HistoryNet.com RSS
ArmchairGeneral.com RSS

HistoryNet.com Articles
America's Civil War
American History
Aviation History
Civil War Times
MHQ
Military History
Vietnam
Wild West
World War II

ACG Online
ACG Magazine
Stuff We Like
War College
History News
Tactics 101
Carlo D'Este
Books

ACG Gaming
Boardgames
PC Game Reviews

ACG Network
Contact Us
Our Newsletter
Meet Our Staff
Advertise With Us

Sites We Support
HistoryNet.com
StreamHistory.com
Once A Marine
The Art of Battle
Game Squad
Mil. History Podcast
Russian Army - WW2
Achtung Panzer!
Mil History Online

Go Back   Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History > Military/History Related Hobbies > Alternate Timelines > Xtreme Alternate History

Notices and Announcements

Xtreme Alternate History Alternatives to History with No Holds Barred!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 27 Dec 15, 19:44
Nebfer's Avatar
Nebfer Nebfer is offline
Captain
United_States
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Titusville
Posts: 781
Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dracoco View Post
T. A.
The torpedo boats are S-boats.
The single 8" gun of the merchant ships allows them to sink allied DD, cruisers, etc, at a safe range & to provide ground support 30 km away. Their Italian 90 mm guns can fire very fast & with an even flatter trajectory & heavier shell than the 8.8 cm FLAK & provide quite a punch against DD, cargo ships, subs, torpedo boats, etc, saving the 15.5 cm shells only for the heavier ships.
Well you mention 18cm which is 7 inches (not many 18cm guns around though, the Germans have a old 17cm gun though), and in any event a single 8 inch gun is not going to mean much. You would be better off sticking with 6x 149mm guns used historically. Which would give you a uniform armament.

Quote:
As to the number of troops that such a large ship can hold, remember the cruiser which transported 1,200 men (despite being smaller than a merchant cruiser). Remember also the people evacuated from Korea in the 1950's in a victory ship. Not that thousands of troops are needed to take over the docks in peace time, while other ships arrive.
So your going to sail a few ships loaded with troops into a harbor, have them rapidly unload them and take over the local facility's, and then sail in other ships to unload further men and supplies? On day one right? Well I will give you that if done right you could catch the Brits by surprise and take a few harbors. Then what? The RN is going to come streaming down, and blocking off all further access...
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 27 Dec 15, 20:22
T. A. Gardner's Avatar
T. A. Gardner T. A. Gardner is online now
General of the Forums
United_States
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: T. A. Gardner
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 34,410
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dracoco View Post
T. A.
My impaired memory afflicted, lousy reader. We are talking about May 7, 1939 at which time OTL Germany has not a single merchant raider, the Fletcher class is but a dream, most RN DDs have 4" guns (a bit weaker than those suggested for KM DD).
I take a large number of axis merchant raiders to start the war on 7 May, 1939 over a few German merchant raiders long after the war started any time.
You don't know the difference between a comparison and replacement? I was using the Fletcher class to demonstrate the amount of room a catapult and crane take up on a destroyer.
Most RN DD in 1939 have 4.7" guns, typically the 4.7" CP MK XVII or XVIII aboard. They generally carry 5 such weapons in A, B, Q, X, and Y positions. They also have 8 21" torpedo tubes.

Quote:
In this scenario, by the evening axis forces control myriad ports & at dawn on 7 May torpedo planes, dive & skip bombers & submarines, torpedo boats, etc, from Ireland, Belgium, Holland, the Faeroes, Canaries, Cape Verde, Azores, Iceland, Portugal, Norway, Spain, Sicily, Sardinia, Crete & myriad bases in South America, Asia, the GEI, German Guiana, Japanese colonies, Thailand (Indian & Pacific Ocean), etc, are having a field day. Don't forget the magnetic & conventional mines deployed in the DDs' way & the large number of axis DD, etc,. Accordingly the 184 RN DD the world over, the few USN DD in the PI & Hawaii, Panama, etc, & the few French DD at the attacked ports & bases (Dakar, etc,) or within range of axis planes, subs, DD, etc, have a rather short life.
So, other than the Germans declaring war immediately on half the planet, your plan is just a wreck. The Japanese have no A6M Zeros. The best fighters they have in service are the A5M Claude with two 7.7mm machineguns and the Ki 27 Nate with two 7.7mm machineguns. Their best bomber is the Italian BR 20 they purchased in small quantities. Their carrier fleet is just 4 large carriers. The standard dive bomber is the Aichi D1A biplane and the B5N1 torpedo bomber is just entering squadron service.

