[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 68 KB, 744x463, 05_hms_warspite_entering_valletta.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
15786862 No.15786862 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

This motherfucker right here, this motherfucker blew the fucking shit out of Germans.

Why is it not a part of Flames of War?

>> No.15786874


Because it's part of Victory at Sea?

>> No.15786876

Flames of war can't handle awesome of that magnitude.

>> No.15786910
File: 60 KB, 740x480, h60418.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Best ship of all the war reporting in.

>> No.15786919

Don't even go there

>> No.15786955
File: 249 KB, 400x311, Best-Top-Stock-War-Ship-Scenary-room-TRENDSETTERS-stock1387-large.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

A google images search for "best ship of the war" comes up with pic related first, so there.

>> No.15786967

Not as good as the Hood.

>> No.15786985

It didn't sink in its first engagement, or at all, so its already infinity times better than the Hood.

>> No.15787002

It never fought in an actual engagement.

The Hood was a symbol of supreme maritime power.

>> No.15787019


Unfortunately, we're not talking about your fancy fantastical alternate reality where the Hood got all the bells and whistles the bluebloods wanted.

And if we were, then it would likely have to compete with the Lion class (also cancelled) Game/Set/Match.

>> No.15787022
File: 192 KB, 744x1206, 03_hms_king_george_v.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You don't fuck with the Empire, or else we will hunt you down and pound you to fucking razorblades.

Lookin at you Bismark.

>> No.15787032

It is the perfect symbol for the decline of the Royal Navy, which has sunk to irreverence.

>> No.15787037


Battleship bombardment rules.


>> No.15787043

The Hood was basically the best ship in the North Atlantic.

>> No.15787046
File: 122 KB, 410x410, 1286767900232.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Oh Goddamnit. This never ends well.

>> No.15787068

No, it wasn't even the best RN ship. The Hood was an outdated interwar battlecruiser that turned out to be a waste of money. Get over it.

>> No.15787069

In terms of brutal looking ships, the Royal Navy ruled supreme. Everyone else had streamlined designs. The RN ships...

Honey, KGV don't give a shit.

>> No.15787078

The "Best" ship in the North Atlantic was a fucking type VIIc U-boat.

The Hood was the usual RN clusterfuck of moronic ammo storage practices, non-existent safety procedures and questionable ship design decisions.

>> No.15787081

Severely damaged the Eugen, crippled the Bismark, all by itself.

Hood took on two ships, and punched above it's weight class.

>> No.15787099
File: 40 KB, 1127x669, sss44.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Gentlemen, this is the Terror.

A Destroyer with 14inch guns. Motherfucker don't take no shit from anyone.

>> No.15787105
File: 128 KB, 600x339, Fairey_Swordfish.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

No, pic related crippled the Bismarck. The only thing the Hood did was get in the way and slow it down.

>> No.15787118

Ammo Storage and Safety procedures are not the Hood's fault. The ship design was solid, as proven by it's service life, speed, versatility, and sister ships.

>> No.15787119


With support form a brand-new KGV battleship, which also got it's shit kicked in the engagement.

"Severely Damaged" is a pissant way of saying "inflicted a few hits that didn't effectively hinder it", at least in regards to the Prinz. Which, incidentally, is actually the ship that sank the Hood, despite the popular version of the story being that the Bismarck did it.

>> No.15787128

The tons of water flooding the Bismarck slowed it down, the swordfish just put it in a shooting gallery, it would have been caught by the RN even if the swordfish hadn't hit the rudder.

>> No.15787140

>as proven by it's service life, speed, versatility, and sister ships.

Good god, that was such a fucking subtle way of taking the piss I almost missed it. Good show.

>> No.15787153

That this is a Terror, who decided to stick guns that big on a freaking destroyer?

>> No.15787157

The PoWl had non-funtional guns, the Hood did the entire fight essentially. And the Eugen didn't sink the Hood. The Hood took out the bismark radar, took out it's spotting post, took out most of the bow. The Bismarck would have sunk in the next few minutes had the Hood not taken a lucky shot.

As it was, the Hood killed the Bismarck by ending it's patrol, so it couldn't break out into the Atlantic to harass convoys.

>> No.15787176

>Who decided

Captain who wanted to fucking END ANY KRAUT WHO LOOKED AT HIM SIDEWAYS!

>> No.15787186

The Hood didn't even score a hit on the Bismarck. All the damage inflicted on it was caused by the Prince of Wales.

>> No.15787192

>it would have been caught by the RN even if the swordfish hadn't hit the rudder.

Arguable. Lütjens had managed to successfully dick around the Atlantic back with the Battlecruiser raiding party, and managed to get back to Brest despite the turbines on the Scharnhorsts operating like a bitch the whole time.

Granted, the Brits did consider the Bismarck a higher-priority target, but even so, search methods were unreliable at best, the weather was hardly ideal, and many of the instances where the Bismarck was found came down to sheer bloody luck.

>> No.15787196
File: 218 KB, 744x1436, 03_hms_nelson.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Sorry chaps, I'm a bit late, what with my more refined cruising speed and all that. Wouldn't want to come off all lary like those yank ships, bit vulgar if I do say.

>> No.15787214

German propaganda lies. The Hood (and the PoWl crew confirms) scored numerous waterline hits on the Bismark, near the bow. 2 Turret hit the Bismarck 5+ times.

>> No.15787215

And that damage was minimal, three hits total. One hit above the waterline, one hit on the torpedo belt which did minimal damage, and a third hit the float plane catapult without exploding.

>> No.15787226

Again, German propaganda.

>> No.15787237

Why do so many people still get a hard on for the Hood? It never accomplished anything in its 20 year career.

>> No.15787243


So glad you are here bro!

