Author Topic: Naval Pictures III: Splice The Main Brace! (Read 256283 times)

Fat Guy · « **Reply #60 on:** 09 December 2016, 15:15:49 »

Quote from: Weirdo on 09 December 2016, 09:00:04

Kinda surprised the Russians cared what happened to it. Eh, it was before I really paid attention to such things, so I'll assume there was something else going on factoring into that.

On a similar note, whatever happened to that deal with Russia buying some Mistrals? Kept hearing it was pending and controversial, and then nothing.

France canceled the sale after Crimea. Egypt wound up buying them, and a bunch of Ka-52s to put on them.

glitterboy2098 · « **Reply #61 on:** 09 December 2016, 15:16:28 »

Quote from: Kidd on 09 December 2016, 15:03:35

It will be both (!) CATOBAR and ski jump, so still very much an experimental duck. Carrier Three however will not only be CATOBAR, it is may be EMALS catapult as well. The Chinese have built/are building both steam and EMALS catapult land-based training facilities. Likely they will conduct testing and decide which one to build Carrier Three as based on that... not to mention closely scrutinising reports on USS Ford's performance.

Current assumption is that there will be a skijump for the fighters, and one catapult for support planes. (Whatever their C-2 greyhound, and E-2 Hawkeye equivalents end up being.)

Weirdo · « **Reply #62 on:** 09 December 2016, 15:19:47 »

Quote from: JadeHellbringer on 09 December 2016, 15:06:36

Wrangler may have meant that Lexington, actually- after retiring from active service, she was used as a training carrier for many years in the Gulf of Mexico, where she remains today as a museum ship.

Visited her once, gorgeous vessel. Coulda done without the entire large compartment devoted to her role in filming scenes for Pearl Harbor, but overall I'd love to visit her again. Shame there's nothing else down there to really justify a trip. Also wish she'd been there when I lived there.

Quote from: Kidd on 09 December 2016, 15:03:35

It will be both (!) CATOBAR and ski ...

Catajump?! Yikes, I take back what I said about hobbled aircraft. They get that working right, she'll be able to get some serious weight into the air... :o

Weirdo · « **Reply #63 on:** 09 December 2016, 15:23:58 »

Quote from: Fat Guy on 09 December 2016, 15:15:49

France canceled the sale after Crimea. Egypt wound up buying them, and a bunch of Ka-52s to put on them.

That's really surprising(the second part), though I admittedly know nothing about Egyptian naval responsibilities or ambitions. I suppose with all those choppers they'd make for good patrol command ships, either looking for refugee boats in the Med, or pirates in the Red.

Kidd · « **Reply #64 on:** 09 December 2016, 15:39:00 »

Quote from: Weirdo on 09 December 2016, 15:23:58

That's really surprising(the second part), though I admittedly know nothing about Egyptian naval responsibilities or ambitions. I suppose with all those choppers they'd make for good patrol command ships, either looking for refugee boats in the Med, or pirates in the Red.

Sudden forced sale of multirole amphibs/support ships? A LOT of countries were interested. Not always one gets valuable assets under such circumstances, like the Kidds turned out to be for the USN.

Add: on top of HADR and marine amphib hooks along the coast, use of such vessels might include ASW and heli patrol as a form of cheap 'sea control ship'. The Egyptians would be concerned with keeping the Suez and East Med free of conflicting interests... Israeli investment in Sa'ars and German subs spring to mind.

Either way, lotsa potential, pretty cheap.

Dragon Cat · « **Reply #65 on:** 09 December 2016, 15:55:06 »

As it's a picture thread here's the Mistral and a cool cutaway

And a cool looking ship I haven't seen before the USS Blue Ridge Command and Communications ship

ColBosch · « **Reply #66 on:** 09 December 2016, 20:09:14 »

Quote from: Weirdo on 09 December 2016, 15:19:47

Catajump?! Yikes, I take back what I said about hobbled aircraft. They get that working right, she'll be able to get some serious weight into the air... :o

Or she'll slap the landing gear right off anything she tries to launch. I suspect the catapult will be on the angled portion, for launching supply planes.

I am Belch II · « **Reply #67 on:** 10 December 2016, 00:05:52 »

The Mistral is a pretty neat ship. I know the deal with Russia is over I wonder where the ships will go.

Weirdo · « **Reply #68 on:** 10 December 2016, 01:11:30 »

Quote from: I am Belch II on 10 December 2016, 00:05:52

The Mistral is a pretty neat ship. I know the deal with Russia is over I wonder where the ships will go.

