RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message


witpqs -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/27/2009 11:46:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

quote:

As far as new technologies go, my understanding is that in the near future (dozens of years) we have nothing that could deploy in time to stop a comet (which is what we are talking about) because we would only know about the danger with at most a few months to spare.


Again, that assumes:
1. That a meteorite would destroy all human life.
No, I said assume that one such comes along every 60,000,000 years. If you like, convert that to 'one that kills 99% comes along every 60,000,000 years'.
2. It would hit between now and the next 12 or so years, and that we couldn't possibly do anything to stop it...
I said "dozens", plural. And I am not trying to say 'We are all doomed! Doomed I tell you!' I am only trying to say that even if you use the best numbers available (you come up with an example), events that are both (rare + big) are very hard for the human mind to relate to.

The "Yucatan Strike" is still highly controversial about what it did to the dinosaurs... it certainly did not kill them all (their ancestors are still around today)... and the fossil record indicates that they were around for a couple of million years AFTER the "Yucatan Strike"... btw, the "Yucatan Strike", while being widely accepted in the US is not widely accepted in other parts of the world (last i read up on this.)
Last I read was today, and a group of researchers is claiming they have found evidence that the comet strike was 300,000 years separated from the K-T boundary mass extinction. I know you do to, but I just gotta say this: I love science. 'Hold it! That's all wrong! Change everything!' [:D]

As for point 2 - i think you underestimate what folks can do when it comes down to life and death... there are some interesting technologies that could divert large objects in space with surprising little effort given a few months lead time... But that is another argument, i suppose.
Unfortunately, it's pure brute force physics. The kind of event we are talking about is a comet strike. If it were a meteor then we stand a good chance of stopping it because we are locating and tracking/projecting orbits into the future on more and more of them. So give ourselves the benefit of the doubt and assume that we will successfully develop one/some of the many techniques & technologies on the drawing board (none actually exist yet but folks are working on it). They all take at least months to deploy, and then many months/years to actually work. That's fine for meteors because we become aware of the danger many orbits (years) in advance.

Comets, on the other hand behave differently. Most are seen by us for the first time because a) their last trip to the inner solar system was either thousands or millions of years ago, or b) they have never made a trip through the inner solar system before. Second, because they begin their fall into the inner solar system from so far away, they are going many times faster than meteors. Third, they are mostly black. Very black. Most simply cannot be seen until they begin to out-gas as a result of being close enough to the sun. This apparently usually occurs somewhere around the orbits of Jupiter or Saturn. By then they are moving very fast and we have at most a few months, maybe two months. Some comets are only seen when they are already on their way back out because their approach was hidden from us by the sun. If one of those is on a collision course we get a few weeks notice, maybe up to two months.

So, comets require massively better technology to deal with just due to the brute force aspects of great speed and short time (and they are still very large objects).


EDIT: Again, what i am saying here is you can pull any number out of a hat and argue for (or against) it... such numbers are relatively meaningless.
I give you my word there were no hats within reach, nor was anyone holding a hat for me, nor was one otherwise available to me for the drawing of numbers. [:'(]

Pick any example you like that is rare + big and supply your own numbers. I am only trying to illustrate that humans have trouble relating to them.

And we are not doomed. We are all going to live happy, well adjusted, comet impact-free lives. And some of us might live to see AE released. What are the odds of that? [:D]






rtrapasso -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 12:02:35 AM)

quote:

Pick any example you like that is rare + big and supply your own numbers.
Oh, you mean like "pull one out of a hat"...[:'(]

i'll say it again: such numbers are essentially meaningless: you can make up a scenario, SAY that "there is no defense", etc., but one doesn't KNOW.

As for the K-T stuff - again, while it is widely accepted in the USA, not so worldwide... the pesky business about the dinosaurs not "dying out" for a couple of million years after the K-T event never has seemed to slow down the popularization of the idea... there are lots of holes in the theory that often get glossed over (at least on this side of the Atlantic)... that the facts don't match the theory hasn't led to a general outcry of "'Hold it! That's all wrong! Change everything!'"... the theory has captured the popular imagination (here) and that's all the science one seems to need.




Tiornu -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 12:12:54 AM)

quote:

Don't recall making a claim

It was the claim that the "only vessel that significantly impacted post war warship design was the Type-21," which I quoted in my post. You stated it twice in fact. I still don't understand it.

quote:

SoDaks made do with their 27 knot maximum but had thicker and better placed armor, plus the same number of big guns.

Actually it was Iowa that had the better protection.

quote:

What amazes me, as a social scientist without a lot of expertise in naval design or the actual history is what appears to be a more or less _total_ lack of consensus among you guys!

If we actually had a consensus on a topic as open as this one--that would be...kind of alarming, actually.

quote:

The German were able to build Type XXI faster in 44 than Type VII in 42.

