Author Topic: Naval Pictures VII: Underway, Shift Colors! (Read 152644 times)

Colt Ward · « **Reply #390 on:** 11 November 2019, 10:44:48 »

A ship on eternal patrol has been found- the USS Grayback SS208, one of the more successful Pac subs of WWII with 14 credited ships. Launched just before Pearl Harbor from the sub yard in Groton, she sailed to the sound of the guns in the Pacific. On her first war patrol she played tag with a Japanese submarine but finally managed to shake it after 4 days and being unable to get into attack position. Her fifth war patrol, she sank 4 landing barges, Japanese sub I-18 (one of 25 Japanese subs lost to Allied subs), rescued a B-26 aircrew from a Japanese controlled island. On her ninth war patrol she went through her torpedo load in five days after making contact with Japanese shipping.

On her tenth and final patrol she again went through her torpedo load- ordered home with 2 left on board, which by Japanese records she loaned to a freighter after heading back to Pearl Harbor. A carrier plane spotted her on the surface and carried out what must have been a devastating attack as the pilot claims it exploded and sank . . . but they depth charged the spot until they got the oil slick. With the wreckage found, the damage to the sub confirms the Japanese records- heavy damage aft of the conning tower. The Grayback's commander, Commander John A Moore, was awarded his 3rd Navy Cross for the patrol and the sub itself had two unit commendations.

Commander John A Moore

grimlock1 · « **Reply #391 on:** 11 November 2019, 12:03:12 »

Quote from: Daryk on 11 November 2019, 09:10:39

Using the engines to turn is called a "twist"... I'm not sure how much good the sail could have done from the picture...

Turning via engines is called a twist. I don't get naval jargon, but I know enough not to argue.

I've seen this story related in the two websites as well a as at the Intrepid museum. The mention at the museum itself didn't have the photo of the "sail" but it did have a photo of a compartment full of bunks that were stripped to their frames for material.

Kidd · « **Reply #392 on:** 13 November 2019, 13:29:49 »

F-35 performing a vertical landing on HMS Queen Elizabeth while she refuels at sea from HMS Tideforce with HMS Northumberland RASing on the other side

Big pic link here cause there's a wealth of detail in it: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJL96FCXYAIrQqi.jpg

Later on the group joined up for exercises with USS Philippine Sea (far right) and USS Truxtun (far left)

Wrangler · « **Reply #393 on:** 14 November 2019, 09:36:33 »

HNLMS Abraham Crijnssen, the sneakiest ship in the Royal Netherlands Navy navy during world war II.

The ship was minesweeper during the Second World War. The ship was operating in the Java Sea in the Pacific when the Japanese came in calling. No time to spare, the crew chopped down some trees and made her not stand out. Essentially they successfully disguised the ship as a Jungle Island!

Quote from: HNLMS Abraham Crijnssen

Nothing to see here! Just small island, not a small warship!

The ship managed to evade detection was last ship pull out of area. She managed to get to Australia, where she was commissioned in their Navy as a Submarine Chaser. She in fact survives to this very day as a museum ship.

Fat Guy · « **Reply #394 on:** 14 November 2019, 09:56:25 »

In the days before infrared sensors, I could see that camouflage working quite nicely.

Sabelkatten · « **Reply #395 on:** 14 November 2019, 14:20:06 »

Modern small ship are typically IR-stealthed, so it may well workable today. :)

I am Belch II · « **Reply #396 on:** 14 November 2019, 17:03:07 »

Nice shot of the QE and the Royal Navy.

Kidd · « **Reply #397 on:** 16 November 2019, 18:13:40 »

Quote from: I am Belch II on 14 November 2019, 17:03:07

Nice shot of the QE and the Royal Navy.

Thank you, the credit goes to the RN Twitter accounts which are very well worth following; and here's more:

This is not HMS Queen Elizabeth...