The answer is seven posts above yours.

marauder648 · « **Reply #69 on:** 10 December 2016, 02:34:28 »

The Italian sail training ships Amerigo Vespucci (left) and Cristoforo Colombo. Vespucci still serves today, while Colombo was handed over to the Soviets and was decomissioned in 1959.

marauder648 · « **Reply #70 on:** 10 December 2016, 07:16:00 »

Not a warship but still a fine looking lady that was too far advanced for her time, the SS Great Eastern.

Sharpnel · « **Reply #71 on:** 10 December 2016, 08:06:48 »

Panzerschiffe Deutschland

and the French response, the Dunkerque

Wrangler · « **Reply #72 on:** 10 December 2016, 13:09:12 »

Here a gem of a German ship, the Battleship Gneisenau.

She operated in the Baltic, where she and sister ship fought starting in 1939. She helped conquest of Norway and clashed with British fleet.

After hitting mine, near Terschelling in 1942. Which damaged her turbines damaged, making her limp to Norway. There while being repaired, she was bombed. Her B and C 11 inch guns turrets were transferred to coastal defense facilities. The ship returned to Germany where she became rebuilt so it could mounted heavier 15 inch cannons. However the reconstruction was cancelled due to reallocation of resources for the war effort. The ship was eventually used a block ship, sunk prevent allies entering the harbor in Poland.

The last part of the ship was the Gneisenau's turrets which were transferred to a fortification in Norway during the war and ironically remained operational until 2000.

Stormlion1 · « **Reply #73 on:** 10 December 2016, 17:54:33 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 10 December 2016, 13:09:12

Here a gem of a German ship, the Battleship Gneisenau.

She operated in the Baltic, where she and sister ship fought starting in 1939. She helped conquest of Norway and clashed with British fleet.

After hitting mine, near Terschelling in 1942. Which damaged her turbines damaged, making her limp to Norway. There while being repaired, she was bombed. Her B and C 11 inch guns turrets were transferred to coastal defense facilities. The ship returned to Germany where she became rebuilt so it could mounted heavier 15 inch cannons. However the reconstruction was cancelled due to reallocation of resources for the war effort. The ship was eventually used a block ship, sunk prevent allies entering the harbor in Poland.

The last part of the ship was the Gneisenau's turrets which were transferred to a fortification in Norway during the war and ironically remained operational until 2000.

So what happened to the Turrets in 2000?

BradGB · « **Reply #74 on:** 10 December 2016, 18:02:02 »

http://bunkersite.com/locations/norway/orland/orlandet.php

Daryk · « **Reply #75 on:** 10 December 2016, 18:30:23 »

Cool site, thanks for the link! O0

I am Belch II · « **Reply #76 on:** 10 December 2016, 19:22:17 »

Thats a nice coastal battery drawing.
Turrets from the Arizona were used to defend Oahu after Pearl Harbor.

Wrangler · « **Reply #77 on:** 10 December 2016, 21:22:18 »

Quote from: Stormlion1 on 10 December 2016, 17:54:33

So what happened to the Turrets in 2000?

The Fortress where the turret exists was retired. The turret was last used (firing the gun, moving the turret) in 2000, the Fortress was turned into a museum.

Quote from: I am Belch II on 10 December 2016, 19:22:17

Thats a nice coastal battery drawing.
Turrets from the Arizona were used to defend Oahu after Pearl Harbor.

I take it those turrets were dismantled after the war? I've never heard of that before.

kato · « **Reply #78 on:** 11 December 2016, 14:06:14 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 10 December 2016, 21:22:18

The turret was last used (firing the gun, moving the turret) in 2000, the Fortress was turned into a museum.

Norway effectively retired all WW2 gun turrets in the mid-1960s, placing them in reserve for another decade and then placing them under long-term storage conditions on-site till the late 1990s when they were dismantled (most cases) or turned into museums (... over the next two decades, since the Norwegian military still runs other stuff at these sites often).

A handful of sites were modernized and kept in use in the same timeframe though - mostly coastal radar sites, but also in particular the underground torpedo batteries protecting Norwegian ports. Postwar 15 of these remained in use, reduced to 9 in the mid-60s and 5 in the mid-80s. These remained the focus of a construction program that planned to replace all of these in situ with new torpedo-firing bunkers and add two new ones; only three such batteries finished this reconstruction (in 1981, 1994 and 1998) and one was newly built (finished 2001). One of these modernized bunkers, at Bergen, was converted into a museum. The new-built torpedo battery fired its only test launch of two torpedoes the same day the Norwegian parliament decided to shut down all torpedo batteries.

