[FT] Re: Small vessels and Line of Battle

At 12:23 PM -0400 9/13/99, Imre A. Szabo wrote:
> > Jutland had destroyer and light cruiser squadrons engaging
>> each other, if I recall--the big boys were preoccupied with
>> each other, and probably would have had trouble hitting the
>> small fry anyway.
>
>Not true.  Several German DD's were hit by heavy guns during the
>withdrawl.

And a couple of CLs were flattened by heavy guns and secondary 
batteries from the big boys at Jutland. The main guns did have 
trouble hitting ships smaller than a battlewagon (a relative thing, 
the hit percentage was fairly low all day for both sides) but the 
secondaries did ok (again, relatively). I don't have the exact hit 
percentages handy, but could work them up with sufficient clamour

> >
>> There was an action in WW2 in which the Americans had an
>> ambush.  Japanese fleet came steaming through a channel, USN
>> DD's on either side engaged with torpedoes while the
>> American heavy ships crossed the Japanese T and obliterated
> > them.

That's Surigao Strait, part of the Leyte Gulf campaign (again, "The 
Battle of Leyte Gulf", Cutler, Pocket Books, 1996, $6.50 is the best 
palce to start). The Japanese had 2 BB, 1 CA and 4 DD. They got 1 DD 
out (the indomitable Shigure). The US Navy had about 2 dozen PT 
boats, 9+ DD, 8 CA and 6 BB (including 5 survivors of Pearl Harbor 
less than three years earlier, a sobering thought) arranged in a 
gauntlet through the straits with the CA's and BB's capping the end 
of the strait and crossing the Japanese T just by virtue of starting 
position. I'm NOT gaming anything like Surigao outside of a campaign 
(or maybe a MOTAS could play the USN...) , although just the PT boat 
action has possibilities: fight past the destroyers to get to the 
battleships. There were enough torpedoe boats out to sink everything 
the Japanese had, but the destroyers managed to fight them off; the 
Shigure was especially active in the phase.

Leyte in general generates many terrific tactical scenario 
possibilities. Frankly, the ability to generate a struggle of the 
magnitude, scope and complexity of the Leyte Gulf campaign is 
*exactly* what I want out of a campaign game. Consider it to be a 
'Use Case' in design terms.

> > I can't think of an occasion (which may mean nothing as I'm
>> not a naval historian) when DD's were worth bringing to the
>> party--except for the threat of torpedoes.  The equivalent,
>> I'd say, is a rack of SM's, capable of doing heavy damage in
>> one punch--but torps don't take up as much space on a real
>> DD as a SMR would on a FTFB ship.  But if you allocated each
>> DD a MT missile, or figured out some way to split a SMR rack
> > among a DD squadron, you could make it work.

Lets see, Destroyers... Well, first of all the threat of torpedo 
attack is very legitimate, and the effect of rapid fire 5 and 6 inch 
guns at short does count for something (cf Second Battle of 
Guadalcanal). Destroyers can also counter enemy torpedo attacks, 
provide AA fire and ASW support, lay smoke screens, rescue survivors, 
operate independantly, search, make flank attacks, detach to send 
message to avoid revealing the main forces' location or courier an 
important message, land supplies, and here I run out of ideas close 
to hand. Most of these missions would be applicable in FT terms.

I'll handle the missile issue seperately
Michael Carter Llaneza
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1991-1950
Devolution is very real to me.
Whenever I hear the "Odd Couple" theme, I get this image of Dennis 
Rodman borrowing Marge Schott's toothbrush.
Overkill: A Sufficient Preponderance of Firepower
http://www.flash.net/~maserati/
Security and Privacy Alert:
http://www.cryptonym.com/hottopics/msft-nsa.html