RE: OT Things to ponder (Full Version)

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



Message


RangerJoe -> RE: OT Things to ponder (3/31/2020 9:08:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

The real important question is who will have the best Covid-19 April Fools Day joke?


Or Halloween costume?

Why don't we skip the next 6 months in the calendar? Let's bag April, May, etc. and resume with October 1. It worked before [:D]


A medically induced coma? That could also work for weight loss!




Zorch -> RE: OT Things to ponder (3/31/2020 9:52:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

The real important question is who will have the best Covid-19 April Fools Day joke?


Or Halloween costume?

Why don't we skip the next 6 months in the calendar? Let's bag April, May, etc. and resume with October 1. It worked before [:D]


A medically induced coma? That could also work for weight loss!

Skipping worked for 11 days...




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/1/2020 9:56:56 PM)

.

[image]local://upfiles/37002/2B9F2A0E0DA64B4786F3777F18B074C4.jpg[/image]




durnedwolf -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/2/2020 3:52:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

.

[image]local://upfiles/37002/2B9F2A0E0DA64B4786F3777F18B074C4.jpg[/image]



That art outta be titled "Day 22 of COVID-19 Lockdown" [:D]




MakeeLearn -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/2/2020 1:54:42 PM)

...

[image]local://upfiles/55056/B64551B1325F44839B011418A7069C4F.jpg[/image]




durnedwolf -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/2/2020 9:48:15 PM)

Looks like a Copywrite infringement...




L0ckAndL0ad -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 3:20:33 PM)

Wasn't sure where to post this, so I'll leave it here.

Some time ago I've seen AARs where people used less valuable ships, like unarmed transports, as pickets, to lessen/divert the offensive enemy effort. A tactic which most of us may reasonably call gamey, abusive and non realistic.

Today I stumbled upon this while reading "One Hundred Days" by Sandy Woodward (about the Falkland War), and thought many of you on these forums may find it interesting:

quote:

I stood there for several minutes pondering our formation, pondering the likelihood of another Arg strike before dark.
At this moment Hermes was about four miles north of Invincible. John Coward in the improving Brilliant was keeping ‘goal’ for us and, ranged in a north-south line facing west, the fleet auxiliaries formed what I hoped was some kind of a ‘chaff’ wall in case of incoming threat. In the most brutal terms, I could afford to lose a big merchant ship, or even a tanker, a whole lot more than I could afford to lose a carrier – not that I thought very highly of either option. It was simply a matter of the lesser of two evils.


There were A LOT of things going wrong during this conflict, and this particular part was written just after yet another British ship was lost due to unreliable SAMs, and Woodward found himself short of escort/screening ships, and reliable anti-aircraft weapon systems in general.




witpqs -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 3:51:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: L0ckAndL0ad

Wasn't sure where to post this, so I'll leave it here.

Some time ago I've seen AARs where people used less valuable ships, like unarmed transports, as pickets, to lessen/divert the offensive enemy effort. A tactic which most of us may reasonably call gamey, abusive and non realistic.

Today I stumbled upon this while reading "One Hundred Days" by Sandy Woodward (about the Falkland War), and thought many of you on these forums may find it interesting:

quote:

I stood there for several minutes pondering our formation, pondering the likelihood of another Arg strike before dark.
At this moment Hermes was about four miles north of Invincible. John Coward in the improving Brilliant was keeping ‘goal’ for us and, ranged in a north-south line facing west, the fleet auxiliaries formed what I hoped was some kind of a ‘chaff’ wall in case of incoming threat. In the most brutal terms, I could afford to lose a big merchant ship, or even a tanker, a whole lot more than I could afford to lose a carrier – not that I thought very highly of either option. It was simply a matter of the lesser of two evils.


There were A LOT of things going wrong during this conflict, and this particular part was written just after yet another British ship was lost due to unreliable SAMs, and Woodward found himself short of escort/screening ships, and reliable anti-aircraft weapon systems in general.

Point taken, but if I am reading this correctly they were still part of the same formation ("a 'chaff' wall" isn't going to work if the chaff deploying ships are too far away, far enough away to be pickets), so the lesser value ships were not sent out on their own.




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 4:00:54 PM)

I know, it's just me, but sometimes I get into some really deep thinking, and I was wondering, when astronomers decided Pluto wasn't a planet anymore, why didn't they rename it Dopey, Doc, Bashful, Happy, Grumpy, Sleepy, or Sneezy?




witpqs -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 4:05:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I know, it's just me, but sometimes I get into some really deep thinking, and I was wondering, when astronomers decided Pluto wasn't a planet anymore, why didn't they rename it Dopey, Doc, Bashful, Happy, Grumpy, Sleepy, or Sneezy?

