Map and chart for U.S and Canada cost,with nets and mines update!

[Gerald]

hello! Are this practicable or possibility to find?

[irish1958]

hello! Are this practicable or possibility to find?

Admiral King didn't think the U-Boats were a threat, and the US Nave really didn't get serious about ASWF until 1943,
I don't think there was much in the way of mine fields and/or nets on the US coasts. The cities remained lighted (?lit), outlining the ships for attack by the subs. Air support for the Navy and Coast Guard remained a very low priority and hunter-killer groups non existent.
The US Navy refused to listen the the British about the U-Boat threat and ignored their experience and tactics (until about 1943).
Admiral Kimmel was unfairly blamed for Pearl Harbor, but Admiral King's failures were magnitudes greater and he was considered a war hero.
Anyway, the US Coasts were mainly unprotected.

[Jimbuna]

Admiral King didn't think the U-Boats were a threat, and the US Nave really didn't get serious about ASWF until 1943,
I don't think there was much in the way of mine fields and/or nets on the US coasts. The cities remained lighted (?lit), outlining the ships for attack by the subs. Air support for the Navy and Coast Guard remained a very low priority and hunter-killer groups non existent.
The US Navy refused to listen the the British about the U-Boat threat and ignored their experience and tactics (until about 1943).
Admiral Kimmel was unfairly blamed for Pearl Harbor, but Admiral King's failures were magnitudes greater and he was considered a war hero.
Anyway, the US Coasts were mainly unprotected.

All of it true and accurate but open up the Campaign_SCR in GWX3.0 mission editor and a different picture regarding minefields and anti sub nets emerges :yep:

[Gerald]

All of it true and accurate but open up the Campaign_SCR in GWX3.0 mission editor and a different picture regarding minefields and anti sub nets emerges :yep: For relevant info.

[krashkart]

You can filter by year what is displayed in the editor, too, to see how those minefields grow over the years. The Grey Wolves made the coasts of England a very frightening place by '43 or so. :o

[Jimbuna]

You can filter by year what is displayed in the editor, too, to see how those minefields grow over the years. The Grey Wolves made the coasts of England a very frightening place by '43 or so. :o

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/9596/mines.jpg (http://img508.imageshack.us/i/mines.jpg/)

@Vendor
If you'd care to name me a port on the US east coast and a date I'll post it up for you if you want.

[Gerald]

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/9596/mines.jpg (http://img508.imageshack.us/i/mines.jpg/)

@Vendor
If you'd care to name me a port on the US east coast and a date I'll post it up for you if you want.
Mr Jim! Your engagement is appreciative.The sequence are from: Norfolk-Key West and area approximately nearby Galveston and New Orleans,if there are some info about port Security it
would be truly great( other port are also throughout premier)
;)

[Jimbuna]

Galveston

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/5804/galveston.jpg (http://img687.imageshack.us/i/galveston.jpg/)

Key West

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/1346/keywestg.jpg (http://img689.imageshack.us/i/keywestg.jpg/)

[Jimbuna]

New Orleans

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/15/neworleans.jpg (http://img295.imageshack.us/i/neworleans.jpg/)

Norfolk

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/9509/norfolk.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/i/norfolk.jpg/)

[Gerald]

New Orleans

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/15/neworleans.jpg (http://img295.imageshack.us/i/neworleans.jpg/)

Norfolk

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/9509/norfolk.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/i/norfolk.jpg/) is this for 1942 or 1943? I don`t mention that before but this is more perfect and detailed...Yes

[Jimbuna]

There is very little if any change during the war.

[Gerald]

There is very little if any change during the war.

:lurk:

[ryanglavin]

Admiral King didn't think the U-Boats were a threat, and the US Nave really didn't get serious about ASWF until 1943,
I don't think there was much in the way of mine fields and/or nets on the US coasts. The cities remained lighted (?lit), outlining the ships for attack by the subs. Air support for the Navy and Coast Guard remained a very low priority and hunter-killer groups non existent.
The US Navy refused to listen the the British about the U-Boat threat and ignored their experience and tactics (until about 1943).
Admiral Kimmel was unfairly blamed for Pearl Harbor, but Admiral King's failures were magnitudes greater and he was considered a war hero.
Anyway, the US Coasts were mainly unprotected.