Only two of Gneisenau's turrets made their way to Norway btw, the third was split up into its three guns and each mounted in a separate emplacement on a fort in the Netherlands. The second Norwegian Gneisenau turret protected the same area as the above torpedo battery at Bergen, was dismantled and scrapped in 1968 and functionally replaced with the concurrent upgrade of the torpedo battery.

Stormlion1 · « **Reply #79 on:** 11 December 2016, 14:49:50 »

Battery Pennsylvania in Hawaii, one of the Arizona's guns being fired after being emplaced as a shore battery. Sadly long since scrapped and Battery Arizonia was never finished.

Dragon Cat · « **Reply #80 on:** 11 December 2016, 17:53:55 »

Future enemies at peace. The German heavy cruiser Admiral Graf Spee anchored off Spithead for the 1937 Fleet Review. In the background are the battleship HMS Resolution and the battlecruiser HMS Hood.

truetanker · « **Reply #81 on:** 11 December 2016, 19:42:56 »

ColBosch · « **Reply #82 on:** 12 December 2016, 00:00:47 »

Quote from: truetanker on 11 December 2016, 19:42:56

TT

Can't link Facebook photos directly. You'll need to track down the original, or save and reupload it.

truetanker · « **Reply #83 on:** 12 December 2016, 13:55:34 »

I see...

TT

God and Davion · « **Reply #84 on:** 12 December 2016, 16:58:33 »

Quote from: Dragon Cat on 11 December 2016, 17:53:55

Future enemies at peace. The German heavy cruiser Admiral Graf Spee anchored off Spithead for the 1937 Fleet Review. In the background are the battleship HMS Resolution and the battlecruiser HMS Hood.

Awesome picture. You can see the evolution from WWI to 20s to late 20s. Nice!

Dragon Cat · « **Reply #85 on:** 12 December 2016, 18:26:51 »

There's a few from that same review

The Soviet battleship MARAT off Spithead for the 1937 Fleet Review. In the background is the Royal Sovereign Class battleship HMS RAMILLIES.

Dragon Cat · « **Reply #86 on:** 12 December 2016, 18:28:14 »

The British aircraft carrier HMS FURIOUS off Spithead for the 1937 Fleet Review.

Dragon Cat · « **Reply #87 on:** 12 December 2016, 18:35:00 »

And this is a really cool shot

HMS FURIOUS (right) with either HMS GLORIOUS or HMS COURAGEOUS off Gibraltar.

worktroll · « **Reply #88 on:** 13 December 2016, 23:17:31 »

We've seen her before in earlier threads, but here's HMS Rodney in colour! Worth noting as the only battleship to fire torpedoes at another battleship.

She, and her classmate HMS Nelson, were nicknames the "Cherry Tree Ships", as they'd been "cut down by Washington" - naval treaty, not president.

One question for our naval-gazers - these two battleships were given the derisive names "Rodnol" and "Nelsol", for their perceived resemblence to fleet oilers seen at a distance. The common reason given is the existance of a class of fleet oilers with names ending in "-ol". I've only been able to find examples of the "Ol" class fleet oilers, from end of WW1 through WW2 in some cases. These tankers had names like Oligarch, Olwen, and Oleander. A later mid-60s class of fleet oiler was also called the "Ol" class.

So can anyone else identify the oiler class ending in "-ol", or have people got things round the wrong way?

And here's the Olcades. Judge for yourself ;)

W.

worktroll · « **Reply #89 on:** 13 December 2016, 23:28:47 »

Speaking of naval atrocities ...

HMS Furious, a Courageous class "large light cruiser". (It should be noted that these "large light cruisers" has displacements 1,000 tons greater than 1906's HMS Dreadnought ...)

While the others of her class carried 4x15" guns in twin turrets, the Furious was meant to carry two 18" guns in single turrets, one fore, one aft. Only one - the fore - was ever fitted. The ships had been designed for their massive turrets, and were stable and sailed well. However, test firings of the single 18" gun caused damage to the hull and frame of the ship.

All three of the class were later converted to aircraft carriers. And - according to the sailors who'd nicknamed the trio the Outrageous class - not a moment too soon.