Author Topic: Tanks sinking a whole task force  (Read 1707 times)

Offline 715

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1835
Tanks sinking a whole task force
« on: April 15, 2008, 12:57:01 AM »
Tanks sinking an entire task force, with the 5"ers on the TF doing no damage at all to the tanks. 

So did that happen every day in WWII or only once a week?

Offline C(Sea)Bass

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1644
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2008, 01:14:10 AM »
did you select HE rounds on the 5"ers?

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2008, 02:16:10 AM »
An F6f with a few eggs solves that problem.

Not having the cv that close to shore in the first place is an even better idea.

Offline Bruv119

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15678
      • http://www.thefewsquadron.co.uk
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2008, 03:10:08 AM »
Carriers sitting less than 3k from the shore that happened in WW2 everyday im sure  :uhoh

Get out of your gun.  Kill the VH so he cant spawn, kill the ords so he cant bomb your ship, steer it away from the Shore battery/ or bomb that too. 

Don't blame the guy in his tank  :salute him for killing a whole carrier force single handedly thats impressive  :D


The Few ***
F.P.H

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2008, 03:35:00 AM »
I was once punching a CV with my Firefly, but somebody manned a gun and toasted me....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Ghosth

  • AH Training Corps (retired)
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8497
      • http://332nd.org
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #5 on: April 15, 2008, 07:27:39 AM »
Wait a second, you saying that a tank armor piercing round shouldn't penetrate a thin skinned Carrier?
Or destroyers? Cruiser is the ONLY ship that should possibly not take major damage from tanks.
A Carrier should not be so close to shore that a Tank can reach it. (Besides it makes it too easy for SB and pt's to jump in)
Bringing it that close would have been a courts martial offense in WWII.

Sounds to me like a FUBAR'd carrier attack, that was poorly planned and executed. In which case then the enemy
should save their field and reset the task group. You want to capture a field with a carrier assault, kill the VH early and keep it down.



« Last Edit: April 15, 2008, 07:41:20 AM by Ghosth »

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #6 on: April 15, 2008, 08:42:44 AM »
Thin skinned CV? And did you count in range? Ever looked around a warship?
Just wondering....lots of metal, lots of range.
A tank round is just a hobbit round compared to the navy stuff....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline BaldEagl

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10791
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #7 on: April 15, 2008, 09:50:12 AM »
Who was the CV commander stupid enough to bring the CV in that close?
I edit a lot of my posts.  Get used to it.

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #8 on: April 15, 2008, 10:07:45 AM »
On that subject....were cruisers that much softer than CVs in WWII ? Why escorts take as much damage as the cruiser ? Did HE shells from tanks disable 8inch guns that easily ?

I know its just a game but....
« Last Edit: April 15, 2008, 10:56:36 AM by Noir »
now posting as SirNuke

Offline Cthulhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2463
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #9 on: April 15, 2008, 10:18:17 AM »
Who was the CV commander stupid enough to bring the CV in that close?

From what I've seen, that describes about 80% of them. :D  When's the last time you saw someone up a TBM or heavy F6F to kill the SB(s) first? Most guys just drag the keel on the bottom and try to park the CV in the town. Then they panic and turn back out to sea when the SB starts tearing them a new one. :cry

It ain't rocket science, "You HO the SB, you lose"
"Think of Tetris as a metaphor for life:  You spend all your time trying to find a place for your long thin piece, then when you finally do, everything you've built disappears"

Offline Hoffman

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 228
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #10 on: April 15, 2008, 10:25:02 AM »
Having been aboard the U.S.S. Lexington for several days thanks to JROTC.  It would be close to impossible for small arms fire to penetrate a Carrier.  But we're not talking small arms fire here, we're talking HE and AP rounds from tank guns.  The sides of a Carrier are too big to actually be armored, its just a steel skin.  If you were to actually but enough armor to soak up that kind of fire the whole thing would probably sink itself from the weight.

Which is why only the important sections of the ship are heavily armored, otherwise you've got too much weight.  And besides as already stated, an Essex class IS NOT DESIGNED TO BE WITHIN 5 KILOMETERS OF THE SHORE.   Personally, as much as I loved the target practice, courtmarshalling this armchair Admiral would be a very good thing.


And when you refer to a TF getting sunk by tanks, are you referring to this one yesterday?
http://www.mediafire.com/?gfhz92991tt


We were receiving flak fire, but it was making puffies and otherwise inaccurate fire from the CV.  Bad gunners, but the CV's course was changing so rapidly I doubt they had a geniunely stable platform to fire from.  So... meh.

17lber HE shells FTW!

Offline GtoRA2

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8339
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #11 on: April 15, 2008, 04:12:58 PM »
Thin skinned CV? And did you count in range? Ever looked around a warship?
Just wondering....lots of metal, lots of range.
A tank round is just a hobbit round compared to the navy stuff....


the 3 inch gun the M10 used was a 3 inch naval canon. (I think)

Tank guns are not allot weaker then a naval 5 or 3 inch gun, and a tank could do a number on most small ships like frigates and destroyers.  Even a CV would be damaged fairly badly.  I wouldn't think a Battleship or a heavy Cruiser has much to worry about though.

5 inch gun was what 127 MM?   The Tiger 2 tank destroyer had a 128MM gun and I bet it perfomed pretty close to a 5 inch gun if not better.

Offline AquaShrimp

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1706
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #12 on: April 15, 2008, 05:13:58 PM »
Submarine deck guns.  Nuff said.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #13 on: April 15, 2008, 07:19:28 PM »
5 inch gun was what 127 MM?   The Tiger 2 tank destroyer had a 128MM gun and I bet it perfomed pretty close to a 5 inch gun if not better.

US Naval guns of the WWII time period are generally viewed as being the best of their ilk. The 16"/50 was without peer, deemed superior to the Japanese 18.1" gun fitted to Yamato and Musashi. Likewise, the 12"/50 fitted to the Alaska class Large Cruisers is considered the finest of her type/class ever fitted to a warship. It should be no surprise that smaller caliber American naval guns were equally outstanding.

The US dual-purpose 5"/38 was the finest gun of its type for many years. Where it really excelled was in rate of fire. A good gun crew could get off between 18 and 21 aimed rounds per minute. A dual mount could manage in the range of 30 to 40 round per minute. I doubt very much that the 128mm in a Jagdtiger was able to get more than two rounds off per minute.

This high rate of fire was sustainable too. During the engagement off of Samar, the US Destroyer Escort Samuel B. Roberts fired off 608 5" rounds from her two 5" guns within 35 minutes (and is believed to have scored over 300 hits on various Japanese battleships and heavy cruisers). That's better than 17 rounds per minute.

This was a powerful gun, shooting a round weighing 54 lbs at 2,600 fps. The standard SCS round could penetrate 5" of face-hardened steel armor at 4,000 yards. 5" rounds striking German Panzers during the Sicily invasion (Destroyers had closed to with 1,000 yards of the beaches to provide direct fire support) literally blew the tanks to pieces.

The problem with the game is that we do not have a variety of ammo types for the 5" guns. We are stuck with the common AA round for all purposes.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Re: Tanks sinking a whole task force
« Reply #14 on: April 15, 2008, 07:30:38 PM »
the 3 inch gun the M10 used was a 3 inch naval canon. (I think)

It was an anti-aircraft gun, modified.


My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.