I think it's because those names were already taken by the astronomers who decided Pluto is not a planet.*

* I really like Pluto.




L0ckAndL0ad -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 4:45:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Point taken, but if I am reading this correctly they were still part of the same formation ("a 'chaff' wall" isn't going to work if the chaff deploying ships are too far away, far enough away to be pickets), so the lesser value ships were not sent out on their own.

I don't think Woodward meant actual "chaff" in case of auxiliaries. He meant using these ships as decoys his carriers may hide behind. This is what actually happened soon after, when they lost SS Atlantic Conveyor.

Battle Group came under attack from enemy planes that came in low and launched a couple of ASMs. HMS Ambuscade deployed chaff. Enemy ASMs targeted the decoys and went through the chaff cloud. Going further, the missiles locked on to the next thing they saw - SS Atlantic Conveyor. If it wasn't there, it was likely that the carrier HMS Hermes would've been targeted instead.

quote:

Her [Atlantic Conveyor's] war had lasted exactly thirty days and, even without her final mission accomplished, we still owed her a considerable debt. Not least, I suppose, because she was in a dead line between Hermes and Ambuscade. If the Conveyor had possessed a chaff system and decoyed the missiles, they might have come straight on for the carrier. We may, or may not, have been able to divert them yet again.

So while it is true that these ships weren't simply sent forward without any support (in fact, Conveyor, being the biggest of all, was kept further back than others in previous days), they were used to shield the most valuable ships of the group, carriers, in time when armed escorts were in short numbers.




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 4:58:09 PM)

I do what it takes to win, as long as it could've happened. For me, if they coulda done it, I woulda done it. Historically the Japanese baited the US navy away from it's BBs by using CVs. It worked too! Sorta.




witpqs -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 6:02:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: L0ckAndL0ad

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Point taken, but if I am reading this correctly they were still part of the same formation ("a 'chaff' wall" isn't going to work if the chaff deploying ships are too far away, far enough away to be pickets), so the lesser value ships were not sent out on their own.

I don't think Woodward meant actual "chaff" in case of auxiliaries. He meant using these ships as decoys his carriers may hide behind. This is what actually happened soon after, when they lost SS Atlantic Conveyor.

Battle Group came under attack from enemy planes that came in low and launched a couple of ASMs. HMS Ambuscade deployed chaff. Enemy ASMs targeted the decoys and went through the chaff cloud. Going further, the missiles locked on to the next thing they saw - SS Atlantic Conveyor. If it wasn't there, it was likely that the carrier HMS Hermes would've been targeted instead.

quote:

Her [Atlantic Conveyor's] war had lasted exactly thirty days and, even without her final mission accomplished, we still owed her a considerable debt. Not least, I suppose, because she was in a dead line between Hermes and Ambuscade. If the Conveyor had possessed a chaff system and decoyed the missiles, they might have come straight on for the carrier. We may, or may not, have been able to divert them yet again.

So while it is true that these ships weren't simply sent forward without any support (in fact, Conveyor, being the biggest of all, was kept further back than others in previous days), they were used to shield the most valuable ships of the group, carriers, in time when armed escorts were in short numbers.

I understand. Be interesting to learn if those ships had literal chaff dispensers installed for the mission to South Atlantic.




BBfanboy -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 6:07:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I know, it's just me, but sometimes I get into some really deep thinking, and I was wondering, when astronomers decided Pluto wasn't a planet anymore, why didn't they rename it Dopey, Doc, Bashful, Happy, Grumpy, Sleepy, or Sneezy?

Or maybe Tyrion?




Chickenboy -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 6:12:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: L0ckAndL0ad

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Point taken, but if I am reading this correctly they were still part of the same formation ("a 'chaff' wall" isn't going to work if the chaff deploying ships are too far away, far enough away to be pickets), so the lesser value ships were not sent out on their own.

I don't think Woodward meant actual "chaff" in case of auxiliaries. He meant using these ships as decoys his carriers may hide behind. This is what actually happened soon after, when they lost SS Atlantic Conveyor.

Battle Group came under attack from enemy planes that came in low and launched a couple of ASMs. HMS Ambuscade deployed chaff. Enemy ASMs targeted the decoys and went through the chaff cloud. Going further, the missiles locked on to the next thing they saw - SS Atlantic Conveyor. If it wasn't there, it was likely that the carrier HMS Hermes would've been targeted instead.

quote:

Her [Atlantic Conveyor's] war had lasted exactly thirty days and, even without her final mission accomplished, we still owed her a considerable debt. Not least, I suppose, because she was in a dead line between Hermes and Ambuscade. If the Conveyor had possessed a chaff system and decoyed the missiles, they might have come straight on for the carrier. We may, or may not, have been able to divert them yet again.

