involved about 12,000 tons of explosive value. Very much looks like the Halafax explosion of a similar load of ammunition. Coal fired ships tend to explode sometimes too - see USS Maine.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: spence

Unless decommissioned, a ship would not normally offload ammunition. But it would do things like tear a boiler or turbine or diesel engine apart, allow major maintenance (or upgrade) of a radar set (or any other thing), stuff like that. The crew normally is partially ashore - on liberty - unless (like USS Yorktown) combat is expected. If a ship is on "24 hour sailing notice" it is trying to fix all these things ASAP - and if things are really bad it will sail regardless of who is around - what is down (like a few ships did at Pearl Harbor). But in that case - it might be that some capabilities are degraded: the ship is slower - it has less AA guns - or no radar of this or that sort - or maybe just that it cannot sustain combat as long - fewer men getting tired sooner and there is no relief - or maybe their skill level declines because of no relief.

The number and type of jobs that can be performed by the ship's crew while in port is quite extensive: rebricking a boiler and replacing tubes therein, overhauling a main turbine (for a steam plant) are a couple of the jobs that would ordinarily happen while in port and be carried out by the ship's engineering department without outside assistance (except parts). The Coast Guard District (Naval District) would put the ship in some time specific "Standby" status (48 hour, 24 hour, 12 hour, 6 hour, 2 hour). Any of the later 3 would preclude jobs such as were mentioned above since part of the plant would have to be hot.

In the field of ship's maintenance I feel that the US should probably enjoy an advantage just from the higher level of mechanical awareness virtually every American had from the very culture he/she grew up in. I'm not trying to denigrate the Naval Rating Specialists of other navies but even the lowliest Fireman Apprentice/Recruit could generally be counted on to have had his head under the hood of a car and have a basic understanding of what allowed the systems to work. In Imperial Japan, relatively few citizens owned or drove a car or truck. For them things mechical were entirely foreign to their experience and they required training just to reach a basic level. Thus while a Japanese crew might perform the same sort of maintenance operations that a US crew performed the engineering personnel actually performing useful work towards the goal would be restricted to those specialists who had received the necessary training. This American "mechanical advantage" has been commented upon in the context of the US Army's mechanization and in aviation support by many noted historians and should carry over no less to ship's maintenance.

Speaking of Naval Districts, are these Naval HQs whose principle mission was maintenance support now going to be included for the US?

The place that shows up is on land - Japan had to send peasants to school just to learn to drive - and others to longer schools to perform simple maintenance (never mind repairs) on a truck. Japanese armor/motor units had the most elaborate support in history - all the way to third echelon maintenance right in a primary unit - because there was NO infrastructure to support such units in almost all the IJA. They even carried significant numbers of spares "pre issued" - parts and whole vehicles - in primary units - because the logistic system could not provide either fast - only on a "special order" basis. Japanese units of the motor sort should have higher support, but be more expensive to feed (it is automatic with higher support) - and if possible more expensive. Japanese tanks in the 1930s - and today still - are the most expensive in the world - due to low economy of scale/production efficiency.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: el cid again
It might be interesting generally though: not very different, TO&E would be 14 men - and theoretically some LTJG or so would be in charge but almost never present (as he has six other jobs). There would not have to be a chief - but if not a PO1 would be in charge - and there would be at least three PO2 - one for each team - of which there could be 3. Naval organization is task oriented - so it might act as one, two or three teams - and in my day the leader was not in any of the teams - but there would be a radioman with him - also not in any of the teams - because the radios were quite heavy - Korean era tube type radios with extra batteries - each of which weighed more than an entire radio today. If more men were required, they would be attached, either grunts from the boat division (on an APA this is about 80 strong, the biggest division on the ship) - or specialists from whatever division (say a signalman, a hospital corpsman, a gunners mate if you had to be armed and worry about supporting weapons - which ordinary sailors didn't do - the gunner's mate took care of weapons - or any other specialist of interest to the particular day's work).

Thank you. That's very informative.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: VSWG
How many AK / AP classes does AE have? CHS introduced many new transport classes, is AE more/less complex? IIRC someone already mentioned that Aquitania is in, are there any other 1 ships AK/AP classes?

Bunches and bunches ... JWE can elaborate ...

I don't want to say billions and billions, but there will be many. There will be general merchant carriers, there will be commissioned AK types, there will be fast passenger transports (like Aquitania) and commissioned AP/APAs. There will be Japanese merchant vessels that can "temp convert" to carry troops, there will be merchant vessels that can "bind convert" to AVs, ASs, ADs, ARs, (AXs). There will be small coastal carriers that can "bind convert" to AGs, MSs, PCs, you name it.