Re: UN Ship Nomenclature

On 12 Aug 98 at 1:42, Los wrote:

> Umm actually it was an indecisive engagement, with out major losses
> by the British. Still the commanders Graves and Hoods didn't feel
> they had enough strength to push through the French to relieve
> Cornwallis and withdrew to Yorktown. Hardly being smashed to Bloody
> toothpicks. (Mahan, Alfred T. "Major Operations of the Navies in the
> American War of Independece" Boston, 1953; Kegan, John "Fields of
> Battle)
> 

I think it's true to say that virtually all the naval engagments
during the age of sail were indecisive. Wooden ships can stand a
tremendous amount of punishment (HMS Victory had eighty shot holes in
places where water could be let in after Trafalgar and was still
basically operational, some ships faced many close full broadsides
and did not sink, in fact only one ship sank out of 60 or so 
engaged during the battle rather than the storm following it, and 
only because fire got into it's magazine.), casualties were usually 
suprisingly light. (For Trafalgar HMS Victory had 102 casualties, 57 
dead, of a complement of around 800. The worst French and spanish 
casualties during combat was around 500 out of 800 for some ships.) 
However, during that period the average number of casualties per ship 
per engagement was about 5 dead! In addition breaking off and 
escaping if things went against you was easily accomplished. (Keegan, 
John "Battle at Sea")

This last point seems to be quite relevant to FT. I have found that 
using the vector movement system, that unless one fleet is 
hopelessly outclassed in thrust rating it's relatively easy to break 
off an engagement and escape if combat is going against you.

This seems to reduce the chances of a decisive engagement. 

My feelings are that SML based ships have a better chance of making a 
decisive engagement under these conditions, since all of their punch 
can be used in the early stages of the battle, perhaps making 
the battle decisive after only two turns of contact. 

While beam based fleets need to be able to have the time to wear
their opponents down... who in turn tend to have the chance to 
disengage and regroup to avoid decisive defeat.

Has anyone any thoughts on this? 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard Slattery	     richard@mgkc.demon.co.uk
Politics makes estranged bedfellows. 
     Goodman Ace
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~