Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Stiebler
The fact that the sinkings of Panamanian ships were mostly in 1942-3 might reflect only the high number of *all* Allied losses in that period.
The *proportion* of Panamanian ships in convoys could have remained the same throughout the war. Indeed, statistically it is possible (although unlikely) that there were fewer Panamanian ships under charter during this period. The figures prove little. You should compare them with all Allied losses during the same period. And even this might prove only that Panamanian ships were better/worse constructed and therefore less/more likely to sink. Or that they were less likely to be found in convoys for their protection than the registered ships of the Allies. You can argue this all ways round - insufficient information.
Stiebler.
|
Absolutely.
In the past I simply relied on Observer's information and any caveats like the above that he mentioned.
In either case, baring any additional information I may go with a 10% figure just to get things rolling. Odds are, no one will ever say a word because of the nature of the statistical analysis required to determine what's really most realistic. Unlike the RuB deckgun reload time, the nationality of a ship you sink really doesn't matter that much, except for immersion, so I think few will care if the number is actually 20% for one month in 1943 and 17% in 1945 in some other convoy.
Such is life.
