Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land

 
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] >> World in Flames >> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land Page: <<   < prev  38 39 [40] 41 42   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/19/2009 10:57:23 PM   
warspite1


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

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

Lets start with...
 
USS Neosho (AO), an oilier, describing a transport? 
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some Translations:
 
Pong Ho - Along the riverside
Hai Yin - Hai; Sea. Yîn; literally "flourishing" and "blood red
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Soviet counter in Cruisers in Flames called Volga (please note Soviet idea of a Heavy Cruiser is not the same as ours in the 2nd link ):
 
http://www.steelnavy.com/KomBrigSverdlov.htm
 
The Sverdlov class, Project 68-bis, of light cruisers.
 
SISTERSHIPS: Zhdanov, Aleksandr Suverov, Admiral Senyavin, Dmitrii Pojarskii, Kronshtadt (not completed), Tallin (not completed), Varyag (not completed), Admiral Ushakov, Aleksandr Nevskii, Admiral Lazarev, Ordjonikidze, Shcherbakov (not completed), Kozima Minin (not completed), Dmitrii Donskoi (not completed), Bez Nazvaniya ("un-named" not completed), Molotovsk (renamed Oktyabriskaya Revolutsiya in 1957), Murmansk, Dzerzhinskii, Admiral Nahkimov, Mikhail Kutuzov, Admiral Kornilov (not completed), Bez Nazvaniya (II) ("un-named" not completed, Thanks to Gordon Hogg for clarification of the two hulls listed as "Bez Nazvaniya", meaning un-named).
 
 
The Soviet Navy at the Outbreak and During the Great Patriotic War
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:

Warspite1 post # 1145

 
Does anyone know where I can get details of US troopships and important convoys - in the Pacific in particular? For example in January 1942 there were 14 ships that sailed from the US for various destinations e.g. Bora Bora, Noumea etc. They were escorted by TF11 and ANZAC forces but I can find nothing about the transports

 
No they were not.
 
Some history:
 
January 6, 1942
 
The Second Marine Brigade (Brigadier General Henry L. Larsen, USMC) embarked in troop transports (former Matson Line passenger liners) SS Lurline, SS Monterey, SS Matsonia, cargo ship USS Jupiter, and ammunition ship USS Lassen sails from San Diego, California, for Pago Pago, American Samoa. The initial escort is provided by Task Force 17 comprised of the aircraft carrier USS Yorktown, the heavy cruiser USS Louisville, the light cruiser USS St. Louis and three destroyers.
 
January 23, 1942
 
Task Force 6814 departs New York for New Zealand and then to New Caledonia. This unit with other additions will become the Americal Division. New Caledonia was a Free French, French colony. With the Japanese war machine rolling, the French asked on 12-15-41 for military assistance on (protection).
 
TF 6814 was built around 2 regiments, the 132nd (Illinois) and the 182nd. These had been declared surplus when the federalized NG 33rd and 26th Divisions had been reorganized into triangular divisions. The 164th Regiment (North Dakota) was later added and thus the units were in place for the creation of the Americal Division. Ameri
(cans in New) Cal(edonia) gives you the name.

 
TASK FORCE 6814, US Army in Australia During WW2
 
SS Argentina
SS Barry
SS Cristobel
SS Erickson
SS McAndrew
SS Santa Elena
SS Santa Rosa
SS Island Mail
 
 
January 27, 1942 almost 5,000 U.S. Army troops sail from Charleston, South Carolina and arrive on February 17, 1942 at Bora Bora in the Society Islands, which located in the western portion of French Polynesia. This force consists of the 102nd Infantry regiment (less one Battalion), an AA Regiment, and 296 men of the Bobcat Detachment (Bobcat was the code name for Bora Bora) of the 1st Naval Construction Battalion. This is the first operational deployment of the Seabees. Bora Bora is to be used as a refueling base to support the Southern Lifeline to Australi
 
I cannot find any information on this group. This is possibly be cause it was hurriedly put together and poorly organized.
 
But here is a List of ships of the United States Army.
 
February 13, 1942
 
Chartered U.S. passenger ship SS President Taylor, transporting 900 Army troops to occupy Canton Island, runs aground on a reef off her destination, and becomes stranded.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Warspite1

Thank-you for taking the time to post. A few things:

1. Yes, a fleet oiler on a transport counter. World In Flames is not on a scale that deals with fleet trains - or indeed supply ships used by the Kriegsmarine. Therefore I have taken the liberty to use one US and one German transport counter for the story of USS Neosho and the Altmark/Westerwald. I have taken a similar liberty with the CW, where I have told the story of Lt Wilkinson V.C and the Li-Wo (Li-Wo was a patrol vessel) on an ASW counter and the Italian Espero convoy (again an ASW counter even though the "transports" were destroyers - not merchant vessels being escorted).

I feel these "liberties" are justified where a story deserves telling but the counters do not quite fit.

2. Translations - thank-you.

3. Sorry - its late and its been a long weekend but I could not see Volga in the Sverdlov`s? What am I missing?

4. Convoys - I am not writing about the early Jan convoy with TF17, but the two at the end of that month. Its interesting - I have double checked my two sources and they both state that TF11 covered these convoys - and that was how Lexington and her escorts came to be in the SW Pacific.

If you are interested (and I hope you are) please watch this space in the next day or so.

Rgds



< Message edited by warspite1 -- 7/19/2009 11:16:59 PM >


_____________________________

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



(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 1171
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/20/2009 12:52:28 AM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
Bez Nazvaniya - "un-named" not completed, Thanks to Gordon Hogg for clarification of the two hulls listed as "Bez Nazvaniya", meaning un-named.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TF11

TF 11 was originally formed around Lexington (CV-2), then Saratoga (CV-3) until she was disabled by a Japanese torpedo in January 1942.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Lexington_(CV-2)

Lexington patrolled to block enemy raids in the Ohau-Johnston Island-Palmyra Atoll triangle until January 11, 1942, when she sailed from Pearl Harbor as flagship for Vice Admiral Wilson Brown commanding Task Force 11.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Saratoga_(CV-3)

Saratoga continued operations in the Hawaiian Island region, but on January 11, 1942, when heading towards a rendezvous with Enterprise 500 miles (800 km) south-west of Oahu, she was hit without warning by a deep-running torpedo fired by I-6.

USS Neches (AO-5) Sunk by enemy action January 23, 1942 by a torpedo from Japanese submarine I-72. Neches was to refuel Task Force 11.

January 1942 - Kingman - Christmas Island offensive patrol. TF 11 has not enough fuel to conduct planned raids and sails back to Oahu. Arrived Pearl Harbor January 24,1942.

January 31, 1942 TF11 departed from Pearl Harbor for Fiji to cover TF 8 and TF 17 retirement from Marshalls and Gilberts and escort a convoy for Bora Bora.

http://pacific.valka.cz/forces/index.htm

The 3 big convoys in January 1942 were:

January 6, 1942 The 2nd Marine Brigade left San Diego, California, for Pago Pago, American Samoa.
January 23, 1942 Task Force 6814 left New York Harbour for New Zealand and New Caledonia.
January 27, 1942 The 102nd Infantry regiment with the Seabees left from Charleston, South Carolina for Bora Bora.



< Message edited by Extraneous -- 7/20/2009 1:55:13 AM >

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 1172
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/20/2009 8:34:12 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Sorry for long delay in reply about what post I was talking about, it was post number 3 from way back that lists Gneisenau & Scharnhorst as Pocket battleships,I think this game is going to be fantastic when released and that the write ups are superb.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

She went boom!






I have been distracted from this game by whats happening at the WITP AE forums sorry for any missunderstandings regarding the above.

< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/20/2009 8:35:10 PM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 1173
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/20/2009 10:47:54 PM   
warspite1


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

As you all know, the write-ups are “chrome” that have been added, to give the counters we push around the board (or more accurately now, drag and drop across the computer screen) added historical flavour and value; for those of us who are interested in that sort of thing.

The write-ups in no way speed up or slow down the MWIF release date, however it would be nice to get these as complete as possible come the game`s release.

To that end I need some serious help! There are some counters that are important in the context of WWII history and so would be nice to have written up. The problem is the time taken for research and planning the counters as much as the actual write ups.

