Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 4:29 pm
Personally, I thought it was hilarious. And very clever.
Iowa is a battlecruiser?
Yea, cute graphic
History, Politics And Current Affairs
Opinions expressed here are personal views of contributors and do not necessarily represent the companies, organizations or governments they work for. Nor do they necessarily represent those of the Board Administration.
https://tboverse.com/
Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Page 1 of 3
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 4:37 pm
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 4:44 pm
Iowa is not evil.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 4:55 pm
More importantly, how the hell is Alaska not evil?
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 5:01 pm
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 5:45 pm
How are we defining a battlecruiser? A fast wing of the battle line? A heavy scout? A raider-killer? A capital ship that sacrifices other features to obtain higher than average speed?
Under definitions 1 and 4, IOWA is - compare her to the MONTANAs or SOUTH DAKOTAs, and you clearly see the sacrifices for the extra 6 knots. Her designers just chose to pay in size and firepower instead of sacrificing protection.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 5:51 pm
I don’t quite agree. It’s a fast battleship that gave up nothing compared to anything that preceded it in terms of protection or armaments.Johnnie Lyle wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 5:45 pmHow are we defining a battlecruiser? A fast wing of the battle line? A heavy scout? A raider-killer? A capital ship that sacrifices other features to obtain higher than average speed?
Under definitions 1 and 4, IOWA is - compare her to the MONTANAs or SOUTH DAKOTAs, and you clearly see the sacrifices for the extra 6 knots. Her designers just chose to pay in size and firepower instead of sacrificing protection.
Iowa sailor
1989
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 5:51 pm
Yes.How are we defining a battlecruiser? A fast wing of the battle line? A heavy scout? A raider-killer? A capital ship that sacrifices other features to obtain higher than average speed?
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 5:55 pm
She’s 15,000 tons heavier than SOUTH DAKOTA with small improvements in protection or armor to get that speed. You could have done a lot of other things with the tonnage (or the money) were you happy with 27 or 30 knots.Nightwatch2 wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 5:51 pmI don’t quite agree. It’s a fast battleship that gave up nothing compared to anything that preceded it in terms of protection or armaments.Johnnie Lyle wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 5:45 pmHow are we defining a battlecruiser? A fast wing of the battle line? A heavy scout? A raider-killer? A capital ship that sacrifices other features to obtain higher than average speed?
Under definitions 1 and 4, IOWA is - compare her to the MONTANAs or SOUTH DAKOTAs, and you clearly see the sacrifices for the extra 6 knots. Her designers just chose to pay in size and firepower instead of sacrificing protection.
Iowa sailor
1989
So yes, it’s a sacrifice.
Now, she’s closer to HOOD than INDEFATIGABLE, but she still demonstrates just how expensive it is to make heavily armed and armored things go faster than contemporaries.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 6:04 pm
Needed the speed to keep up with the carrier fleet. The key is that the Iowas gave up nothing wrt to armament or armor compared to the previous classes. They are full on battleships with extra speed.Johnnie Lyle wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 5:55 pmShe’s 15,000 tons heavier than SOUTH DAKOTA with small improvements in protection or armor to get that speed. You could have done a lot of other things with the tonnage (or the money) were you happy with 27 or 30 knots.Nightwatch2 wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 5:51 pmI don’t quite agree. It’s a fast battleship that gave up nothing compared to anything that preceded it in terms of protection or armaments.Johnnie Lyle wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 5:45 pm
How are we defining a battlecruiser? A fast wing of the battle line? A heavy scout? A raider-killer? A capital ship that sacrifices other features to obtain higher than average speed?
Under definitions 1 and 4, IOWA is - compare her to the MONTANAs or SOUTH DAKOTAs, and you clearly see the sacrifices for the extra 6 knots. Her designers just chose to pay in size and firepower instead of sacrificing protection.
Iowa sailor
1989
So yes, it’s a sacrifice.
Now, she’s closer to HOOD than INDEFATIGABLE, but she still demonstrates just how expensive it is to make heavily armed and armored things go faster than contemporaries.
