09-23-07, 01:42 PM
|
#25
|
Sonar Guy 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: 14 Meters
Posts: 394
Downloads: 29
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jimbuna
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by minute
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jimbuna
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by minute
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Spruence M
Seems to me that aircraft carriers should be worth more than a battleship. I understand the German mentality about it, but they were the most dangerous things on the high seas.
|
I find it more reasonable - the British Carriers were not raising the same threat as the American ones did in the Pacific. Even the Illustrious was carrying mosly Swordfish biplanes that were not as dangerous as modern aircraft... They did help to sink the Bismark but it still took the old battleships to seal the deal. |
Aircraft and 'Jeep' Carriers often shadowed the convoys headed north to Russia. Disembarking vitally needed fighters to Russia, Gibraltar, Malta, North Africa etc. It was due mainly for that reason that Hitler would not allow his heavy units out into the Atlantic for fear of them being damaged or sunk.
The effect/impact carriers had in the Pacific is well documented (and rightly so). But do not underestimate the contribution made by their lesser/unsung British cousins. |
I didn't meant to underestimate them, they were very important ships, no doubt about that. I was just commenting on the SHIII renown values, thinking that they had (IMHO) less obvious (at that time) firepower than a battleship. I wonder, if a kaleun had a choice of firing his torps either at on battleship or a Bogue carrier, which one he would have gone for? |
With reference to personal firepower your absolutely correct  But try to imagine the firepower they could project via their airwing and I believe that would be far greater
As for which one to go for....purely hypothetical and probably never been tested in RL conditions :hmm: ....I'd go for the shot that had the best chance of success  |
Well, I think thats a no brainer.
|
|
|