stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856 
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Feb 6, 2020 14:34:20 GMT
lordroel , A couple of small grammatical issues with the WWII entry for today.
This sounds like he initially accepted it and then turned it down after his wife suggested that Russia would be a better place for him to make his name. Which did prove to be the case, but not in the way he expected. Would be an interesting POD if von Paulus had taken over the DAK. Doubt he would have made the initial offensive that Rommel did which as I understand it was in defiance of Hitler's orders which was to support the defence of the Tripoli region.
Also
I think your missing something like successor as after Kennedy's here?
Otherwise looking good and a lot of detail there.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,031
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 6, 2020 14:44:27 GMT
lordroel , A couple of small grammatical issues with the WWII entry for today.
This sounds like he initially accepted it and then turned it down after his wife suggested that Russia would be a better place for him to make his name. Which did prove to be the case, but not in the way he expected. Would be an interesting POD if von Paulus had taken over the DAK. Doubt he would have made the initial offensive that Rommel did which as I understand it was in defiance of Hitler's orders which was to support the defence of the Tripoli region.
Also
I think your missing something like successor as after Kennedy's here? Otherwise looking good and a lot of detail there. Steve
Will punish the troll in question who made this mistake, thanks for the spotting as always stevep. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Feb 17, 2020 16:26:10 GMT
One small typo on the WWII entry for today.
Hopefully that's one death and seven survivors rather than the other way around?
Churchill being Churchill again and interfering in everything while understanding very little. 
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,031
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 17, 2020 16:30:24 GMT
One small typo on the WWII entry for today.
Hopefully that's one death and seven survivors rather than the other way around? Churchill being Churchill again and interfering in everything while understanding very little. Steve
Checking List of shipwrecks in February 1941 it seems that it should be 1 death. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Feb 19, 2020 15:23:50 GMT
lordroel , I should have mentioned this earlier. In the WWII posts you keep mentioning Scharnhorst and Gneisenau as heavy cruisers. Since they are 32,000 ton ships with 9x11" guns they are normally classified as BCs or even BBs. The Wiki page for them, Scharnhorst-class_battleship, uses the latter term although I suspect the former is more accurate. However at that tonnage I don't know what source would classify them as heavy cruisers. Even the pre-WNT armoured cruisers were only about 10-12ktons, on about a third of the weight. You may choose to keep with the HC term since your been using it and I should have mentioned earlier but it's not really accurate.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,031
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 19, 2020 15:39:46 GMT
lordroel , I should have mentioned this earlier. In the WWII posts you keep mentioning Scharnhorst and Gneisenau as heavy cruisers. Since they are 32,000 ton ships with 9x11" guns they are normally classified as BCs or even BBs. The Wiki page for them, Scharnhorst-class_battleship, uses the latter term although I suspect the former is more accurate. However at that tonnage I don't know what source would classify them as heavy cruisers. Even the pre-WNT armoured cruisers were only about 10-12ktons, on about a third of the weight. You may choose to keep with the HC term since your been using it and I should have mentioned earlier but it's not really accurate. Steve
Okay will update it in the next post that are coming. So how did you find the World War I map of the February 19th naval engagement stevep. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Feb 19, 2020 15:58:00 GMT
lordroel , I should have mentioned this earlier. In the WWII posts you keep mentioning Scharnhorst and Gneisenau as heavy cruisers. Since they are 32,000 ton ships with 9x11" guns they are normally classified as BCs or even BBs. The Wiki page for them, Scharnhorst-class_battleship, uses the latter term although I suspect the former is more accurate. However at that tonnage I don't know what source would classify them as heavy cruisers. Even the pre-WNT armoured cruisers were only about 10-12ktons, on about a third of the weight. You may choose to keep with the HC term since your been using it and I should have mentioned earlier but it's not really accurate. Steve
Okay will update it in the next post that are coming. So how did you find the World War I map of the February 19th naval engagement stevep .
Do you mean the initial day of bombardment at Gallipoli? Looks very through and complete thanks  . Given that's only using 9 pre-dreads of the 16 in total, as well as smaller ships and a brief role by the new Queen Elizabeth it shows how much actual resources were committed to this operation. If only they have been supported by troops now, before the Turks had been warned and reinforced the ground units and those troops had been better led they might even have gotten somewhere. Not probably to Constantinople by land, but either occupying most of the peninsula and getting the fleet into the Sea of Marmara and/or triggering Bulgarian and/or Greece intervention against the Ottomans.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,031
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 19, 2020 16:03:24 GMT
Okay will update it in the next post that are coming. So how did you find the World War I map of the February 19th naval engagement stevep . Do you mean the initial day of bombardment at Gallipoli? Looks very through and complete thanks . Given that's only using 9 pre-dreads of the 16 in total, as well as smaller ships and a brief role by the new Queen Elizabeth it shows how much actual resources were committed to this operation. If only they have been supported by troops now, before the Turks had been warned and reinforced the ground units and those troops had been better led they might even have gotten somewhere. Not probably to Constantinople by land, but either occupying most of the peninsula and getting the fleet into the Sea of Marmara and/or triggering Bulgarian and/or Greece intervention against the Ottomans. Steve
There is another one of this map coming in a couple of days. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Feb 23, 2020 12:12:12 GMT
lordroel , One typo on the Gulf War thread. " 710% of polled Americans say objective should be to force Saddam from power. " Well unless Bush has suddenly accepted Soviet election methods.  Assuming it should be 71%.
Also with those assessments of how much of the Iraqi equipment having been destroyed, i.e.
"Over 1,685 Iraqi tanks (39% of known inventory), 925 armored vehicles (32% of known inventory) and 1,450 artillery pieces (48% of known inventory) have been destroyed to-date."
Do you know if that is something calculated more recently or estimates made at the time please? If the former, given that the Iraqis would be familar with Soviet deception methods and the general tendency for attacking forces to over-estimate the effects of their work the damage would probably be something less in reality.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,031
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 23, 2020 12:49:13 GMT
lordroel , One typo on the Gulf War thread. " 710% of polled Americans say objective should be to force Saddam from power. " Well unless Bush has suddenly accepted Soviet election methods. Assuming it should be 71%. Also with those assessments of how much of the Iraqi equipment having been destroyed, i.e.
"Over 1,685 Iraqi tanks (39% of known inventory), 925 armored vehicles (32% of known inventory) and 1,450 artillery pieces (48% of known inventory) have been destroyed to-date." Do you know if that is something calculated more recently or estimates made at the time please? If the former, given that the Iraqis would be familar with Soviet deception methods and the general tendency for attacking forces to over-estimate the effects of their work the damage would probably be something less in reality. Steve
Seems to me we had a 89 Bush Troll fan, will change it. The number will increase when the Ground Campaign begins stevep,, but so far the numbers come directly from the US Navy and Army historical websites, so i assume they are correct. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Feb 28, 2020 13:18:53 GMT
lordroel , Just realised when reading the monthly summaries for the WWII shipping losses, that you have a day off tomorrow, as there was no 29th Feb in either 1915 or 1941 so unless there's something for the USN you can enjoy a bit of a break. Have fun and thanks for all the work on those posts.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,031
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 28, 2020 14:02:58 GMT
lordroel , Just realised when reading the monthly summaries for the WWII shipping losses, that you have a day off tomorrow, as there was no 29th Feb in either 1915 or 1941 so unless there's something for the USN you can enjoy a bit of a break. Have fun and thanks for all the work on those posts. Steve
1915 has no extra day nor does 1941, thus March 1st update will happen. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Feb 29, 2020 12:19:46 GMT
lordroel , Just realised when reading the monthly summaries for the WWII shipping losses, that you have a day off tomorrow, as there was no 29th Feb in either 1915 or 1941 so unless there's something for the USN you can enjoy a bit of a break. Have fun and thanks for all the work on those posts. Steve
1915 has no extra day nor does 1941, thus March 1st update will happen.
Doesn't that mean you will be a day early with future posts, unless your planning to have tomorrow off?
I didn't know if the USN had anything it considered significant happening on some 29th Feb but presumably not.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,031
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 29, 2020 12:25:18 GMT
1915 has no extra day nor does 1941, thus March 1st update will happen. Doesn't that mean you will be a day early with future posts, unless your planning to have tomorrow off? I didn't know if the USN had anything it considered significant happening on some 29th Feb but presumably not. Steve
Only in 1992 when the Fast Attack Submarine USS Jefferson City (SSN 759) was commissioned. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,031
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Mar 5, 2020 17:05:19 GMT
So stevep what are the difference between 1915 HMS Queen Elizabeth.  And 1941 HMS Queen Elizabeth.  |
|
. Given that's only using 9 pre-dreads of the 16 in total, as well as smaller ships and a brief role by the new Queen Elizabeth it shows how much actual resources were committed to this operation. If only they have been supported by troops now, before the Turks had been warned and reinforced the ground units and those troops had been better led they might even have gotten somewhere. Not probably to Constantinople by land, but either occupying most of the peninsula and getting the fleet into the Sea of Marmara and/or triggering Bulgarian and/or Greece intervention against the Ottomans.
Assuming it should be 71%.