Jump to content


Photo

The Chieftain Does History!


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#21 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,469 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 18 July 2017 - 0526 AM

I haven't actually watched the video yet. The poor video team have been slammed the last month putting a series of videos together, and the fall of France video was recorded the day before I went on vacation, so I got no input on the final product (Though I did scan and email some maps to them if they wanted to come up with graphics based on them). However, I do suspect they would have done a shortcut anyway, they are a little understaffed
  • 0

#22 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,366 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 18 July 2017 - 0832 AM

Sometimes, graphics can be overdone and become a distraction.  You did well, Nick; I like the style.


  • 0

#23 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,469 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 18 July 2017 - 1750 PM

The aforementioned James Holland interview. Well, most of it. https://m.youtube.co...h?v=8JcCrQ18-6c
  • 0

#24 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,548 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 19 July 2017 - 0653 AM

Good lecture, manic. :)

 

Though it comes across as an audio odcast with a talking head attached. ;)

 

 

Sometimes, graphics can be overdone and become a distraction.  You did well, Nick; I like the style.

 

While true (I think we have all endured through bad power point slides) a few maps would have helped imho. But as manic said above, when the staff has to take a shortcuts to get the work done and the video released on time...


Edited by Panzermann, 19 July 2017 - 0654 AM.

  • 0

#25 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,359 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 24 July 2017 - 0654 AM

One thing got my attention. More than once he remarked that dive bombers aren’t good at hitting small and moving targets. ??? Japanese, American but also Italian and German DB pilots routinely did hit such targets. So why didn’t German DB pilots in 1940?

 

My money is on: They were not trained for attacks on ships at that time. So they used the regular tactics plus whatever their gut feeling told them. The fate of some of the sunk destroyers hints this could have been the case. Wiki(!) says one DD was sunk inside the port, one had just left and two were sunk right off the coast. The former was a sitting duck, the second wasn’t probably going full speed and the last two might have had limited room to manoeuvre.

 

Just a WAG but a year later at Crete Ju88, Me109 fighter bombers and Ju87 sunk several warship on the high seas. 


  • 0

#26 Adam_S

Adam_S

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 984 posts

Posted 24 July 2017 - 0715 AM

You are correct about the Luftwaffe's lack of anti-shipping training at the time. IIRC they also didn't have any AP bombs that would have been able to deal with British battleships in the English Channel, had it come to that.


  • 0

#27 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,359 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 24 July 2017 - 1332 PM

Speaking off: Didn't one of the R's actually shell a French Channel port full of barges sometime during the BoB?
  • 0

#28 Adam_S

Adam_S

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 984 posts

Posted 24 July 2017 - 1644 PM



Speaking off: Didn't one of the R's actually shell a French Channel port full of barges sometime during the BoB?

 

Yep, HMS Revenge.

 

https://en.wikipedia...MS_Revenge_(06)

 

She spent the summer of 1940 based at Plymouth. Had the Germans invaded, her job would have been to sail up the English Channel and cause as much mayhem as she possibly could.


  • 0

#29 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,180 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 21 December 2017 - 1300 PM

I haven't actually watched the video yet. The poor video team have been slammed the last month putting a series of videos together, and the fall of France video was recorded the day before I went on vacation, so I got no input on the final product (Though I did scan and email some maps to them if they wanted to come up with graphics based on them). However, I do suspect they would have done a shortcut anyway, they are a little understaffed

Where did you get the idea that the Deutschland class armored ship was armored against 8-inc gunfire? I've never read that.


  • 0

#30 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,469 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 21 December 2017 - 1743 PM

Hmm. You're the first person to call me on that in several months, but I am in vacation in Ireland. Remind me to look again in a couple of weeks...
  • 0

#31 Mr King

Mr King

    Major Washout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,614 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of corn syrup and fake breasts
  • Interests:Odds and Ends

Posted 21 December 2017 - 2324 PM

Great video. Thanks. 


  • 0

#32 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,469 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 22 December 2017 - 1436 PM

Huh. Turns out vacation doesn’t matter. If you happen to have the Purnell’s History of the Second World War from 1966, it’s mentioned in the section written by Kapitan zur See Bilding-Maier .
  • 0

#33 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,180 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 22 December 2017 - 1540 PM

I see no immunity vs 8-inch gunfire. Maybe Bilding-Maier was impressed with the narrow main belt of 100mm, but that's no immunity to 8-inch. You should have been more suspicious:

 

obajpv.jpg

 

0FHSKK.jpg


  • 0

#34 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,469 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 23 December 2017 - 0614 AM

Fair enough. I never claimed to be particularly authoritive in ship armor. Graf Spee values don’t seemt that far off from those of New Orleans (Not that I am near my Friedman right now) but I do seem to recall that New Orleans was designed to resist 8” fire, so the claim didn’t seem that outrageous to me.