>> No.15787261

Actually, it can be argued that the Hood was highly effective, it quelled rebellions just by showing up in ports of the empire. No other ship in the world could do that, no other ship had the fearsome aura of the Hood. The Bismark actively AVOIDED fighting the Hood, only engaging as a last resort.

>> No.15787266

Thread was started by a Hoodfag who's butthurt that his favorite ship got its shit kicked in three minutes into battle.

>> No.15787272

The Tirpitz achieved nothing in it's 3 year career. The Yamato achieved even less.

Hood was an operational warship that flew the flag of Empire and ruled the waves.

>> No.15787274

The Hood?
That piece of junk can't even keep the Mollys from harassing the BMM, let alone do battle with Rheinland vessels.

>> No.15787278

OP posted the Warspite, not the Hood. Learn to profile.

>> No.15787280

>Implying that other nations haven't been using naval power to intimidate weaker nations into oblivion since the time they could field a warship.

>Implying that the Bismarck didn't try to avoid engaging ANY Allied warship that could stand a chance at defending itself, since it was meant to be a commerce raider.

>> No.15787288

>The PoWl had non-funtional guns
Only for the latter half of the fight. It carried the RN right up until it's firing systems went out.

>took out most of the bow.
complete fucking exaggeration. It holed the bow, sure. Flooded a few small compartments and caused a ton of fuel oil to leak, but it was still essentially seaworthy.

>And the Eugen didn't sink the Hood.
Plenty of evidence to indicate it did.
First: The Hood was carrying a large amount of Rocket Ammunition for her AA rocket mountings, stowed in light steel lockers under the boat deck, which was the site of the fire caused by 8-in shellfire from the Prinz Eugen.

Second, four out of the seven shells from the Bismarck which hit the Prince of Wales did not explode, and the remaining three detonated only partially.

Third, the aft magazines in the Hood had been surrounded by additional 4-in AA ammo stowage *Outside* of the armoured barbettes.

Therefore: If the fire amidships did not detonate the above-water torpedo tubes, and there is no direct evidence of this, and if the Bismarck's shells were defective, as we know they were, then the most tenable conclusion is that the Hood was sunk by a fire that spread tot eh 4-in Ammunition below and thereafter to the aft 15-in Magazines. Stemming from this, the probability is that the Hood was sunk by the results of 8-in shellfire from the Prinz Eugen hitting the decks, and not from a 15-in Bismarck shell penetrating the armour.

Further going from this, if the ammunition was stored in such a vulnerable manner and ignited so easily, it also stands to reason that such a catastrophic occurrence was highly likely, and not just "a wild fluke".

>> No.15787291

Okay, then the thread was hijacked by a Hoodfag. It's pretty much what every WWII navy thread in /tg/ devolves into.

>> No.15787306

I understand why people would be in love with the thing at the time. You think these views would have been crushed after the ship was so easily sunk in its first real engagement.

The British have better ships to masturbate to, why do some of them still latch onto the Hood?

>> No.15787315

>complete fucking exaggeration. It holed the bow, sure. Flooded a few small compartments and caused a ton of fuel oil to leak, but it was still essentially seaworthy.

5 degrees down angle on the bow is not seaworthy. Reduced running speed for fear of sinking from flooding is not seaworthy. They were running the pumps full bore to keep it up. Noted by many bismarck crew members.

>> No.15787317


Ballard's 1989 expedition to the Bismarck's wreck decided that from the visible damage, the German figures of the Hood engagement was more accurate. Not to mention the numerous and consistent accounts from the many, many Bismarck survivors.

>> No.15787323

Fire...in the Hood!

>> No.15787324

Mostly because there was only one Bismarck and if they lost it, then they wouldn't be able to tie down parts of the RN by just existing.

Because idiots insist on always claiming it's a crappy shit even when it isn't.

>> No.15787332
File: 313 KB, 1250x685, Yamato.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Why would these fags waste their time arguing about a shit ship when Japan clearly had the most superiorist ship ever.

>> No.15787337

1. Awesome name
2. Awesome reputation
3. Largest Surface Combat Vessel ever built by the UK
4. Undeserved "bad ship" press due to a lucky shot.
5. British love an underdog
6. Despite being outgunned, outarmoured, and outranged, the Hood sailed into combat, and lashed out in the finest naval tradition.

>> No.15787338

Indeed, the shot was on target and did notable damage. But which ship sunk?

>> No.15787344

What you need is a fast battleship with aircraft launching capabilities and I mean not just a scout aircraft or two but a wing of fighters and a wing of dive bombers.

>> No.15787346

When it was first launched it was a very nice ship, but for WWII it was mediocre at best. It was scheduled for a refit, but then it sunk.

>> No.15787353

Technically both of them.

But the Hood gets the bad press because of a lucky shot, which isn't really fair to the men who served on her, or the ship itself.

>> No.15787355


No. Overarmed, overbuilt, and overhyped.

Complete lack of useful radar FCS, and the shortcomings in its internal structure render it inferior to its contemporaries in the Iowa-class. Not to mention that it was such an insane fuel hog as to defy belief.

>> No.15787362

>British love an underdog
They sure did love all those underdogs in their history, didn't they?

>> No.15787364


>Okay, then the thread was hijacked by a Hoodfag. It's pretty much what every WWII navy thread in /tg/ devolves into.

Stupid thing to have a hard-on for

takes all sorts I suppose

>> No.15787366
File: 57 KB, 640x480, yamato.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

At least it got better on its second life.

>> No.15787368

The Hood didn't even score that hit. It was the PoW that did it.

Plus, the biggest gain Britain got out of that fight was that it forced Bismarck to abort its commerce raiding mission and retreat back to port for repairs.

>> No.15787370

Outranged the Iowa, was faster, and more armour. It took three carrier air wings to sink it.

