SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Silent Hunter 3 - 4 - 5 > SH4 Mods Workshop
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-17-08, 08:45 AM   #1
d5j55
Loader
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: soon to be Germany
Posts: 89
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default KMS tirpitz

Just last week i finished a 30 page essay on the tirpitz and commaired any other ship it was awsome... well if you include all 72 guns and the fact that it survived for 4 years of being attacked. now having a ship like that would be quite fun.
d5j55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 10:55 AM   #2
Sailor Steve
Eternal Patrol
 
Sailor Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: High in the mountains of Utah
Posts: 50,369
Downloads: 745
Uploads: 249


Default

Were you aware that the Iowa class carried more than 150 guns of various types? Tirpitz and her sister, Bismarck, were indeed powerful ships, but they had plenty of company; and most of them would have fared about as well as Tirpitz, given the nature of the attacks.

I'm not knocking a great ship; just trying to keep it in perspective.
__________________
“Never do anything you can't take back.”
—Rocky Russo
Sailor Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 12:39 PM   #3
d5j55
Loader
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: soon to be Germany
Posts: 89
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
Were you aware that the Iowa class carried more than 150 guns of various types? Tirpitz and her sister, Bismarck, were indeed powerful ships, but they had plenty of company; and most of them would have fared about as well as Tirpitz, given the nature of the attacks.

I'm not knocking a great ship; just trying to keep it in perspective.
well you do have a point
d5j55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 01:59 PM   #4
andycaccia
XO
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Italy
Posts: 418
Downloads: 261
Uploads: 2
Default

Those battleships were some of the most effective ones of the entire war. Maybe not as powerful as Yamato or Iowas, but indeed fearful vessels.
I'd like to command one.
__________________
"Memento Audere Semper"
andycaccia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 02:57 PM   #5
Doolittle81
Commodore
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 624
Downloads: 6
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by d5j55
Just last week i finished a 30 page essay on the tirpitz and commaired any other ship it was awsome... well if you include all 72 guns and the fact that it survived for 4 years of being attacked. now having a ship like that would be quite fun.
Cut-and-pasted from some Navy Forum: Yamato's main armanant was nine 18.1/45 guns, divided into threes per turret. Secondary armanant was 12 6.1 guns, divided into twos per turret. Additinal secondary was also twelve 5 in guns. Main AA armanant was some 150 25mm guns. An additinal 4 thirteen milimetres was also used.

That's about 187 guns. A LOT!
Doolittle81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 03:11 PM   #6
Raptor1
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stavka
Posts: 8,211
Downloads: 13
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andycaccia
Those battleships were some of the most effective ones of the entire war. Maybe not as powerful as Yamato or Iowas, but indeed fearful vessels.
I'd like to command one.
Bismarck sunk the Hood then sunk herself, Tirpitz did NOTHING throughout the entire war but sit around in the Baltic and force the Royal Navy to tie down masses of Aircraft and Ships for Convoy Defence in the case that she might sortie

But as Merchant Raiders, which was their intended purpose, Both could've been very effective
__________________
Current Eastern Front status: Probable Victory
Raptor1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 03:50 PM   #7
ivank
The Old Man
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,426
Downloads: 284
Uploads: 0
Default

TO get back on subject, anyone willing to make one?
ivank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 04:10 PM   #8
Doolittle81
Commodore
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 624
Downloads: 6
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivank
TO get back on subject, anyone willing to make one?
We are off subject?
__________________
Flight Sim Movies
..............................................
.........................View "Faith, Hope, and Charity" movie
Doolittle81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 04:58 PM   #9
akdavis
Samurai Navy
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 597
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

I feel compelled to link this article whenver biggest and baddest comparisons come up:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm

:hmm:
__________________
-AKD
akdavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 09:16 PM   #10
d5j55
Loader
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: soon to be Germany
Posts: 89
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by akdavis
I feel compelled to link this article whenver biggest and baddest comparisons come up:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm

:hmm:
well some of that stuff i do aggree with but some i don't, mainly because i just spent an hour a day for about 70 days writing an essay on the bismarck and the commparison from "him" to the other capital ships. the armmament was most definantly not the biggest but it was one of the fastest. also the tirpitz had many more AA guns almost as much as the other ships, and the bismarck used KC n/a which was an offly good steel even better than most other types. sorry for the bold i couldn't get it off.
d5j55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-08, 11:15 PM   #11
akdavis
Samurai Navy
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 597
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by d5j55
Quote:
Originally Posted by akdavis
I feel compelled to link this article whenver biggest and baddest comparisons come up:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm

:hmm:
well some of that stuff i do aggree with but some i don't, mainly because i just spent an hour a day for about 70 days writing an essay on the bismarck and the commparison from "him" to the other capital ships. the armmament was most definantly not the biggest but it was one of the fastest. also the tirpitz had many more AA guns almost as much as the other ships, and the bismarck used KC n/a which was an offly good steel even better than most other types. sorry for the bold i couldn't get it off.
I think the article they reference for the armor comparison is the product of far more than 70 hours of research:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/okun_biz.htm

Bismark/Tirpitz did have an incredible secondary battery, on par with Iowa/South Dakota and Yamato for anti-ship fire, but its usefulness against aircraft was far less than US ships secondary batteries (but perhaps equal or greater than any other contemporary, fire control aside). I simply quote the authors here: "Iowa and SoDak have by far the best heavy AA suite of the seven. The 5"/38, coupled with the Mark 37 fire-control system, was the best heavy AA system of the war. Period."

On the light AA armament, I think their ranking of Bismark/Tirpitz (and note they used the late-war Tirpitz light AA complement in the comparison, not the much lighter early war complement) below Iowa, South Dakota King George V is indisputable. Not even considering superior, rate of fire, fire-control and proximity fuses, the US/British ships exceed Bismark/Tirpitz in throw weight/minute to a very significant degree. Iowa = 31,392 lbs./min.; Tirpitz = 6,713 lbs.

Combining the secondary battery and light AA leads to the following rates: Iowa = 48,992 lbs./min.; King George V = 35,593 lbs./min.; and Tirpitz = 20,677 lbs./min.

Then factor in the increasing use of fire control radar and proximity fusing on all the AA guns on the US/British ships and the comparison is a foregone conclusion.
__________________
-AKD
akdavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-08, 12:45 AM   #12
woofiedog
Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 216
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0
Default

A few photos of the USS Massachusetts I took during a visit in 2005.





















__________________
woofiedog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-08, 10:31 AM   #13
Sailor Steve
Eternal Patrol
 
Sailor Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: High in the mountains of Utah
Posts: 50,369
Downloads: 745
Uploads: 249


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by d5j55
...and the bismarck used KC n/a which was an offly good steel even better than most other types. sorry for the bold i couldn't get it off.
Yes, Krupp Cemented Armor is arguably the best that can be made. But, it was developed in 1893, and the formula sold to other countries, so KC has been in use by everyone since before 1900; that is to say that all battleships use it. I say arguably, because German Wotan was an improved development of it, but so was American STS, and there have been many discussions over the years as to whether either of those was really any better than the original. My point here is that Bismarck's armor was no better structurally than anyone elses; they were all KC.
__________________
“Never do anything you can't take back.”
—Rocky Russo
Sailor Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-08, 02:46 PM   #14
Snaptrap
Eternal Patrol
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 224
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Battleship photos, essays, and general warship discussion. What exactly does all of this have to do with modding?
Snaptrap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-08, 03:36 PM   #15
Sailor Steve
Eternal Patrol
 
Sailor Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: High in the mountains of Utah
Posts: 50,369
Downloads: 745
Uploads: 249


Default

True it would have been better in the General Topics forum, but a lot of people don't even know it exists.
__________________
“Never do anything you can't take back.”
—Rocky Russo
Sailor Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.