The production techniques used for the Type XXI are worth scrutiny. Assessments of the boats postwar, with their varying conclusions, make me wonder if the haste in construction increased the incidence of skunky boats.

quote:

it is inconceivable that the type would have passed service acceptance trials had the hydraulics really been that vulnerable

I do believe it has been conceived.




witpqs -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 12:15:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

i'll say it again: such numbers are essentially meaningless: you can make up a scenario, SAY that "there is no defense", etc., but one doesn't KNOW.
All reasonable estimates is still only estimates. I am not talking about psychic predictions here, I am only talking about reasonable estimates.

As for the K-T stuff - again, while it is widely accepted in the USA, not so worldwide... the pesky business about the dinosaurs not "dying out" for a couple of million years after the K-T event never has seemed to slow down the popularization of the idea... there are lots of holes in the theory that often get glossed over (at least on this side of the Atlantic)... that the facts don't match the theory hasn't led to a general outcry of "'Hold it! That's all wrong! Change everything!'"... the theory has captured the popular imagination (here) and that's all the science one seems to need.

Years ago I read The Dinosaur Heresies by Robert Bakker. He has never bought the impact-dinosaur extinction theory. I've come to understand that the media here (and quite especially including scientific 'documentaries', etc.) just love promoting false consensus, orthodoxy, cut and dried endings, massively instant gratification - basically crap that conforms to good marketable scrips.





Nikademus -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 1:45:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

The South Dakotas had probably the best mix of speed, armor and firepower of any battleship ever built.  The Iowas sacrificed some armor for the ability to steam 33+ knots; the SoDaks made do with their 27 knot maximum but had thicker and better placed armor, plus the same number of big guns.  Getting six more knots but at the cost of thinner armor and 20,000+ more tons displacement isn't all that good a tradeoff.


Iowa's protection was modestly better. She also benefited from being a far less cramped design. Its true though that the extra tonnage available for her under the escalator clause was used to ek out those extra knots of speed. I consider the Iowa's to be the best choice for a balanced BB design that had to wear two hats. (carrier escort and slogging it out). If its just a straight up slogging match though, I'll take Yamato. Its what she was made for.




Tiornu -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 2:05:28 AM)

I agree with rating Yamato as the Champ of the Brawl, though I rate Iowa higher overall. With her range and speed, she's a better bet on getting to the brawl in the first place.




rtrapasso -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 2:14:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Well, I'm waiting for someone to pipe up that an ELE class bolide would lose in a confrontation with Bismarck. Since we're stepping kind of far afield now I figured the conversation should naturally now take a hard turn into the bizarre.


Well of course you are being ridiculous. A sufficient number of mass-produced Shermans, on the other hand...

Shermans aren't ships! You need to stay on the subject!!! [:-] [:'(]




Hornblower -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 2:18:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Well, I'm waiting for someone to pipe up that an ELE class bolide would lose in a confrontation with Bismarck. Since we're stepping kind of far afield now I figured the conversation should naturally now take a hard turn into the bizarre.


Well of course you are being ridiculous. A sufficient number of mass-produced Shermans, on the other hand...

Shermans aren't ships! You need to stay on the subject!!! [:-] [:'(]


Yes i do believe that rtrapasso is correct on that point...




Hornblower -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 2:23:11 AM)

Baltimore's, Fletchers, Essex..




Anthropoid -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 2:24:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

dukw

I know I am being a bit silly but nobody ever says a bad thing about them.


Yeah, but did you see that thing has a caution RADIATION hazard sticker on it!? Definite WMD . . . [:D]

But yeah, I agree, that is a "good design."




Nikademus -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 2:54:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

I agree with rating Yamato as the Champ of the Brawl, though I rate Iowa higher overall. With her range and speed, she's a better bet on getting to the brawl in the first place.


and for less cost at the fuel pump. [:D]






Iridium -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 3:32:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

I agree with rating Yamato as the Champ of the Brawl, though I rate Iowa higher overall. With her range and speed, she's a better bet on getting to the brawl in the first place.


and for less cost at the fuel pump. [:D]




Clearly the Yamato is the "Caddy" one only takes out on Sundays, only in good weather of course.




Terminus -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 5:44:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hornblower

Baltimore's, Fletchers, Essex..


Gato/Balao/Tench... Oh, my![:D]




Dili -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 8:00:31 AM)

Iowa was very vulnerable if hit near A-turret amno depot.




Terminus -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 8:57:53 AM)

What?




John Lansford -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 12:13:52 PM)

Yamato's fire control was suspect; both the Iowa's and SoDaks had radar guided fire control.  The SoDak or Iowa could control the distance of engagement and keep getting hits on Yamato, who probably couldn't hit the USN ships often enough to make a difference.  I've read that the Iowa had better underwater protection than the SoDaks, but just barely, and the long narrow bow was always a damage control concern since it had no depth at all in the event of a torpedo or penetrating large shell hit.





Kadrin -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 12:24:50 PM)

Best Designed?