>> No.15787371


Though the whole Battlecruiser concept was flawed from the start, and only ever made any headway due to fucking Beatty and his madcap ideas throwing millions of pounds worth of RN funding at the concept.

That said, if the Hood had received an upgrade to bring her up to late-war "Fast Battleship" specs, she would have been quite a nice ship.

>> No.15787380
File: 62 KB, 1000x800, overcon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

it sailed out and turned into a deathtrap for its crew because it was fatally flawed, and a poor design, deal with it

>> No.15787388

What you need is a goddamn Carrier. Combining the two is just completely idiotic.

>> No.15787398

On paper, it was a very fucking scary thing to go up against, but in the actual war it didn't achieve much other than look really scary. One of the few times it had the chance to do something in battle, it was sent running like a scared little girl by a small squadron of cruisers and destroyer escorts.

>> No.15787399
File: 240 KB, 1011x598, Ise1944.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The Japanese played around with this concept, this of course was when their entire military was insane.

>> No.15787400

The British navy had it's origins as sailing out from small coves and firebombing unsuspecting ships.

it continued that tradition of ambushing enemy ships in harbour and blowing the ever loving shit out of them. Nelson was different, he actively engaged at Trafalgar, but even then, he defied convention and took out (the arguably larger) French and Spanish fleets.

The British love the underdogs.

>> No.15787402

>Outranged the Iowa

Maximum range only. Iowa had a better effective range due to its fire control systems and superior radar.

>was faster

LOL no. The Iowa-class battleships were the fastest battleships ever built, despite their size.

>more armour

Yes, but not enough to make a difference when the Yamato can't hit shit but the Iowa can rain down shells on it all day.

>> No.15787412

There was no actual engagement between the Iowa and Yamato.

Simulations give the Yamato the edge. And it was faster.

>> No.15787414


My Fucking french arse it was faster. The Yamato did 27 and a half knots at best. The Iowas could hit 33.

Not to mention the 18-in guns, while large and long-ranged, had fucking awful ballistics that made them painfully inaccurate, and lacked a decent Radar-guided Fire control system, which the Iowas did have, thereby giving the Iowas the *effective* range advantage, which is what really matters.

Armour also doesn't mean a great deal when the Yamato had a badly flawed internal structure. It was a veritable nightmare for damage control teams. Not to mention the fact that the Iowas had a whole bunch of advantages in that regard, like having the engine and machinery rooms made entirely out of fucking expensive Non-splintering steel. Cost-wise, it's insane, but it's also fucking effective.

>> No.15787422
File: 13 KB, 280x160, e032308a_thumbnail_4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]



>> No.15787424

It's funny, all the Americans posting at the moment clearly only know their naval history from wikipedia and the discovery channel, and it really shows.

>> No.15787426
File: 28 KB, 633x475, LOL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Somebody got the 27 vs. 33 knot thing before I did, but these "simulations" wouldn't be Battlestations: Pacific, would they?

>> No.15787433

Did you not see my image?
Also, if they love burning ships in harbor, I'm guessing they just love the Dutch, amirite?

>> No.15787437
File: 8 KB, 191x188, tumblr_lmudz4UTlc1qlqloto1_250.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The only thing the American navy did properly in the Pacific was submarine warfare.

There entire surface fleet was full of tards and morons.

>> No.15787446

Had better guns, but not better aiming system. Iowa class could hit 35 knots, Yamato maxed at 27 due to its much larger girth. Part of that girth was its extra armor.
If it came to a slugfest, the Iowa would have the advantage at peak range due to its maneuverability. But once visual contact would be established, the Yamato would dominate that fight.
Still, the Yamato went down to air power because the dumb Japs sent it out alone to go beach itself. The idea was to set it up as an unsinkable gun platform whose field of fire would cover a vital straight the Americans would have to sail through to get closer to Japan.

>> No.15787448
File: 24 KB, 461x403, Itwasaliens.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

They didn't even have a submarine fleet.

>> No.15787450

I hope that when they run out of land based warriors, they do idiotic naval battles.


And the Hood still manages to lose.

>> No.15787454

Close but not quite. It only had one real tard/moron, unfortunately he was the guy in charge of the whole damn fleet.

>> No.15787456

>There entire surface fleet was full of tards and morons.
Oh, my apologies, I would've been more respectful if I'd known we had a veteran in this thread.

>> No.15787469


>It took three carrier air wings to sink it.

Which was the entire fucking point of the Pacific war. Carriers make Battleships obsolete, and Iowa vs Yamato wank pointless.

The only reason Reagan brought 4 of the Iowas out of mothballs in the 80s was his carriers couldn't be everywhere, and raining 16in shells on Beirut was slightly cheaper than dropping bombs on it via F-14.

>> No.15787470

Hell, even within visual contact the Yamato would be straddling like a motherfucker for a good while. And with its internal layout and spaces being as well-designed as they were, it'd probably survive the odd 18-inch hit long enough to cripple the Yamato.

>> No.15787474

This is what History channel watchers actually believe.

>> No.15787478


>> No.15787487 [DELETED] 
File: 45 KB, 750x600, 750px-Baldeale.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>mfw I'd watch it

>> No.15787488

No, Iowa was a deathtrap.

>> No.15787492

Say what?

The US Submarine Service was a highly capable force that consistently kicked the shit out of the IJN.

>> No.15787496

Bullshit. Iowa's only real weakness was that its torpedo defenses weren't as good as they could've been (and they were still good, mind) because the new hull plan they used for it turned out to not be all that great (ironically the North Carolina class had better torpedo resistance than the Iowas).

>> No.15787498


33, actually.

>> No.15787499

No, they sent out most of the Imperial Navy out with the Yamato, unfortunately by that point that was like ten ships.

