stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866 
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on May 23, 2021 13:49:25 GMT
Lordroel
Comment on today's WWII thread. The Grants may be faster and possibly even better armed but their a lot taller which makes them much larger targets. Also with their main gun in a sponson low down on the hull its a lot harder to put it on a target in front of you, let alone one outside the narrow arc as you need to turn the entire tank rather than just the turret.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,086
Likes: 49,472
|
Post by lordroel on May 23, 2021 13:53:47 GMT
Lordroel Comment on today's WWII thread. The Grants may be faster and possibly even better armed but their a lot taller which makes them much larger targets. Also with their main gun in a sponson low down on the hull its a lot harder to put it on a target in front of you, let alone one outside the narrow arc as you need to turn the entire tank rather than just the turret. Steve
Well both the "Lee" and "Grants"in service with the British where better than having no tank. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on May 23, 2021 15:13:35 GMT
Lordroel Comment on today's WWII thread. The Grants may be faster and possibly even better armed but their a lot taller which makes them much larger targets. Also with their main gun in a sponson low down on the hull its a lot harder to put it on a target in front of you, let alone one outside the narrow arc as you need to turn the entire tank rather than just the turret. Steve
Well both the "Lee" and "Grants"in service with the British where better than having no tank.
True but Britain suffered from very bad use of its tanks, which meant much higher losses than necessary and also problems with design that left many under-powered.  |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on May 29, 2021 10:39:52 GMT
Comment on today's WWI post:
It shows how dire the situation is for both sides around Verdun in that highlights of the battle are sections of trench are changing hands. 
I had a feeling we were coming up to HMS Hampshire when you started talking about that passage through the Orkney's. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,086
Likes: 49,472
|
Post by lordroel on May 29, 2021 11:05:05 GMT
I had a feeling we were coming up to HMS Hampshire when you started talking about that passage through the Orkney's. Dam i spoiled it. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on May 29, 2021 12:49:54 GMT
I had a feeling we were coming up to HMS Hampshire when you started talking about that passage through the Orkney's. Dam i spoiled it.
Not really, I knew it was coming. As with so much else unfortunately in the years to come in both conflicts.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on May 30, 2021 11:58:41 GMT
On today's WWI posts: I don't know why those ships are wasting so much coal and oil. Its never going to amount to anything.  Its a great pity that Campania was left behind as she could have been very useful, especially given the lack of information Jellicoe got from most of his subordinates. However if we still had the clashes at night she might have been very vulnerable there. It might be useful making clear she was a seaplane carrier rather than what we think of as an aircraft carrier. The planes had to dropped into the sea by crane and then picked up the same way after landing. Since this means the ship stopping in both cases then having to pick up speed it would have been a factor if she was desired to use her a/c in a chase or running battle and of course, especially with U boats known to be about stopping like that makes her vulnerable to them.
I must admit everything time I see a reference to a U boat sinking an Italian ship I think what then remember this is WWI rather than WWII.