Just a note on how stupid this scenario is:

Hawaii still has all the same coast defenses it had in 1941. There is still a full US infantry division on Oahu (a "square" division with 4 regiments of infantry or about 20,000 troops).

At the Panama canal on the Atlantic side is the 4th Coast Artillery regiment manning the defense batteries, the 33rd Infantry Regiment, and 2nd FA (Bn). On the Pacific side is the 1st Coast Artillery regiment and 14th Infantry Regiment.
The USAAC has about 75 aircraft stationed in the canal zone.

That's 1939, not 1941.

Oh, you might note, that the French Navy in 1939 has 78 destroyers 7 heavy 12 light cruisers, and 81 submarines.

Quote:
The torpedo boats are S-boats.
The single 8" gun of the merchant ships allows them to sink allied DD, cruisers, etc, at a safe range & to provide ground support 30 km away. Their Italian 90 mm guns can fire very fast & with an even flatter trajectory & heavier shell than the 8.8 cm FLAK & provide quite a punch against DD, cargo ships, subs, torpedo boats, etc, saving the 15.5 cm shells only for the heavier ships.
As to the number of troops that such a large ship can hold, remember the cruiser which transported 1,200 men (despite being smaller than a merchant cruiser). Remember also the people evacuated from Korea in the 1950's in a victory ship. Not that thousands of troops are needed to take over the docks in peace time, while other ships arrive.
Then the S-boats are worthless. The British 4.7" and US 5" fire 50 to 60 lbs. shells versus the 4" firing a 35 lbs. shell. So, something like an 8.8cm or 90mm is pretty worthless versus a destroyer by comparison. The ROF isn't any higher either. A US 5"/38 could fire 20+ RPM max just like an 8.8 or 90mm could.
As for transporting, carrying men on deck for a day or so at sea on a quick trip is one thing, carrying them for a week or more is entirely another. Your miniscule forces will be crushed on landing.

Quote:
Too bad You didn't read about the Piper Cub purchase. Sea Cubs simply have floats & are operating form myriad axis bases, DD, merchant raiders, etc, they needn't much range to detect ships approaching Britain & spot for the gunners. It is easier to land a slow, very light, low wing loading Sea Cub than to TO or land the heavier, faster sea planes.
Doesn't change what I said. Such aircraft cannot operate on open ocean and nothing you stated changes that. Landing in open ocean means dealing with waves. Anything beyond say sea state 2 is beyond their capacity to take off or land on water.

Such an aircraft has less than 200 miles operating range at about 75 mph. That makes them useless for almost any military mission beyond forward observer or liaison.

Last edited by T. A. Gardner; 27 Dec 15 at 20:41..
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 27 Dec 15, 20:33
Nick the Noodle's Avatar
Nick the Noodle Nick the Noodle is offline
General of the Forums
Wales
Distinguished Service Award 5 Year Service Ribbon Greatest Westerns Campaign Greatest Spy Movies Campaign 
Greatest Blunders Campaign Best Pin-Up Of World War II Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign 
Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C SPQR Campaign Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign CWiE 1939-45 Campaign 
 
Real Name: Tin Pot Noodle
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Land of the Red Dragon
Posts: 17,619
Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by BELGRAVE View Post
I have to admire the sheer industry involved in all this, but where do the Trojan Horses come in ?
Absolutely.

My Christmas's consist of mainly cooking, with kids and family getting in the way. Must have been a Christmas joint?
__________________
How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 27 Dec 15, 20:43
T. A. Gardner's Avatar
T. A. Gardner T. A. Gardner is online now
General of the Forums
United_States
5 Year Service Ribbon Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
 
Real Name: T. A. Gardner
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 34,410
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+] T. A. Gardner has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
I could imagine his landings and assaults going something like this:



And, it was a Trojan Rabbit...
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 27 Dec 15, 21:51
Dracoco's Avatar
Dracoco Dracoco is offline
First Lieutenant
Mexico
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Morelia
Posts: 572
Dracoco has a little shameless behaviour in the past [-1 to -99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebfer View Post
Well you mention 18cm which is 7 inches (not many 18cm guns around though, the Germans have a old 17cm gun though), and in any event a single 8 inch gun is not going to mean much. You would be better off sticking with 6x 149mm guns used historically. Which would give you a uniform armament.

