Unluckiest Warship

General naval discussions that don't fit within any specific time period or cover several issues.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7587
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by RF » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am

Pr_Eugen wrote:
Italian - 1-st division of heavy cruisers
Iwould be more specific here, the cruiser Zara.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

surfsup
Junior Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:58 am

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by surfsup » Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:56 am

You could probably add the General Belgrano to the list. As USS phoenix, she survived the torpedo devastation at Pearl Harbour only to fall victim to one 41 years later.

JtD
Member
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:37 pm

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by JtD » Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:13 pm

JtD wrote:Stability problems aren't a matter of luck, are they?

Mogami managed to sink five ships with a spread of six torpedoes, you'd call that luck if it hadn't been friendly ones. Unlucky for each of the five sunk.
Having read up a bit about Mogami recently, I think she's indeed a good candidate. Not only did she manage to sink the mentioned 5 friendly ships, but she also had 3 collisions during the war.

User avatar
Legend
Senior Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:46 am
Location: Tomahawk, Wisconsin

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by Legend » Tue May 05, 2009 12:59 am

That is unlucky! Did we mention the Shinano? Sunk while sailing out on her first mission...
AND THE SEA SHALL GRANT EACH MAN NEW HOPE, AS SLEEP BRINGS DREAMS.

surfsup
Junior Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:58 am

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by surfsup » Tue May 05, 2009 8:00 am

Legend wrote:That is unlucky! Did we mention the Shinano? Sunk while sailing out on her first mission...
Ouch...!!! How did I forget about her. She knew open seas for less than 24 Hours. Archerfish's biggest and indeed any sub's biggest prize.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7587
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by RF » Tue May 05, 2009 8:22 am

surfsup wrote:You could probably add the General Belgrano to the list. As USS phoenix, she survived the torpedo devastation at Pearl Harbour only to fall victim to one 41 years later.
With that longevity I wouldn't describe the Belgrano as being particulary unlucky, particulary being a PH attack survivor.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

tnemelckram
Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:45 am

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by tnemelckram » Wed May 06, 2009 2:44 am

Here's my nomination:

USS. Wlliam D. Porter DD 579D

Credits:

1. Almost torpedoed Iowa with Roosevelt aboard demonstrating to the President the fleet's proficiency in the tactic.

2. Captain cashiered and ship exiled to the Aleutians.

3. Left a 5 inch practice round in the base Commander's garden at end of exile and departure.

4. Earned the universal fleet greeting "Don't shoot- we're Republicans!".

5. Sunk in novel style by a kamikaze exploding underneath her while on radar picket duty off Okinawa.

Links to the interesting tale:

http://www.usshancockcv19.com/histories/willie-d.htm

http://diodon349.com/War/willie_d_porte ... _story.htm

DANFS is more tactful and graceful:"

http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/destroy/dd579txt.htm

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7587
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by RF » Wed May 06, 2009 8:07 am

With a career like that, you could make a movie. But would Hollywood be interested in making a movie that makes the US Navy look like a laughing stock?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
chcrawfish
Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Contact:

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by chcrawfish » Fri May 08, 2009 6:28 pm

RF,
Today's Hollyweird would gladly take the opportunity to make the US Navy look like dog poo.

I gotta agree with the nomination of HMS Mary Rose. The flagship of the fleet. Brand new and the most expensive ship yet built for the Royal Navy. With King Henry VIII watching from the shore, she set out from Portsmouth, made one turn, the gun ports on that side dipped to the water, she took on water, capsized, and went down. I believe Henry was described as being properly miffed. I saw the reconstruction project of her wreck when I visited Portsmouth in 1993, but the roll of film I used on that part of my vacation was lost before we made it back to the US. :(
"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."
- General George S. Patton, Jr

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by lwd » Sat May 09, 2009 5:16 pm

RF wrote:With a career like that, you could make a movie. But would Hollywood be interested in making a movie that makes the US Navy look like a laughing stock?
Hollywood is interested in making money. Next comes making money. Then making money. Then comes "Reputation". A distant 5th is political points if that high and they vary by the personalities involved.

tnemelckram
Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:45 am

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by tnemelckram » Sun May 10, 2009 3:31 am

chcrawfish: "Today's Hollyweird would gladly take the opportunity to make the US Navy look like dog poo."