And magnificent ships and quite the experience to have sailed on her into harm’s way. (Granted that hostilities did not ensue probably because it WAS the battleship armored and armed Iowa!)
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Thu May 11, 2023 10:50 pm
If you compared the Montana and Iowa classes I think Iowa would look more like a battlecruiser with less armor and more speed.
Bow if you built the Montana's in the version 8 configuration with the extra boilers and 2 extra shafts they could keep up with the carriers and still have the heavier armor. You might even be able to mount 4 triple 18 inch gun torrents.
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Mo ... -779014493
Bow if you built the Montana's in the version 8 configuration with the extra boilers and 2 extra shafts they could keep up with the carriers and still have the heavier armor. You might even be able to mount 4 triple 18 inch gun torrents.
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Mo ... -779014493
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 12:01 am
82k ton monster!Rocket J Squrriel wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 10:50 pm If you compared the Montana and Iowa classes I think Iowa would look more like a battlecruiser with less armor and more speed.
Bow if you built the Montana's in the version 8 configuration with the extra boilers and 2 extra shafts they could keep up with the carriers and still have the heavier armor. You might even be able to mount 4 triple 18 inch gun torrents.
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Mo ... -779014493
Interesting variations as super Iowas or super Dakotas
I would like to have seen Montana
Just think how many Harpoons and Tomahawks the 1980’s modernization could have added!
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 9:50 am
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 1:30 pm
In an alternative history:Rocket J Squrriel wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 10:50 pm If you compared the Montana and Iowa classes I think Iowa would look more like a battlecruiser with less armor and more speed.
Bow if you built the Montana's in the version 8 configuration with the extra boilers and 2 extra shafts they could keep up with the carriers and still have the heavier armor. You might even be able to mount 4 triple 18 inch gun torrents.
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Mo ... -779014493
Admiral Spruance detaches TF 54 to cover San Bernardino Strait, trusting Mitscher to get Ozawa's carriers.
Kurita on Yamato says, "We've got the biggest damn battleship in the world, what's the worry?"
Lookout: "Uh, sir, we're now apparently the fifth biggest battleship in the world. The Americans have the first four, and they're forming battle line."
Sigh. It would have been . . . glorious.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 3:44 pm
It would have been quite the event with just the Iowa’s, and South Dakota’s, and some Baltimore’s and Cleveland’s.Poohbah wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:30 pmIn an alternative history:Rocket J Squrriel wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 10:50 pm If you compared the Montana and Iowa classes I think Iowa would look more like a battlecruiser with less armor and more speed.
Bow if you built the Montana's in the version 8 configuration with the extra boilers and 2 extra shafts they could keep up with the carriers and still have the heavier armor. You might even be able to mount 4 triple 18 inch gun torrents.
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Mo ... -779014493
Admiral Spruance detaches TF 54 to cover San Bernardino Strait, trusting Mitscher to get Ozawa's carriers.
Kurita on Yamato says, "We've got the biggest damn battleship in the world, what's the worry?"
Lookout: "Uh, sir, we're now apparently the fifth biggest battleship in the world. The Americans have the first four, and they're forming battle line."
Sigh. It would have been . . . glorious.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 4:10 pm
No, because they'd still be in the ways being built. Given the historical times for the Iowas and Montanas, I doubt they'd even be to the level of launching, much less getting ready for commissioning or being in the Pacific.Poohbah wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:30 pm
In an alternative history:
Admiral Spruance detaches TF 54 to cover San Bernardino Strait, trusting Mitscher to get Ozawa's carriers.
Kurita on Yamato says, "We've got the biggest damn battleship in the world, what's the worry?"
Lookout: "Uh, sir, we're now apparently the fifth biggest battleship in the world. The Americans have the first four, and they're forming battle line."
Sigh. It would have been . . . glorious.