>> No.15787524

Sorry, you're wrong. The "American" Submarine fleet was actually underwater UFO's.

>> No.15787531

Sorry, 35 was the theoretical max while empty. 33 was the typical maximum. The USS New Jersey did manage to hit 35.2 in 1968... but that's not part of the discussion.

>> No.15787536

I think we can all agree that the French Richelieu was one of the best looking ships of the War.

>> No.15787567


>> No.15787634

Flower Corvette was best ship of the War.

>> No.15787641


>> No.15787657


What shit right where?

>> No.15787713
File: 5 KB, 323x156, typevii.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

See you in Silent Hunter 5, bitch.

>> No.15787722
File: 383 KB, 1300x711, Monitor_vs_Warrior_by_Radojavor.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This is a picture of the U.S.S. Monitor fighting the H.M.S. Warrior.
This picture is drawn to take place at ideal engagement range for the Monitor, where its profile is such that most of the Warrior's cannons cannot possibly score a hit on her.
The Monitor is drawn in such a way that one is lead to believe that her 20" Dahlgrens are using full charge instead of the half-charge bullshit that saved the C.S.S. Virginia's life.


(It's the H.M.S. Warrior, because her superior British steel is folded over a million times).

>> No.15787755

Do you work for Deadliest warrior?

>> No.15787765


One issue with the picture, given the rain and the speed at which it is depicted moving, the water is far, far too calm for that kind of weather.

The Monitor in any sort of rough sea? Doomed.

That said the Monitor was a shite concept for the time, and that exact, specific situation is really the only one it's remotely viable in. The Warrior, as well as any other conventionally-structured ironclad is a better ship in every regard.

>> No.15787777

Any wave over a foot high is a danger to the monitor.

>> No.15787782

Not to mention with its turret it can literally sail circles around its target and still shoot the shit out of it regardless of alignment.

>> No.15787789

>the Monitor was a shite concept for the time,
The Monitor was a SWEDISH idea.
You know those vikings always make the good stuff.

>> No.15787790

Yep. But hey, it was invented by a fucking Swede. Would you expect anything else?

>> No.15787809

My Krappe(c) table from Ikea would beg to differ.

>> No.15787830

No love for the Nelsol--er, Nelson?

>> No.15787845
File: 92 KB, 744x490, 02_hms_nelson_1939.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.15787857

Are you actually implying that the Monitor, with it's pathetic 9-knot speed, could actually run rings around any contemporary ironclad?

Hell, even the Warrior, which was several years older, could hit 14 knots easily.

>> No.15787868


>> No.15787876

Leave it to the British to make such a stupefyingly ugly ship.

>> No.15787877
File: 203 KB, 720x529, hunley.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]





>> No.15787897




>> No.15787903

The danger with that analysis is that the Iranians win.

>> No.15787912

>20" Dahlgrens

The Monitor used 11" Dahlgren smoothbore cannon, with bloody round shot of all things.

Fact, gentlemen. They are somewhat important.

>> No.15787919

That entire exercise was a massive display of retardation on both sides.

>> No.15787937

Not on Deadliest fucking Warrior.

Get with the meme, man.

>> No.15787950


The Hunley sinks and perhaps blows itself up with its own torpedo spar.

The Monitor catches some light waves from the explosion, takes on water and sinks.

Everyone dies, no-one wins. Except the genius who sold tickets to this clusterfuck of a battle.

>> No.15787952

I recall reading that the motorboat side was saying that it was perfectly reasonable to assume that they could fire full sized anti-ship cruise missiles from motorboats that were about as big as the missiles themselves. Then when that was ruled to be ridiculous people started saying that the thing was rigged and the USN is doomed.

>> No.15787981


You left out the part where the Bayou St. John catches fire five seconds after leaving shore and the crew jumps out, and that third one turns upside down and everyone dies for some fucking reason or another.

Another glorious victory for America.

>> No.15787994


It was perfectly reasonable as long as you never intended for any of the boat crews to survive the launch.

And the "game is rigged" cries tend to be more about how the USN arbitrarily stacks the scenarios in its favour every. bloody. time. Instead of doing the sensible thing and preparing for possible disadvantageous situations or worst-case scenarios.

>> No.15787995


What, you don't like rotating turrets?

>> No.15788000

They actually fired weapons that were resonable for the boat size.

>> No.15788011

Yes, Paul Riper, commander of "Fictional Middle Eastern Country" made up his countries capabilities as he went along, including the speed boat cruise missiles.

Now instead of reacting to the situation properly General Peter Pace, commander of the American Fleet, threw a temper tantrum and said Paul wasn't following the rules.

This is what happens when you let Marines command fleets.

>> No.15788012

>God Bless America

Pentagon Wars: Civil War edition

>> No.15788015

>worst case scenario
The worst case scenario is that the navy has to actually fight at all.
If that happens, the entire navy will vanish in a puff of radioactive smoke.
Because if you have the resources to mount a navy, you have the resources to perform a first strike.

>> No.15788026

Wait, so.
That Navy comedy film with Kelsey Grammer was a documentary after all?

>> No.15788041

Pretty much, the US is scared shitless of the Chinese subs, there old models even can evade the us sonar. China surfaced inside a CBG protection ring and waved at the swabbies on the carrier, trollfacing the whole time.

>> No.15788049

Down Periscope, while a comedy, is one of my favourite submarine films, behind only Das Boot and HFTRO. Down Periscope works well as a naval thriller actually. The comedy is a bonus.

>> No.15788070


I remember reading about some US Navy wargames against some fucking Scandinavian country or another, involving Scandinavia's superior diesel subs beating modern Navy equipment. Like, a lot.
I also remember reading that wargames are supposed to mostly be dickwaving contests with rules created to make a predetermined outcome happen in order to justify spending money on elaborate new toys ("hey Mr. President the United States needs new tech to defeat these diesel SUPER-SUBS everyone else is getting!") or to reinforce national pride.
So I don't know whether there's anything to it or not.