There are two distinct problems:

Submarines

As much as I love the naval aspect, submarine warfare has never been a favourite of mine and as a result, I know next to nothing. This means I have to do a ton of reading to plan out the counters before I can even begin the write-ups. All the German, French, Italian and US subs are yet to be started.

Required

Would anybody be interested in a) doing some research and planning what each counter would be used for (i.e. split by class, variant or whatever), b) what sub(s) would be written about in each counter.

In order of priority I would say Germans followed by US, Italian then French. The Japanese and all other navies except the CW need to be started, or the small number that have been done, needs reviewing.

For example, see CW counter below. There were enough counters to do one or more examples of all the main classes of RN sub. Each write up contains a brief history of the RN subs, the particular class and then the boat itself.

[4742 Submarine - by Robert Jenkins]
.B Engine(s) output: 800 hp (Surfaced) 760 hp (Submerged)
.B Top Speed: 12.75 knots (Surfaced), 9 knots (Submerged)
.B Main armament: 4 x 21-inch torpedo tubes and 1 x 12-pdr gun
.B Displacement (Fully Submerged): 740 tons
.B Diving Depth: 300 ft
.P These World In Flames counters represent a number of submarines rather
than any specific individual submarine. The dates printed on the back of the
counters do not tie up in any meaningful way with build dates for the various
classes of Royal Navy (RN) submarine class and therefore the counter date in
most cases should be ignored. These Commonwealth submarine write-ups contain the
usual technical data, followed by a brief history of one or more submarines from
each of the main classes that saw action during the Second World War.
.P The British initially tried to get the submarine outlawed during the inter-
war years. When this policy failed, Britain tried through treaty to limit the
number of submarines that would be available to any potential enemy. When Hitler
ordered the expansion of the Kriegsmarine in the mid-thirties, U-boat building
was allowed at up to 100% of the RN submarine tonnage (although in theory, this
meant tonnage being taken from surface ship allowances). At the start of the
Second World War, the RN had fifty-nine submarines, of which all but twelve
could be considered modern vessels.
.P This write-up looks at the U-class submarines. This class of submarine was
designed originally as an unarmed training vessel, with the first group of three
boats being ordered in 1936. However, the coming of war changed these plans and
their design was altered to allow six forward mounted torpedo tubes, including
two external tubes. The external tubes were not a success however and they were
removed in later models.
.P The boats were small at 191 feet long, of a single, riveted hull design. They
featured a diesel-electric drive system, which used electric motors to turn the
propellers, relegating the diesel engines to charging of the batteries and
generating electricity for the motors; this was a first for the RN. They proved
manoeuvrable vessels that were quick to dive.
.P Some of the later boats began with the letter V as the RN found difficulty in
finding enough appropriate words beginning with the letter U!
.P The group III boats, also known as the V-class, were built to a slightly
larger design, with a length of 205 feet, and were slightly faster on the
surface. They used a welded hull and could dive an additional 100 feet. The data
above reflects these changes.
.P Although there were numerous problems with the initial design, these were
soon ironed out and this class became one of the most successful submarine
classes of the Second World War. Seventy of these submarines were built, serving
with the Free French, Dutch, Norwegian, Russian, Polish, Danish and Greek
navies.
.P
.P HMS Venturer
.P HMS Venturer was from group III or the V-class. She was completed in August
1943 and after work-up she joined the 9th Submarine Flotilla then based in
Scotland.
.P She had a number of victories to her name; she sank the German merchant ship
Thor in March 1944 off Stadlandet, Norway and the Friedrichshafen the following
month. In September, she disposed of the Norwegian vessel Vang and was then
lucky to escape from an attack by enemy shore batteries two days later whilst
trying to attack a convoy.
.P Then in November, she sank the first of two German submarines. Her first
victim was the U-771 which she engaged on the 11th November, again off the
Norwegian coast. There were no survivors from the German vessel.
.P Her second U-boat success gave Venturer a unique place in World War II
history; she is believed to be the only submarine of any nationality to have
sunk a submerged enemy submarine while submerged herself. The incident took
place in February 1945 west of Bergen, when Venturer, commanded by Lt Jimmy
Landers, took on U-864, commanded by Kapitan Ralf-Reimar Wolfram.
.P The British were aware from intelligence reports that the Germans were going
to attempt to send vital materials and plans to Japan in order that she could
continue the war; Operation Caesar. U-864`s cargo included jet fighter parts
and missile guidance systems. In addition, she carried around seventy tons of
mercury.
.P The operation got off to a bad start in late 1944 as U-864 ran aground in the
Kiel canal. However, she was able to get to Bergen, where she underwent repairs.
It was only at the start of February 1945 that she was able to sail once more.
.P Venturer was ordered to intercept her, but the German vessel had already
passed the patrol area that Venturer had been assigned. However, the bad luck
that U-864 had already encountered on its ill-fated mission continued. She was
struck by mechanical problems and so had no choice but to return for further
repair. This meant her passing back through Venturer`s patrol area. The Germans
sent an escort to meet U-864 and in order to avoid detection, Landers decided to
turn off his sonar system, and use his more basic hydrophone equipment. This
decision would make the search for the German U-boat more difficult but would
also make detection by the German escorts more difficult.
.P On the 9th February, Venturer made contact, and after confirming sight of
the U-boat`s periscope through his own periscope, Landers decided to follow the
U-boat and attack when she surfaced. Unfortunately for Landers, Wolfram soon
realised he was being followed and tried to shake off the pursuing RN vessel.
.P For Landers it was decision time. With each minute, U-864 would get closer to
the safety of Bergen and the escorts waiting to accompany it to the Norwegian
port. He decided to strike, even though U-864 was still submerged. The German
vessel was zig-zagging and so Landers had to decide how best to launch his four
torpedoes. With no computers to assist his calculations, he came up with a
firing solution. He ordered all four torpedoes be fired at precise times and at
various depths and courses.
.P Wolfram and the crew of U-864 heard the torpedoes and took evasive action. He
managed to avoid the first three torpedoes but not the fourth. This hit the
U-boat, causing her sinking with all 73 crew.
.P In March, Venturer sank the German merchant Sirius. After the war ended, she
was transferred to the Royal Norwegian Navy, whereupon her name was changed to
Utstein.
.P HMS Venturer/Utstein was scrapped in 1965.


Transports / Amphibious / ASW

Again few of these have been done (CW excepted) and the US in particular must have a ton of stories – especially in the Pacific. I have posted examples of CW counters for all of these unit types on this thread previously. The only critical country here is the US.

Any assistance would be extremely gratefully received – but be warned – it’s a lot of work!!


_____________________________

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



(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1174
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/21/2009 2:21:15 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
Depending on the number of AMPH's in the game you could use the Amphibious Command ships as write ups.

NavSource Naval History Photographic History Of The U.S. Navy

This site lists Civil War through current U.S. Navy ships. 




< Message edited by Extraneous -- 7/21/2009 2:23:03 PM >

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 1175
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/21/2009 8:08:21 PM   
warspite1


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

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

Depending on the number of AMPH's in the game you could use the Amphibious Command ships as write ups.

NavSource Naval History Photographic History Of The U.S. Navy

This site lists Civil War through current U.S. Navy ships. 



Warspite1

Well done Mr Extraneous - this is really helpful

I have used the Amphibious Command Ship for one of the Royal Navy counters (HMS Bulolo) so one - possibly two (Pacific and European?) of these will be perfect for the US transports.


_____________________________

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



(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 1176
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 12:50:38 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
While reading the CASE WHITE AAR, I noticed 2 obvious stand out points of interest concerning the German ship counters.

1 = The heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper has her full name,while the Admiral Graf Spee is just Graf Spee.

2 = Regarding both ships defence strenght Vulnerability Admiral Hipper is (6) while Admiral Graf Spee is (7) surely they should be the same value or Admiral Graf Spee should be (5) as she was the heavier armoured of the 2 classes of ships.

I know that the heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper is the larger ship lenght and tonnage wise + 4 knots faster,but in all other aspects she is weaker than the Pocket Battleship Admiral Graf Spee ?

< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/22/2009 11:42:27 PM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 1177
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 1:23:54 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

While reading the CASE WHITE AAR, I noticed 2 obvious stand out points of interest concerning the German ship counters.

1 = The heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper has her full name,while the Admiral Graf Spee is just Graf Spee.