So while it is true that these ships weren't simply sent forward without any support (in fact, Conveyor, being the biggest of all, was kept further back than others in previous days), they were used to shield the most valuable ships of the group, carriers, in time when armed escorts were in short numbers.


In game terms (I assume why you brought this up), my interpretation of this RL event is that the combatant ships and the auxiliaries / transports would have been in a single mixed ship type amphibious (or transport) TF and the incoming air strike would have tried to attack members of that TF. In so doing, some auxiliary / transports were preferentially targetted by the air strikes. That happens all the time in the game, doesn't it?

I think it's different than sorting out xAKs or xAKLs and sending them in separate TFs away from the air combat TF (say 1-2 hexes= 40-80nm) in order to soak off an incoming air strike sortie.




BBfanboy -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 6:12:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: L0ckAndL0ad

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Point taken, but if I am reading this correctly they were still part of the same formation ("a 'chaff' wall" isn't going to work if the chaff deploying ships are too far away, far enough away to be pickets), so the lesser value ships were not sent out on their own.

I don't think Woodward meant actual "chaff" in case of auxiliaries. He meant using these ships as decoys his carriers may hide behind. This is what actually happened soon after, when they lost SS Atlantic Conveyor.

Battle Group came under attack from enemy planes that came in low and launched a couple of ASMs. HMS Ambuscade deployed chaff. Enemy ASMs targeted the decoys and went through the chaff cloud. Going further, the missiles locked on to the next thing they saw - SS Atlantic Conveyor. If it wasn't there, it was likely that the carrier HMS Hermes would've been targeted instead.

quote:

Her [Atlantic Conveyor's] war had lasted exactly thirty days and, even without her final mission accomplished, we still owed her a considerable debt. Not least, I suppose, because she was in a dead line between Hermes and Ambuscade. If the Conveyor had possessed a chaff system and decoyed the missiles, they might have come straight on for the carrier. We may, or may not, have been able to divert them yet again.

So while it is true that these ships weren't simply sent forward without any support (in fact, Conveyor, being the biggest of all, was kept further back than others in previous days), they were used to shield the most valuable ships of the group, carriers, in time when armed escorts were in short numbers.

I understand. Be interesting to learn if those ships had literal chaff dispensers installed for the mission to South Atlantic.

The RN was scraping together every warship they could muster and I doubt they had chaff dispensers in stock to stick on the merchant vessels. The missiles would be set to search for the largest vessel in a group so launching chaff from it probably would not change things if the missile was coming right at them already. Not sure if the chaff cloud can look like an even larger vessel.




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 8:09:30 PM)

There's more involved than just soaking up air strikes. As a matter of fact using freighters as scouts soaks up search planes and keeps them from spotting the real target. If they waste some enemy ordinance and shoot anything down with their pitiful flak, gravy.




L0ckAndL0ad -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 8:36:18 PM)

Well, regardless of exact details (like range and positioning), what is interesting to me personally is the commander's intent. The first quote I posted above is Woodward's words. He intentionally put completely unarmed auxiliaries in a picket line formation to protect his two carriers, which were both armed with point defense SAMs.

That's something to think about.




BBfanboy -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 10:35:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: L0ckAndL0ad

Well, regardless of exact details (like range and positioning), what is interesting to me personally is the commander's intent. The first quote I posted above is Woodward's words. He intentionally put completely unarmed auxiliaries in a picket line formation to protect his two carriers, which were both armed with point defense SAMs.

That's something to think about.

Yes, the fat guy should always be picked to go on point for the patrol ...[:'(]




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 10:53:41 PM)

A torpedo that strikes one of my xAKs and detonates is worth θ. A torpedo that strikes one of my CVs and detonates is worth θ x 1,000 (roughly).

Hey, this thread isn't supposed to be about serious game stuff.




jdsrae -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/4/2020 11:38:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: L0ckAndL0ad

Wasn't sure where to post this, so I'll leave it here.

Some time ago I've seen AARs where people used less valuable ships, like unarmed transports, as pickets, to lessen/divert the offensive enemy effort. A tactic which most of us may reasonably call gamey, abusive and non realistic.