Yes, unprotected, but you really can't blame King. For a really good support argument, Clay Blair goes on on pretty much a 5 page rant supporting King. It actually makes sense, which is the cool part.

[nemchenk]

All of it true and accurate but open up the Campaign_SCR in GWX3.0 mission editor and a different picture regarding minefields and anti sub nets emerges :yep:
I'm intrigued by what appears to be a mounting picture of GWX being quite different from historical reality -- I guess I was under the mistaken impression that it was a close simulation... :oops: As a new player, are my assumptions about how close GWX is to WWII way off base?

[Jimbuna]

I'm intrigued by what appears to be a mounting picture of GWX being quite different from historical reality -- I guess I was under the mistaken impression that it was a close simulation... :oops: As a new player, are my assumptions about how close GWX is to WWII way off base?

It is a fine line trying to form a balance between historical accuracy, realism and gameplay immersion.

One area we believed was seriously unhistorical was the games inability to prevent harbour raiding anywhere the individual chose.

To this end we put nets and mines, not so much as to make them impossible to enter but to at least make the effort more challenging with a leaning toward what was more historically accurate (certainly in most ports).

[ryanglavin]

It is a fine line trying to form a balance between historical accuracy, realism and gameplay immersion.

One area we believed was seriously unhistorical was the games inability to prevent harbour raiding anywhere the individual chose.

To this end we put nets and mines, not so much as to make them impossible to enter but to at least make the effort more challenging with a leaning toward what was more historically accurate (certainly in most ports).

Hey jim, you got a map for murmansk?

[Jimbuna]

Hey jim, you got a map for murmansk?

Here ya go....crap writing an all :DL

http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/3354/78158723.jpg (http://img692.imageshack.us/i/78158723.jpg/)

[Gerald]

Yes, unprotected, but you really can't blame King. For a really good support argument, Clay Blair goes on on pretty much a 5 page rant supporting King. It actually makes sense, which is the cool part.

About historical argument,can you be more specific in your speech,I refer to your last part of Clay Blair and his title-role under the War.

[FIREWALL]

I think what we all forget sometimes is.

The GWX Team were not made priviy of the Hardcode in SH3 and did their best to work around it. :salute:

To those that don't think GWX NYGM are realistic enough.

Take a Year out of your life and show us what you can build. :DL

[Gerald]

I think what we all forget sometimes is.

The GWX Team were not made priviy of the Hardcode in SH3 and did their best to work around it. :salute:

To those that don't think GWX NYGM are realistic enough.

Take a Year out of your life and show us what you can build. :DL GWX Dev Team,they implant the sharpness for the game.for me is this high priority and outstanding.

:lurk:

[nemchenk]

Take a Year out of your life and show us what you can build. :DL

Indeed. However, the first step is to identify what a new mod is trying to "fix", which is why I asked my question. I'm sure I won't be able to "take a year out of my life", but there may very well be things which can be improved in GWX Gold, and I plan to contribute my efforts to making GWX the best it can be.

I apologise if my comments appear to be disparaging of the GWX team and their efforts -- that could not be further from what my intention is. However, if there are areas where GWX can be improved I don't see why we, the playerbase, should not explore ways of doing so.


Respectfully,

nemchenk

[ryanglavin]

About historical argument,can you be more specific in your speech,I refer to your last part of Clay Blair and his title-role under the War.

I'll find it in the book for you, but for a quick reference, its the last 1/4th of the first volume, which was drumbeat.
If I can recall correctly, Blair made the claim that, King wanted to build more escorts for coastal waters, but the British and convoys took priority.


Edit: great, can't find the book.

[Gerald]

I'll find it in the book for you, but for a quick reference, its the last 1/4th of the first volume, which was drumbeat.
If I can recall correctly, Blair made the claim that, King wanted to build more escorts for coastal waters, but the British and convoys took priority.