On the WWII post: The 1,000 bomber raid was more a political move than anything else as BC had to transfer many of their flying instructors to get to the necessary numbers. Even then relatively few of the a/c are really modern strategic bombers. "602 Wellingtons, 131 Halifaxes, 88 Stirlings, 79 Hampdens, 73 Lancasters, 46 Manchesters & 28 Whitleys" only really the Halifaxes, Stirlings and Lancs count in that role. It does seem to have done significant damage in terms of housing and probably other 'infrastructure' losses but even so the number of deaths of civilians and AA gunners is not to different from the number of trained air crew that the RAF lost. It won popularity at home in that Britain was fighting back, especially with the over-reporting that generally occurred with such raids but I'm doubtful how effective the bomber campaign was given the opportunities lost elsewhere. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,086
Likes: 49,472
|
Post by lordroel on May 30, 2021 12:43:40 GMT
On today's WWI posts: I don't know why those ships are wasting so much coal and oil. Its never going to amount to anything. Its a great pity that Campania was left behind as she could have been very useful, especially given the lack of information Jellicoe got from most of his subordinates. However if we still had the clashes at night she might have been very vulnerable there. It might be useful making clear she was a seaplane carrier rather than what we think of as an aircraft carrier. The planes had to dropped into the sea by crane and then picked up the same way after landing. Since this means the ship stopping in both cases then having to pick up speed it would have been a factor if she was desired to use her a/c in a chase or running battle and of course, especially with U boats known to be about stopping like that makes her vulnerable to them. Will add the seaplane carrier rather than aircraft carrier to the updater and give the trolls some lessons on their difference. I must admit everything time I see a reference to a U boat sinking an Italian ship I think what then remember this is WWI rather than WWII. On the WWII post: The 1,000 bomber raid was more a political move than anything else as BC had to transfer many of their flying instructors to get to the necessary numbers. Even then relatively few of the a/c are really modern strategic bombers. "602 Wellingtons, 131 Halifaxes, 88 Stirlings, 79 Hampdens, 73 Lancasters, 46 Manchesters & 28 Whitleys" only really the Halifaxes, Stirlings and Lancs count in that role. It does seem to have done significant damage in terms of housing and probably other 'infrastructure' losses but even so the number of deaths of civilians and AA gunners is not to different from the number of trained air crew that the RAF lost. It won popularity at home in that Britain was fighting back, especially with the over-reporting that generally occurred with such raids but I'm doubtful how effective the bomber campaign was given the opportunities lost elsewhere. And this 1,000 bomber raid is the first of many to come. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on May 30, 2021 14:30:56 GMT
On today's WWI posts: I don't know why those ships are wasting so much coal and oil. Its never going to amount to anything. Its a great pity that Campania was left behind as she could have been very useful, especially given the lack of information Jellicoe got from most of his subordinates. However if we still had the clashes at night she might have been very vulnerable there. It might be useful making clear she was a seaplane carrier rather than what we think of as an aircraft carrier. The planes had to dropped into the sea by crane and then picked up the same way after landing. Since this means the ship stopping in both cases then having to pick up speed it would have been a factor if she was desired to use her a/c in a chase or running battle and of course, especially with U boats known to be about stopping like that makes her vulnerable to them. Will add the seaplane carrier rather than aircraft carrier to the updater and give the trolls some lessons on their difference. I must admit everything time I see a reference to a U boat sinking an Italian ship I think what then remember this is WWI rather than WWII. On the WWII post: The 1,000 bomber raid was more a political move than anything else as BC had to transfer many of their flying instructors to get to the necessary numbers. Even then relatively few of the a/c are really modern strategic bombers. "602 Wellingtons, 131 Halifaxes, 88 Stirlings, 79 Hampdens, 73 Lancasters, 46 Manchesters & 28 Whitleys" only really the Halifaxes, Stirlings and Lancs count in that role. It does seem to have done significant damage in terms of housing and probably other 'infrastructure' losses but even so the number of deaths of civilians and AA gunners is not to different from the number of trained air crew that the RAF lost. It won popularity at home in that Britain was fighting back, especially with the over-reporting that generally occurred with such raids but I'm doubtful how effective the bomber campaign was given the opportunities lost elsewhere. And this 1,000 bomber raid is the first of many to come.
Thanks. Very true on the latter although as I say I'm more than a little doubtful it was good use of British resources. But then that's an old gripe of mine. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,086
Likes: 49,472
|
Post by lordroel on May 30, 2021 14:36:46 GMT
Will add the seaplane carrier rather than aircraft carrier to the updater and give the trolls some lessons on their difference. And this 1,000 bomber raid is the first of many to come. Thanks. Very true on the latter although as I say I'm more than a little doubtful it was good use of British resources. But then that's an old gripe of mine. Do not know if the Germans ever manged to do a 1,000 bomber raid over England but the facht the United Kingdom could before the full entry of United States air power over Europe says how much they have grown in less than 2 years after the end of the Blitz. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on May 30, 2021 14:42:55 GMT
Thanks. Very true on the latter although as I say I'm more than a little doubtful it was good use of British resources. But then that's an old gripe of mine. Do not know if the Germans ever manged to do a 1,000 bomber raid over England but the facht the United Kingdom could before the full entry of United States air power over Europe says how much they have grown in less than 2 years after the end of the Blitz.
