Re: Most Beautiful Dreadnought
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 5:07 pm
I consider a Dreadnought to be a ship with battleship caliber guns, all of which are of the same size and can fire to both sides of the ship.
Warships, naval battles, technology, weapons, navies of all eras, modeling, etc.
http://kbismarck.org/forum/
So you are including Alaska, Graf Spee, Furious, Glorious, and Coragious? Not to mention Robers and Abercrombie>Bgile wrote:I consider a Dreadnought to be a ship with battleship caliber guns, all of which are of the same size and can fire to both sides of the ship.
Yes, absolutely. I believe that represents the advance represented by Dreadnought and other contemporary ships. Prior to that, ships had more than one caliber of heavy gun and many of them couldn't fire to either side, which was very inefficient and is why Dreadnought completely outclassed them on the same displacement.lwd wrote:So you are including Alaska, Graf Spee, Furious, Glorious, and Coragious? Not to mention Robers and Abercrombie>Bgile wrote:I consider a Dreadnought to be a ship with battleship caliber guns, all of which are of the same size and can fire to both sides of the ship.
I agree with Bgile, as wellBgile wrote:Yes, absolutely. I believe that represents the advance represented by Dreadnought and other contemporary ships. Prior to that, ships had more than one caliber of heavy gun and many of them couldn't fire to either side, which was very inefficient and is why Dreadnought completely outclassed them on the same displacement.lwd wrote:So you are including Alaska, Graf Spee, Furious, Glorious, and Coragious? Not to mention Robers and Abercrombie>Bgile wrote:I consider a Dreadnought to be a ship with battleship caliber guns, all of which are of the same size and can fire to both sides of the ship.
In some cases but the ACW moniters for instance usualy carried the same size gun.Bgile wrote:Yes, absolutely. I believe that represents the advance represented by Dreadnought and other contemporary ships. Prior to that, ships had more than one caliber of heavy gun and many of them couldn't fire to either side, which was very inefficient and is why Dreadnought completely outclassed them on the same displacement.lwd wrote:So you are including Alaska, Graf Spee, Furious, Glorious, and Coragious? Not to mention Robers and Abercrombie>Bgile wrote:I consider a Dreadnought to be a ship with battleship caliber guns, all of which are of the same size and can fire to both sides of the ship.
I agree with Bgile, as wellKyler wrote:Yes, absolutely. I believe that represents the advance represented by Dreadnought and other contemporary ships. Prior to that, ships had more than one caliber of heavy gun and many of them couldn't fire to either side, which was very inefficient and is why Dreadnought completely outclassed them on the same displacement.Bgile wrote:[quote="lwd]So you are including Alaska, Graf Spee, Furious, Glorious, and Coragious? Not to mention Robers and Abercrombie>
SCHARNHORST, KONGO, REPULSE, ALASKA, RICHELIEU...my 6-10RF wrote:Where would you part Scharnhorst if its not in your top five crawfish?
Sure, but that predates the whole era of the battleship. I realize they qualify by my definition, and I suppose they do represent the first use of center line turrets although those were the only guns they had.lwd wrote:In some cases but the ACW moniters for instance usualy carried the same size gun.
Weill, I do what I can to be as friendly as can be, life is short anyway. I know that according to mkenny I'm the devil and Genda says no one is uglier than me (maybe because he did his assesment before mkenny appeared). However, I will like to know what do I look to you?Karl, you don't seem like the facebook type