Edit: great, can't find the book. If you find more about the book,let me be notify if there are some supplementary or link.....:cool:

[irish1958]

I'll find it in the book for you, but for a quick reference, its the last 1/4th of the first volume, which was drumbeat.
If I can recall correctly, Blair made the claim that, King wanted to build more escorts for coastal waters, but the British and convoys took priority.


Edit: great, can't find the book.
That is quite true; all admirals wanted more of everything and they had to make do with what was available. The war dept stripped the Pacific fleet of most of their destroyers and sent them to the British. Because of Republican resistance in the Congress, no effort to gear up for war occurred before 1942 and decisions to concentrate on building the Army (and Marines), the Pacific fleet, and the Manhattan project took precedence.
However, the Navy department did nothing to limit merchant losses until 1943.
No coastal blackouts, no air patrols, no arming of merchant vessels, no formation of convoys to make use of the limited resources, no effort to seek out and eliminate the milk cow supply subs, without which the patrols to the East and Gulf coasts of the USA would be severely limited or impossible.
Admiral King was responsible for all of the above omissions.

[Gerald]

That is quite true; all admirals wanted more of everything and they had to make do with what was available. The war dept stripped the Pacific fleet of most of their destroyers and sent them to the British. Because of Republican resistance in the Congress, no effort to gear up for war occurred before 1942 and decisions to concentrate on building the Army (and Marines), the Pacific fleet, and the Manhattan project took precedence.
However, the Navy department did nothing to limit merchant losses until 1943.
No coastal blackouts, no air patrols, no arming of merchant vessels, no formation of convoys to make use of the limited resources, no effort to seek out and eliminate the milk cow supply subs, without which the patrols to the East and Gulf coasts of the USA would be severely limited or impossible.
Admiral King was responsible for all of the above omissions. what more can I ask for,true and hard info.
-Thank you! :up:

[irish1958]

And Admiral King's greatest sin was to totally ignore the 2 and 1/2 years of British experience with anti-sub warfare (ASW).

[Gerald]

And Admiral King's greatest sin was to totally ignore the 2 and 1/2 years of British experience with anti-sub warfare (ASW). He probable be hard controversial also.many people suffer with his denial of innovation in new technological,or was he despotic?

[Jimbuna]

That is quite true; all admirals wanted more of everything and they had to make do with what was available. The war dept stripped the Pacific fleet of most of their destroyers and sent them to the British. Because of Republican resistance in the Congress, no effort to gear up for war occurred before 1942 and decisions to concentrate on building the Army (and Marines), the Pacific fleet, and the Manhattan project took precedence.
However, the Navy department did nothing to limit merchant losses until 1943.
No coastal blackouts, no air patrols, no arming of merchant vessels, no formation of convoys to make use of the limited resources, no effort to seek out and eliminate the milk cow supply subs, without which the patrols to the East and Gulf coasts of the USA would be severely limited or impossible.
Admiral King was responsible for all of the above omissions.

Sadly, that was the case :hmmm:

[Gerald]

Now I`ts time to go South ,Gulf of Mexico,and see what they can offer me,but the trip is long and to have much torps i`ts good (IXC) but I need avoid convoy and only take singel ships,so after the relevant info from Mr jim,about the ports in the Gulf, I can sit and relaxing.
:lurk:

[ryanglavin]

King employed coastal convoying in May 1942, using small coastal vessels and private vessels.

Found this also: Professor Robert W. Love has stated that "Operation Drumbeat (or Paukenschlag) off the Atlantic Coast in early 1942 succeeded largely because the U.S. Navy was already committed to other tasks: transatlantic escort-of-convoy operations, defending troop transports, and maintaining powerful, forward-deployed Atlantic Fleet striking forces to prevent a breakout of heavy German surface forces. Navy leaders, especially Admiral King, were unwilling to risk troop shipping to provide escorts for coastal merchant shipping. Unscheduled, emergency deployments of Army units also created disruptions to navy plans, as did other occasional unexpected tasks. Contrary to the traditional historiography, neither Admiral King’s unproven yet widely alleged Anglophobia, an equally undocumented navy reluctance to accept British advice, nor a preference for another strategy caused the delay in the inauguration of costal escort-of-convoy operations. The delay was due to a shortage of escorts, and that resulted from understandably conflicting priorities, a state of affairs that dictated all Allied strategy until 1944."