Well part of the thing was it was seen by many as the only way Britain could strike back against Germany since it couldn't realistically challenge German forces on the continent. Although that seems to have been a factor in Churchill's eagerness to support Greece, despite that it should be clear that such a position at that stage of the war was not something that could be supported against serious German effort. Probably also some desire to hit back at them for the German carpet bombing during the Blitz.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on May 31, 2021 12:41:08 GMT
On WWI you have
It sounds like possibly there's a little missing here like his full name and I suspect he might have ended up getting a gong for this.
This I suspect relates to a bit of stupidity by a fairly high ranked officer related to Room 40, which the German codes were being intercepted and read. He asked where the code sign for Spree's ship was and was informed it was in Wilhelmshaven. What he didn't ask and for some region the men involved didn't tell him - I get the impression from what I've read he was something of an unpleasant and unpopular character and might have headed off before someone plucked up the nerve to tell him was that Spee change his code sign when he left harbour with the fleet. If he had asked he would have found out the German fleet was at sea!
Actually there were clashes during the night as the Germans sought to cut across the rear of the British line to get away. Unfortunately again subordinates failed to report details to Jellicoe so he was unaware of this and hence the Germans were able to escape. There were two possible safe routes back to German ports and this enabled Spree's ships to reach one while Jellicoe believed they were heading towards the other. If he had been informed he could have intercepted the Germans the follow day with more time to do further damage.
In terms of other comments the bad shooting was largely by the British BC fleet as it lacked the facility for practice in its forward base at Roysth. The 2rd squadron, which had been detached to Scapa for such practice, which is why the 5th Battle Squadron was with the BCF did shoot much better and HMS Invincible achieved a hit which proved fatal for the German BC Lutzow although was fatally hit itself shortly afterwards. - There is an alternative argument of a basic flaw in the 12" guns which meant that beyond medium range they have serious dispersal problems as the clash I just mentioned was at relatively short range as both groups appeared and disappeared in banks of mist.
The question of the British BCs' is a heated one with some arguing that they were too thinly armoured compared to the Germans whereas others point out that to achieve a faster rate of fire safety regulations had been ignored with extra shells and powder stored in the turrets and anti-flash barriers removed to speed up the flow of powder and shells. This meant that a hit on the turret could cause an explosion which spread down to the powder room, setting that off. The Germans may have also had such a problem earlier as one of their BCs at Dogger Bank had a similar incident but like the Lion survived it which meant that they learnt their lessons.
The other notorious flaw with the fleet at the time was that while British shells were generally bigger 12", 13.5" and 15" compared to 11" and 12" and carried much more explosives failures in test procedures hide poor quality control and at angles differing significantly from the perpendicular the shells detonated rather than penetrating before doing do. This enabled quite a number of ships to survive with extensive damage to the exterior elements but not to the internal vitals.
Other issues have been mentioned in discussion, including the problem of handling a fleet as large as the Grand Fleet with such technology but those were the main lessons learnt. - Sorry to have rabbited on but as you might have guessed its a battle of some interest to me. 
Drachinifel did a series a few months back on the battle, the 1st of the three being Jutland Part 1. you might have seen then but a good read that covers the subject in some detail. The other parts, Jutland part 2 and Jutland Part 3. Respectively they are the clash of the battlecruisers, then of the main fleets then the aftermath, which includes some analysis and changes made after the battle.
On the WWII post today yes Ritchie really missed an opportunity to defeat Rommel and a lot of men died or were captured as a result.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,086
Likes: 49,472
|
Post by lordroel on May 31, 2021 13:54:00 GMT
On WWI you have
It sounds like possibly there's a little missing here like his full name and I suspect he might have ended up getting a gong for this.
This I suspect relates to a bit of stupidity by a fairly high ranked officer related to Room 40, which the German codes were being intercepted and read. He asked where the code sign for Spree's ship was and was informed it was in Wilhelmshaven. What he didn't ask and for some region the men involved didn't tell him - I get the impression from what I've read he was something of an unpleasant and unpopular character and might have headed off before someone plucked up the nerve to tell him was that Spee change his code sign when he left harbour with the fleet. If he had asked he would have found out the German fleet was at sea!
