Author Topic: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth  (Read 208154 times)

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25214
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1350 on: 31 October 2018, 19:17:23 »
I was trying find a scary warship or something for Halloween post here.

USS Independence comes up!  That made me laugh. The guy who wrote it up when the ship came in for refueling, said it was "Big, Scary-Looking Navy Ship Refueling in Humboldt Bay"



I didn't find this ship scary looking.
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37922
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1351 on: 31 October 2018, 19:27:34 »
If I was in charge of painting and preserving that thing, I'd be scared...

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 26169
  • Need a hand?
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1352 on: 31 October 2018, 19:44:09 »
Paint it yellow and it'd look like a giant metal banana.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

Charlie 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2092
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1353 on: 31 October 2018, 19:57:57 »
In my first liberty port, Thessaloniki, Greece, I was asked by a local if I had come from the battleship.  I embarked on USS OAK HILL (LSD-51).

Dave Talley

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3616
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1354 on: 31 October 2018, 21:09:23 »
Paint it yellow and it'd look like a giant metal banana.


Resident Smartass since 1998
“Toe jam in training”

Because while the other Great Houses of the Star League thought they were playing chess, House Cameron was playing Paradox-Billiards-Vostroyan-Roulette-Fourth Dimensional-Hypercube-Chess-Strip Poker the entire time.
JA Baker

chanman

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3964
  • Architect of suffering
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1355 on: 31 October 2018, 22:54:46 »
I was trying find a scary warship or something for Halloween post here.

USS Independence comes up!  That made me laugh. The guy who wrote it up when the ship came in for refueling, said it was "Big, Scary-Looking Navy Ship Refueling in Humboldt Bay"


Maybe the writer's seen the accounting  ;D

Istal_Devalis

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4153
  • Baka! I didnt change my avatar because I like you!
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1356 on: 01 November 2018, 10:17:09 »
As a tangent inspired by certain other games: Can anyone recommend some good naval gaming rules?

Nothing ovetly complex, beer and pretzels level. Looking at something that could get a decent sized fleet battle done in 2-3 hours at most. A summary of their base mechanics would be appreciated, too.
« Last Edit: 01 November 2018, 10:33:45 by Istal_Devalis »

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40982
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1357 on: 01 November 2018, 11:16:45 »
Naval Command is pretty good.

Detection is pretty simple. You roll a die, add your radar stat(if you've gone active) and maybe a situational modifier or two, and if you've beaten your target's EW stat, you've detected him and can now shoot. Shooting is much the same, with a single die roll plus a couple modifiers for weapon quality and situation trying to beat that same EW stat to lock on to the target. Finally, the target tries to shoot down your shot, rolling a die plus modifiers and trying to beat the missile' defense value. If that last roll fails, you hit and do damage. Airstrikes function almost exactly the same way, with a few different modifiers to show the difference. Detection and misdirection are huge parts of the game, and once the missiles stat flying, things happen FAST. Deciding when to go active with your sensors is almost always a white-knuckle decision. Despite all that, it's very much a game first and simulation second, with playability taking precedence over detail accuracy.

It's available on Wargamevault, and the author's website has complete stats for a lot of navies.
« Last Edit: 01 November 2018, 11:21:19 by Weirdo »
My wife writes books

Sixteen tons means sixteen suits. CT must be repaired.

"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3535
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1358 on: 01 November 2018, 15:36:52 »
Why no, I can't get enough of Slava-class cruisers, why?

Lookit all them doodads stuffed all over the ship though.

I am Belch II

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10258
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1359 on: 01 November 2018, 16:14:20 »
I've always liked the Slava class cruiser. Lots of angry firepower on that ship.
Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

Euphonium

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2024
  • Look Ma, no Faction!
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1360 on: 01 November 2018, 17:32:08 »
HMS Viking, the RN's only 6-stack destroyer.
>>>>[You're only jealous because the voices don't talk to you]<<<<

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25214
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1361 on: 01 November 2018, 21:24:33 »
Was there reason why there was so many stacks on the early 20th century ships?  Due to placement of the engine rooms?
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

Feenix74

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3026
  • Lam's Phoenix Hawks
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1362 on: 01 November 2018, 21:26:29 »
I assume it is a stack per a boiler furnace.
Incoming fire has the right of way.