HMS Prince of Wales enters the RN's carrier homeport of Portsmouth for the first time, escorted by HMS Sutherland, with a few helicopters of 820 Naval Air Squadron on deck

kato · « **Reply #398 on:** 22 November 2019, 10:16:06 »

German F125 frigates F222 Baden-Württemberg, F223 Nordrhein-Westfalen and F224 Sachsen-Anhalt:

Fourth unit isn't delivered yet. Note that both F223 and F224 still sport the "Hamburg" homeport under the pennant, i.e. they aren't formally commissioned yet.

Colt Ward · « **Reply #399 on:** 22 November 2019, 11:35:36 »

Interesting little bay window set up for VTOL flight deck ops.

kato · « **Reply #400 on:** 22 November 2019, 12:11:06 »

Flight Control Tower, was introduced with the previous F124 frigates (also centerline) and the A702 supply vessels (on port side of single large hangar door).

On A702:

Colt Ward · « **Reply #401 on:** 22 November 2019, 12:24:49 »

Sure, makes sense but usually you do not get stern shots of ships.

Daryk · « **Reply #402 on:** 22 November 2019, 19:59:50 »

That was a sweet shot of those three ships, Kato... :thumbsup:

I am Belch II · « **Reply #403 on:** 22 November 2019, 22:04:54 »

The German fleet on the move nice.

DoctorMonkey · « **Reply #404 on:** 23 November 2019, 03:40:06 »

Quote from: I am Belch II on 22 November 2019, 22:04:54

The German fleet on the move nice.

Does Britain need to get ready to sink it for a third time (I accept the High Seas Fleet sunk themselves but that was in acknowledgement of their defeat and it was done in British waters)

Kidd · « **Reply #405 on:** 23 November 2019, 03:56:05 »

The mini control tower with two hangar doors side by side gives the impression they're really beamy...

kato · « **Reply #406 on:** 23 November 2019, 04:12:52 »

That's mostly the angle. They're 491 ft long and 62 ft wide - a 7.9 : 1 ratio.

For comparison (for current ships in the same size class) Arleigh Burkes have a 7.7 : 1 ratio, French-Italian Horizons have a 7.5 : 1 ratio - i.e. both are beamier.
All three roughly conform to the "rule-of-thumb" ratio of length^(2/3)+1 that relates to stability in the water.

ANS Kamas P81 · « **Reply #407 on:** 23 November 2019, 10:01:13 »

Makes you wonder about some of those Imperial Japanese ships, now. Yubari was 11.5:1 for length:beam...

kato · « **Reply #408 on:** 23 November 2019, 10:15:51 »

Quote from: ANS Kamas P81 on 23 November 2019, 10:01:13

Makes you wonder about some of those Imperial Japanese ships, now. Yubari was 11.5:1 for length:beam...

Wasn't that uncommon until about the 60s for claimed speed benefits. Somewhere inbetween 10:1 to 11:1 was a common light cruiser ratio.

Higher ratios result in better performance at high speed. With the introduction of gas turbines this became less significant with better power-to-weight performance in engines.

Daryk · « **Reply #409 on:** 23 November 2019, 10:22:35 »

Maximum speed is directly related to hull length. It's why carriers are so fast.

Ruger · « **Reply #410 on:** 23 November 2019, 10:56:29 »

Quote from: Daryk on 23 November 2019, 10:22:35

Maximum speed is directly related to hull length. It's why carriers are so fast.

You can see it even better when you compare the (speed of the) Iowa-class battleships vs the North Carolina and South Dakota-classes vs the older US battleships (not to mention other nations’ battleships). In comparison to the rest, the Iowa’s had a longer length to breadth ratio, and consequently, could achieve a higher flank speed.

Ruger

I am Belch II · « **Reply #411 on:** 23 November 2019, 20:17:24 »

The Iowa also had very powerful engine attached to it to them. They had a better horsepower to tonnage compared to the South Dakotas and NC class.

Daryk · « **Reply #412 on:** 23 November 2019, 20:25:26 »

Engines can only do so much before cavitation effects start robbing power.

