Author
Topic: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.
(Read 228101 times)

Cincydawg · « **Reply #5502 on:** **Today** at 07:15:15 AM »

I know the "technical" details that differ, they look the same to me, basically, as a tourist. A LOT of folks ponder how an Iowa would fare against Yamato. Some credibly say it would come down to a bit of luck, one on one, in such a hypothetical. An early hit in such an engagement could be critical of course, especially with an 18.1 incher.

CWSooner · « **Reply #5503 on:** **Today** at 12:27:31 PM »

Details, schmetails, they all look alike to you. To my eye, the South Dakotas look very different, while the North Carolinas and Iowas look similar to each other. I think that the North Carolinas were the most beautiful battleships ever built.

If I were Bull Halsey, for one thing, I would try not to run my fleet through typhoons twice in the same summer. But, for another thing, I would want an advantage in numbers if it came down to a surface action against Yamato or Musashi. I think I'd want a night action, where my radar gunnery would have an advantage.

Those 18.1"/45 guns were not to be sneezed at, but they weren't quite as powerful as one might expect. They fired a lighter shell than the 18" guns that the Brits had on their two Courageous-class "large light cruisers" in WWI. They had an advantage over the 16"/50 guns on the Iowas, but not much of one.

Interesting article here.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #5504 on:** **Today** at 12:41:31 PM »

The best analysis I came across was about that lucky first shot, by either side, akin to the Bismark being unabled by biplane launched torpedoes.

The Iowas would have a speed advantage and probably a first detection advantage, presume one-v-one. Maybe their scout planes find the other side before radar. They close range and both fire about the same time at the other. Iowas could fire faster, almost twice as fast, so they'd be sending more "lead" down range over time. The Iowas could also dart about some, changing course and speed to throw off long range gunnery. But it would come down to luck, I think. Maybe a first hit was not terribly damaging, but even a close miss could buckle plates perhaps and slow the ship. Too many variables.

I have a hunch torpedoes were more effective than 16 inchers.

CWSooner · « **Reply #5505 on:** **Today** at 12:49:20 PM »

Since there's no softball thread, I'll post the softball results here.

OU beat Texas 5-1 in the Big 12 tournament championship game last night. Texas finished 1st in the regular season, OU 2nd. Texas was ranked #1 nationally, oSu 2nd, Tennessee 3rd, and OU 4th. All of those teams except OU lost yesterday. It would seem that OU and Texas will be seeded 1st and 2nd for the NCAA Tournament, but--I think--probably not in that order.

That was OU's 9th Big 12 tournament championship in the 22 years that it was held. Texas is next with 4. Kansas and Oklahoma State have each won once. Of former teams, Nebraska had 3, Missouri had 2, and Texas A&M had 1. The 2019 tournament was not completed due to rain.

In 3 of Texas' wins, Cat Osterman was the MOP. Jennifer Lizama of Nebraska won it twice, once when the Huskers did not win the championship. Nobody else has won it more than once and nobody but Lizama has won it when her team did not win the championship.

CWSooner · « **Reply #5506 on:** **Today** at 12:57:06 PM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on Today at 12:41:31 PM

The best analysis I came across was about that lucky first shot, by either side, akin to the Bismark being unabled by biplane launched torpedoes.

The Iowas would have a speed advantage and probably a first detection advantage, presume one-v-one. Maybe their scout planes find the other side before radar. They close range and both fire about the same time at the other. Iowas could fire faster, almost twice as fast, so they'd be sending more "lead" down range over time. The Iowas could also dart about some, changing course and speed to throw off long range gunnery. But it would come down to luck, I think. Maybe a first hit was not terribly damaging, but even a close miss could buckle plates perhaps and slow the ship. Too many variables.

I have a hunch torpedoes were more effective than 16 inchers.