So your going to sail a few ships loaded with troops into a harbor, have them rapidly unload them and take over the local facility's, and then sail in other ships to unload further men and supplies? On day one right? Well I will give you that if done right you could catch the Brits by surprise and take a few harbors. Then what? The RN is going to come streaming down, and blocking off all further access...
I much rather have 1 long range gun, 3 medium range & 3 very quick firing short range guns in different calibers than have to waste 6" shells on small ships & have to wait until a DD or cruiser comes within range of the smaller guns to open fire. It's funny how much people over estimate the power of a coastal gun, but think that a single long range gun on a ship is useless.

The RN can do nothing in the English & St. George's Channels with axis planes in the continent, Ireland & in captured airfields & airports in England & Wales & with the axis torpedo boats, DD, subs, cruisers, mines, coastal guns, etc, controlling the area. Hell, OTL even without German torpedo planes in 1940, allied ships took a beating in Norway & France, imagine with torpedo planes in the Channel in 1939. OTL with German air cover, the RN could not even prevent the Channel dash & they had to send mighty fleets just to supply Malta with heavy losses because of a few planes in Sardinia & Sicily, despite the narrows of Tunisia being much wider than the Strait of Dover.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 27 Dec 15, 22:09
Dracoco's Avatar
Dracoco Dracoco is offline
First Lieutenant
Mexico
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Morelia
Posts: 572
Dracoco has a little shameless behaviour in the past [-1 to -99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
You don't know the difference between a comparison and replacement? I was using the Fletcher class to demonstrate the amount of room a catapult and crane take up on a destroyer.
Most RN DD in 1939 have 4.7" guns, typically the 4.7" CP MK XVII or XVIII aboard. They generally carry 5 such weapons in A, B, Q, X, and Y positions. They also have 8 21" torpedo tubes.



So, other than the Germans declaring war immediately on half the planet, your plan is just a wreck. The Japanese have no A6M Zeros. The best fighters they have in service are the A5M Claude with two 7.7mm machineguns and the Ki 27 Nate with two 7.7mm machineguns. Their best bomber is the Italian BR 20 they purchased in small quantities. Their carrier fleet is just 4 large carriers. The standard dive bomber is the Aichi D1A biplane and the B5N1 torpedo bomber is just entering squadron service.

Just a note on how stupid this scenario is:

Hawaii still has all the same coast defenses it had in 1941. There is still a full US infantry division on Oahu (a "square" division with 4 regiments of infantry or about 20,000 troops).

At the Panama canal on the Atlantic side is the 4th Coast Artillery regiment manning the defense batteries, the 33rd Infantry Regiment, and 2nd FA (Bn). On the Pacific side is the 1st Coast Artillery regiment and 14th Infantry Regiment.
The USAAC has about 75 aircraft stationed in the canal zone.

That's 1939, not 1941.

Oh, you might note, that the French Navy in 1939 has 78 destroyers 7 heavy 12 light cruisers, and 81 submarines.



Then the S-boats are worthless. The British 4.7" and US 5" fire 50 to 60 lbs. shells versus the 4" firing a 35 lbs. shell. So, something like an 8.8cm or 90mm is pretty worthless versus a destroyer by comparison. The ROF isn't any higher either. A US 5"/38 could fire 20+ RPM max just like an 8.8 or 90mm could.
As for transporting, carrying men on deck for a day or so at sea on a quick trip is one thing, carrying them for a week or more is entirely another. Your miniscule forces will be crushed on landing.



Doesn't change what I said. Such aircraft cannot operate on open ocean and nothing you stated changes that. Landing in open ocean means dealing with waves. Anything beyond say sea state 2 is beyond their capacity to take off or land on water.

Such an aircraft has less than 200 miles operating range at about 75 mph. That makes them useless for almost any military mission beyond forward observer or liaison.
The catapults required for a Sea Cub are tiny, given the low TO speed & weight.