I don’t consider picket ships gamey, abusive or non-realistic.
It’s on Wikipedia so it must be true!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No.1-class_auxiliary_patrol_boat






geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 12:09:27 AM)

There's another misconception at work here. Take the US during WWII. When the war started the Merchant Marine were automatically drafted into military service (and they knew that up front) and we lost a heck of a lot of those sailors in the Atlantic, fighting the war for us on freighters. They were soldiers just like any other. The Pacific is no different and which side you're on is no different. Did we ever sacrifice soldiers in a calculated way? You bet we did.




BBfanboy -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 12:58:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

There's another misconception at work here. Take the US during WWII. When the war started the Merchant Marine were automatically drafted into military service (and they knew that up front) and we lost a heck of a lot of those sailors in the Atlantic, fighting the war for us on freighters. They were soldiers just like any other. The Pacific is no different and which side you're on is no different. Did we ever sacrifice soldiers in a calculated way? You bet we did.

Not quite an equivalence with picket duty. Merchant ships were made to haul stuff and that is what they did under war conditions. Telling them to sit out in the ocean and radio in if they spot any enemy activity is not what they signed up for. IIRC, the 'weather ships' that were sent out to various regions were made naval ships and given naval crews. In essence they became Patrol Boats. Even on the merchant ships, naval crewmen operated the defensive guns aboard and probably the Convoy Admiral's radios.

Japanese philosophy would have allowed for merchant sailors to do picket duty, but I am not sure if Western nations ever got desperate enough to sacrifice them in that way.

I do agree that the merchant sailors were heroes who should all have gotten a medal and a pension for their service in any war zone. I could never picture myself as being a stoker on a fat tanker, waiting for a torpedo to hit while I am below sea level and surrounded by flammable liquids.

[image]local://upfiles/35791/D9CF2BBCD8724F1990ECF8B1A8A083FF.gif[/image]




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 1:18:31 AM)

My best friend in high school went into the Merchant Marine, working river boats pushing barges up and down the Mississippi. He knew full well and couldn't have gotten in without knowing that at any moment he could be placed under military orders and military discipline. He had to pass an exam proving that he understood that explicitly. He didn't sign up for anything in particular he could be ordered to do.




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 1:30:09 AM)

I remember back in those days (maybe it's still true) you could sign up to serve in the Navy and you'd get there and a Marine Sgt might walk along the line you were in like Madeleine Kahn in History of the World Part I and pick guys out and say "you're in the Marines now, boy!"




AW1Steve -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 1:49:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I remember back in those days (maybe it's still true) you could sign up to serve in the Navy and you'd get there and a Marine Sgt might walk along the line you were in like Madeleine Kahn in History of the World Part I and pick guys out and say "you're in the Marines now, boy!"

When was that the case Geoff? [&:] I've been associated with the Navy since 1977 and I've never seen that. Now they could if you were a Corpsman. I had a friend during Vietnam who joined up and bragged "That there was no way he was going to Vietnam". Then he told me the rate he'd put into. Hospital corpsman. Guess where he went? [:D]

I knew another guy who joined and went into small boats. He had never heard of Riverine forces. He learned. [:D]




AW1Steve -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 1:51:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I do what it takes to win, as long as it could've happened. For me, if they coulda done it, I woulda done it. Historically the Japanese baited the US navy away from it's BBs by using CVs. It worked too! Sorta.


Errr... is that what you were trying to do? Funny I thought you were going after a convoy. Which was screened by a large number of CVE's. Who gave a really good account of themselves. [:D]




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 1:54:24 AM)

Just before or just after the draft ended. It ended just before I turned 18. I had heard that if you tried joining the Navy to avoid going into the Army exactly that could happen.




AW1Steve -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 1:56:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

There's another misconception at work here. Take the US during WWII. When the war started the Merchant Marine were automatically drafted into military service (and they knew that up front) and we lost a heck of a lot of those sailors in the Atlantic, fighting the war for us on freighters. They were soldiers just like any other. The Pacific is no different and which side you're on is no different. Did we ever sacrifice soldiers in a calculated way? You bet we did.

Actually that's not quite true. THE SHIPS were drafted into military service , the crews were not. But if they stayed with the ships , they were very well paid and eligible for bonuses. If they left , their draft status was immediately revoked. Which meant a nastier job , for pocket change and an instead of a chance of being torpedoed , they could go out and LOOK for things that shot torpedoes. [:D]




geofflambert -> RE: OT Things to ponder (4/5/2020 1:57:26 AM)

Steve just sent me a turn, so I changed the dates on my script from 8/44 to 9/44 because it's now September 1.




Page: <<   < prev  172 173 [174] 175 176   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125