OT: Greyhound

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

OT: Greyhound

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> OT: Greyhound

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

OT: Greyhound - 10/11/2019 6:08:49 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

"Greyhound" is a new movie starring Tom Hanks that is slated to be released in May 2020. It's an adaptation of a C.S. Forester (Horatio Hornblower is a well-known work of his) novel that is being adapted to a WWII American destroyer captain in the Atlantic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greyhound_(film)

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/11/2019 8:02:29 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

That must be Forester's novel, The Good Shepherd. crsutton recommended that highly, so I read it about two years ago. It's a fine book.

I can understand why they'd feel a need to change the title, lest folks think the movie was about the Gospels.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 2

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/11/2019 10:32:56 PM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

Both "The Good Sheperd" and "Greyhound" somewhat overstate the role of the US Navy in guarding the convoys in the early days of WW2 (early days for the USA). Mostly the North Atlantic convoys were escorted by the Brits and Canadians. There was a US contingent composed of older US destroyers ( 4 pipers) and 327 ft Treasury Class Coast Guard Cutters (the 6 sister ships of the USCGC Taney in WitP). Those CG Cutters were in fact the largest ships assigned by the US to escort duties and managed to sink 4 or 5 U-boats and pull innumerable Allied survivors out of the sea.
Some of them later show up as AGCs (after modification) in '44-45 in WitP.

One might be inclined to ask what the USN Atlantic Fleet was doing at this time? They were learning the same lessons that the Brits had learned back in 1939: swanning around the ocean looking for U-boats to attack (failing to realize that the U-boats were at the same time attacking the convoys. Adm King knew better than the Brits who must have given up way too soon).

BTW: I still plan to see the movie "Greyhound". I read "The Good Sheperd" some years back and enjoyed that book too.

< Message edited by spence -- 10/11/2019 10:35:06 PM >

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 3

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/11/2019 10:52:43 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

Here is an example of more modern US DDs involved with convoy duty, although not close escort.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy_PQ_16

Attachment (1)

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 4

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/11/2019 11:51:29 PM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

PQ16 was a convoy to Murmansk or Archangelsk and involved significant threats of both German air attack and attack by the battleship Tirpitz (and escorts) as well as U-boats.

The regular North Atlantic convoys, the ones that kept Britain in the war and slowly built up the foundation for Overlord were not so blessed by the USN. Much like the IJN close convoy escort was not regarded as the place to find fame, glory and career enhancement within the USN. Fortunately the Battle of the Atlantic finally got the attention and resources it deserved from USN (from the start).

I forgot what they called it but something like 5-7 German U-boats sank considerably more tonnage of unprotected tankers and freighters off the East Coast of the US in Jan-March 1942 than the US lost at Pearl Harbor. The first U-boat sunk in this offensive was sunk by a USS Roper in April. The next was sunk by USCGC Icarus in May. Strangely the USN eventually decided that convoys might help with the carnage off the East Coast, something that the Brits recommended on Dec 8th or so.

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 5

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 1:39:24 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

PQ16 was a convoy to Murmansk or Archangelsk and involved significant threats of both German air attack and attack by the battleship Tirpitz (and escorts) as well as U-boats.

The regular North Atlantic convoys, the ones that kept Britain in the war and slowly built up the foundation for Overlord were not so blessed by the USN. Much like the IJN close convoy escort was not regarded as the place to find fame, glory and career enhancement within the USN. Fortunately the Battle of the Atlantic finally got the attention and resources it deserved from USN (from the start).

I forgot what they called it but something like 5-7 German U-boats sank considerably more tonnage of unprotected tankers and freighters off the East Coast of the US in Jan-March 1942 than the US lost at Pearl Harbor. The first U-boat sunk in this offensive was sunk by a USS Roper in April. The next was sunk by USCGC Icarus in May. Strangely the USN eventually decided that convoys might help with the carnage off the East Coast, something that the Brits recommended on Dec 8th or so.

I think the German U-Boat offensive (Roll of the drums, or thunder, depending who you read) was a big surprise to the Allies who did not think the U-boats could operate so far from their bases in France. I don't know if Milch cow subs played a part in the deployment but that would make some sense, to replenish fuel and food until the sub used up all of its torps.