The only thing more accurate than incoming enemy fire is incoming friendly fire.

Always remember that your weapon was built by the lowest bidder.


                                   - excepts from Murphy's Laws of Combat

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1363 on: 02 November 2018, 01:50:29 »
I assume it is a stack per a boiler furnace.

Pretty much, mostly though it's because of the distance between furnaces. Modern ships use smaller engines which can generally be co-located, meaning you can actually have more than one exhaust pipe in a single stack, reducing the number of stacks. Old ships not so much, they'd run their boilers and furnaces sequentially down the ships centre line, with a stack above each one.

Insulation, fuel and engine technologies have come a long way, not even counting new types of engine like the GTRB or nuclear heat generation, a modern boiler is half the size of a turn of the century boiler of equivalent power. Smaller engines, closer together use need stacks.

kato

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2419
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1364 on: 02 November 2018, 02:25:40 »
Old ships not so much, they'd run their boilers and furnaces sequentially down the ships centre line, with a stack above each one.
Actually it was typically one stack per boiler room, sometimes with one stack for two adjacent boiler rooms. The 3-5 boiler rooms on such ships then each had 3-4 boilers mounted in them. The reason why you had this arrangement was that cruisers at that time typically grouped each boiler room with an adjacent machinery room, and the next boiler room would only come behind that. This was done for redundancy against battle damage at the time.

Post-WW1 this arrangement was given up, and you basically had a group of boiler rooms and behind them a group of machinery rooms. The exhaust from all adjacent boiler rooms could then be more easily routed through a single stack. The reason for the new arrangement was to save weight, which was typically then placed in additional armor. The new arrangement also required less space in ship length. The downside of it was that there were increasingly cruisers with only 2 boiler rooms which then in theory could be taken out entirely by hitting exactly the bulkhead between the two boiler rooms.

The one exception to giving up this arrangement was Britain, which kept the original redundancy arrangement except for five single-stack cruisers of the Leander class built from 1929; the last three of the class were completed with redundancy arrangement and two stacks. Hence why their WW2 cruisers built in the 30s typically still had 2 or 3 stacks.
That the size and number of the boilers was largely irrelevant in this development was largely irrelevant can be seen with Japanese cruisers btw - they kept using larger numbers of small boilers, but grouped their rooms together and rearranged the machinery rooms in front and behind them.

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1365 on: 02 November 2018, 05:30:18 »
Actually it was typically one stack per boiler room, sometimes with one stack for two adjacent boiler rooms. The 3-5 boiler rooms on such ships then each had 3-4 boilers mounted in them. The reason why you had this arrangement was that cruisers at that time typically grouped each boiler room with an adjacent machinery room, and the next boiler room would only come behind that. This was done for redundancy against battle damage at the time.

Post-WW1 this arrangement was given up, and you basically had a group of boiler rooms and behind them a group of machinery rooms. The exhaust from all adjacent boiler rooms could then be more easily routed through a single stack. The reason for the new arrangement was to save weight, which was typically then placed in additional armor. The new arrangement also required less space in ship length. The downside of it was that there were increasingly cruisers with only 2 boiler rooms which then in theory could be taken out entirely by hitting exactly the bulkhead between the two boiler rooms.

The one exception to giving up this arrangement was Britain, which kept the original redundancy arrangement except for five single-stack cruisers of the Leander class built from 1929; the last three of the class were completed with redundancy arrangement and two stacks. Hence why their WW2 cruisers built in the 30s typically still had 2 or 3 stacks.
That the size and number of the boilers was largely irrelevant in this development was largely irrelevant can be seen with Japanese cruisers btw - they kept using larger numbers of small boilers, but grouped their rooms together and rearranged the machinery rooms in front and behind them.

Heh, waddaya know. I just remember seeing the old Kent (County) class Australia, DC diagrams she was a beautiful ship, but her boiler rooms were all sequentially arranged, one after the other with a machinery room aft of them, except for no 2 boiler room, which was the other way around. Each boiler room had a stack above it, the machinery spaces used pretty much all of the below decks space right in the middle of the ship. Looking at the spec I'd say there were two boilers and furnaces mounted in each room. Seems pretty typical of 1930s British design.

Photo just for stamps

glitterboy2098

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 12087
    • The Temple Grounds - My Roleplaying and History website
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1366 on: 02 November 2018, 09:19:24 »
how does that all compare to modern conventionally powered ships? i know that Diesels replaced steam on some of the smaller ships, but the big ones still use oil fired boilers, feeding steam turbines.


unrelated question (though all deriving from some research i've been doing for an RPG writing project), some of the Kitty Hawk class of carriers had an ASW sonar mounted in the bow (the AN/SQS-23 sonar, according to wikipedia). since the ships didn't mount torpedoes or other anti-submarine weaponry as far as i can tell, what was the point of giving them an ASW focused sonar?
and if they had been equipped with torpedo launchers or ASROCs or whatever, would the combo even be useful for ASW work, given the size of the carrier?
« Last Edit: 02 November 2018, 09:42:56 by glitterboy2098 »

Ghost0402

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1267
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1367 on: 02 November 2018, 10:04:23 »
how does that all compare to modern conventionally powered ships? i know that Diesels replaced steam on some of the smaller ships, but the big ones still use oil fired boilers, feeding steam turbines.


unrelated question (though all deriving from some research i've been doing for an RPG writing project), some of the Kitty Hawk class of carriers had an ASW sonar mounted in the bow (the AN/SQS-23 sonar, according to wikipedia). since the ships didn't mount torpedoes or other anti-submarine weaponry as far as i can tell, what was the point of giving them an ASW focused sonar?
and if they had been equipped with torpedo launchers or ASROCs or whatever, would the combo even be useful for ASW work, given the size of the carrier?
Most modern ships are gas fired turbines or large two stroke diesels.
"Kiss my hairy ass Falcon,"  Star Colonel Onyx,  17th Wolf Regulars Cluster, Clan Wolf  Wars of Reaving.

Istal_Devalis

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4153
  • Baka! I didnt change my avatar because I like you!
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1368 on: 02 November 2018, 11:33:06 »
Naval Command is pretty good.

It's available on Wargamevault, and the author's website has complete stats for a lot of navies.
I was looking for more WWII oriented rules, but that looks to be worth a look too.

Anyone else?

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4963
  • O-R-E-O
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1369 on: 02 November 2018, 14:10:52 »
I was looking for more WWII oriented rules, but that looks to be worth a look too.

Anyone else?

Naval Thunder is WW 2, with an expansion for WW 1 and interwar.  Including stats for the Lexington-class BCs.

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25214
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1370 on: 02 November 2018, 15:41:25 »
The USS Ranger, sailing gunship/training/survey ship built in 1876.  She had a long life and a lot of names!  Most her career she was the Ranger, while during First World War within year she was renamed Rockport and the Nantucket to name few while she was in commission, she would become the TV Emery Rice in 1940 as training ship for civilians officers.  She sadly was decommissioned and scrapped in 1958, after becoming a museum ship.


This is image of her while she was anchor off the coast of California near Mare Island Navy Yard in 1899.

Fortunately, her unique 61 ton compound back-acting type Steam Engine was preserved and American Merchant Marine Museum in Kings Point. She certainly beautiful ship, same rest her wasn't preserved.
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

Elmoth

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3438
  • Periphery fanboy
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1371 on: 02 November 2018, 17:55:22 »
Must be the BT board or looking at the image on my phone, but at first I thought it had a wolf head on a black background in the upper sail.

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3535
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1372 on: 02 November 2018, 21:48:44 »
Must be the BT board or looking at the image on my phone, but at first I thought it had a wolf head on a black background in the upper sail.
I see a stylized cute doggo with its tongue hanging out

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1373 on: 03 November 2018, 06:12:01 »
how does that all compare to modern conventionally powered ships? i know that Diesels replaced steam on some of the smaller ships, but the big ones still use oil fired boilers, feeding steam turbines.


unrelated question (though all deriving from some research i've been doing for an RPG writing project), some of the Kitty Hawk class of carriers had an ASW sonar mounted in the bow (the AN/SQS-23 sonar, according to wikipedia). since the ships didn't mount torpedoes or other anti-submarine weaponry as far as i can tell, what was the point of giving them an ASW focused sonar?
and if they had been equipped with torpedo launchers or ASROCs or whatever, would the combo even be useful for ASW work, given the size of the carrier?

The sonar could be used to vector and ASW Helo in on target, or just to avoid the submarine. Most likely though, it was just to be able to energise the water, pump enough sonic energy into the water and you will find the submarine.

You don't need to be able to attack the sub for there to be benefit in knowing where it is. Since the carriers all had data link, they can transmit the position of submarines to other ships for those ships and helos to take out.

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3535
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1374 on: 03 November 2018, 07:08:08 »

unrelated question (though all deriving from some research i've been doing for an RPG writing project), some of the Kitty Hawk class of carriers had an ASW sonar mounted in the bow (the AN/SQS-23 sonar, according to wikipedia). since the ships didn't mount torpedoes or other anti-submarine weaponry as far as i can tell, what was the point of giving them an ASW focused sonar?

According to a quick Google, USS America of the class was the only psot WW2 US aircraft carrier to ever mount a sonar, so it was certainly out of the ordinary.

The SQS-23 was a very large, very long range sonar that escort frigates had trouble fitting on and outranged all ASW weapons of the time. Think the Light Gauss Rifle of sonars. Hence at the time it was perhaps a thought in the minds of TPTB, hey, why not stick one on. We've lots of space and it just might find something the escorts missed.

Bear in mind that this was in the era where the Kitty Hawk-class were still firing Terrier SAMs and the sonar used vacuum tubes.

But it never did amount to much and the sonar was removed later. There endeth the Great Carrier Sonar Experiment.

kato

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2419
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1375 on: 03 November 2018, 07:21:17 »
Only CVA-66 USS America actually carried the sonar. JFK carried the dome, but no sonar inside.

It was supposedly intended to improve discovery of the quieter Soviet November class SSNs being commissioned during its building time, and was planned as a wider fleet rollout (it was part of FRAM II for the Essex carriers, with 8 units receiving the sonar dome but not the sonar) but basically aborted with only the America installation ever tested. Factually it was replaced with ASCAC in the early 70s, an analysis center for underwater threats merging information from other ships and in particular sonars carried and sonobuoys dropped by ASW units within the carrier air wing (after they transitioned from attack carriers to multi-mission).

The SQS-23 sonar was the same unit that FRAM I already installed on 79 Gearing class destroyers.
« Last Edit: 03 November 2018, 07:24:48 by kato »

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8158
    • Project Zhukov Fan AU TRO's and PDFs
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1376 on: 03 November 2018, 12:09:46 »
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Project Zhukov Fan AU TRO's and PDFs - https://thezhukovau.wordpress.com/

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40982
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1377 on: 03 November 2018, 14:51:48 »


Not seen: The helmsman of the newer ship flipping off the older one while leaning on the ship's horn as he passes, because the geezer won't stay in the slow lane.
My wife writes books

Sixteen tons means sixteen suits. CT must be repaired.

"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul

I am Belch II

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10258
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1378 on: 03 November 2018, 20:02:35 »
That looks like all my battles in Civilation when you have such a huge tech advantage.
Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

Charlie 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2092
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1379 on: 03 November 2018, 20:55:51 »
That looks like all my battles in Civilation when you have such a huge tech advantage.
Dammit!  Why doesn't this website have a like button.