  • 0

#35 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,180 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 23 December 2017 - 0736 AM

I think the missing term is 'partial protection'  or 'limited protection' against xx caliber. That's the term one reads with the Alaska class large cruisers.

 

I don't have my library with me either, but the New Orleans class was distinguished by protection of turrets and barbettes against 8-inch fire, quite another matter: 8-inch turret faces and 5-inch barbettes (6.5" on San Francisco). I doubt that any USN CA was considered protected against 8-inch fire until the Des Moines class, which was much larger than Adm Graf Spee.

 

Protecting a ship against 8-inch fire is no small measure, for not only turrets, barbettes, magazines, and waterline (center 50%) require vertical protection, but also the decks must be armored against plunging fire. I did not  'call you' on your statement, I asked an honest question, because protection of a ship against a given threat is just not easy and the Kriegsmarine was noteworthy for its rather poor WWII ship designs, as some articles have stated [the post WWI Seeoffizieren receiving preference over the engineers in the between wars period]. So I did wonder where you had found that one. Indeed, Graf Spee had greater displacement and protection than her two sister ships, but there was little deck protection for them and I don't think the 100mm belt on the middle waterline would defeat 8-inch attack either. 

 

When home, I'll look in Erich Groener or Siegfried Breyer for their notes, looking for what was intended. I think CV Graf Zeppelin was designed to resist 6-inch gunfire, for example, and she was built with the 100mm belt and 60mm main deck armor.

 

Garzke & Dulin, Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II state that the Z-Plan battlecruisers O,P, and Q were designed to resist 8-inch fire, and their design specified 100-190mm belts and multiple decks of 50mm + 80mm. That's more likely what was required in the German system.

 

Enjoy your break and have a Merry Christmas in Ireland.


  • 0

#36 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,497 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 23 December 2017 - 0748 AM

From the net: http://www.pwencycl....leans_class.htm

 

1520 tons:
5" (127mm) belt tapering to 3" (76mm) on 0.75" (19mm) STS plating
3" (76mm) machinery bulkheads tapering to 2" (51mm)
4.7" (119mm) magazine sides tapering to 3" (76mm)
1.5" (38mm) magazine bulkheads
2.25" (57mm) armor deck
8"/1.5"/2.25" (203mm/38mm/57mm)) turret faces/sides and rear/roof
5" (127mm) barbette
2.5" (64mm) conning tower

 

Deutschland/Scheer/Spee: http://www.ww2ships....-ch-001-b.shtml

 

Armour       Side Belt 30-80 mm (1.2 - 3.1 in) 40 - 80 mm (1.6 - 3.1 in) 100 mm (3.9 in) End Bulkheads 60 mm (2.4 in) 60 mm (2.4 in) 100 mm (3.9 in) Magazine None None 70 mm (2.8 in) above only Barbette 100 mm (3.9 in) 125 mm (4.9 in) 125 mm (4.9 in) Turret 50-140 mm (2.0 - 5.5 in) 50-140 mm (2.0 - 5.5 in) 50-140 mm (2.0 - 5.5 in) Machinery 30-45 mm (1.2 - 1.8 in) 20 - 45 mm (0.8 - 1.8 in) 20 - 45 mm (0.8 - 1.8 in)
  • 0

#37 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,359 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 23 December 2017 - 0952 AM

I have looked up the relevant chapter in my Friedman.

 

The New Orleans class were second generation CA. They displaced 1,000tons more than the first generation and were better protected but still not well protected. Theoretically magazines and machinery spaces were immune to 8” shell between 12(15) and 24k yards, provided the target angle of was 60 degrees or smaller. In reality that meant they were armored against destroyer gunfire. Which was important and something the first generation ships weren't. 

 

A guy who has probably forgotten more about US warships than I know once said that the first US CA that was protected from 8” standard shells in the sense protection is understood when it comes to battleships was the USS Salem. 


  • 0

#38 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,180 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 23 December 2017 - 1150 AM

Salem was second in the three ship Des Moines Class; third was Newport News, nine others cancelled 1945-46.


  • 0

#39 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 23 December 2017 - 1239 PM

 

I do not understand the point of a video with a talking head, with no graphics whatsoever, instead of a written article.

 

Excellent content, however.

We want powerpoint! I demand powerpoint! :)

 


You'll take wax tablets and you'll like it!


  • 0

#40 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,469 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 23 December 2017 - 1426 PM

Fair enough. I thought it was something to do with the ship being protected against 8 when angled to engage at at least 30 degrees off the beam, and proof against in the critical areas such as magazines at all angles. However, again, I am about 6,000 miles from my Friedman and am more than willing to accept my memory is faulty. (Esp since it was quoted above)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users