Also, you all are taking the chart way too seriously. If we look at the axis titles:
Good-Neutral-Evil is how much the ship actually resembles a battlecruiser
Lawful - chaotic has descriptions attached. It's somewhat incoherent. If it weren''t for Iowa, I would say Lawful is classic battlecruiser, but the armor meeting contemporary battleship standards has her as 'fast battleship' instead. Chaotic are cruisers that people shoehorn in because of size.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 4:14 pm
i don't disagree but it is an entertaining discussion.kdahm wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 4:10 pmNo, because they'd still be in the ways being built. Given the historical times for the Iowas and Montanas, I doubt they'd even be to the level of launching, much less getting ready for commissioning or being in the Pacific.Poohbah wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:30 pm
In an alternative history:
Admiral Spruance detaches TF 54 to cover San Bernardino Strait, trusting Mitscher to get Ozawa's carriers.
Kurita on Yamato says, "We've got the biggest damn battleship in the world, what's the worry?"
Lookout: "Uh, sir, we're now apparently the fifth biggest battleship in the world. The Americans have the first four, and they're forming battle line."
Sigh. It would have been . . . glorious.
Also, you all are taking the chart way too seriously. If we look at the axis titles:
Good-Neutral-Evil is how much the ship actually resembles a battlecruiser
Lawful - chaotic has descriptions attached. It's somewhat incoherent. If it weren''t for Iowa, I would say Lawful is classic battlecruiser, but the armor meeting contemporary battleship standards has her as 'fast battleship' instead. Chaotic are cruisers that people shoehorn in because of size.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 4:44 pm
Simply assume that Leyte Gulf is in 1948...kdahm wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 4:10 pmNo, because they'd still be in the ways being built. Given the historical times for the Iowas and Montanas, I doubt they'd even be to the level of launching, much less getting ready for commissioning or being in the Pacific.Poohbah wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:30 pm
In an alternative history:
Admiral Spruance detaches TF 54 to cover San Bernardino Strait, trusting Mitscher to get Ozawa's carriers.
Kurita on Yamato says, "We've got the biggest damn battleship in the world, what's the worry?"
Lookout: "Uh, sir, we're now apparently the fifth biggest battleship in the world. The Americans have the first four, and they're forming battle line."
Sigh. It would have been . . . glorious.
Also, you all are taking the chart way too seriously. If we look at the axis titles:
Good-Neutral-Evil is how much the ship actually resembles a battlecruiser
Lawful - chaotic has descriptions attached. It's somewhat incoherent. If it weren''t for Iowa, I would say Lawful is classic battlecruiser, but the armor meeting contemporary battleship standards has her as 'fast battleship' instead. Chaotic are cruisers that people shoehorn in because of size.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 5:42 pm
Or if Kincaid had put a couple of radar destroyers at the mouth of San Bernadino St.Poohbah wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 4:44 pmSimply assume that Leyte Gulf is in 1948...kdahm wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 4:10 pmNo, because they'd still be in the ways being built. Given the historical times for the Iowas and Montanas, I doubt they'd even be to the level of launching, much less getting ready for commissioning or being in the Pacific.Poohbah wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:30 pm
In an alternative history:
Admiral Spruance detaches TF 54 to cover San Bernardino Strait, trusting Mitscher to get Ozawa's carriers.
Kurita on Yamato says, "We've got the biggest damn battleship in the world, what's the worry?"
Lookout: "Uh, sir, we're now apparently the fifth biggest battleship in the world. The Americans have the first four, and they're forming battle line."
Sigh. It would have been . . . glorious.
Also, you all are taking the chart way too seriously. If we look at the axis titles:
Good-Neutral-Evil is how much the ship actually resembles a battlecruiser
Lawful - chaotic has descriptions attached. It's somewhat incoherent. If it weren''t for Iowa, I would say Lawful is classic battlecruiser, but the armor meeting contemporary battleship standards has her as 'fast battleship' instead. Chaotic are cruisers that people shoehorn in because of size.
Or not read 3rd Fleet's internal messages
Or someone had put a bullet in MacArthur's brain before he could be evacuated from the Phillipines
My favorite would have been for Kurita to have been more aggressive and competent, pushed past the sky cancer on Oct 24th, and been met by the 4 Iowa and 4 Montana battleline, instead of pulling back.
Re: Just saw this - Battlecruiser Alignment Chart
Posted: Fri May 12, 2023 8:13 pm
kdahm, instead of a bullet in the brain, he should have been court-martialed.