Actually there were clashes during the night as the Germans sought to cut across the rear of the British line to get away. Unfortunately again subordinates failed to report details to Jellicoe so he was unaware of this and hence the Germans were able to escape. There were two possible safe routes back to German ports and this enabled Spree's ships to reach one while Jellicoe believed they were heading towards the other. If he had been informed he could have intercepted the Germans the follow day with more time to do further damage.
In terms of other comments the bad shooting was largely by the British BC fleet as it lacked the facility for practice in its forward base at Roysth. The 2rd squadron, which had been detached to Scapa for such practice, which is why the 5th Battle Squadron was with the BCF did shoot much better and HMS Invincible achieved a hit which proved fatal for the German BC Lutzow although was fatally hit itself shortly afterwards. - There is an alternative argument of a basic flaw in the 12" guns which meant that beyond medium range they have serious dispersal problems as the clash I just mentioned was at relatively short range as both groups appeared and disappeared in banks of mist. The question of the British BCs' is a heated one with some arguing that they were too thinly armoured compared to the Germans whereas others point out that to achieve a faster rate of fire safety regulations had been ignored with extra shells and powder stored in the turrets and anti-flash barriers removed to speed up the flow of powder and shells. This meant that a hit on the turret could cause an explosion which spread down to the powder room, setting that off. The Germans may have also had such a problem earlier as one of their BCs at Dogger Bank had a similar incident but like the Lion survived it which meant that they learnt their lessons. The other notorious flaw with the fleet at the time was that while British shells were generally bigger 12", 13.5" and 15" compared to 11" and 12" and carried much more explosives failures in test procedures hide poor quality control and at angles differing significantly from the perpendicular the shells detonated rather than penetrating before doing do. This enabled quite a number of ships to survive with extensive damage to the exterior elements but not to the internal vitals.
Other issues have been mentioned in discussion, including the problem of handling a fleet as large as the Grand Fleet with such technology but those were the main lessons learnt. - Sorry to have rabbited on but as you might have guessed its a battle of some interest to me. Drachinifel did a series a few months back on the battle, the 1st of the three being Jutland Part 1. you might have seen then but a good read that covers the subject in some detail. The other parts, Jutland part 2 and Jutland Part 3. Respectively they are the clash of the battlecruisers, then of the main fleets then the aftermath, which includes some analysis and changes made after the battle. On the WWII post today yes Ritchie really missed an opportunity to defeat Rommel and a lot of men died or were captured as a result. Steve
As always, thanks for your comments stevep, it gives me energy to keep the trolls working as we area nearing our 1000 update for World War II. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,866
Likes: 13,252
|
Post by stevep on Jun 1, 2021 9:11:04 GMT
Sorry for the thud post but you know my interesting in naval history. Didn't realise you were still going to comment on other details in today's post which makes some of my comments redundant as their mentioned there.
In terms of the faulty information passed to Jellicoe that might have been an incident I had read about before but didn't realise how critical the timing was, i.e. in the latter stages of the Jutland battle. Apparently when Rm 40 decoded the German signal the latter reported a position somewhere in the mountains of Norway, hence the distrust. It was no fault of the RN decoder but instead of the original German radio signal which gave the inaccurate location! So many lost chances for a more decisive battle at German expense. I'm tempted to wonder if an hostile ASB was involved at times in WWI to make the war last as long as it did and so destructive.
Of course in manpower terms Britain is facing an even bigger loss to start shortly on land.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,086
Likes: 49,472
|
Post by lordroel on Jun 1, 2021 14:22:35 GMT
Sorry for the thud post but you know my interesting in naval history. Didn't realise you were still going to comment on other details in today's post which makes some of my comments redundant as their mentioned there. [/div][/quote] What did the trolls put in the update you wanted to comment on then. |
|
Its a great pity that Campania was left behind as she could have been very useful, especially given the lack of information Jellicoe got from most of his subordinates. However if we still had the clashes at night she might have been very vulnerable there. It might be useful making clear she was a seaplane carrier rather than what we think of as an aircraft carrier. The planes had to dropped into the sea by crane and then picked up the same way after landing. Since this means the ship stopping in both cases then having to pick up speed it would have been a factor if she was desired to use her a/c in a chase or running battle and of course, especially with U boats known to be about stopping like that makes her vulnerable to them.