Whatsit #2

Whatsit #2 (Full Version)

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

Message

Chickenboy -> Whatsit #2 (4/21/2015 3:33:31 PM)
Alright, this one should go a little faster. Nationality and class of vessel please? [image]local://upfiles/6968/6608E2A4901F429AA874D54ED390DC9F.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/21/2015 3:36:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Alright, this one should go a little faster. Nationality and class of vessel please? [image]local://upfiles/6968/6608E2A4901F429AA874D54ED390DC9F.jpg[/image] warspite1 Is the camoflague scheme Killer Whale? [image]local://upfiles/28156/878643C9C6E44F79A65D99877F0B2761.jpg[/image]

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/21/2015 3:40:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Is the camoflague scheme Killer Whale? [:D]

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 3:26:59 PM)
C'mon-no guesses other than a certain British comedian?

Seeadler -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 3:50:17 PM)
U.S. Navy Attack Cargo Ship (AKA)?

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 3:56:40 PM)
Danke! Correct. AKA-20 USS Virgo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Virgo_%28AKA-20%29 So, Seeadler, what was the differentiating feature that made you guess AKA (instead of xAK, AK, or any manner of other related vessels)?

warspite1 -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 3:59:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Seeadler U.S. Navy Attack Cargo Ship (AKA)? warspite1 Also known as what? Thank-you, thank-you very much, I'm here till Thursday, try the veal.

AW1Steve -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:01:55 PM)
United States Maritime Commission C2 Type It has LCVP's .It could be Andromnea, Arcturus , or a lot of other sub classes. Vireo was an Andromeda.

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:11:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve United States Maritime Commission C2 Type It has LCVP's .It could be Andromnea, Arcturus , or a lot of other sub classes. Vireo was an Andromeda. Are the LCVPs glommed together on deck? I can't make 'em out individually. Also, did the AKAs have more overhead cranes (presumably for lowering supplies, LCVPs, etc.) than other 'non-assault' classes of supply ships? It just seems-to my eye-that her topdeck is littered with add-ons and cargo that I'm not used to seeing in ships with 'cleaner' lines.

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:16:04 PM)
Also, Warspite1, a little-known fact about the AKA. It was second only to the German river barges (circa Sealion) in its speed and efficiency unloading combat-laden troops onto foreign shores. As a matter of fact, the German high commands: OK, NotOK, OKNOW turned down the opportunity to build some 30 of these ships in favor of building more river bucket...erm...amphibious riverine landing craft. Little known facts. [;)]

AW1Steve -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:20:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve United States Maritime Commission C2 Type It has LCVP's .It could be Andromnea, Arcturus , or a lot of other sub classes. Vireo was an Andromeda. Are the LCVPs glommed together on deck? I can't make 'em out individually. Also, did the AKAs have more overhead cranes (presumably for lowering supplies, LCVPs, etc.) than other 'non-assault' classes of supply ships? It just seems-to my eye-that her topdeck is littered with add-ons and cargo that I'm not used to seeing in ships with 'cleaner' lines. The LCVP's are in davits alongside the superstructure. She has Kingposts AND cranes. Also massive cargo holds. An APA might have cranes , but no king posts , plus there would be fewer and smaller holds. Think of a Liner versus a freighter.

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:21:26 PM)
Is the 'kingpost' the center 'teepee'-like structure?

warspite1 -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:22:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Also, Warspite1, a little-known fact about the AKA. It was second only to the German river barges (circa Sealion) in its speed and efficiency unloading combat-laden troops onto foreign shores. As a matter of fact, the German high commands: OK, NotOK, OKNOW turned down the opportunity to build some 30 of these ships in favor of building more river bucket...erm...amphibious riverine landing craft. Little known facts. [;)] warspite1 [;)]

Orm -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:33:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Also, Warspite1, a little-known fact about the AKA. It was second only to the German river barges (circa Sealion) in its speed and efficiency unloading combat-laden troops onto foreign shores. As a matter of fact, the German high commands: OK, NotOK, OKNOW turned down the opportunity to build some 30 of these ships in favor of building more river bucket...erm...amphibious riverine landing craft. Little known facts. [;)] Probably because it would have taken the Germans 10 years to build them. [;)]

AW1Steve -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:37:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Is the 'kingpost' the center 'teepee'-like structure? The "Tee-pee" is a crane. The thing that looks like a goal post is a king post.

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 4:41:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Is the 'kingpost' the center 'teepee'-like structure? The "Tee-pee" is a crane. The thing that looks like a goal post is a king post. And more 'mundane' xAKs, xAPs and the like didn't have them?

AW1Steve -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 5:04:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Is the 'kingpost' the center 'teepee'-like structure? The "Tee-pee" is a crane. The thing that looks like a goal post is a king post. And more 'mundane' xAKs, xAPs and the like didn't have them? Ak's Have cranes for cargo.(and of course dock facilities) APa's have Cranes of a different type for landing craft alone. A AKA has to be able to unload ANY type of cargo, even LCM's , pontoons, causeways, and lots of weird sized stuff. Hence it needs to be very flexible. Cargo ships have either or. Rarely both.