I think the USN failed to appreciate that there is economy of escort use when you concentrate the individual merchantmen into convoys and concentrate your scarce escorts there - make the enemy come to you and risk themselves in so doing. There was also a lack of understanding of the tactics required to attack a sub by USN naval officers. They overestimated how powerful their depth charges were against the incredibly tough sub hulls and thus did not appreciate just how precise the attack needed to be. It was in fact a physics computation to figure out the best intercept course against a moving, turning target that could maneuver in 3 dimensions. Captain Donald McIntyre RN became a master at ASW tactics and his ships (his own or his escort group) racked up an impressive number of sub kills. He also had to fight to convince the big-ship RN admirals that ASW was worthy of resources and great captains for the ASW ships.

I also muse that perhaps the US reluctance to adopt convoys came from the mantra that the government should not tell private industry what to do! Technically, individual ships plying their trade without any waiting for other ships is the most efficient and profitable way to run a shipping line. And since the carnage (over 100 ships IIRC) was kept secret, there was not much willingness for the merchant ship lines to support convoy movement.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 6

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 3:05:33 AM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

quote:

And since the carnage (over 100 ships IIRC) was kept secret, there was not much willingness for the merchant ship lines to support convoy movement.

You may be right about the reluctance the USN may have felt about imposing on private industry (certainly the govt might have imposed a blackout had they not been initially reluctant to impose on industry) but the bodies and oil washing ashore in NJ probably made the secrecy surrounding the sinkings superfluous.

Pretty sure the Germans used the Type IX U-boats in their East Coast offensive at least initially.

< Message edited by spence -- 10/12/2019 3:09:33 AM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 7

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 4:22:54 AM

Lovejoy

Posts: 240
Joined: 12/16/2015
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

You may be right about the reluctance the USN may have felt about imposing on private industry (certainly the govt might have imposed a blackout had they not been initially reluctant to impose on industry) but the bodies and oil washing ashore in NJ probably made the secrecy surrounding the sinkings superfluous.

The city council of Miami did not want to issue a blackout ordinance when the US entered the war, even resisting after U-boats started to attack coastal shipping, because they were worried about the affect it would have on tourists. It took a tanker burning offshore one night in sight of Miami Beach (with lots of tourists turning out to watch it burn) becuase a U-Boat could see it due to the city's light to get the council to change its mind.

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 8

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 6:26:40 AM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Pretty sure the Germans used the Type IX U-boats in their East Coast offensive at least initially.

warspite1

Correct, in January 1942 the Kriegsmarine had 20 type IXs, IX (1), IXB (11) and IXC (8) - although only half a dozen were ready for operations.

There was an argument over whether Type VII's should be used in Canadian waters (in support of the Type IX further south) given how long it would take to get there plus the limited time they would then have on station. Somehow the Germans were able to extend the range of the VII by 1,000 miles and Donitz won the argument to have Type VII operating in Canadian waters and ten sailed initially.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 9

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 8:53:43 AM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

"Greyhound" is a new movie starring Tom Hanks that is slated to be released in May 2020. It's an adaptation of a C.S. Forester (Horatio Hornblower is a well-known work of his) novel that is being adapted to a WWII American destroyer captain in the Atlantic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greyhound_(film)

warspite1

Well I hear Ms Shue is in it so that's good - she was kind of cutesy back in the jour.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 10

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 9:40:36 AM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

I have decent hopes for Greyhound....Hanks has been involved in good work over his career.

I sort of have a clue over the idea of distant escort but if I am a sailor on a merchie I might think to myself 'where is the Navy?'

PQ16 was OK, PQ17 was a nightmare. There's a book out there about it. It did raise questions for me about the logic of scattering a convoy, though I have used that tactic at least once in this game.

I think the Brits were overly afraid of Tirpitz after what Bismarck did to Hood (Or was it Prinz Eugen? Not sure that debate ever got settled). At the end of the day those two German BBs were not all that advanced by WW2 standards. A SoDak, Washington, or KG5 likely would take them out in a 121 fight. POW doesn't really count as she wasn't even finished and yet managed to put a couple of rounds into Bismarck.