2 = Regarding both ships defence strenght Vulnerability Admiral Hipper is (6) while Admiral Graf Spee is (7) surely they should be the same value or Graf Spee should be (5) as she was the heavier armoured of the 2 classes of ships.

I know that the heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper is the larger ship lenght and tonnage wise,but in all other aspects she is weaker than the Pocket Battleship Admiral Graf Spee ?

From what I know, ADG used the data for the 1945 refit for the Hipper.
After this refit, the Hipper had a thicker max belt and turret armor than the Graf Spee.
Also, the Hipper was 4.5 knots quicker than the Graf Spee, which is a factor that is considered in the defense factor.
After all calculations, the Hipper had a defense factor of 6.28, and the Graf Spee 6.75. The rounding make it a 1 point difference, but they were closer in reality.

Anyway, in MWiF you'll be able to change the values of all ships to what you prefer. You'll just need to find people that share the same views, so that they use your CSV files and you can have a game.

(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1178
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 1:37:32 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Regarding Admiral Hipper refit I will need to check to see if that was ever done as she was scuttled in May 1945.At time of launch of both ships Admiral Graf Spee was the better armoured,I asked about the ability to use an editor in another thread I posted and was told no,so glad to here that I will be able to tweak values on the counters,I will be changing quite alot,won't matter much in respect of playing the game as I play against the AI.

< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/22/2009 1:38:00 PM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 1179
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 1:42:03 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

Regarding Admiral Hipper refit I will need to check to see if that was ever done as she was scuttled in May 1945.At time of launch of both ships Admiral Graf Spee was the better armoured,I asked about the ability to use an editor in another thread I posted and was told no,so glad to here that I will be able to tweak values on the counters,I will be changing quite alot,won't matter much in respect of playing the game as I play against the AI.

There is no editor, but all the counters factors and all the map datas are contained in a dozen of CSV files. Editing CSV files is pretty easy, once you know the meaning of each field, and the MWiF documentation will have an appendix where all those fields are described. And if iit is not sufficient, I've worked enougth on the counters and the map to give directions to anyone who would have problems editing the counters.

(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1180
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 1:47:45 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Thanks Froonp,
I like to edit stuff to my own strenght values,in respect of the naval aspect of things,Scharnhorst is my favourite ship I have a photo of her on my desktop defence wise she was comparable to the Bismarck,great pity she only ever had 11in guns!

_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 1181
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 2:06:15 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

There is no editor, but all the counters factors and all the map datas are contained in a dozen of CSV files. Editing CSV files is pretty easy, once you know the meaning of each field, and the MWiF documentation will have an appendix where all those fields are described. And if iit is not sufficient, I've worked enougth on the counters and the map to give directions to anyone who would have problems editing the counters.


Hiya Froonp,
I just downloaded a csv file editor from the web, CSVed version 1.4.8b Sam Franke 2009 for anyone else who may be interested in editing,so hopfully I'm all set to edit factors when game is released can't wait.

_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 1182
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 2:10:36 PM   
Mike Parker

 

Posts: 583
Joined: 12/30/2008
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
Hellfirejet,

Open office's spreadsheet program works well with CSV's also, and its a free office suite.  Ya might want to look into it.

(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1183
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 2:42:07 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Parker

Hellfirejet,

Open office's spreadsheet program works well with CSV's also, and its a free office suite.  Ya might want to look into it.

I think that you should not use any office program to edit the CSV files, only text editors.
Other programs may have a tendency to disrupt the CSV file.

(in reply to Mike Parker)
Post #: 1184
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 3:00:46 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
I have Open Office & Microsoft Office Pro on my system already, I just downloaded the CSVed version 1.4.8b Sam Franke 2009 editor to see what it was like.

_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 1185
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 3:14:20 PM   
Mike Parker

 

Posts: 583
Joined: 12/30/2008
From: Houston TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Parker

Hellfirejet,

Open office's spreadsheet program works well with CSV's also, and its a free office suite.  Ya might want to look into it.

I think that you should not use any office program to edit the CSV files, only text editors.
Other programs may have a tendency to disrupt the CSV file.


Well I edit csv files all the time at work with excel, its one of the native formats, I just assumed open office has a csv native format too, but I do not know.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 1186
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 8:56:10 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Parker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Parker

Hellfirejet,

Open office's spreadsheet program works well with CSV's also, and its a free office suite.  Ya might want to look into it.