>> No.15788108


I remember an internal wargame the US did, USN v. an Iraq expy. The US got their arse handed to them, 4 or 5 times. Each time, the brass would reset and give the OpFor a new restriction, all because they did things like use messengers with time-stamped instructions instead of radio/telecomms, resulting in SILKWORMS FUCKING EVERYWHERE and the USN is now on the bottom.

>> No.15788117


Results invalid due to retardation on both sides.

>> No.15788140


Instead of managing the military as it is, we should just forcibly reset everything so that the entire homosexual population of America runs the entire American Military.

It couldn't possibly be any worse than the way things are now. Plus I'd get to fly airplanes. Zoom! ZOOOM!

>> No.15788142

No, they're not. Getting a diesel close enough is pretty much dumb luck, which is exactly what that incident was.

>> No.15788143

US Navy admirals confirmed for douchebag who shouts "NOT FAIR DO-OVER" any time they lose.

The incident was reviewed by GAO, and Ripper was found to have acted in accordance with verifiable weapon systems and delivery methods.

>> No.15788156

New German SSK is quietest sub ever made, USN cannot track it.

China sub surfacing was not luck, it was a military pissing contest that China won.

>> No.15788166

China also has a 13km 250 knot torpedo. US has nothing at all like that, only the shitty ADCAP.

>> No.15788167


Australia fucks over the US in those exercises too, with the diesel-powered Collins subs beating nuclear subs, sinking carriers and doing the obligatory "Surface right next to the carrier and fucking wave at them" prank.

Come to think of it, The Collins were based off of a Swedish design.

>> No.15788180

Meanwhile Canada replaced the shitty Upholder class with leaky rejects from the Royal Navy that, despite leaking like crazy, still catch on fire.

Fucking British.

>> No.15788186

They were both Marines, I think the exercise would have had much better results if they used actual naval officers.

As for the weapons Riper used, yes, they were capable of doing the level of damage they did. The problem was he made up what he had as he went along. That doesn't excuse the behavior of the idiot they put in charge of the US forces.

>> No.15788200

As mentioned above, The Aussies in their diesel subs manage to fuck over the USN in exercises every. fucking. time.

RIMPAC exercises are basically just an arena for the RAN to troll the fuck out of the Yanks.

>> No.15788208

The "he made it up" excuse was also debunked by GAO, he had a clearly defined battle plan that was not changed in anyway in terms of force composition. He was not obligated under the exercise rules to tell the USN what to expect, and he used his pieces to their strengths. If you want to talk about people making stuff up as they go along,talk to the US navy about refloating one of their CBGs.

>> No.15788209
File: 32 KB, 603x464, zapp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Obviously the problem is that America's military budget is not big enough.
Time to take out your wallet and bend over, it's time to drown our dire enemies in the Neutral nations in wave after wave of our own tax dollars!

>> No.15788213

Perfectly reasonable if you expect the ship to fire from land, not sea. The boats can't even carry the missiles without sinking, never mind the rest.

The sub surfaced as a "My arms are over my head, don't shoot me" gesture.

Those exercises are conducted in a very limited area, which is why subs can get close enough. In a real-world situation, there's thousands of fucking square miles to cover, and the CVBG is faster than the sub, meaning the sub's only real option is to pick a spot and hope the Carrier group stumbles right over it.

Yeah, cause there's no good use for it.

>> No.15788224


Heard they haven't had much against the Thais either. Land exercises involve the Thais not worrying about logistics (need fuel? Buy from gas station in next town) while the Air Farce got shitcanned on day one.

>> No.15788230


I wasn't aware the US had any dollars left in it's treasury, barring those two dimes Bernanke found on the floor the other week.

>> No.15788239


You're implying the Collins gets out of the drydock, of course.

>> No.15788250
File: 17 KB, 300x225, brannigan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


That's defeatist talk, Kif!
Come on! Don't you want to beat China?
We're going to beat China, and we'll do it the American way: with Chinese loans!

>> No.15788254

Subs are faster then Carriers.

>> No.15788261

Most diesel subs, especially the Chinese ones, can only go about 22 knots. A Nimitz class carrier can at least 30.

>> No.15788262


True. Hopefully there'll be less problems when we build our own.
The Lack of trained submariners doesn't help either.

>> No.15788266

ah taking a page from my own classic masterpiece of war and strategery i see.

>> No.15788268 [DELETED] 

mfw most of those military exercises put the US in a horribly disadvantaged and unrealistic position to train them to deal with the situation or to help the other side deal with a specific situation.

Guys I wouldn't put much weight into wargame exercises as proof of anything other than the particular parameters that scenario plays out under.

>> No.15788270

Sure, he had a perfectly defined battle plan, one that relied on weapons that a random middle eastern country would never really have and used them in ways they would never be used.

Surprises like this can happen in a real war though, the Marine General they put in charge of the US fleet refused to adapt his plan and got the fleet sunk. This is the biggest hole in the exercises results, he acted completely unrealistically. Thankfully, they don't put marines in charge of carrier groups in real life.

>> No.15788278
File: 48 KB, 728x157, wtfamIreading.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Subs are faster then Carriers.

>> No.15788285

Except he used the weapons exactly as they would be used.

Remember the Iranians zooming their little MTBs between the carrier fleet ships a year ago? EXACTLY AS RIPPER PREDICTED>

>> No.15788292

Every quoted max speed you see on subs is wrong.

Add about 20~40 percent onto that and you get closer to the truth.