[Gerald]

King employed coastal convoying in May 1942, using small coastal vessels and private vessels.

Found this also: Professor Robert W. Love has stated that "Operation Drumbeat (or Paukenschlag) off the Atlantic Coast in early 1942 succeeded largely because the U.S. Navy was already committed to other tasks: transatlantic escort-of-convoy operations, defending troop transports, and maintaining powerful, forward-deployed Atlantic Fleet striking forces to prevent a breakout of heavy German surface forces. Navy leaders, especially Admiral King, were unwilling to risk troop shipping to provide escorts for coastal merchant shipping. Unscheduled, emergency deployments of Army units also created disruptions to navy plans, as did other occasional unexpected tasks. Contrary to the traditional historiography, neither Admiral King’s unproven yet widely alleged Anglophobia, an equally undocumented navy reluctance to accept British advice, nor a preference for another strategy caused the delay in the inauguration of costal escort-of-convoy operations. The delay was due to a shortage of escorts, and that resulted from understandably conflicting priorities, a state of affairs that dictated all Allied strategy until 1944." and his engagement,so back in time as shore duty at Annapolis in 1912 and there are plenty of txt and history as well His career was resurrected by one of his few friends in the Navy, CNO Admiral Harold "Betty" Stark, who realized that King's talent for command was being wasted on the General Board. Stark appointed King as Commander-in-Chief, Atlantic Fleet in the fall of 1940, and he was promoted to Admiral in February 1941. On 30 December 1941 he became Commander-in-Chief, United States Fleet. On 18 March 1942, he was appointed Chief of Naval Operations, relieving Admiral Stark. He is the only person to hold this combined command / Some of the text is from Wikipedia) but still relevant!

[TOM KIMMEL]

Yes, unprotected, but you really can't blame King. For a really good support argument, Clay Blair goes on on pretty much a 5 page rant supporting King. It actually makes sense, which is the cool part.

King overturned the favorable findings of the Naval Court of Inquiry regarding Kimmel. The unjustness of this is fully revealed by Professor Michael Gannon--see my website for details at:
http://www.pearlharbor911attacks.com.
Regards,
Tom Kimmel

[Gerald]

King overturned the favorable findings of the Naval Court of Inquiry regarding Kimmel. The unjustness of this is fully revealed by Professor Michael Gannon--see my website for details at:
http://www.pearlharbor911attacks.com.
Regards,
Tom Kimmel :lurk:

[Snestorm]

Admiral King didn't think the U-Boats were a threat, and the US Nave really didn't get serious about ASWF until 1943,
I don't think there was much in the way of mine fields and/or nets on the US coasts. The cities remained lighted (?lit), outlining the ships for attack by the subs. Air support for the Navy and Coast Guard remained a very low priority and hunter-killer groups non existent.
The US Navy refused to listen the the British about the U-Boat threat and ignored their experience and tactics (until about 1943).
Admiral Kimmel was unfairly blamed for Pearl Harbor, but Admiral King's failures were magnitudes greater and he was considered a war hero.
Anyway, the US Coasts were mainly unprotected.

1: One must remmember that Admiral King was not "just" Commander and Chief Atlantic, but Commander and Chief Navy. The whole US Navy. Worldwide.
2: Transatlantic convoys continued to recieve USN & USCG escort.
3: Japan was the major threat to USA at the time. Hawaii, Phillipines, Wake Island, Alaska.
(Yes. Japan actualy had ground forces on US territory).
4: There weren't enough assets to go around, and The Pacific had to be priorty #!.
5: King personaly held responsability over The Atlantic so he, and he alone, was accountable.
6: Although there were a great number of ships sunk along USA's East Coast, those losses effected England's war effort much more so than they did USA's.

Is it better to have unprotected convoys, or no convoys?
It remains "the million dollar question" in NATO today.
And there are many intellegent pros and cons on both sides.

