Guess that ship!

[Widewing]

Correct.  

I was rather surprised to learn that France had such impressive battleships during WW2.

-C+

Both Richelieu and Jean Bart were very modern and very capable ships. Some rate them as superior to the Bismarck and Tirpitz. Check out this battleship rating website: http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm


My regards,

Widewing

[pipz]

That Imperial Japanese navy page is interesting.Theres an article in there somewhere that gets into the economics of the war.I like the hypothetical discussion on what would have happened if the US navy lost at Midway.

This one is probably pretty easy for you guys but I thought Charge may find it interesting <G>

[vatiAH]

That would be the Dunkerque

Vati

[pipz]

That would be the Dunkerque
Vati

Thats it.People seem to love or hate the looks of that ship.


Pipz

[SDGhalo]

name this ship hint there has been a investigation if sh was sank by the enemy or if it was friendly fire.



and here a bonus if you can get the first

[MiloMorai]

Not hard to guess with the Pennant Num. showing.

Tribal Class Destroyer, HMCS Athabaskan
Flower Class Corvette, HMCS Algoma.

[SDGhalo]

ok ok ok lol i guess if you look up the pennant numbers its not hard but ill ask this how many tribals class destroyes and flower class corvettes did canada have during ww2 with out looking at the internet guess at the top of your head lol

[Simba]

"Both Richelieu and Jean Bart were very modern and very capable ships. Some rate them as superior to the Bismarck and Tirpitz."

They might have been when facing the enemy - but with their entire main armament mounted forward, they'd have had a hell of a time countering fire from an enemy coming up astern, same as the Royal Navy's Rodney and Nelson. Of course, they could have turned broadside-on to fire but that would have denied them the full benefit of their high maximum speed when escaping from superior forces.

Without looking it up on the WWW, number of Tribal Class destroyers operated by Canada during WW2: eight. Number of Flower Class corvettes built in Canada during WW2: 42. I presume most if not all served with the RCN and I know four 'Modified Flowers' were transferred from the ten built in the UK for the Royal Navy.

Cheers!

[Widewing]

"Both Richelieu and Jean Bart were very modern and very capable ships. Some rate them as superior to the Bismarck and Tirpitz."

They might have been when facing the enemy - but with their entire main armament mounted forward, they'd have had a hell of a time countering fire from an enemy coming up astern, same as the Royal Navy's Rodney and Nelson. Of course, they could have turned broadside-on to fire but that would have denied them the full benefit of their high maximum speed when escaping from superior forces.

Cheers!

Yes, an enemy behind them would be an issue. On the other side, steering towards the enemy, they could bring the full weight of a broad side on an enemy ship while presenting the smallest possible target. They also presented a rapid changing range issue for the enemy fire control, as well as their own. Before the Richelieu and Jean Bart were built, the French recognized that their best bet with the earlier Dunkerque and Strassbourg was to reduce range to where their 13" guns could be more effective. The 15" guns on the later ships provided for better stand-off effectiveness.


My regards,

Widewing

[Simba]

"steering towards the enemy, they could bring the full weight of a broad side on an enemy ship while presenting the smallest possible target."

To which the correct response for the pursuers would be to turn broadside-on to 'cross the T' and bring all guns to bear, of course.

 

 

[pipz]

"steering towards the enemy, they could bring the full weight of a broad side on an enemy ship while presenting the smallest possible target."

To which the correct response for the pursuers would be to turn broadside-on to 'cross the T' and bring all guns to bear, of course.

 

In that case you would have the French aiming all theyre guns at the side of an enemy ship while the enemy ship only has a smaller bow on view of the French.So the French would have a better target.The tactic of crossing the T was so that you cut down the enemys firepower because they would not be able to bring theyre rear turrets to bear.In this case it doesnt matter since the French guns are all forward.Now running away thats another problem for the French ship I would think.


Pipz

[pipz]

I always thought ships of this era were cool looking.

[Karnak]

Iron Duke class, not sure which ship though.

[pipz]

Iron Duke class, not sure which ship though.

Jeezzz I just posted that maybe 2 minutes ago.Cant you guys let it sit and soak in for a bit hehhehehheh
I must be posting the easy stuff <G>

Pipz

[Widewing]

"steering towards the enemy, they could bring the full weight of a broad side on an enemy ship while presenting the smallest possible target."

To which the correct response for the pursuers would be to turn broadside-on to 'cross the T' and bring all guns to bear, of course.

 

 

Which gains you nothing more that parity, and presents the the bow-on ship an easier gun solution.

The Japanese also employed the "all guns forward" theory to one class of heavy cruiser. I think that the disadvantages out-weigh the positives, but under certain circumstances the configuration could provide a tactical advantage.


My regards,

Widewing