Prev: Re: Capital vs. others Debate Next: Minefields: WAS RE: [OFFICIAL] Missile Ideas

Graf Spee tonnage was Re: Historical DD's

From: rpaul@w... (Robin Paul)
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 13:07:08 -0500
Subject: Graf Spee tonnage was Re: Historical DD's

>> That's what I meant by overtaken... (and I should have said "slow for
a
>> cruiser").  They were also a LONG way outside the Treaty limits, more
like
>> 14000 tons than the grudgingly-admitted 12000.  
>  ^^^^^
>
>I'd like to know your source of information for this estimate, as I am
>attempting to write some rules for WW2 navel engagements myself, and
>constantly run across the problem of inconsistent data.  So far I have
the
>Graff Spee weighing in at 10500 - 16000 tones, but the figure of 12,100
is
>most often quoted, and by what I have generally come to regard as the
most
>reliable sources...

In my senile state, I can't remember where I got 14000 tons, but on
Andrew
Toppan's excellent "Haze gray and under way" site (the URL is
http://www.membrane.com/~elmer/navy/) he quotes 11700 standard, 15900 to
16200 full load.  An excellent site for your purposes, by the way, give
it a
look.

cheers,
"Rob Paul
NERC Institute of Virology 
Mansfield Road, Oxford OX1 3SR	  Tel. (01865) 512361
rpaul@worf.molbiol.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
  "Once again, villainy is rotting meat before the maggots of justice!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--"

Prev: Re: Capital vs. others Debate Next: Minefields: WAS RE: [OFFICIAL] Missile Ideas