Nightlord01 · « **Reply #413 on:** 25 November 2019, 03:18:15 »

Quote from: Daryk on 23 November 2019, 10:22:35

Maximum speed is directly related to hull length. It's why carriers are so fast.

In theory, yes. The truth is, though, that most ships run out of power a long time before they hit their theoretical drag loss limit.

Let's not forget that a greater length at the waterline means a heavier ship, all other things being equal, which means more power required.

Hydrofoils remain the fastest thing on the water, without a great length at the waterline, but they cheat somewhat.

Daryk · « **Reply #414 on:** 25 November 2019, 04:36:38 »

Somewhat? They cheat all the way around! ;D

Wrangler · « **Reply #415 on:** 25 November 2019, 06:56:51 »

Just random pick of ships...the Italian Warship, Antonioto Usodimore. She was a Navigatori-class destroyer, named for an explorer.
She like her sisterships were considerably bigger than her pre-war counterparts, weighing in at near 2,600 tons at full displacement. Speedy ships with 38 knots for flank speed, it's main weapons were 4.7 inch (120mm) guns and triple tubed 533mm torpedoes tubes, with assortment of 40m cannons later replaced with 37m anti-cannnons during the war. She like most of her sisterships did not survive the war, she was lost during escort mission in 1942 where she was escorting 3 freighters when the British submarine HMS Unbending torpedo her to the bottom.

That must been interesting when she got into fight, she have to show her broadside to use her guns, since some of them along with the torpedoes are in midships!

grimlock1 · « **Reply #416 on:** 25 November 2019, 08:38:55 »

Quote from: Nightlord01 on 25 November 2019, 03:18:15

In theory, yes. The truth is, though, that most ships run out of power a long time before they hit their theoretical drag loss limit.

Let's not forget that a greater length at the waterline means a heavier ship, all other things being equal, which means more power required.

Hydrofoils remain the fastest thing on the water, without a great length at the waterline, but they cheat somewhat.

A friend served on a US Coast Guard cutter that had been originally designed as a ~300 foot ship but was chopped down to ~200 feet fairly late in the design process, with no change in beam. It wasn't a problem at low speeds, but if they opened up the throttles, the ride got so rough that "inanimate objects started getting sea sick."

marauder648 · « **Reply #417 on:** 25 November 2019, 16:07:30 »

Well I just went and saw Midway.

Honestly, it was surprisingly good. Perhaps a bit busy as they did cram in Pearl, Doolittle AND Midway whilst focusing mainly on the Enterprise. But still, it was very good.

There was some historical inaccuracies, but these were not Pearl Harbour bad, then again NOTHING could be that bloody bad. And the inaccuracies were nothing that made me go REEEEEEEEEEEE!!!! Whilst pointing at the screen. There's was also some very very nice actual historical things as well (the B-26 Marauder attack on the IJN for example, a mix of accurate and inaccurate).

Acting was decent and all in all a good film.

Daryk · « **Reply #418 on:** 25 November 2019, 17:52:34 »

The most amazing thing to me was the incident that got that petty officer promoted was accurately portrayed (except for the fact that in real life, the petty officer in question hid for a bit afterwards because he'd left his battle station to do what he did)...

Nightlord01 · « **Reply #419 on:** 26 November 2019, 04:16:21 »

Quote from: grimlock1 on 25 November 2019, 08:38:55

A friend served on a US Coast Guard cutter that had been originally designed as a ~300 foot ship but was chopped down to ~200 feet fairly late in the design process, with no change in beam. It wasn't a problem at low speeds, but if they opened up the throttles, the ride got so rough that "inanimate objects started getting sea sick."

I'm guessing that was a draught issue, the keel was too shallow and the stabs probably too big. When you have that arrangement the ride gets unpleasant at high speeds, causing the ship to wobble on the X axis.

You don't even need to eliminate ~25% of the mass to achieve that. Try heading out on a ship critically low on water, fuel and stores, a small chop induces a very unpleasant ride, high speed makes it sea sick central. :brew: