Best World war two warships?

[Henk]

Thanks mate. You must try it it is great, at first it was crap and then I started to get use to it and got good at it. I do not want to be a designer, I were not good at maths and science. No, I draw them by hand and it is on large papers to big to scan. I wish I could get them on my PC, but to draw them on PC is not my stile i love drawing them on paper it is more fun. I will try to take a picture to post.

Henk

[carpenoctem1689]

Awesome, that sounds really cool. Do you do it on large graph paper and such to keep dimensions and everything, are they to any particular scale, or just whatever it turns out as? I have free handed some real battleships and some designs ive come up with but nothing on anything bigger than a notebook page. I have a note book i just scetch in, though your idea sounds much more fun, might have to steal it <.< >.>

nice to find someone with an affinity for battleships once and a while, keep up the designs, you can only get better

[Henk]

No, it is a large white blank page and I use a scale like 4mm is one meter, because I do not have a large enough page to have a larger scale.

Thanks mate and try it and great to find someone who love battleships.

Henk

[KraziKanuK]

If you want to get into the nitty-gritty of tha Yamato, get the Anatomy of the Ship on the Yamato by Janusz Skulski, ISBN0-87021-019-X. Over 600 perspective and scale 3 view drawings on 159 pages.

[Henk]

Oh yes that sounds good thanks mate. The only thing that got my attention from the Yamato is the range finders, guns, secondary and the aft hull the rest is a faillure for me and thus will only make it bad in combat situation. Look where the AA guns are, all together in one place just waiting for a bomb.

Henk

[KraziKanuK]

Henk, one on the Bismarck ISBN 0851779824 (did not know about this one)

A list of the books in the series:

The Flower Class Corvette Agassiz
The Cutter Alert, 1777
The Submarine Alliance
The Cruiser Bartolomeo Colleoni
HMS Beagle Survey Ship Extraordinary, 1820–1870
The Cruiser Belfast
The 74-Gun Ship Bellona
The Schooner Bertha L. Downs
The 20-Gun Ship Blandford
The Armed Transport Bounty
The Destroyer Campbeltown
The Royal Yacht Caroline, 1749
The Ships of Christopher Columbus (Niña, Pinta, Santa Maria)
The Frigate Diana
The Battleship Dreadnought
Captain Cook's Endeavour
The Destroyer Escort England
The 32-Gun Frigate Essex
The Fairmile "D" Motor Torpedo Boat
The Battleship Fuso
The Escort Carrier Gambier Bay
The Bomb Vessel Granado, 1742
The Battlecruiser Hood
The Aircraft Carrier Intrepid
The Four Masted Barque Lawhill
The 24-Gun Frigate Pandora, 1779
The Liner Queen Mary
The Destroyer The Sullivans
The Susan Constant, 1607
The Heavy Cruiser Takao
The Type VII U-boat
The Type XXI U-boat
The Aircraft Carrier Victorious
The 100-Gun Ship Victory
The Battleship Warspite
The Battleship Yamato

[Henk]

Oh yes those look great I wish I could get my hands on some of them. Thanks mate. Do you have some of them?

Henk

[carpenoctem1689]

I wish i had them, never can know too much about them. My only paper reference that i own only provides one overhead and horizontal of battleships, carriers and various other warships, the general statistics and only a brief summary

[Henk]

I learned a lot when I got Janes Fighting Ships of WW2. I want some more books on Battleships, but the book shops here are crap when it comes to battleships and WW2 and expensive.

Henk

[carpenoctem1689]

I know what you mean. the borders and all the other book stores have never even heard of janes fighting warships, and wouldnt order them for me..bastards. i mean i really wanted that book.

[Henk]

Assholes, it does have some problems here and there, but it is great to find out if a **** were actualy a great gun platform. I also have Jane's fighting ships of WW1 and Jane's fighting aircraft of WW2.

Henk

[carpenoctem1689]

both those books would serve me pretty damn well, i need to do some online shopping, but first i need some funds for this shopping, i have too many projects running as it is, warship models, aircraft models, learning how to paint, a girlfreind, and gas, and guess whats next, no job.

hypothetical battle. Richleu *butchered spelling but thats allright, ill just refer to it as R) against Bismarck. According to this website R was better than the Bismarck http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm but come on, the comparison must seriously not consider the combat effectiveness of these vessels. The R has all guns concentrated forward, like the nelsons, making them easy to knock out all main battery fire power with one shell hit. She had good underwater protection, and decent armor, but i doubt the crew would be well trained, considering the french navy had languished somewhat in training, building speeds and such. Bismarck now, amazing ship, my opinion best BB of the atlantic. Fast, well armed and can certainly, as was proven, take a pounding and a half. If she could get behind R (its french, come on it was pracitally made to run) then it would easily win. if R were to trun, it would be the same as the yamato vs iowa scenario, the pursuer would have a manouvering and firepower advantage, and could close range quickly and fire more rounds. i would easily take bismarck

[Henk]

Yep, the R is not in the same class as the Bismarck and the crew of the Bismarck were ready for combat and they were well trained. The French were made to run from war and they would not have stood a chanse.

Now then the Nelson is a other stupid battleship and the only thing is, crap.

The same problems here mate, girls, gas and no car only my moms car and she just wants gas.

Oh, by the way you have a PM mate.

Henk

[delcyros]

This webpage has grave shortcomings. I put forward a lot of arguments in another thread (was it battleship raiders?). All indicates a very unbalanced view, giving US - ships a generally higher credit for unproven aspects (just to name one: the underwater protection, which was considered even by the USN in 1943 as weak, since Washingtons somehow similar TDS was defeated by a japanese standart submarine torpedo - not even a long lance), while all benefittal aspects of Yamato and Bismarck in special are neglected or greatly reduced (take rate of fire: they almost halved Bismarcks rpm, while they reduced Iowas by 18% only or the belt protection: vitals of Bismarck cannot be reached by side hits. The sloped deck behind was simply not taken into consideration, or range: simply false numbers) Some aspects with disadvantage (metacentric height protected buoyancy reserve, compartimentation) for US ships are completely neglected. All this seems to indicate that the author puts a good deal of patriotism (which is ok) and all-or-nothing pathetics.
Last but not least he failed to acknowledge that Iowa and South Dakota´s so called "decapping plates" would never ever decap a 15" round. Nathan Okun proves this in his revised dacapping analysis (after he wrote in his otherwise excellent Bismarck armour scheme protection that the plate barely decaps). The webpage also neglects that Littorios decapping plate ALWAYS decaps projectiles before they reach the belt, mistakes and mistakes. Other than this , I like the way of analyzing there.

[Henk]

Yes, I only use it to show the battleships that were some of the strongest, yes I agree they do have great shortcomings. The Bismarck does not get the credit it need and the fact that some think the Rodney and Nelson were such great battleships is bullshit. I think they were worse than the Richelieu.

Ag you know the thing is that I still say the Iowa is my best, but the Bismarck is in the same frame and the Iowa also has here shortcomings and so does the Bismarck.

Henk