I think all of that is probably right.
Speaking of scout planes, it's interesting that the Kido Butai, the Japanese carrier task force, depended on the float planes of its cruiser escorts to search for the enemy. Or at least that was the case at Midway, where the scout from Tone was late launching and was thus critically late in finding the U.S. carriers.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #5507 on:** **Today** at 01:01:46 PM »

It makes some sense to me, the cruisers and BBs would have planes and crews designed specifically for scouting, not attack or air to air. I think the US usually had enough carrier planes to scout, and the Dauntlesses would carry a 500 pounder when scouting often as not.

So, the Japanese could devote their carrier air groups solely to attack (and some defense) without wasting some planes on scouting.

It's a bit amusing to think the early concept of a carrier was to scout for the main battle fleet.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #5508 on:** **Today** at 01:14:20 PM »

A more realistic battle would of course involve fleets of some sort. I think one could limit said fleets to something like say 3 BBs on each side, 4 heavy cruisers (CA) and 6 light cruisers (CL) and maybe 12 destroyers (DDs). I don't know the actual makeup of Admiral Lee's fast BB fleet so I'm guessing.

Then it still would come down to luck, the Japanese destroyers might get in and launch their Long Lances and get some hits that would cause havock, and at least disrupt the fleet formations.

CWSooner · « **Reply #5509 on:** **Today** at 08:00:04 PM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on Today at 01:01:46 PM

It makes some sense to me, the cruisers and BBs would have planes and crews designed specifically for scouting, not attack or air to air. I think the US usually had enough carrier planes to scout, and the Dauntlesses would carry a 500 pounder when scouting often as not.

I wonder if having the scouting done by floatplanes launched by cruisers induced some C2 problems. I don't know about the U.S. having "enough" carrier planes relative to the numbers of Japanese carrier planes. I suspect that it was more about philosophical differences. Re the Dauntlesses, yeah, the "scouting" squadrons at Midway carried 500-lb bombs while the "bombing" squadrons carried 1,000-pounders.

Quote

So, the Japanese could devote their carrier air groups solely to attack (and some defense) without wasting some planes on scouting.

At Midway, the scouting and bombing SBD squadrons were launched simultaneously. Also, at Midway and at least some of the other carrier battles, land-based PBY Catalinas and PB4Y Navy Liberators played a major role in locating the enemy fleet. The Japanese also had flying boats. They used them for various purposes, including scouting.

Quote

It's a bit amusing to think the early concept of a carrier was to scout for the main battle fleet.

Yep. Related to that, there's a nautical myth that the "C" in "CV" originally stood for "cruiser." It sort of made sense, as the earliest U.S. experiments in ship-borne air operations involved cruisers.

Early on, the same concept of scouting applied to submarines, even though subs were manifestly unsuited to that role.

CWSooner · « **Reply #5510 on:** **Today** at 08:02:26 PM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on Today at 01:14:20 PM

A more realistic battle would of course involve fleets of some sort. I think one could limit said fleets to something like say 3 BBs on each side, 4 heavy cruisers (CA) and 6 light cruisers (CL) and maybe 12 destroyers (DDs). I don't know the actual makeup of Admiral Lee's fast BB fleet so I'm guessing.

Then it still would come down to luck, the Japanese destroyers might get in and launch their Long Lances and get some hits that would cause havock, and at least disrupt the fleet formations.

Long Lances were lethal, as seen in the Battle of Savo Island. It's a scandal how bad our torpedoes were for much of the war.

CWSooner · « **Reply #5511 on:** **Today** at 08:04:12 PM »

Re the tornadoes of the last couple of weeks, one in Oklahoma spun the "wrong" way and another nearby doubled back on itself.

Here

The B12 (XII) Forum, home of the 'Front Porch, y'all' at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

Cincydawg

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

CWSooner

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

Cincydawg

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

CWSooner

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

CWSooner

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

Cincydawg

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

Cincydawg

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

CWSooner

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

CWSooner

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.

CWSooner

Re: The Porch, y'all. pull up a seat and kick back.