For fuck's sake, the SS United States averaged 35 knots on the surface, and that was in the 50s. 60 years later you really think an SSK sits at 22 knots? Jesus, don't be gullible.

>> No.15788298

That doesn't make a lick of sense

>> No.15788306
File: 34 KB, 742x1151, Projeto_HAUNEBU1c90.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Why is this not a part of Flames of War?

>> No.15788307


chase after carrier sitting on surface?


i may be crazy, but a diesal sub, going fast underwater is going to be noisy as fuck right?

>> No.15788311

He's right, the Akula can easily do 45 knots submerged, and the Seawolf and 688i aren't far behind. The German U-Boat can hit around 40, especially since it has that new prop/powerplant.

>> No.15788316

Electric motor.

No not noisy at all.

>> No.15788328

Your plant makes no noise. That's all well and good, but the water going over your hull 30+ knots sure as hell does.

>> No.15788340

Two of the subs you mentioned are nuclear powered, not diesel.

>> No.15788344

>subs vs. carriers
This argument is so old it makes subs vs. dubs look like virgin territory.

>> No.15788345


Modern subs have compensated for that with various bits of mostly-classified equipment. Some subs in recent years have had a problem with being *too* silent, in that they're visible from the fact that they're even cancelling out the background noise that's supposed to be there.

>> No.15788349

More full retarding. Even assuming those speeds are actually achievable and sustainable (They aren't), you'd be openly announcing your presence with the racket you're making.

>> No.15788360

That's when they are cruising along at like 15 knots; i.e., not that fast. Once you get to 30, guess what, your sub can be as silent as it wants but you cannot quiet down the disturbance you are making in the water.

>> No.15788410
File: 68 KB, 1000x314, 1000px-CB-1_Alaska_Outboard_Profile.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Great concept, or greatest concept?

>> No.15788432

In 1939? They'd have been awesome, or at least useful. In 1944? Not o much.

>> No.15788434


Oh don't even start.

>> No.15788447

>Hey Guy, Guys, you know those battlecruiser things they have been building around the world for awhile, and have had pretty shitty performance? Lets build 6!

>> No.15788481

You mean the British have been having shitty performance. The German battlecruisers seemed to be doing fine for themselves, especially when they were kept out of the battleline and were let to do their jobs.

Which is what the Alaskas were supposed to be. They were a direct counter to a supposed Japanese raider-battlecruiser, and if utilized to hunt down and destroy cruisers (the battlecruiser's actual job) they would have been good at it. Their designation as "Large Cruisers" instead of "Battlecruisers" seems to support that theory.

>> No.15788486
File: 732 KB, 4288x2848, minitz.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Sup broskis how's it hanging? Just blew up a small nation, shit was so cash.

>> No.15788517
File: 248 KB, 740x384, Montana_Class.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Why couldn't they have built at least one of these? Would have killed all those Yamato vs American battleship arguments before they began.

>> No.15788534


And even to be fair to the British Battlecruisers, their awful performance at their big Jutland bash was more a consequence of the Atrocious RN Ammunition handling and storage practices at the time, not to mention stupid shit like the Vaseline-based "stabilizer" in their cordite, which had the opposite effect of making the stuff grossly unstable. Their German counterparts fared much better, as they had less retarded safety practices and solventless cordite.

That, and the preceding and following smaller actions which involved battlecruisers vs. Cruisers and escorts showed Battlecruisers to perform well in their proposed role. Just not in a goddamn battleline.

>> No.15788549


Eh, not so much. Size-wise, sure, but the Montanas had the same proposed speed as the Yamato, and instead of 18-in guns all they added over the Iowas was an extra triple 16-in turret. Frankly, the Iowas would have been far more cost-effective (Oh dear god I can't believe I said that about a battleship).

>> No.15788550

Because they couldn't fit through the Panama Canal...and the only yards capable of building them were on the East Coast. Seriously, that was one of the reasons for cancellation.

>that and carriers having proven themselves vastly more useful by that point

>> No.15788562

Yeah, but it would've had the heaviest total broadside in the Pacific, the same fire control as the Iowas, and enough armor to simply slug it out directly with a Yamato.

I'm a bit biased, though, as I'm from Ohio and one of the proposed Montanas would've been USS Ohio.

>> No.15788565

One day, there will be a game like NavyField again.

And it will be GLORIOUS.

>> No.15788566


Plus it's not like the Kriegsmarine posed an actual threat to America by that point.
At all.

>> No.15788570

>Implying it ever actually did

>> No.15788583
File: 24 KB, 400x365, trollface4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.15788585

The U-Boats? Sure, in 1942 the Battle of the Atlantic was not yet won. On the surface? No way in hell.

>> No.15788586


Again, to be fair, the WW1 Reichsmarine had almost twice as many equivalent ships as the US navy, and most of them were very good modern designs. They could've easily tossed the USN Atlantic fleet if they'd needed to. (Predicated on the British not existing, granted, but that was the case regardless.)

>> No.15788587


Sure they did... wait.
Were they called the Kriegsmarine back in early World War 1 before America started spending on the military again? Because if not, yeah you're right.

>> No.15788595
File: 29 KB, 481x478, Design_A-150.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Please, try Design A-150. AKA the Super Yamato, with 20 inch guns and even more armor.

>> No.15788598


Anyone still play that? If it still exists, maybe we could start up a /tg/ Fleet or something.

>> No.15788605

It still exists, but it is still just as terrible as it ever was.

>> No.15788618

I heard about that fucking thing. Hilarious shit. Didn't the Germans have blueprints for something with even more idiotically huge guns on the board?

>> No.15788626

Lol, thread.

British posters who can't stomach that their flagship had been sunk by the German flagship 70 years after. Get over it, you won the war.

I'll give you a hint though: the Bismarck getting downed by a simple airplane with a torpedo marked the end of the era of large battleships and started the age of air carrier battlegroups.