If Graf Spee had sent such a plane aloft to confirm that the incoming ships were cruisers, she could have easily sunk them one at a time, before they came within range of their guns & ganged up on her.

The 9 blade prop also increases the range slightly, but with the very large number of axis ships around Britain, who needs range, they act like a swarn, informing each other.

Isn't it ridiculous to have 75 outdated planes in 1939 guarding the Panama Cannal. Are the coastal guns mounted or turrets as in Sevastopol or do they have their crews exposed to strafing & dive bombing as in Oahu, Oregon, etc,? Did you read about flying boats landing with troops in Lake Gatun & along the cannal, paratroopers, etc,? The US knew since 1936 that the USSR had a much stronger army & did nothing and in 1938 that the LW was ages ahead from US military aviation (as reported by Lindbergh, Rickenbacker & Doolittle after their visits) & did nothing at all (other than reducing the budget for military planes), it was in complete denial & was extremely lucky that the axis struck elsewhere for years, but if it is attacked at the outset, it has no time to do its homework & is lost.

S boats are so worthless than they killed hundreds of American soldiers rehearsing for D-day & sank ships off Normandy, despite the ridiculously huge allied navy there. Torpedo boats form Pantelleria, etc, also caused heavy allied losses. In large numbers in narrow channels they are quite dangerous for DD, cruisers & BB, expecially coordinating with planes, DD, etc, Just like cheap, deficient Panzers wreaked havok against heavier tanks in France with heavy air support.

Yet again, we are talking about 7 May, 1939, not 1941. Hawaii was a joke. Even in 1941 it was a joke, as proved by the raid. The Japanese could have easily wiped out the carriers & occupied Kauai, etc, if they wanted & blasted PH into ashes or easily invaded it form the opposite side of the guns, as they did in Sngapore. Coastal guns were even more useless in 1939 than BB, too bad You haven't noticed.

Last edited by Dracoco; 27 Dec 15 at 22:21..
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 28 Dec 15, 03:21
Doveton Sturdee's Avatar
Doveton Sturdee Doveton Sturdee is offline
Colonel
England
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tewkesbury
Posts: 1,995
Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dracoco View Post
The catapults required for a Sea Cub are tiny, given the low TO speed & weight.

If Graf Spee had sent such a plane aloft to confirm that the incoming ships were cruisers, she could have easily sunk them one at a time, before they came within range of their guns & ganged up on her.

The 9 blade prop also increases the range slightly, but with the very large number of axis ships around Britain, who needs range, they act like a swarn, informing each other.

Isn't it ridiculous to have 75 outdated planes in 1939 guarding the Panama Cannal. Are the coastal guns mounted or turrets as in Sevastopol or do they have their crews exposed to strafing & dive bombing as in Oahu, Oregon, etc,? Did you read about flying boats landing with troops in Lake Gatun & along the cannal, paratroopers, etc,? The US knew since 1936 that the USSR had a much stronger army & did nothing and in 1938 that the LW was ages ahead from US military aviation (as reported by Lindbergh, Rickenbacker & Doolittle after their visits) & did nothing at all (other than reducing the budget for military planes), it was in complete denial & was extremely lucky that the axis struck elsewhere for years, but if it is attacked at the outset, it has no time to do its homework & is lost.

S boats are so worthless than they killed hundreds of American soldiers rehearsing for D-day & sank ships off Normandy, despite the ridiculously huge allied navy there. Torpedo boats form Pantelleria, etc, also caused heavy allied losses. In large numbers in narrow channels they are quite dangerous for DD, cruisers & BB, expecially coordinating with planes, DD, etc, Just like cheap, deficient Panzers wreaked havok against heavier tanks in France with heavy air support.

Yet again, we are talking about 7 May, 1939, not 1941. Hawaii was a joke. Even in 1941 it was a joke, as proved by the raid. The Japanese could have easily wiped out the carriers & occupied Kauai, etc, if they wanted & blasted PH into ashes or easily invaded it form the opposite side of the guns, as they did in Sngapore. Coastal guns were even more useless in 1939 than BB, too bad You haven't noticed.
If Graf Spee had sent such a plane aloft to confirm that the incoming ships were cruisers, she could have easily sunk them one at a time, before they came within range of their guns & ganged up on her.

