Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Cairo1

Members
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

50 Excellent

About Cairo1

  • Rank
    Landsmen
  • Birthday 01/26/1990

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Chicago
  • Interests
    Boats

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I hope in the Future we get the ability to design our own hull forms, and superstructure, I know its complicated ant time consuming with the slices we saw in that early preview, but i would really like to form my ship exactly the way it is in my mind. I used to play From the Depths and build realistic ships or "replicas" but they made it so cannons do no damage unless you want 50cm machine guns. I really liked putting together my own combination of differing ships features, and Layouts, I hope we get to see something like that here. Maybe we can anticipate some kind of post release, or DLC module that lets us develop our own layouts of conning towers Tripod masts, hectopod masts, or Flying bridges and such
  2. Hey man don't be mean, The guy needs help, not a scolding.
  3. You can thank the French for those, Originally Akitsushima was also going to feature a Cannet Gun, However Japanese Naval thinkers though the quick firing 4.7 inch guns would be enough as the ludicrous load times of the 32cm guns made them theoretically ineffective. This Infuriated the French Naval attache ending Franco Japanese Naval cooperation. Intrestingly all 4 of these ships were also made in Japan. Please enjoy These Japanese Gunboats, Maya with her 2, 8 inch guns, and Akagi with her 4, 4.7cm guns Akagi was the first All steel hulled ship manufactured in Japan, and actually was only scrapped in the 50s Also Here is a Great little song Naming and showing Many ships From teh Russo Japanese War Era.
  4. The Information I present is largely from Japanese sources as opposed to American ones, I know White plains Claims the kill on Chokai, and Chikuma is credited to TBMs in US sources, however The Japanese Credit both kills to Samuel B. Roberts, Torpedoes did take Chokai's stern, but Japanese sources Credit Roberts for the torpedo rack detonation. TBMs did Hit Chikuma, but she was also scuttled by Naganami, The loss of command systems from Roberts gun fire is where the credit comes from. Perhaps 5'' gun fire alone was a bit much :3, but it was that which gave the crippling blows. (as a neat aside the little brother of one of Roberts crew works at the War of the pacific Museum in Fredricksburg Texas, I met him while i was there with a Japanese congressman) Keep in mind The Japanese Score Credit for kills differently then the US dose, to them its not about who gets in the last hit, but who strikes the fatal blow. All I have read about fire from either of the Yamatos in combat was of type 3 shells, to my knowledge that was what she was firing at White plains, these are Anti air, or used for bombardment, air bursting shells. Further more I though it was Kongo that hit Johnston with her main guns. Area of effect shell not directly fired at ships don't count. I don't find the US intelligence reports to be that biased, I figure mistakes are from lack of information. Most of them were marked secret, and for legitimate assessment, not post war anti Japanese propaganda. we certinally wanted to take advantage of anything the Japanese knew we did not. Here is the one for the 46cm''L45 mounts. https://web.archive.org/web/20141022175714/http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/primary_documents/gvt_reports/USNAVY/USNTMJ Reports/USNTMJ-200F-0384-0445 Report O-45 N.pdf
  5. Perhaps This is a case of looking for Realism in the wrong places, but i do not mind the randomness at all. How would one nation gather the needed information on the armor layout of an enemy? in addition to the armor lay out, then you have the armor theory, what I am saying is what nation just published weather they have an inclined belt, or how thick it is, or how high or low to the waterline it sits. I can see the benefit of trying to gather expectation on your own ships then, but how will you know what the weight of an enemy shell is, its amount of explosive filler, how could you estimate the actual penetration even if you use your own guns? In reality old ships were used for target practice, but also in the early treaty era modern ships became target practice and demonstrators of theory. you just don't know until you try is what i am saying. I would rather Development time be dedicated to additional game play features, more CG models, improvements to already existing systems. New features like night battles, which i second, I would really like to see search lights cut through the darkness. Let our destroyers act like real ladies before they die in hell fire.
  6. 天気晴朗ナレドモ波高シ,Tenki seiro naredomo nami takashii, Weather is serene with large waves. This was one of the most prophetic statements prior to the outbreak of the battle of Tsushima. By clear weather the statement means spotting and observation will be without hindrances, large waves is a comment on the high assessment of victory and the Japanese crews were extremely well trained, thus neither hindered by the wind and waves. The statement was sent to the Japanese Naval HQ along with informing them that battle was about to meet and the enemy has been spotted. Please enjoy this collection of film from the Russo-Japanese war.
  7. I think that part of the argument here may be a result of Wows, but not from their shitty gimmicky game play, People see the All guns forward in quad turrets, and think "oh wow thats a great idea" or see ships like Nelson thinking those ships were designed to sail head on and fight in such a manner. What may not be understood is the bad performance seen in quad turrets, specifically their bad accuracy, Bad, not poor Bad. Use over time, combined with the science of maths has shown us the reverberation and resonance of turrets with these layouts caused movement in the turret and loss of precision in aiming equipment. Other all guns forward designs were centered around the idea of the guns, and magazines inside a smaller area needing less heavy armor in order to comply with treaty regulations. These ships weren't designed to be powerful, they were designed to be clever. One can only be so clever before his own machinations come back to bite him. The French have a reputation for building clever ships, and often they are just a little too clever. Remember Bouvet which sank in just TWO minutes with just over 70 of her 700 man crew surviving. The power of pinesol
