I always thought the Japs had the best all around DD design in a sleek, well armed and speedy Shiratsuyu class, of course the Long Lance made any jap DD a serious contender.
Heres the Shigure ( Summer squall)in 1939 as a nod Capt.T. Hara, who commanded her in all her engagements especially the furious fire away flanagans re; Tokyo Express around Guadalcanal up to 44, not losing a man. His Bio. Jap. Destroyer Captain is imho, a must read.
Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000 From: Vermont, USA Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: warspite1 Beating South Dakota to my personal no. 1 in the warship dept. is of course the most famous, the most incredible, and - as per the point of this thread - the most beautiful battleship of all time.
I always thought the Japs had the best all around DD design in a sleek, well armed and speedy Shiratsuyu class, of course the Long Lance made any jap DD a serious contender.
Heres the Shigure ( Summer squall)in 1939 as a nod Capt.T. Hara, who commanded her in all her engagements especially the furious fire away flanagans re; Tokyo Express around Guadalcanal up to 44, not losing a man. His Bio. Jap. Destroyer Captain is imho, a must read.
Japanese Destroyers lacked a robust anti air and anti sub arsenal
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk: You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008 From: England Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aurelian
The best looking battlecruiser in IMHO.
warspite1
+ 1 billion. You certainly know how to find beautiful pictures Emperor.
The very antithesis of SoDak and Warspite (even in her WWI guise). HMS Hood was startlingly pretty. Like a cat walk model or a mannequin, the perfect body to be drapped in - in Hood's case - some of the finest weapons of war (her 15-inchers). But she was a fragile and ultimately a tragic beauty in the mould of Vivien Leigh.
The most beautiful battlecruiser ever built; HMS Hood
Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008 From: England Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Orm
And a picture of a real beauty. Liked the look of this ship already as a young kid. First WWII ship model I ever bought. And built.
warspite1
Battleship or battlecruiser? A difficult one to slot into either category. As a child I always thought of her as a BC, but her small (relative) armament and high levels of protection are the opposite of what a BC should be. So I personally place the Scharnhorst in the BB class - albeit an under-gunned one.
As she first appeared, she would not even make my top 10. But after fitting the Atlantic bow and the capped funnel, the ugly duckling became a swan; a ship of mean and purposeful Tuetonic beauty.
Successful when operating with Gneisenau, these beautiful 'ugly sisters' proved effective. But when they became separated, the successful careers of each came to a sticky end.
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk: You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008 From: England Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Gotta rule the waves:
warspite1
With Warspite No.1 and South Dakota No.2, I need to find three more battleships to round out the top 5. Scharnhorst is a contender, and so is Yamato. She certainly has character - with that step in the main deck just aft of her second turret - and bristles with weaponry that is largely housed within a small area of the ship. Definitely another contender.
Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008 From: England Status: offline
One ship that should be a contender for a top 5 place is the Littorio. But there is one feature of this ship that really spoils the asethetic. Her aft main turret is too high up. If she had a fourth turret it would be fine, but she doesn't and so it gives her a slightly odd apppearance....
Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015 From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part. Status: offline
I want to complain about the nose art on that aircraft. It violates the standards according to the original Australian Beauties thread - wherever that thread is . . .
_____________________________
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.
I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).” ― Julia Child
I want to complain about the nose art on that aircraft. It violates the standards according to the original Australian Beauties thread - wherever that thread is . . .
On a wargaming board historical accuracy trumps all other considerations. You would no more want aircraft without historically accurate nose art than you would a Tiger II that can't handle a Sherman.
Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008 From: England Status: offline
Runner-up to HMS Hood in the battlecruiser category (yes I know they were re-classified before WWII but they were still BC's in my eyes) is Kongo.
Beautiful lines that even the pagoda tower couldn't ruin. In fact the pagoda was actually not bad looking on these ships. The different funnels don't spoil the aesthetic either.
Runner-up to HMS Hood in the battlecruiser category (yes I know they were re-classified before WWII but they were still BC's in my eyes) is Kongo.
Beautiful lines that even the pagoda tower couldn't ruin. In fact the pagoda was actually not bad looking on these ships. The different funnels don't spoil the aesthetic either.
Kongo after her first reconstruction after which she was classified as a battleship
Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015 From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part. Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
quote:
ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
I want to complain about the nose art on that aircraft. It violates the standards according to the original Australian Beauties thread - wherever that thread is . . .
On a wargaming board historical accuracy trumps all other considerations. You would no more want aircraft without historically accurate nose art than you would a Tiger II that can't handle a Sherman.
That nose art violates the standards according to the Australian Beauties thread. It does not matter if it is an original or a faked replica, it still violates the standards as set for in the original Australian beauties thread as well as the "Gary Grisbys Next Project???? " thread.
_____________________________
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.
I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).” ― Julia Child
I want to complain about the nose art on that aircraft. It violates the standards according to the original Australian Beauties thread - wherever that thread is . . .
On a wargaming board historical accuracy trumps all other considerations. You would no more want aircraft without historically accurate nose art than you would a Tiger II that can't handle a Sherman.
That nose art violates the standards according to the Australian Beauties thread. It does not matter if it is an original or a faked replica, it still violates the standards as set for in the original Australian beauties thread as well as the "Gary Grisbys Next Project???? " thread.
I don't really think you're serious, but the difference is between gratuitous salaciousness for the sole purpose of arousement, and art for the purpose of adherance to historical accuracy.
Great picture no matter what, though!
< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 12/29/2021 2:58:15 AM >
Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015 From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part. Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
quote:
ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
quote:
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
quote:
ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
I want to complain about the nose art on that aircraft. It violates the standards according to the original Australian Beauties thread - wherever that thread is . . .
On a wargaming board historical accuracy trumps all other considerations. You would no more want aircraft without historically accurate nose art than you would a Tiger II that can't handle a Sherman.
That nose art violates the standards according to the Australian Beauties thread. It does not matter if it is an original or a faked replica, it still violates the standards as set for in the original Australian beauties thread as well as the "Gary Grisbys Next Project???? " thread.
I don't really think you're serious, but the difference is between gratuitous salaciousness for the sole purpose of arousement, and art for the purpose of adherance to historical accuracy.
Great picture no matter what, though!
I am serious and if you want historical accuracy then a better picture to post would the be P-51B "Ding Hao" with its story plus the story of its pilot who was born in then Canton, China, and who had been in a movie plus had been a mercenary.
Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Australian Beauties II 
RE: Australian Beauties II - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread