Author Topic: Naval awesome (Read 7742 times)

Perd Hapley · « **on:** October 12, 2008, 01:15:21 AM »

Naval awesome, as in the British victories against the Armada, and at Trafalgar; and the Japanese victories against the Chinese and Russians near the turn of the century. As a Midwestern land-lubber and infantryman, who has seen the ocean only from the window of a 747, I have never before studied naval tacticality or strategery. But shazam!

Alright, you squids, I guess this navy stuff can be pretty cool, too.

The Armada: Them boys just wandered into a slaughter. Note to Phillip the 2th: with the advent of gun-powder, ships aren't just for troop transport anymore. They are more effective as mobile artillery. Even when the Spanish attempted to run away, many of the ships ran aground, and the sailors were set upon and killed by the Celtic Committee for Christian Hospitality. Also, fire ships are awesome.

Trafalgar: Ouch. They took away Napoleon's bath tub toys. I also found this amusing - French report of their victory against Nelson. Is this thing real? http://www.napoleonguide.com/sailors_frtraf.htm Also found here: http://www.nmm.ac.uk/explore/sea-and-ships/facts/faqs/royal-navy-and-battles/who-really-won-the-battle-of-trafalgar

First Sino-Japanese War: Better, faster ships, sailed by trained sailors, not soldiers as with the Chinese. Just a foretaste of how Japan would later pwn China in a most brutal fashion.

Tsushima: Go ahead, Russia. They just destroyed your Pacific fleet, and they're still hungry. Now send them the Baltic fleet. Too bad the British won't let you use the Suez; you get to take them ships all the way around Africa and up to Japan. Just in time to get wiped out by this little up-start bunch of islanders.

Manedwolf · « **Reply #1 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:24:59 AM »

I am really surprised Trafalgar hasn't become a summer blockbuster film. They even have the real HMS Victory to film non-FX scenes on...

I mean, holy crap, stuff like Nelson's ship firing its carronades through the STERN of the enemy ship to wipe out their gun decks (and likely dramatically blowing out all the stern windows in doing so), that's just begging for big-screen treatment.

Regolith · « **Reply #2 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:28:02 AM »

Quote from: Manedwolf on October 12, 2008, 01:24:59 AM

I am really surprised Trafalgar hasn't become a summer blockbuster film. They even have the real HMS Victory to film non-FX scenes on...

I mean, holy crap, stuff like Nelson's ship firing its carronades through the STERN of the enemy ship to wipe out their gun decks (and likely dramatically blowing out all the stern windows in doing so), that's just begging for big-screen treatment.

That would require that Hollywood script writers actually knew some history.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #3 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:28:59 AM »

Yeah, but, Nelson would be played by Keanu Reeves.

Manedwolf · « **Reply #4 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:29:32 AM »

Quote from: Regolith on October 12, 2008, 01:28:02 AM

That would require that Hollywood script writers actually knew some history.

Master and Commander, based on novels, wasn't bad at all. Neither was A&E's Hornblower series. Both had some seriously visceral fighting. I was surprised by the intensity of the combat in the A&E series, they had really impressive visual effects.

K Frame · « **Reply #5 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:31:58 AM »

If you like Trafalgar, read up on the tactics that won Nelson the Battle of the Nile.

Manedwolf · « **Reply #6 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:37:17 AM »

I suppose with movies, it depends on what studio does it and the manner in which it's done.

Master and Commander was a well-done tribute to actual fighting ships in the age of sail, and the traditions and practices.

But then you had Pearl Harbor, which added in the "love story" subplot and was just absolute crap. As one elderly vet said about it when asked outside the theater, "Love? There weren't no love at Pearl unless you had a shore pass and went and paid three bucks for it."

I would like to see Midway done right as a new film, but done RIGHT.

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #7 on:** October 12, 2008, 03:45:41 AM »

So, none of you oldsters has seen Lady Hamilton?

280plus · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2008, 06:52:43 AM »

Read up on the raid on St Nazaire...

Some of the story. The USS Buchanan used was the first in the line of 3 USS Buchanans. I was on the 3rd and last USS Buchanan. The only ship in the fleet named after a Confederate officer. PC restictions have prevented the Nav from naming a 4th.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Nazaire_Raid

K Frame · « **Reply #9 on:** October 12, 2008, 07:39:26 AM »

"The only ship in the fleet named after a Confederate officer."

USS Stonewall Jackson and the USS Robert E Lee were both I think commissioned after the Buchanan...

280plus · « **Reply #10 on:** October 12, 2008, 07:56:22 AM »

Those aren't ships, those are bubbles...

No, I wasn't aware of either of those. I have to check back with my resident naval historian on this cause he's the one that told me we were the only one and they weren't going to name another because of the PC stuff. Oh well, if you can't look stupid, what can you do?

Apparently he was talking about surface ships although he may not have known that. He's the type if I mention it to him he'll say, "Oh, I knew that. Didn't you?"

Next question, are there any ships (or bubbles) commisioned today with a Confederate officer's name?

K Frame · « **Reply #11 on:** October 12, 2008, 08:27:14 AM »

"Are there any ships..."

Oh, you mean TARGETS?

I don't know if there are any named for a Confederate Officer in service today or not.

I do know, however, that there's the Aegis cruiser Chancellorsville, which is named for the Confederate victory in the Civil War.

The naming of Navy ships has changed somewhat over the past 40 years.

The ships being named for military commanders right now are the Arleigh Burke Class destroyers, and it appears that the Navy is sticking to famous members of the Navy and Marine Corps, concentrating on figures from WW II, Korea, and Vietnam while still pulling out the names of some politicians and famous commanders from the Navy's past.