>> No.15788636


The Germans had a lot of crazy ideas.
Albert Speer canceling that shit left and right probably kept them in the war for three years longer than they should've been.

>> No.15788642
File: 566 KB, 551x527, H_class_%28Richard_Allison%29.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The H-Class Battleship, another of Hitler's wet dream projects. These things would have been larger than modern super carriers, and had eight 20 inch main guns.

>> No.15788652

At some point Hitler probably would have personally ordered the engineers to find some way to strap rockets onto them.

>> No.15788656


Oh Hitler, us so crazy!

>> No.15788678

>Kriegsmarine Planning Office circa 1943
"Is Der Fuehrer letting the surface fleet leave their bases again yet?"
"Are we still getting paid?"
"Fuck it. Lets see how crazy we get before they make us do something useful again."

>Later at Der Fuehrer's office
"Oh, verdammt Hölle."

>> No.15788685


If he'd stuck V1 launchers on the things, they would've been the world's first cruise-missile equipped ships, to a certain point. Which is kinda cool.

I mean, they had various kinds of guided bombs already, so a guided/remote-operated Naval V1 would not be an impossible proposition for ~1945/6.

>> No.15788710


Eh, I might fire it up again for gits and shiggles. See if I can test out the Scharnhorst/Gneisenau with their proposed 15" gun refit, might be fun for a laugh.

>> No.15788711

I kinda love how fucking stupid and crazy Hitler was.

If some German scientist had come to him with some drawn-up plans for a fucking Gundam, he'd have gone for it in a fucking heartbeat.

>> No.15788724


The upside is that since every half-assed idea got rubberstamped, you had some genuine gems in there that would never have gotten funding otherwise. Rocketry, Jet engines, Assault rifles, that sort of thing.

>> No.15788734


Emphasis on the stupid

>assault rifles are for gheys!
>we don't need no stinking long-range bombers!
>Physics? What are you, Jewish?

>> No.15788735
File: 30 KB, 594x396, German_landcruiser-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

And for every great idea, you got ten of pic related. Also, Hitler didn't allow the STG-44 (The Assault Rifle) to go into mass production because he though it looked dumb.

>> No.15788742


The value of these things were more in overall moral boosting, ala: we have the biggest and bestest tanks/guns/ships/etc.

>> No.15788771

By that point in the war the German Military was one of (if not the) most experienced and veteran fighting forces on the face on the planet. And Hitler thought they were idiots.

>Look at this awesome tank! It's the size of a bunker and has the guns of a battleship!
>Uh, Allied aircraft can kill our regular tanks and super tanks just fine. What makes this even less of a sitting duck?

>> No.15788775


Not as stupid as not mobilizing two tank divisions on D-Day because the Führer was asleep and not to be woken up. Till noon. Now that's quality military leadership.

>> No.15788781

Robert Goddard of America.
>Jet engines,
That one's Britain's.
>Assault rifles,
Fedorov's rifles preceded World War 1.

German science: leading from behind.

>> No.15788804


At that point it was all moot efforts anyway. The generals should have killed Hitler and surrendered to western allies and kept the Red Army out of Europe. Would have spared the East Europeans decades of tyranny and tipped the Cold War balance in favour of the West early on.

>> No.15788813


Pffft... in that case we'll claim the invention of the nuclear bomb on German's behalf.

Not to mention Konrad Zuse and his invention of the computer.

>> No.15788814


>implying the West would accept a conditional surrender

Total or nothing, Hitler's death wouldn't have changed a thing. The conspirators were told as much by MI6.

>> No.15788828

Most people who were sane and had any knowledge of what was going on knew how hopeless the situation was, and probably would have gone for an unconditional surrender as early as 1944. It all depends on who takes power though, Hitler surrounded himself with nut jobs.

>> No.15788856

>blew the shit out of the Germans.

That might be why it's not in FoW.

>> No.15788883
File: 13 KB, 650x177, fedorov_avtomat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>atomic bomb
I cited actual production models, try again.

>> No.15788888


Really, once the war started, Germany was in a barely tenable postition. Up until 1942 they might have won, but past then it's all downhill.

Frankly instead of the Molotov/Ribbentrop pact, they should've done a Halifax/Ribbentrop agreement to let them bumfuck the Soviets in exchange for not stirring up shit in Poland/Western Europe anymore.

>> No.15788896

>Design the most awesome rifle of your era
>Chamber it for obscure Japanese rounds

>> No.15788911

>Willingly use Japanese ammo for any purpose whatsoever


>> No.15788932
File: 94 KB, 350x455, 9186206.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.15788935
File: 40 KB, 526x400, Correa-Martians_vs._Thunder_Child.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You're all fucked when Thunder Child get's here.

>> No.15788947

Oh. You've got a ram. How delightfully quaint.

>> No.15788957

Okay, then;
Jet bombers and Helicopters.

Germans got there first.

>> No.15789021

So, can anyone find something that tops this in ridiculousness?

>> No.15789075




>> No.15789106


Oh great, now you've opened the doors for someone to mention that moronic British CV made out of an iceberg.

>> No.15789122
File: 253 KB, 702x761, 1275495239328.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.15789147

Yep, the British wanted a gigantic aircraft carrier made out of ice, because steel was running a bit short.

>> No.15789164



Not really moronic, more deluded

>> No.15789196

>>implying the West would accept a conditional surrender

>Total or nothing, Hitler's death wouldn't have changed a thing. The conspirators were told as much by MI6.

That's what I said though: total surrender to the western allies. I am very certain a deal could have been struck with western allies that would have kept Stalin out of Europe if it had been done in well enough in time. It would have been in their own interest.

>> No.15789206


It was downhill from Oct/Nov 1941 when the Russian rasputina hit. By December 41 the generals knew the war was pretty much lost.

>> No.15789214



>> No.15789222

Speaking of Russia, anybody else heard about a Russian naval report from the war that claimed one of their subs managed to approach Tirpitz and take a shot at her? Apparently the incident is a required bit of reading at Russia's naval schools.

>> No.15789250

This is the single most idiotic concept I have ever heard of

>> No.15789320


When she went out to hunt PQ17, the Tirpitz was shot at twice by K-21, both torps missed. But given the way Soviet submariners of WW2 operated, they probably claimed half the Kriegsmarine was sunk.

>> No.15789596
File: 80 KB, 740x605, 20070327082132!USS_Florida_BB-30.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Yeah, but the USN at the time built some awesome fucking ships and had amazing crews, even if they were a bit slower and outnumbered. (Of course, No RN or Kaisermarine ship of the period could sustain the sort of Abuse the USN engineered their ships to take.)

Then again, the US Navy really didn't give a shit about Europe in the run up to WWI. They built everything for the Pacific, and for duking it out with the IJN. Which is why you had things like USS Florida cruising at full speed for 24 hours, without need of repair.

Also, Dat Cage Mast. Shame they gave them up. It really gave American ships a good look. Unlike the IMO Aesthetic lackings of the IJN, and generic utilitarianism of the European Ships.

>> No.15789622


>IMO Aesthetic lackings of the IJN


>> No.15789630

>Still room on the tripod? Throw on another bridge.

>> No.15789678

The only good looking IJN warships were the Mikasa-class, the Wakamiya and the ones the got from the Russians.

>> No.15789696


Quite true; But you do have to remember that on the whole the Reichsmarine was not the anemic force it was in WW2, which is the stereotype everyone remembers. It was the second-largest navy in the world, had modern designs that were on a par with (or sometimes superior to) their British equivalents, and had a high degree of professionalism.

Now I don't doubt that the USN would've put up a hell of a fight if it came to blows, But the WW1 Reichsmarine would have had the same sort of overwhelming advantage that the USN had over the IJN in WW2.

>> No.15789708


iunno, the Nagato-class was pretty good looking, even post-refit. That and quite a few of their destroyers were pretty cool.

Not, shit like the Fuso-class? Yeah, those were fucking out there.

>> No.15789738




>> No.15789789

Oh hell yeah, the USN would've been outnumbered in Capitolships by the Kaisermarine something like five to one in theatre in mid 1914, since off the top of my head, the only US BBs then in service that were actually worth anything were the South Carolinas (don't laugh,) Delawares, Floridas, Wyomings and New Yorks, for a total of 8 half-decent BBs and two shitty ones, split more or less between the Pacific and Atlantic, versus the Kaisermarines roughly 25 good BCs and BBs in the period. (19BBs including the Deutschland-class, and Six BBs)
The USN still had the advantage of operational flexibility, but that isn't as useful, or really worth that much.

>> No.15789793

>19BBs, Six BCs,
Sorry about any confusion there.

>> No.15789819

I'll also say that despite being fairly sure that an Iowa-class battleship could have taken her down, the Yamato herself was a lovely-looking design. Dem back-swept smokestacks.

>> No.15789916


mmm. Also, the New Mexico's post-refit Clipper bow is the sexist thing ever.

>> No.15789939

Yes it is. Now, Cage Masts and Clipper Bows?
>All my money.jpg

>> No.15790013


While i'm not too fond of the cage masts personally, Stick that Clipper bow on the Dunkerques or Richilieu-class and i'll be in love forever.

>> No.15790034
File: 155 KB, 1145x800, German-BC-'SCHARNHORST'-(1939-1943).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Y'all niggas don't know what a sexy ship is.

>> No.15790055


Scharnhorst is sexy, yes, we established that early on I think.


I'm half tempted to get a 1/700 Scharnhorst kit, and slap on the 15-in Turrets from a same-scale Bismarck/Tirpitz kit and see how it looks. Some kitbash may be required, but what the hell ever.

>> No.15790801


>> No.15791163

That's why Britain had both the Lion, and the N3 Class.

>> No.15791301

They should be in Flames of War.

Mind you, the Flames of War rules would Derp and give the germans an overwhelming naval superiority, all British ships would explode on a 5+, etc.

>> No.15792339

Flames of war is well balanced, I don't know why it bothers you.

>> No.15793090

Both of those ships combined wouldn't have met the displacement of the H-class, you would have to be a giga-idiot to try and make something to match it. Just send in the submarines, naval aviation, or hell just nuke it while its docked.

>> No.15796491

Sorry, the H-Class wasn't even in the same league as the N3, which would rape anything anywhere anytime.

>> No.15796509

Displacement: 62,496 tons
Speed: 30 knots
Armament: 2|2|2|2 16 inch

>> No.15796742

Anyone seen the new "Battleship!" movie trailer!

Aliens! And Pegs

>> No.15796893
File: 83 KB, 1653x507, 1308330527009.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Don't mind me, just being the most retarded design for a warship ever!

>> No.15797012

You mean BEST design?

>> No.15797032


You could literally build a dozen, better ships from the kind of materials you'd have to pour into building that thing. On the bright side, the war in the pacific would have ended in 43, and we'd have an awesome exhibit in pearl harbor.

>> No.15797059
File: 281 KB, 800x1573, HMS_Vanguard_by_dashinvaine.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Age of Sail>WWII

>> No.15797093

...that isn't something they actually considered, is it?

>> No.15797119


What would be some good Age of Sail wargames? I'd love some of dat sail and cannon gaming.

>> No.15797163
File: 461 KB, 1024x768, 2003_master_and_commander_wallpaper_002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Has some Age of Sail.



Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.