Remmember also, the germans feasted very well on Englands unescorted convoys early in the war.

On Admiral Kimmel, I'll have to agree with you but, that's a political discussion that would go way beyond the boundaries of SH3. Very hot topic.

[Snestorm]

:lurk:

This was an exellent post, Vendor. Thank you.

[Snestorm]

King overturned the favorable findings of the Naval Court of Inquiry regarding Kimmel. The unjustness of this is fully revealed by Professor Michael Gannon--see my website for details at:
http://www.pearlharbor911attacks.com.
Regards,
Tom Kimmel

Reading up from the bottom of the page, I missed the original source.
Thank you, sir. Good luck, and best wishes for your deserved victory, and justice.

[Gerald]

Reading up from the bottom of the page, I missed the original source.
Thank you, sir. Good luck, and best wishes for your deserved victory, and justice.

engaging and substantial simplicity,this thing are pleasant, :up:

[Snestorm]

Self edit.
Removed as off topic.

[Gerald]

While I have you here, may I ask a question?
Not SH3 related.

When a swede posts a video, on youtube, is it better for me to post a reply in danish, or english?

Some of the videos are in swedish, and some in english.
I'm always at a loss for which language to reply in.
Your help will be greatly appreciated.
english? I`ts more likely at the person can handle,any of your reply,so some mess,can be determine.

[Snestorm]

Self edit.
Removed as off topic.

[Gerald]

This was an exellent post, Vendor. Thank you.

For praise and independent enjoy!

:up:

[Gerald]

When she posts the video in swedish, I post my reply in danish.

When she posts a video in english, this is where I am unsure whether to reply in danish or english. I support her videos, and wish to do whats best for her, not me.

Fashionable excelience to carry out! :up:

[nemchenk]

3: Japan was the major threat to USA at the time. Hawaii, Phillipines, Wake Island, Alaska.
(Yes. Japan actualy had ground forces on US territory).
4: There weren't enough assets to go around, and The Pacific had to be priorty #!.
6: Although there were a great number of ships sunk along USA's East Coast, those losses effected England's war effort much more so than they did USA's.

I believe this point is discussed very well in "Why the Allies Won", an excellent somewhat-unorthodox look at WWII. I don't have the book on me at the moment, but I'll look up the relevant figures and post them here as soon as I can. The gist of it, however, is that the Pacific was NOT the US top priority. Many more men and much more materiel was used by the US against Germany than Japan at every point in the war.

There was however a major split in the US military and political circles on this issue, which continuously tried to push the Pacific theater as top priority over the Atlantic/European one, very much against Roosevelt's personal beliefs and direct orders. This whole question might very well be a manifestation of that struggle.

Anyway, if you like 20th Century and Military history, I definitely recommend "Why the Allies Won" -- it is a very informative and challenging read :know:

[Gerald]

I find this...


$288,000,000,000 — cost to U.S.
$212,336,000,000 — cost to Germany
$111,272,000,000 — cost to France
$93,012,000,000 — cost to Soviet Union
$49,786,000,000 — cost to Britain
$41,272,000,000 — cost to Japan
$1,600,000,000,000 — direct economic costs of WWII

http://www.google.se/imgres?imgurl=http://www.b26.com/page/img/united.states.air.force.world.war.ii.metals.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.b26.com/page/united.states.air.force.world.war.ii.medals.htm&usg=__C7mCiwPJcfCQVK0cq5ye_vh3uRM=&h=1003&w=640&sz=104&hl=en&start=11&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=a1UjtrJF9JMPNM:&tbnh=149&tbnw=95&prev=/images%3Fq%3DU%253BS%2Bunder%2BWWII%26um%3D1%26hl% 3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26channel%3Ds%26tbs%3Disch:1

[Snestorm]

Fashionable excelience to carry out! :up:

Yes. Your new avatar is also fashionable. Congrats.

[Gerald]

There are a link,more to honor!

[irish1958]

This has been a good discussion re Adm King and Kimmel. They both served their country well and to the best of their ability. They deserve our respect and admiration. They did what they thought was right at the time, but because of the fog of war, in retrospect they sometimes chose the wrong course of action.

