Search found 233 matches
- Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:50 am
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Two Photos
- Replies: 83
- Views: 13524
Re: Two Photos
I don't think Busch is making it up, I think he is mistaken about the date that's all. If I translate to that English, what you try to say is: it doesn't fit my theory so it must be wrong. That's peculiar because pictures taken days before this entry (Most likely following from a diary or log, so t...
- Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:17 pm
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Two Photos
- Replies: 83
- Views: 13524
Re: Two Photos
Well, I wouldn't attach such grand accolades to the notification of the white line :cool: Still, it's an interesting fact and one which I have missed for many years and iff not pointed out here it would continue to go unnoticed. It continually surprises me what information can remain hidden in photo...
- Wed Aug 05, 2009 10:17 am
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Naval Architect, Naval Engineer, Marine Engineer...
- Replies: 12
- Views: 13082
Re: Naval Architect, Naval Engineer, Marine Engineer...
Naval architecture is a wider term, encompassing the entire ship design, while a marine engineer is tasked with engineering the power plant, system engineering structural integrity and so forth, but could be responsible for the general arrangement. A naval architect always has a strong background in...
- Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:07 pm
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck Speed
- Replies: 624
- Views: 75594
Re: Speed - Bismarck versus Scharnhorst/Gneisenau
Having your propellers close to hull, that is less distance between shafts, keeps the propeller closer in the boundary layer of a ship. Although this isn't always beneficial for vibrations and thrust variations, it generally is better for efficiency. Single screw ships nearly always have a better pr...
- Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:41 pm
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck Speed
- Replies: 624
- Views: 75594
Re: Speed - Bismarck versus Scharnhorst/Gneisenau
This just isn't reasonable, especially given the inefficiencies involved in a 3 shaft layout where the centre shaft is always less efficient due to water flow issues. This is a statement most likely based on the work by Stuart Slade on the navweaps site, but unfortunately he is wrong on this issue....
- Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:43 am
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Design 1047
- Replies: 10
- Views: 5221
- Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:44 pm
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Balance: offensive vs. defensive?
- Replies: 55
- Views: 22175
- Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:32 am
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Balance: offensive vs. defensive?
- Replies: 55
- Views: 22175
I may be a solitary voice, but I disagree with the idea that battleships were obsolete in WWII. I'd say it depends if you're sailing in the Pacific or the Atlantic. But even in the Pacific they had their moments. With radar being so primitive in the early days, gun range was sometimes enough to hit...
- Fri Nov 03, 2006 10:21 pm
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Balance: offensive vs. defensive?
- Replies: 55
- Views: 22175
And battleships still have a role to play today, as evidenced in the wars against Saddam Hussein. Wishful thinking. Just for the cute shots to fool journalists (and certain battleship fans who think they are actually useful). They are floating cruise missile batteries, nothing more. They used them ...
- Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:11 pm
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Balance: offensive vs. defensive?
- Replies: 55
- Views: 22175
- Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:59 pm
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Balance: offensive vs. defensive?
- Replies: 55
- Views: 22175
- Thu Nov 02, 2006 9:17 am
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Balance: offensive vs. defensive?
- Replies: 55
- Views: 22175
What surprises me is that no navy has ever thought of doing something like this..... Of course they have. But why on earth would you ever want to mount a big gun? Can't we just all stop making up fantasies about large guns? Not going to happen for the same reason we stopped used the catapult or the...
- Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:25 am
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Balance: offensive vs. defensive?
- Replies: 55
- Views: 22175
I'd agree. The twins never engaged a warship a normal cruiser would avoid or would have to avoid. All larger ships wete too risky to take on. You can have 5 cruisers (tonnage wise) for the Twins. Being 5 is even more easy to be somewhere else. You can even risk putting a few torpedo launchers on dec...
- Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:22 am
- Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
- Topic: Crew size
- Replies: 12
- Views: 4038
HMS Hood stored her ammunition for her HA guns in ready-to-use lockers. Each gun was fitted with 5 lockers holding a number of shells. 6 ammo deck hoists were available near these guns, but looked like a simple system to me. But it could be worse, the Japanese tripple 25mm guns required a crew of 9....
- Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:54 pm
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Red October
- Replies: 11
- Views: 5992