Lwd: "Hollywood is interested in making money. Next comes making money. Then making money."

Lwd hit the nail on the head. From September 2001 until about mid 2006 the heroes from Hollywood were all meat heads, all the time, the less thoughtful the better, shoot first and ask questions later. They know which way the wind is blowin' and money blows in with the wind. Good Republican money men out there in Hollywood! Antd then:

Lwd: "A distant 5th is political points if that high and they vary by the personalities involved."

Indeed Lwd! the people who run Hollywood are part of the vaguely defined but definitely existing group that run this country (Wall Street, oil, defense contractors, large industrial firms, most importantly the media, and some excessively liberal pressure groups who also won't hesitate to hit us over the head with the government to teach us their ideas.) They have no real political party or sincere views and are more like the looters in Atlas Shrugged. For them, politics is a pretend fight staged to stir up and distract the rest of us poor slobs.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by lwd » Sun May 10, 2009 3:02 pm

tnemelckram wrote:... Good Republican money men out there in Hollywood! ....
In Hollywood there are probably a good deal more Democrats than Republicans not that it makes much difference and we are getting way off topic especially for this forum.

User avatar
rtwpsom2
Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 6:13 am

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by rtwpsom2 » Mon May 11, 2009 1:19 am

I am going to agree with Gneisenau. When first laid down, Hitler decided she and her sister needed to be bigger so the original keel was scrapped. After a re-design and re-build, she was launched only to have her stopping gear fail to deploy causing her to crash into the pier on the opposite side of the bay. With a boiler/turbine system more powerful than any ship in the German navy, she was still slower than Scharnhorst. After multiple design issues compounded to make her heavier than originally planned she had a freeboard barely two meters at her lowest point. Nearly her entire deck would be awash in anything but the smoothest seas at the slowest speeds. Here bow was so poorly designed that it nearly broke off on her shakedown cruise. After re-building the bow failed to help, she was never able to use her A turret successfully during an entire engagement, and in fact parts of the turret well flooded several times. In 1940 a torpedo from the submarine HMS Clyde put a hole in her bow and actually knocked the bow off center, causing it to be torn down and re-built again. After being repired she broke out into the Atlantic with her sister and arrived in Brest, only to recieve another torpedo hit in the stern. While undergoing repairs in drydock she was hit by four bombs causing extensive damage. She was repaired just in time to leave Brest and make for northern waters only to hit a mine on the way there. Ten days later, while undergoing repairs she was hit by a bomb during a night raid which ignited her Anton turrets powder magazine, blowing off the turret, peeling open the hull at the bow, and killing 122 crewmen. At this point German high command said "nuff o' this shiat" and sent her to Gotenhafen for a complete bow rebuild and up-gunning. When it was determined by Hitler that the rebuld was untennable, she sat alone for over three years, until 1945 when she was towed to the entrance of Gotenhafen harbor and sunk as a blockage to the harbor. And of all the ignomaneous fates possible, she was scrapped by the polish.

Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by Bgile » Mon May 11, 2009 2:24 am

I have to admit that's a pretty good case.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7587
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Unluckiest Warship

Post by RF » Mon May 11, 2009 8:04 am

chcrawfish wrote:RF,

I gotta agree with the nomination of HMS Mary Rose. The flagship of the fleet. Brand new and the most expensive ship yet built for the Royal Navy. With King Henry VIII watching from the shore, she set out from Portsmouth, made one turn, the gun ports on that side dipped to the water, she took on water, capsized, and went down. I believe Henry was described as being properly miffed. I saw the reconstruction project of her wreck when I visited Portsmouth in 1993, but the roll of film I used on that part of my vacation was lost before we made it back to the US. :(
The sinking of Mary Rose was as a result of a decision by Henry VIII arm her with heavier artillery, without considering the ships original design. These heavier guns upset the weight distribution of the ship, and being close to the waterline any heeling became potentially a fatal problem because the extra weight would make the ship heel more.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Post Reply