It is a shame that you don't seem to know anything about the Battle of the River Plate, or you would not post such nonsense ( Sorry, belay that, of course you would ).

Had Spee's warship recognition not been so poor, she could have attempted to avoid action, but the cruisers had a significant speed advantage, could have chosen whether to risk an action or simply shadow Spee, and Harwood's tactics were designed to split Spee's inadequate fire power anyway.

How exactly do you propose that Spee could have 'easily sunk' the cruisers one at a time? Do you assume that Harwood's squadron would simply have waited passively whilst Spee sank it simply because they were British and therefore stupid?

Rather like your earlier ludicrous assertion that merchant raiders armed with a single eight inch gun could potter around the oceans sinking cruisers and destroyers at will, all you are doing is demonstrating that, along with much else, you are quite astoundingly ignorant of how naval warfare in WW2 actually worked.

The Japanese could have easily wiped out the carriers

I don't wish to interfere in the American side of things, but it occurs to me that, in view of what the American carriers later did to the Japanese, why didn't they?

Were they just being nice, or is there some other reason? I think you should tell us.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 28 Dec 15, 03:44
Nebfer's Avatar
Nebfer Nebfer is offline
Captain
United_States
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Titusville
Posts: 781
Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99] Nebfer is on the path to success [1-99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dracoco View Post
I much rather have 1 long range gun, 3 medium range & 3 very quick firing short range guns in different calibers than have to waste 6" shells on small ships & have to wait until a DD or cruiser comes within range of the smaller guns to open fire. It's funny how much people over estimate the power of a coastal gun, but think that a single long range gun on a ship is useless.
In general out side of specialist applications single large guns on ships will be ineffective, and that is due in part to how they did their firing solutions (if their on target or not) it's not as easy to adjust your shots with one gun than with more.

According to you you want a single 8 inch gun to deal with Cruisers, that gun will be useless when doing so or do you really think that a single 8 inch gun will be able to deal with a even a light cruiser reliably It can not easily compete with just 4 six inch guns, let alone 6 or more... Heck it's going to be hard pressed to deal with a single destroyer with that gun.

And vs merchant ships it's dead weight as you said thats is not what it's their for, as for range your generally not going to have much if any range advantage with that single 8 inch gun vs typical 6 inch cruisers, not with the typical set up for fire control that merchant cruisers will have.

Land based gun are always more inherently accurate (nothing to heave up and down), and in general come with more than one to a battery so your rarely going to see single guns in coastal defenses.



Quote:
The RN can do nothing in the English & St. George's Channels with axis planes in the continent, Ireland & in captured airfields & airports in England & Wales & with the axis torpedo boats, DD, subs, cruisers, mines, coastal guns, etc, controlling the area. Hell, OTL even without German torpedo planes in 1940, allied ships took a beating in Norway & France, imagine with torpedo planes in the Channel in 1939. OTL with German air cover, the RN could not even prevent the Channel dash & they had to send mighty fleets just to supply Malta with heavy losses because of a few planes in Sardinia & Sicily, despite the narrows of Tunisia being much wider than the Strait of Dover.
Only in your dreams, half the stuff you want to happen will never work out that way due to the real people not being idiots (even though they would seem like it to you, what you think is being reasonable is them being idiots), not to mention doing a lot of what you want would be tipping off the opponents of the Axis.

Heck I doubt the UK will be at peace with Germany when you want to pull your little stunt (to much stuff going on for them not to be).