Given that there were few famous Confederate Naval Officers, and I don't believe the South even had a Marine Corps, I think that's a more pervasive reason for the apparent change, not any great spasm of political correctness.

280plus · « **Reply #12 on:** October 12, 2008, 08:40:16 AM »

I have one "word" for you, ASROC.

Sigh, I remember when the Spruance class was the "gee whiz look at that!!" ship of the "new navy", now THEY'RE being decommisioned. They may even be DONE decommisioning them.

K Frame · « **Reply #13 on:** October 12, 2008, 08:46:06 AM »

I'll see your wimpy ASROC and raise you a Harpoon.

280plus · « **Reply #14 on:** October 12, 2008, 09:05:13 AM »

Hmmm, don't make me toss the nuke card in there. That'd just get us both.

K Frame · « **Reply #15 on:** October 12, 2008, 09:24:42 AM »

What, you mean a nuclear tipped Harpoon?

A sub doesn't have to worry about that...

280plus · « **Reply #16 on:** October 12, 2008, 09:37:19 AM »

No, a nuke tipped ASROC.

Azrael256 · « **Reply #17 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:46:58 PM »

Quote

I would like to see Midway done right as a new film, but done RIGHT.

I wrote my senior thesis on Midway. It would be a supremely badass movie if they just stuck to the facts and didn't embellish like the last one. It's one of the more spectacular moments in naval history just by itself.

Manedwolf · « **Reply #18 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:51:53 PM »

Quote from: Azrael256 on October 12, 2008, 01:46:58 PM

I wrote my senior thesis on Midway. It would be a supremely badass movie if they just stuck to the facts and didn't embellish like the last one. It's one of the more spectacular moments in naval history just by itself.

A Japanese carrier taking a hit while the deck is covered with fuel hoses and bombs wouldn't need any embellishment.

Silver Bullet · « **Reply #19 on:** October 12, 2008, 01:59:36 PM »

I know all about this stuff. Twenty years ago I played "Ancient Art of War at Sea" on my Mac.

Fun game.

K Frame · « **Reply #20 on:** October 12, 2008, 02:07:56 PM »

I still have that for PC down in the basement somewhere.

roo_ster · « **Reply #21 on:** October 12, 2008, 02:20:43 PM »

fistful:

You have no, I mean NO excuse not to get and read Keegan's Price of Admiralty
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=keegan&n=200000237&tn=price+of+admiralty&x=0&y=0.
$1 plus $4 shipping.

Holy bibliophilia! The abebooks seller thriftbooks.com (access via abebooks.com) has a bunch of Keegan books for a buck. Shipping is usually $4 for the first book and some discounted rate per book thereafter:
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=%22john+keegan%22&bi=0&bx=off&ds=30&sortby=2&sts=t&vci=3961782&x=41&y=8

If I didn't already own them all, I would get myself an Insta-Keegan library, RFN.

Pick up some other Keegan modern classics while you're at it:
Face of Battle
Mask of Command
A History of Warfare

His book on WW2 is really good, too, as it takes into account the role of Allied intel in Allied victories. The classic WW2 histories were written before that data was declassified.

Face of Battle and Price of Admiralty are perennial crowd pleasers and favorites. I think my favorite of his most recent work is:
Intelligence in War: The value--and limitations--of what the military can learn about the enemy
[Of what value is intel? Of what value is absolute knowledge of the enemy by an observer...if the observer can get back and report only slightly faster (via horseback, say) than the the enemy can arrive at your doorstep?]

FYI, the Clausewitz Clique despises Keegan, so be ready for some hatin' if any of them catch you reading Keegan.

Quote from: Manedwolf on October 12, 2008, 01:24:59 AM

I am really surprised Trafalgar hasn't become a summer blockbuster film. They even have the real HMS Victory to film non-FX scenes on...

I mean, holy crap, stuff like Nelson's ship firing its carronades through the STERN of the enemy ship to wipe out their gun decks (and likely dramatically blowing out all the stern windows in doing so), that's just begging for big-screen treatment.

But, that would make England the good guy. Master & Commander was do-able because it was fiction and it was one ship. Showing the triumph of the British Empire would be too much for Hollywood to swallow.

Azrael256 · « **Reply #22 on:** October 12, 2008, 09:25:19 PM »

Quote

FYI, the Clausewitz Clique despises Keegan, so be ready for some hatin' if any of them catch you reading Keegan.

If you ever cite Keegan, you had better cite somebody else who said the same thing, too. Getting backed against a wall by three history profs who *hate* the man but who are grading your thesis is no fun at all.

Ask me how I know...

RadioFreeSeaLab · « **Reply #23 on:** October 12, 2008, 09:28:46 PM »

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Robert+K.+Massie+&x=0&y=0
Robert K. Massie. Outstanding books on naval history. I read Dreadnought, working on Castles of Steel, and Peter The Great.

Scout26 · « **Reply #24 on:** October 12, 2008, 09:47:00 PM »

“The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors – James D. Hornfischer

Battle of Leyte Gulf.

Quote

....the Japanese Center Force was still very powerful, consisting of four battleships (including the giant Yamato), six heavy cruisers, two light cruisers and a dozen destroyers. With the exception of Task Force 34, this was still probably the most powerful surface force in the world, although perhaps roughly comparable in strength with Oldendorf's Fire Support Group in Seventh Fleet. The Yamato - the largest and most powerful battleship ever to see surface combat - alone displaced as much as all of Taffy 3's ships put together

.

Yep, you and couple of destroyers and destroyer escorts against the above......and you make them withdraw, by charging directly AT THEM......gotta have damn huge brass ones.....

News:

Author Topic: Naval awesome (Read 7742 times)