The retrospectoscope in the historian's and lawyer's weapon of choice.

[nemchenk]

True, true, irish1958...

and yet: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

[Gerald]

This has been a good discussion re Adm King and Kimmel. They both served their country well and to the best of their ability. They deserve our respect and admiration. They did what they thought was right at the time, but because of the fog of war, in retrospect they sometimes chose the wrong course of action.

The retrospectoscope in the historian's and lawyer's weapon of choice.

Thank you for your great support! :up:

[Gerald]

Self edit.
Removed as off topic.

what we talk latel today,about Video or some translation?

[Gerald]

Yes. Your new avatar is also fashionable. Congrats.

I always like superlativ :up:

[Paul Riley]

Jim, (or anyone else if they have them)

Do you have any maps for the west coast (looking over the bay of DEATH!) of France by chance?,ideally from 1940 onwards.I plan to give them froggies a wake up call sometime tonight.
Cheers captain! :up:

[Gerald]

Jim, (or anyone else if they have them)

Do you have any maps for the west coast (looking over the bay of DEATH!) of France by chance?,ideally from 1940 onwards.I plan to give them froggies a wake up call sometime tonight.
Cheers captain! :up: So early in the war,man you need som rest for a while....well anyway, Mr jim have option I think....:yep:

[Jimbuna]

What sort of maps Paul?

Do you mean screenshots of the scripted campaign layer?

[Gerald]

What sort of maps Paul?

Do you mean screenshots of the scripted campaign layer?

I think....:)

[Paul Riley]

What sort of maps Paul?

Do you mean screenshots of the scripted campaign layer?

The ones with the nets and mines matey ;):D

[Jimbuna]

The ones with the nets and mines matey ;):D


TOP SECRET

The French Biscay ports aren't netted or mined until captured by the Germans.

[irish1958]

TOP SECRET

The French Biscay ports aren't netted or mined until captured by the Germans.
"Loose lips shin ships"

[Gerald]

"Loose lips shin ships" :up:

[Jimbuna]

"Loose lips shin ships"


http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/2391/bubblegum21.gif

[Paul Riley]

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/2391/bubblegum21.gif

I didnt get it either :haha:
Sounds like some Irish sorcery to me :o;)

[Gerald]

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/2391/bubblegum21.gif I wonder if he or she no whats happen.....:hmmm:

[irish1958]

Dyslexia:wah: strikes again

[Gerald]

Dyslexia:wah: strikes again

:help:

[Herr-Berbunch]

The ones with the nets and mines matey ;):D
And, of course, Jim's lovely red scribbles!

[Jimbuna]

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/1309/seagullmine.jpg

[Gerald]

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/1309/seagullmine.jpg Beware of mines,great Pic :yep:

[Gerald]

Liverpool,early 1940?

[Jimbuna]

Liverpool,early 1940?

Jan 40

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/3452/86103029.jpg (http://img823.imageshack.us/i/86103029.jpg/)

[Gerald]

Jan 40

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/3452/86103029.jpg (http://img823.imageshack.us/i/86103029.jpg/)

Thank you Jim! I have sneak in twice,and the first one was so close, to hit a mine on portside
but I was lucky,in the port of Liverpool there are fine gorgeous ship,so now I can go for a hat-trick,but the mines will change later I think to another place.....right? :up:

[Jimbuna]

Thank you Jim! I have sneak in twice,and the first one was so close, to hit a mine on portside
but I was lucky,in the port of Liverpool there are fine gorgeous ship,so now I can go for a hat-trick,but the mines will change later I think to another place.....right? :up:

Couldn't possibly say :smug:

[Gerald]

Couldn't possibly say :smug:

.....I see :hmmm:

[Jimbuna]

.....I see :hmmm:


The minefields don't change position :DL

[Gerald]

The minefields don't change position :DL plotting time an fireworks all the night, :ping:

[Jimbuna]

plotting time an fireworks all the night, :ping:

LOL :DL

[Gerald]

LOL :DL about tassel?