S-boats are more of a nuisance, their not going to stop a major attack by themselves, and the Luftwaffe is not going to be equipped to deal with them in 1940 if they have the planes or training then it's going to be a smaller group, or the luftwaffel as a whole will suffer in it's main job that being to bomb land targets to support the Heer, as your pulling regular units into a more dedicated role of anti shipping strikes.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 28 Dec 15, 04:12
BF69's Avatar
BF69 BF69 is offline
General of the Forums
Australia
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5,640
BF69 has earned the respect of all [900] BF69 has earned the respect of all [900]
BF69 has earned the respect of all [900] BF69 has earned the respect of all [900] BF69 has earned the respect of all [900] BF69 has earned the respect of all [900] BF69 has earned the respect of all [900] BF69 has earned the respect of all [900] BF69 has earned the respect of all [900]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsar View Post
I'm glade I'm not the only one who feels that way. I was scrolling through the seemingly endless post and I decided to not even bother reading it .
I actually got bored just scrolling. Has anyone read through the whole lot? Anything new, or just more ways in which the evil Allies fall victim to the brilliant & glorious 3rd Reich and their bestest buddies in Tokyo.
__________________
Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 28 Dec 15, 09:12
dmf01's Avatar
dmf01 dmf01 is offline
Brigadier General
Russia
5 Year Service Ribbon Best Pin-Up Of World War II 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Perm
Posts: 2,486
dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500]
dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500] dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500] dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500] dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500] dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500] dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500] dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500] dmf01 is a jewel in the rough [500]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dracoco View Post
How about using their massive resources to actually win the war before Italy joins Germany & the USSR & US win the war for the allies?

Look at the thread where the allies do not declare war, but prepare to occupy Denmark (including a Polish divison) so soon as Germany invades Poland & Britain actually gives Poland a few planes (Swordfish, etc,)

There are plenty of threads where Britain actually wins (instead of blundering for years, wasting its economy & 30 billion dollars of L-L and thousands of Indians, Aussies, Canadians, etc,) You just are too lazy to look for them.

How about a thread in which the allies defeat ridiculously weak Japan in Java in months (instead of having to ruin the American economy building over 100 carriers & a huge number of BB, CA, subs, planes, etc, & losing a lot of men invading useless islands for years) by deploying their numerous BB, the forces from the untenable PI, etc, to the invaluable, distant from Japan & most defensible place, which they know is certainly going to be attacked. Instead of keeping a huge fleet just waiting to be destroyed in PH by a nation with an industry 100 times weaker than that of the allies? Look for it instead of whining.

The allies won despite astonishing incompetence & waste only because they had a lot more industry & people & the axis did not coordinate their efforts & resources at all. However, had the allies had good generals & admirals, they would have promptly swept aside the axis' relatively weak forces (which were used far more competently to kick the allies' butt for years).
Yes, I never heard of such threads that you're talking about. Actually, I'm not too much into what-ifs, so, there's no whining, just curiosity. The only thread that I remember that was dubiously anti-Axis started with proposition that Hitler died early in the war. Thanks for your post, still it looks to me that one-sided advantage is compulsory in AT.
__________________
"Keep Calm. Use Less X's"
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #41  
Old 28 Dec 15, 10:02
Dracoco's Avatar
Dracoco Dracoco is offline
First Lieutenant
Mexico
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Morelia
Posts: 572
Dracoco has a little shameless behaviour in the past [-1 to -99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doveton Sturdee View Post
If Graf Spee had sent such a plane aloft to confirm that the incoming ships were cruisers, she could have easily sunk them one at a time, before they came within range of their guns & ganged up on her.

It is a shame that you don't seem to know anything about the Battle of the River Plate, or you would not post such nonsense ( Sorry, belay that, of course you would ).

Had Spee's warship recognition not been so poor, she could have attempted to avoid action, but the cruisers had a significant speed advantage, could have chosen whether to risk an action or simply shadow Spee, and Harwood's tactics were designed to split Spee's inadequate fire power anyway.

How exactly do you propose that Spee could have 'easily sunk' the cruisers one at a time? Do you assume that Harwood's squadron would simply have waited passively whilst Spee sank it simply because they were British and therefore stupid?

Rather like your earlier ludicrous assertion that merchant raiders armed with a single eight inch gun could potter around the oceans sinking cruisers and destroyers at will, all you are doing is demonstrating that, along with much else, you are quite astoundingly ignorant of how naval warfare in WW2 actually worked.

The Japanese could have easily wiped out the carriers

I don't wish to interfere in the American side of things, but it occurs to me that, in view of what the American carriers later did to the Japanese, why didn't they?

Were they just being nice, or is there some other reason? I think you should tell us.
Graf Spee had a significant range & armor advantage over the 2 cruisers which she encountered. She could have opened fire long before the enemy. Moreover, at extreme range the lower impact velocity makes the 28 cm more likely to explode in the ship, instead of going through & through. Even if Graf Spee came within firing range of the heavy cruiser, at extreme range of the 8" guns, Graf Spee's armor was invulnerable.

A very few Japanese carrier planes caused Lexington's demise & damaged Yorktown twice, causing its loss to a sub the second time (despite the USN carriers having intelligence regarding Japanese plans & more planes than the Japanese in either battle). Anybody but a British naval expert can see that the carriers from 6 IJN CVs can easily wipe out 2 separate USN CVs completely unprepared for combat (caught with their pants down). The only reason they did not was that Nagumo chose to run away with the strongest carrier force the IJN would ever assemble, forcing the IJN carriers to be lost piecemeal in battles with much better odds for the USN than those in Hawaii on 7 Dec, 1941.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 28 Dec 15, 10:09
BobTheBarbarian's Avatar
BobTheBarbarian BobTheBarbarian is offline
Colonel
United_States
Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C 
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 1,955
BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200] BobTheBarbarian is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dracoco View Post
Yet again, we are talking about 7 May, 1939, not 1941. Hawaii was a joke. Even in 1941 it was a joke, as proved by the raid. The Japanese could have easily wiped out the carriers & occupied Kauai, etc, if they wanted & blasted PH into ashes or easily invaded it form the opposite side of the guns, as they did in Sngapore. Coastal guns were even more useless in 1939 than BB, too bad You haven't noticed.
The Japanese had no idea where the American carriers were and did not want to waste fuel looking for them. For all they knew the USN already had a fix on their location and could be preparing an ambush. Nagumo's responsibility to preserve his forces was stronger than his desire to risk serious losses by going on a wild goose chase after his objective of crippling the Pacific Fleet had already been achieved.

From the Japanese standpoint the American carriers would be in no position to interfere with the coming southern offensive and could be destroyed later anyway. They had no way of knowing what would happen to them at Midway thanks to a combination of good intelligence work and sheer luck on the part of the US.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 28 Dec 15, 10:10
Dracoco's Avatar
Dracoco Dracoco is offline
First Lieutenant
Mexico
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Morelia
Posts: 572
Dracoco has a little shameless behaviour in the past [-1 to -99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebfer View Post
In general out side of specialist applications single large guns on ships will be ineffective, and that is due in part to how they did their firing solutions (if their on target or not) it's not as easy to adjust your shots with one gun than with more.

According to you you want a single 8 inch gun to deal with Cruisers, that gun will be useless when doing so or do you really think that a single 8 inch gun will be able to deal with a even a light cruiser reliably It can not easily compete with just 4 six inch guns, let alone 6 or more... Heck it's going to be hard pressed to deal with a single destroyer with that gun.

And vs merchant ships it's dead weight as you said thats is not what it's their for, as for range your generally not going to have much if any range advantage with that single 8 inch gun vs typical 6 inch cruisers, not with the typical set up for fire control that merchant cruisers will have.

Land based gun are always more inherently accurate (nothing to heave up and down), and in general come with more than one to a battery so your rarely going to see single guns in coastal defenses.




Only in your dreams, half the stuff you want to happen will never work out that way due to the real people not being idiots (even though they would seem like it to you, what you think is being reasonable is them being idiots), not to mention doing a lot of what you want would be tipping off the opponents of the Axis.

Heck I doubt the UK will be at peace with Germany when you want to pull your little stunt (to much stuff going on for them not to be).

S-boats are more of a nuisance, their not going to stop a major attack by themselves, and the Luftwaffe is not going to be equipped to deal with them in 1940 if they have the planes or training then it's going to be a smaller group, or the luftwaffel as a whole will suffer in it's main job that being to bomb land targets to support the Heer, as your pulling regular units into a more dedicated role of anti shipping strikes.
A 7 or 8" gun can easily deal with a light cruiser if it starts firing at 30 km. Actually, had Graf Spee had one such gun when she opened fire at closer range, it would have been more likely to sink a cruiser than the 28 cm guns, because the smaller shell would explode inside the ship, instead of going through.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 28 Dec 15, 10:19
Dracoco's Avatar
Dracoco Dracoco is offline
First Lieutenant
Mexico
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Morelia
Posts: 572
Dracoco has a little shameless behaviour in the past [-1 to -99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobTheBarbarian View Post
The Japanese had no idea where the American carriers were and did not want to waste fuel looking for them. For all they knew the USN already had a fix on their location and could be preparing an ambush. Nagumo's responsibility to preserve his forces was stronger than his desire to risk serious losses by going on a wild goose chase after his objective of crippling the Pacific Fleet had already been achieved.