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 5:30:54 PM)
Thanks for taking the time to answer this (and Whatsit#3) helpfully and thoroughly, Steve. [:)]

AW1Steve -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/22/2015 5:48:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Thanks for taking the time to answer this (and Whatsit#3) helpfully and thoroughly, Steve. [:)] Your very welcome. You know that I can't resist this kind of challenge.[:D] I am having a hard time getting work done though. [8\|][:D]

Orm -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 7:12:00 AM)
Are there any rules, formal or informal, when making these questions? Must it be connected, somehow, to the Pacific War?

warspite1 -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 8:38:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm Are there any rules, formal or informal, when making these questions? Must it be connected, somehow, to the Pacific War? warspite1 The vast majority of people on this forum are fine - some are up themselves with their view of what can and can't be posted - but thankfully they are in the (very small) minority. Why not add a question to my Who is She? ETO thread if yours is not PTO related? Most folks here are knowledgeable about World War II whatever the theatre.

Numdydar -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 2:18:47 PM)
I'm not knowledgeable [:(] I just play the game and have fun [:)]

warspite1 -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 2:28:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Numdydar I'm not knowledgeable [:(] I just play the game and have fun [:)] warspite1 I did not want to single out individuals Numdydar as that would not be fair. But as you raised the matter, I am (with heavy heart you understand [:D]) prepared to name names. Roll call of (lets be charitable) less than knowledgeable folks on this forum [ahem - clears throat, leaves a slight pause, while raising an eyebrow at the audience to magnify the importance of what is being said]: Chickenboy.... ...that's it. That's the list Thank-you very much [:)]

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 3:47:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm Are there any rules, formal or informal, when making these questions? Must it be connected, somehow, to the Pacific War? Not really, Orm. The "what is it" ilk has been around for some time on the WiTP:AE community "General" board. Some folks put an "OT" warning prefix on their first post of the thread (subject line) to alert some of the more persnickety out there if something is likely to be considered off-topic. But pretty much anything pertaining to the Pacific War is fair game and decidedly ON topic. It would be nice if Warspite1 adhered to more of the forum rules in his posts. I think he should start all of his threads with the following label just to be sure: "WARNING: CONTAINS RUBBISH". [;)]

Orm -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 3:50:00 PM)
So if I put a OT label on it then I may ask about a tank used in Europe exclusively? Or a WWI ship? Or a ship from a neutral country? Or a modern ground to air missile? Are any of them ok or all of them? Edit: Sorry. I forgot to attach the warning. Warning: Contains rubbish. [:)]

Chickenboy -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 3:51:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm So if I put a OT label on it then I may ask about a tank used in Europe exclusively? Or a WWI ship? Or a ship from a neutral country? Or a modern ground to air missile? Are any of them ok or all of them? I wouldn't have an issue with you posting an OT topic such as that here. After all, people post OT threads here about movies, adult beverages, other non-PTO militaria here all the time, mate. [8D]

AW1Steve -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 4:04:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Orm Are there any rules, formal or informal, when making these questions? Must it be connected, somehow, to the Pacific War? Not really, Orm. The "what is it" ilk has been around for some time on the WiTP:AE community "General" board. Some folks put an "OT" warning prefix on their first post of the thread (subject line) to alert some of the more persnickety out there if something is likely to be considered off-topic. But pretty much anything pertaining to the Pacific War is fair game and decidedly ON topic. It would be nice if Warspite1 adhered to more of the forum rules in his posts. I think he should start all of his threads with the following label just to be sure: "WARNING: CONTAINS RUBBISH". [;)] I MUST DISAGREE WITH YOU CB! [:-] Warspite should NOT place WARNING;CONTAINS RUBBISH above his threads. He should instead post "WARNING; CONTAINS COMPLETE AND UTTER RUBISH". Some environmental hazard warning logo's would not be amiss either. [:D][:D][:D]

AW1Steve -> RE: Whatsit #2 (4/23/2015 4:05:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm So if I put a OT label on it then I may ask about a tank used in Europe exclusively? Or a WWI ship? Or a ship from a neutral country? Or a modern ground to air missile? Are any of them ok or all of them? Edit: Sorry. I forgot to attach the warning. Warning: Contains rubbish. [:)] But never , EVER post the phrase "Disregard". You have been warned! [:-][:D][:D][:D]

warspite1 -> WARNING CONTAINS RUBBISH - HAZCHEM etc (4/23/2015 4:44:53 PM)
Well I might talk rubbish, I might look rubbish - indeed I may be rubbish. But at least, unlike some on this forum, I can spell the word [:-] [:)]

AW1Steve -> RE: WARNING CONTAINS RUBBISH - HAZCHEM etc (4/23/2015 4:47:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Well I might talk rubbish, I might look rubbish - indeed I may be rubbish. But at least, unlike some on this forum, I can spell the word [:-] [:)] I forget , you speak (and write) in that quaint little dialect from that funny little island under the clouds. [:D]

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.414063