  8. Ah sory, I don't play with trash, so i dotn understand everything said about Wargaming's products Please enjoy this Colorized picture as an apology.
  9. I will fill in the information when i find where i read the story but this one is pretty good. Did you know the Japanese navy trained crews and performed experiments with High speed reverse maneuvering? The Japanese had concerns about their precious carriers taking catostrphic damage to the bow and thus taking in great water in the event of withdraw, thus trials began to be conducted and speeds clocked with Carriers, destroyers, and light cruisers in reverse. these trials actually saved the destroyer Amatsukaze who had her bow ahead of her bridge entirely blown away by a torpedo, she sailed away in reverse to prevent taking on greater water, and later had a temp bow affixed.
  10. Wrong. I can off the top of my head think of at least one example of a ship stopping under fire with submarines present. light cruiser Isuzu was sunk in 45 while taking on survivors from another ship transporting hundreds of IJA personnel. This was also after she was hit and had her boilers exposed to the open sea, she was able to keep pressure though and contuined untill an additional torpedo struck her. I am not saying Stopping under fire ends well, but it dose happen. Come to think of it that was not the first time Isuzu stoped under fire to take on survivors, or have you forgotten the great rescue of the Ozawa distraction force?
  11. Something like this actually did happen during WWII this is called Kedging, The seapalne tender Akitsushima Kedged in combat to avoid several diver bombs and lived to see another day. It was a semi common practice for maneuvering in the days of sail, in fact the USS Constitution kedged during the war of 1812 while fighting an English squadron. I am not saying this is something i want to see in game, its just neat.
  12. Where dose this statement come from? From what i have heard the Japanese 46cm guns had poor accuracy at best, while the US 41cm guns were magnificent. If i am not mistaken Either of the Yamatos never scored a hit with their 46cm guns, it is disputed if Kongo, or Musashi's secondary fire hit Samuel B. Roberts, but most scholars agree it was likely Kongo, and this exchange was at close range. Keep in mind as well, this was after Roberts sank 2 Japanese heavy cruisers with 5'' gun fire alone. Have you read this http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/primary_documents/gvt_reports/USNAVY/USNTMJ Reports/USNTMJ-200E-0633-0764 Report 0-30.pdf This is a post war assessment of Japanese fire control systems and it is a fairly good read "if you are a nerd like me" the TL;DR is more or less though japanese techolology was more or less on par with their american equivalents modernization was poor, and most ships still carried out of date, obsolete, or in cases no centralized fire directors, the best systems were present on or were in storage for late war destroyers, carriers, like Ryuhou, Ibuki, and Katsuragi, the Yamatos them selves had some fire directors that were less modern then those used in the 3rd Kongo modernization, though Japanese fire calculation computers were worth bring back to the US to study, we don't really know if they were present on the Yamatos, and much information on them was destroyed. In regards to weight in sea-warfare, I ask you to think about the battle of the yellow sea between the Japanese fleet, and the Qing Beiyang fleet, The Qing fleet included to well made, (poorly stocked) Ironclad battleships, but fell to the Japanese fleet without.
  13. What about Observation blimps? is this something that we can have for shell spotting, or increased detection?
  14. Here are a for and aft pic of the Japanese armored cruiser Nisshin, 3 of her 8 inch guns were disabled and she took the second most hits after Mikasa in the Japanese battle line. For Aft Another picture of the For turret Turret of the Armored cruiser Azuma, a shell struck one barrel and warped it in an interesting cartoonish way. Finaly an Image of the Russian Ship Orel Fianlly a neat quote from Captain 2nd rank Vladimir Semenoff, "It seemed as if these were mines, not shells, which were striking the ship’s side and falling on the deck. They burst as soon as they touched anything — the moment they encountered the least impediment in their flight. Handrails, funnel guys, topping lifts of the boats’ derricks, were quite sufficient to cause a thoroughly efficient burst. The steel plates and superstructure on the upper deck were torn to pieces, and the splinters caused many casualties. Iron ladders were crumpled up into rings, and guns were literally hurled from their mountings. Such havoc would never be caused by the simple impact of a shell, still less by that of its splinters. It could only be caused by the force of the explosion. The Japanese had apparently succeeded in realizing what the Americans had endeavored to attain in inventing their “Vesuvium.” In addition to this, there was the unusual high temperature and liquid flame of the explosion, which seemed to spread over everything. I actually watched a steel plate catch fire from a burst. Of course, the steel did not I burn, but the paint on it did. Such almost non – combustible materials as hammocks, and rows of boxes, drenched with water, flared up in a moment."
  15. It would be cool if ships raised signal flags to reflect status, but i would rather see voice actors for each of the nations.
×
×
  • Create New...