From the Japanese standpoint the American carriers would be in no position to interfere with the coming southern offensive and could be destroyed later anyway. They had no way of knowing what would happen to them at Midway thanks to a combination of good intelligence work and sheer luck on the part of the US.
The purpose of the raid was to destroy the carriers with a concentrated force. Much easier than it would be later when they struck unannounced & accompanied by the carriers deployed fromthe Atlantic & coming out of the shipyards.

You don't waste fuel waiting at anchor in completely empty Lahaina Roads, etc, for the carriers after destroying the fuel farms, etc, you do waste a lot of fuel & fire power sailing all the way from Japan to Hawaii with BB, etc, to damage a few outdated ships where they can be repaired & leaving the carriers, fuel tanks, docks & submarine base unscathed.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 28 Dec 15, 12:08
Doveton Sturdee's Avatar
Doveton Sturdee Doveton Sturdee is offline
Colonel
England
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tewkesbury
Posts: 1,995
Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200] Doveton Sturdee is walking in the light [200]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dracoco View Post
Graf Spee had a significant range & armor advantage over the 2 cruisers which she encountered. She could have opened fire long before the enemy. Moreover, at extreme range the lower impact velocity makes the 28 cm more likely to explode in the ship, instead of going through & through. Even if Graf Spee came within firing range of the heavy cruiser, at extreme range of the 8" guns, Graf Spee's armor was invulnerable.

A very few Japanese carrier planes caused Lexington's demise & damaged Yorktown twice, causing its loss to a sub the second time (despite the USN carriers having intelligence regarding Japanese plans & more planes than the Japanese in either battle). Anybody but a British naval expert can see that the carriers from 6 IJN CVs can easily wipe out 2 separate USN CVs completely unprepared for combat (caught with their pants down). The only reason they did not was that Nagumo chose to run away with the strongest carrier force the IJN would ever assemble, forcing the IJN carriers to be lost piecemeal in battles with much better odds for the USN than those in Hawaii on 7 Dec, 1941.
Graf Spee had a significant range & armor advantage over the 2 cruisers which she encountered.

As I said before, you really should buy a book, which might at least enable you to avoid the egregious errors you continually make.

In fact, Graf Spee opened fire at 0618, at a range of 20000 yards, which was about her maximum for effective shooting. The (according to you) outranged Exeter opened fire at 0620, and the two light cruisers at 0622. Incidentally, Graf Spee encountered three cruisers, not two.

Both Graf Spee & Exeter obtained straddles with their third salvo. Despite your conviction that Graf Spee was invulnerable, she was actually hit by three 8 inch shells, all of which penetrated the hull, and one, alarmingly for Langsdorff, the main armoured belt. I suppose I really should not have expected you to know this or, given your rather unique view of the world, should not have expected you to take any notice of it.

Furthermore, all three cruisers had at least an eight knot speed advantage over Graf Spee, whose engines after her long cruise were not in the best of health, and had Harwood so chosen he could have refused battle and carried out the traditional role of a cruiser force in such a situation, that of a shadower, much as Wake-Walker did with Norfolk & Suffolk during the Bismarck action.

In the event, Harwood took a calculated gamble, in the hope that he could inflict sufficient damage upon Graf Spee so as to make it impossible for her to return to Germany. Harwood was successful. By the end of the battle, Graf Spee had suffered at least 18-20 serious hits, but even more importantly had used up most of her ammunition in largely ineffectual firing at Ajax & Achilles.

With the arrival of an additional, eight gunned, heavy cruiser (Cumberland), there was a very real possibility that should Graf Spee attempt a break out, she would find herself out of main calibre ammunition and under fire from a vessel whose shells could, despite your blithe (and blind) conviction to the contrary, penetrate her armour.

I am sorry to post like this as I appreciate that in your world any British or American victories are the results of flukes, whilst German victories (if you can actually find many of any significance at sea) down to innate Germany superiority, but I regret to inform you that the Battle of The River Plate was not a German triumph.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Please bookmark this thread if you enjoyed it!


Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:12.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.