The initial fight of Hood/POW vs Bismarck does not seem to have got as much research as I would expect. Some questionable course decisions by the British BBs and the IMO odd decision to keep the CAs Norfolk and Suffolk out of the fray come to mind.

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 11

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 4:56:03 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

"Greyhound" is a new movie starring Tom Hanks that is slated to be released in May 2020. It's an adaptation of a C.S. Forester (Horatio Hornblower is a well-known work of his) novel that is being adapted to a WWII American destroyer captain in the Atlantic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greyhound_(film)

warspite1

Well I hear Ms Shue is in it so that's good - she was kind of cutesy back in the jour.

Eye candy, like Dana Wynter in Sink the Bismarck :

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 12

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 5:08:48 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

I have decent hopes for Greyhound....Hanks has been involved in good work over his career.

I sort of have a clue over the idea of distant escort but if I am a sailor on a merchie I might think to myself 'where is the Navy?'

PQ16 was OK, PQ17 was a nightmare. There's a book out there about it. It did raise questions for me about the logic of scattering a convoy, though I have used that tactic at least once in this game.

I think the Brits were overly afraid of Tirpitz after what Bismarck did to Hood (Or was it Prinz Eugen? Not sure that debate ever got settled). At the end of the day those two German BBs were not all that advanced by WW2 standards. A SoDak, Washington, or KG5 likely would take them out in a 121 fight. POW doesn't really count as she wasn't even finished and yet managed to put a couple of rounds into Bismarck.

The initial fight of Hood/POW vs Bismarck does not seem to have got as much research as I would expect. Some questionable course decisions by the British BBs and the IMO odd decision to keep the CAs Norfolk and Suffolk out of the fray come to mind.

Having lost two armoured cruisers at Jutland (Warrior and Black Prince) when they got too close to the German Battle Cruisers or Battleships, the British thought that the two shadowing cruisers should remain in their shadowing positions rather than try to engage. Their own confidence in Hood made them sure that they could win . As for the tactics issue, yes the Hood could have turned broadside sooner to have more guns bear on target, but the admiral was aware of the Hood's vulnerability to plunging fire so he steered to close the range as quickly as possible. The fact that Prince of Wales crew had not yet worked up properly may have figured in his desire to close the range before going broadside. As it turns out, Hood and PoW were just starting a turn to open aft arcs when disaster struck.

No one knows if turning earlier would have resulted in a better battle outcome. Bismarck and Prinz Eugen were dimly seen against the early dawn darkness while Hood and PoW were backlit by the waxing light from the east. The German gunnery accuracy was more formidable for that. The same situation existed at Jutland and Coronel where the Germans enjoyed backlit targets while being in a murky background.

EDIT: PS - distant cover was used because convoys are submarine magnets and you do not want to get your BB torpedoed in an area where the enemy has control of the skies. The distant cover kept silent and moved at a much faster speed than the convoy to make attack by U-boat more difficult. The intention was that intel intercepts would give warning of enemy ships making a sortie so the distant cover could close with the convoy. The close escort for PQ-17 did not abandon it, the cruisers were ordered to join the heavy cover force to take on Tirpitz and the ASW vessels went with the most valuable ships they could escort.

Having learned a lesson with PQ-17, the British kept the cruisers with the convoy and did not scatter it when Scharnhorst and a strong DD force came out to play. Admiral Sir Bruce Fraser then sprang his trap using the distant cover force to cut off Scharnhorst's path of retreat. In equal gunnery conditions (black night for both), British radar and plenty of starshells made the difference in the Battle of North Cape. (The low freeboard of Scharnhorst's design also contributed, causing a flooding of the forward main turret in the heavy seas).

< Message edited by BBfanboy -- 10/12/2019 5:23:51 PM >

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 13

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 8:35:00 PM

Elessar2

Posts: 883
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline

OT OT, but Speilberg and Hanks are keeping themselves busy.

There will be a new TV miniseries based off of the 8th Air Force's bombing campaign:

Mighty 8th trailer

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 14

RE: OT: Greyhound - 10/12/2019 8:36:30 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

OT OT, but Speilberg and Hanks are keeping themselves busy.

There will be a new TV miniseries based off of the 8th Air Force's bombing campaign:

Mighty 8th trailer

I know. Please see my posting on this from yesterday.