CV: Essexs or Midways
BB: Iowas
CA: Baltimores
CL: Brooklyns or Clevelands
DD: Fletchers

You did say designed.




AW1Steve -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 12:37:13 PM)

The USN's AOG. And they had a really mean garbage scow too! 2Nd to none! [:D]




mdiehl -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 6:53:00 PM)

quote:

With her range and speed, she's a better bet on getting to the brawl in the first place.


And with here targeting systems, she's got the drop on Yamato at any range and the guns to put her out straight away.




Hornblower -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 7:35:14 PM)

not to toss gas on the fire, but what the heck:  I don't believe that the vaunted 18.1” rifles of the Yamato were even able to score a single hit on a 10,000 Ton  18 knot CVE off Samar.  That doesn’t bode well for her gunnery department / officer.   Now a savvy Poster will come back with “Well the Iowa didn’t hit anything with her 16” rifles off of Truk in ’44.”  However I maintain there is a slight difference in hitting a 10,000 ton 18 knot CVE and a 36knt 2,000 ton DD.

At the Battle of Surigao Strait the We-Vee hit the Yamashiro at 23,000 yards with her first Salvo.  Her Mark 8 fire control had gained a firing solution at 30,000 yards – same set up the fast BB’s had.  So one could reasonably infer that the Yamato would be under fire from 30,000 yards in ..




Dili -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 7:35:19 PM)

quote:

What?
In a torpedo hit. Iowa hull was very "squeezed" at A-Turret frame.




John Lansford -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 8:20:06 PM)

That's why I give the nod in protection to the SoDaks rather than the Iowas.  The latter class had slightly thicker armor in some locations, but the hull was so slender forward that it was essentially unprotected, not a problem on the SoDaks.  The forward 16" barbette and magazine had very little between it and the outer hull thanks to that narrow hull structure.




AW1Steve -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 9:20:24 PM)

What , no one is going to disagree with my AOG or garbage scow nomination? I'm crushed. [:D]




Titi -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 9:51:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hornblower


quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Well, I'm waiting for someone to pipe up that an ELE class bolide would lose in a confrontation with Bismarck. Since we're stepping kind of far afield now I figured the conversation should naturally now take a hard turn into the bizarre.


Well of course you are being ridiculous. A sufficient number of mass-produced Shermans, on the other hand...

Shermans aren't ships! You need to stay on the subject!!! [:-] [:'(]


Yes i do believe that rtrapasso is correct on that point...


I disagree.
Show me the Bismarck being more versatile than a Sherman. [:D]

[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/DD-Tank.jpg[/image]




Anthropoid -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 10:45:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

What , no one is going to disagree with my AOG or garbage scow nomination? I'm crushed. [:D]


Don't take it personal Steve. Didja see how everybody just totally ignored my bit about Liberty ships and early model U-boats?




AW1Steve -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 10:46:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

What , no one is going to disagree with my AOG or garbage scow nomination? I'm crushed. [:D]


Don't take it personal Steve. Didja see how everybody just totally ignored my bit about Liberty ships and early model U-boats?


I think I'll raise the ante......a mark 7 inflatable life boat! There, beat that guys! [:D]




Anthropoid -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 10:52:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

What , no one is going to disagree with my AOG or garbage scow nomination? I'm crushed. [:D]


Don't take it personal Steve. Didja see how everybody just totally ignored my bit about Liberty ships and early model U-boats?


I think I'll raise the ante......a mark 7 inflatable life boat! There, beat that guys! [:D]


I find it ironic that guys are arguing that designs that never actually seem to have _DONE_ anything (e.g., as somebody noted above Yamato didn't sink nuthin', Iowa didn't sink nuthin') are "best designs."

Now Mark 7 inflatable rafts on the other hand, those must have "DONE" lots of things in the war. Remember that scene in "A Bridge to Far" . . . "Hail Mary! Full of Grace! . . . Hail Mary! Full of Grace!"

Now THAT is good design: cheap, efficient, gets the job done.

What is the point of some gigantor hunk of iron with hugiferous big frickin' guns that go !BOOM! but which are so big and scary the enemy runs away any time they are nearby (else dog piles them in any attack) and consequently all they really do is act as a magnet/repulsor of enemy, not actually a destructor of enemy!?! I don't get it!? Ever since Jutland, the complete impracticality of big arse boats with big arse guns was shown quite clearly wasn't it!? [:D]

Hail the Liberty ships and the rubber dinghies! Best Designs!
<hoping that is sufficiently provocative to get the real naval theorists roused up into some interesting soliloquies>

ADDIT: *Pssst* BTW, what's an "AOG?"




AW1Steve -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 11:42:55 PM)

Small gasoline tanker. Very small. [:)]




Barb -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 11:49:40 PM)

Well, what about LVTs?
I would rate LST as best designed ship. Without them ...




AW1Steve -> RE: Best Designed Ship of WWII (4/28/2009 11:50:25 PM)

LST's? Best targets ever made! [:D]




Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.550781