I think that you should not use any office program to edit the CSV files, only text editors.
Other programs may have a tendency to disrupt the CSV file.


Well I edit csv files all the time at work with excel, its one of the native formats, I just assumed open office has a csv native format too, but I do not know.

Excel should work fine for editing CSV files, as long as you defeat Microsoft's constant attempts to save the file as xls instead of csv.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Mike Parker)
Post #: 1187
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 8:59:49 PM   
warspite1


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

Thanks Froonp,
I like to edit stuff to my own strenght values,in respect of the naval aspect of things,Scharnhorst is my favourite ship I have a photo of her on my desktop defence wise she was comparable to the Bismarck,great pity she only ever had 11in guns!

Warspite1

Great pity for who? Not the Royal Navy or the men of the merchant marine!


_____________________________

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



(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1188
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 9:28:49 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Althought the German navy was small compared to what she had in the 1st world war,Germany during the 2nd world war in my opinion, never really used her surface fleet in an agressive manner,on land and in the air Germany was agressive,but at sea they were to say the least ineffectual, althought the uboats were good in wolf packs. The surface ships should have concentrated on the British merchant convoys and cut the supply lines much more often than they did during the actual war.

In general they were used in 1 or 2 ship missions,that ran away at the first sign of a capital ship.

Don't get me wrong I'm British well Scottish, the Royal navy had very good ships your avatar Warspite was one of them Nelson,Rodney,Hood the list is end less,but the battle of the river plate demonstrated there true potential if used aggressively,Admiral Graf Spee v Exeter,Ajax & Achilles the Exeter had to disengage crippled with a heavy list,while Graf Spee suffered minor damage during the engagement,she should have slipped away into the south atlantic,instead she got trapped in harbour because of false information.

< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/22/2009 9:57:05 PM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 1189
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 9:41:55 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

Althought the German navy was small compared to what she had in the 1st world war,Germany during the 2nd world war in my opinion, never really used her surface fleet in an agressive manner,on land and in the air Germany was agressive,but at sea they were to say the least ineffectual, althought the uboats were good in wolf packs. The surface ships should have concentrated on the British merchant convoys much more often than they did during the actual war.

In general they were used in 1 or 2 ship missions,that ran away at the first sign of a capital ship.

Hitler was unhappy about the loss of ships in the Norwegian invasion.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1190
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 9:47:27 PM   
warspite1


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

Althought the German navy was small compared to what she had in the 1st world war,Germany during the 2nd world war in my opinion, never really used her surface fleet in an agressive manner,on land and in the air Germany was agressive,but at sea they were to say the least ineffectual, althought the uboats were good in wolf packs. The surface ships should have concentrated on the British merchant convoys much more often than they did during the actual war.

In general they were used in 1 or 2 ship missions,that ran away at the first sign of a capital ship.

Warspite1

That`s right - one of the few exceptions was Captain Langsdorff in the Graf Spee who, contrary to popular belief, grew tired of his "can`t attack enemy units -even if weaker" orders and choose to attack Harwood`s cruiser force.

If the Germans or Italians had a Somerville or a Cunningham - particularly in the Mediterranean - things could have been very different.


_____________________________

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



(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1191
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 9:48:51 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Covering the land invasion with the large surface units was a mistake they should have been harrassing the convoy routes,in so doing keeping the royal navy busy trying to hunt for them,in the mean time the available light cruisers and destroyers could have supported the invasion forces!

Hitler knew nothing about Naval tactics,and his Admirals were to scared of him to object a bunch of pussies

< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/22/2009 9:59:21 PM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 1192
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 9:55:11 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Yip captain Langsdorff was a true gentleman,by all accounts in any books I have read,Admiral Graf Spee and her 2 sister ships were perfect for what they were designed for commerce raiders,faster than any British battleship except the battlecruisers,and stronger than any cruiser in firepower.

< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/22/2009 10:19:52 PM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 1193
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 10:04:05 PM   
warspite1


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

Yip captain Langsdorff was a true gentleman,by all accounts in any books I have read,Admiral Graf Spee and her 2 sister ships were perfect for what they were designed for commerse raiders,faster than any British battleship except the battlecruisers,and stronger than any cruiser.

