Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Pratt <valen@gatecom.com>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 7:31 AM
Subject: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Glenn M Wilson" <triphibious@juno.com>
> To: <Stargrunt-Fullthrust@yahoogroups.com>;
<FullThrust@yahoogroups.com>;
> <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 6:52 AM
> Subject: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts
>
>
> >
> > On Fri, 9 Mar 2001 02:51:17 -0800 (PST)
> > =?iso-8859-1?q?Michael=20Robert=20Blair?= <pellinoire@yahoo.com>
writes:
> > >To put it very bluntly.
> > >DD vs BB? The DD dies, live with it.
> > >
> >
> > As it should be. <grin>
> >
> > >If anything most starship games do not give small
> > >ships a hard enough time. Fighters always seem to be
> > >of exaggerated usefulness - people take the Yamato as
> > >a normal example of the superiority of aircraft over
> > >BBs and apply this model to the space games forgetting
> > >just what a concentration of airpower this
> > >represented.

For a good book on just this topic, try "The Naval Battle of
Guadalcanal:
Night Action 13 November 1942."  U.S.N. destroyers and cruisers tangle
with
I.J.N. destroyers and two battleships...  The U.S. won, but only because
they were able to keep the battleships from bombarding Henderson Field
and
the Japs scuttled won of thier own battleships the next day.  It is
interesting that the reason the Jap captain scuttled his battleship was
because a US airstrike the next day nocked out communications to one of
his
engine rooms and it was incorrectly reported as the engine room being
knocked out.  He didn't think they could survive tell dusk against the
US
airstrikes.  Well, by the time they finished abondoning the ship, it was
dusk...  The first I.J.N. battleship loss of the war was mistake they
made
themselves...

> > Yeah, anybody know just how many carriers were involved in this
strike?
>
> umm... all of them...
>
> Seriously, all 10 american fleet carriers launched something in the
> neighborhood or 320 strike aircraft!
> As a side note, when Musashi (the other yamato class) was sunk earlier
in
> the war, she took 12 torpedos and 19 dive bomb strikes before she wnet
> down...
>
> >
> > >I know I am biased, I don't like fighters - I would go
> > >for the pre WW I model.
>
> I agree... but then I'm a battleship junkie myself.  Before WWII, most
of
> the admirality's of the world belived that aircraft would fight it out
in
> the skies above a major fleet action, much the same way the destroyers
of
> jutland fought between the apposing battle lines.
>
> > >
> > >I can't help but see fighters as air-superiority and
> > >ground attack craft launched from orbit with no part
> > >in a fight in space.
> > >
> > >Michael
> > >
> > Well, it depends on your basis for the game model - One modern CV
with
> > full complement should be able to sink multiple Kirov, Missouri's
etc.
> > But then that's hardly a fair (or even reasonable) model.  I like
the
> > 'Extended Range Air Force' model for SF space war myself but yes if
this
> > is WW2 in space then strike craft (fighters) are over rated.
> >
A Kirov, yes; a Missouri, I wouldn't be so sure.  The U.S.N. doesn't
have
the ordance to deal with that type of armor anymore...	In WWII, they
did;
dive bombers and torpedoe bombers.  When was the last time a Harpoon or
tomahawk was tested against 12" steel armor???	Yes, you can smash the
lightly armored supperstructure, but that's not going to put the ship
down
(unless the captain gets a false report of an engine room being
destroyed
and then scuttles the ships)...

IAS