Warspite1

Mmmm.... maybe when they were built. Unfortunately for the Kriegsmarine, shortly after they were completed the French laid down the two Dunkerque`s, and battleships generally started to get a whole lot faster. The PB`s had too many drawbacks, little more strongly armoured than a cruiser and only two turrets - so difficult to focus on more than one target and still get a decent salvo - were just two.

Langsdorff certainly played the game though as far as treatment of merchant ships and their crews were concerned - more than can be said for the Deutschland - two of the ships she captured/sunk on her maiden voyage caused international incidents - whoops!


_____________________________

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



(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1194
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 10:12:41 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Yip your right again they were not designed to engage Battleships,and that the newer battleships were faster the French Dunkerque's approx 30 knots compared to the Pocket battleships 28 knots,not to be to disrespectful to the French navy but they did not do much during the war either!

In regard to fighting more than one target,her 6 x 11in main armament could engage the most powerful opponent, while her 8 x 5.9in secondary could keep other targets busy,as at the battle of the river plate that I mentioned earlier proved, she was more than capable of taking on more than one opponent.


Name: Admiral Graf Spee
Namesake: Maximilian von Spee
Laid down: 1 October 1932
Launched: 30 June 1934
Commissioned: 6 January 1936
Nickname: Graf Spee
Fate: Scuttled 17 December 1939
General characteristics
Class and type: Deutschland class cruiser
Displacement: 12,100 t standard;
16,200 t full load
Length: 186 m (610 ft)
Beam: 21.65 m (71.0 ft)
Draught: 7.34 metres (24.1 ft)
Propulsion: Eight 9-cylinder double-acting two-stroke MAN diesels
two screws, 52,050 hp
Speed: 28.5 knots (53 km/h)
Range: 8,900 nautical miles at 20 knots (16,500 km at 37 km/h)
Or
19,000 nautical miles at 10 knots (35,000 km at 18.5 km/h)
Complement: 1001-1,150
Electronic warfare
and decoys: Early version of Seetakt radar
Armament:
6 × 280 mm (11 inch)
8 × 150 mm (5.9 inch)
6 × 105 mm (4.1 inch)
8 × 37 mm
10 × 20 mm
8 × 533 mm (21 inch) torpedo tubes
Armour:
turret face: (140 mm)
belt: (100 mm)
deck: 40-70 mm)
Aircraft carried: Two Arado 196 seaplanes, one catapult


< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/24/2009 3:05:57 PM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 1195
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/22/2009 10:18:05 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
I'm sure I speak for all the members here, who are interested in the Naval aspect of things,and to those who actually served during the war,may I say I'm humbled in your company and full of respect and admiration.For I like many others lost relatives in the war and there memory will live on.

< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/22/2009 10:50:37 PM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1196
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/23/2009 4:36:04 AM   
warspite1


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

Yip your right again they were not designed to engage Battleships,and that the newer battleships were faster the French Dunkerque's approx 30 knots compared to the Pocket battleships 28 knots,not to be to disrespectful to the French navy but they did not do much during the war either!

In regard to fighting more than one target,her 6 x 11in main armament could engage the most powerful opponent, while her 8 x 5.9in secondary could keep other targets busy,as at the battle of the river plate that I mentioned earlier proved, she was more than capable of taking on more than one opponent.


Name: Admiral Graf Spee
Namesake: Maximilian von Spee
Laid down: 1 October 1932
Launched: 30 June 1934
Commissioned: 6 January 1936[1]
Nickname: Graf Spee
Fate: Scuttled 17 December 1939
General characteristics
Class and type: Deutschland class cruiser
Displacement: 12,100 t standard;
16,200 t full load
Length: 186 m (610 ft)[2]
Beam: 21.65 m (71.0 ft)[2]
Draught: 7.34 metres (24.1 ft)[2]
Propulsion: Eight 9-cylinder double-acting two-stroke MAN diesels
two screws, 52,050 hp
Speed: 28.5 knots (53 km/h)
Range: 8,900 nautical miles at 20 knots (16,500 km at 37 km/h)
Or
19,000 nautical miles at 10 knots (35,000 km at 18.5 km/h)
Complement: 1001-1,150[1]
Electronic warfare
and decoys: Early version of Seetakt radar[3]
Armament: 6 × 280 mm (11 inch)
8 × 150 mm (5.9 inch)
6 × 105 mm (4.1 inch)
8 × 37 mm
10 × 20 mm
8 × 533 mm (21 inch) torpedo tubes
Armor: turret face: (140 mm)
belt: (100 mm)
deck: 40-70 mm)
Aircraft carried: Two Arado 196 seaplanes, one catapult

Warspite1

HFJ,

Yes she could take on more than one opponent, but not with her main armament (without having to keep switching targets - never ideal). The point about her being stronger than any faster ship was supposed to be that she did not need to engage at "close quarters" but could keep a faster ship at bay with her 11-inchers.

Commodore Harwood - of typical RN fighting stock - knew full well that he did not have to sink Graf Spee with his cruiser force. Graf Spee was thousands of miles from home. All he needed to do was damage her badly enough that she would not be able to get home without running into heavier units later. Langsdorff had to sink the British/NZ ships or they could shadow him and guide those heavy units down on her.

By engaging at her secondary armament distance (the same as the main armament of Achilles and Ajax), that meant Graf Spee was going to take the punishment she could ill afford due to her relatively light armour.



_____________________________

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



(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1197
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/23/2009 8:16:50 AM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
All true but in my eyes it's better to go down fighting than let yourself be scuttled,maybe a bit to agressive, but I would have taken the damage,closed the range on Exeter and blown her out of the water,then turned my attention on the those annoying light cruiser,with my main + secondary armaments,I don't think Ajax or Achilles could have withstood much 11in shell damage before being SUNK,they can't shadow and give position reports if they are at the bottom of the south atlantic,the army and airforce were fighting and taking heavy losses,the navy should have done the same,I mean they were supposed to be at war.

All reports after the battle showed that it was Exeters 8in shells, that were penetrating Admiral Graf Spee armour and doing damage,Ajax and Achilles 6in shells in general were not penetrating her armour,so the damage they were inflicting was more annoying than a major concern.After Exeter had been sunk, I feel the light cruisers would have had to try and increase the range or suffer the same fate of Exeter.

Then when at there max 6in gun range any hits would be fewer, but Admiral Graf Spees 11in shells with the aid of plunging fire, would go through Ajax & Achilles armour like a hot knife through butter,with only one outcome the destruction of the ship.

< Message edited by hellfirejet -- 7/23/2009 8:58:55 AM >


_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 1198
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/23/2009 10:03:40 AM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfirejet

All true but in my eyes it's better to go down fighting than let yourself be scuttled,maybe a bit to agressive, but I would have taken the damage,closed the range on Exeter and blown her out of the water,then turned my attention on the those annoying light cruiser,with my main + secondary armaments,I don't think Ajax or Achilles could have withstood much 11in shell damage before being SUNK,they can't shadow and give position reports if they are at the bottom of the south atlantic,the army and airforce were fighting and taking heavy losses,the navy should have done the same,I mean they were supposed to be at war.

All reports after the battle showed that it was Exeters 8in shells, that were penetrating Admiral Graf Spee armour and doing damage,Ajax and Achilles 6in shells in general were not penetrating her armour,so the damage they were inflicting was more annoying than a major concern.After Exeter had been sunk, I feel the light cruisers would have had to try and increase the range or suffer the same fate of Exeter.

Then when at there max 6in gun range any hits would be fewer, but Admiral Graf Spees 11in shells with the aid of plunging fire, would go through Ajax & Achilles armour like a hot knife through butter,with only one outcome the destruction of the ship.


I think you underestimate what damage the always aggressive, and skilled, English could do. Maybe they would try to do smoke screens and get in close and torpedo Admiral Graf Spee. That is asuming that the light cruisers had torpedos.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to hellfirejet)
Post #: 1199
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 7/23/2009 2:27:49 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Yes Leander class light cruisers have 8 x 21" TT but that won't help much because Graf Spee had radar which as you know can see through smoke.

_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 1200
Page:   <<   < prev  38 39 [40] 41 42   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land Page: <<   < prev  38 39 [40] 41 42   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.891