Author Topic: Picture of the Day  (Read 2082216 times)

Offline Fuchs

  • No lollygagging
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 6.655
  • Traction Wars Propaganda Officer
    • View Profile
    • Traction Wars - WWII Free to Play Game
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1350 on: 02-11-2009, 17:11:20 »
drive the up the themse straight into london

fuck operation sealion
And then ram the Big Ben, we'll get zhe Royalist pricks!
"Force answers force, war breeds war, and death only brings death.
To break this vicious circle one must do more than act without thought or doubt."

Offline Rustysteel

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 176
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1351 on: 02-11-2009, 18:11:22 »
So aircaft carriers wouldn't have been useful in the battle of the atlantic no?

Offline SirGutz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1352 on: 02-11-2009, 18:11:44 »
First times to past the royal navy to get the Carriers from the north or Baltic Sea into the Atlantic  ::)

Offline Rustysteel

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 176
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1353 on: 02-11-2009, 18:11:33 »
Eh? and you think that would've been an impossibility? like the japanese attacking pearl harbour that'll never happen!   ::)

Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.248
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1354 on: 02-11-2009, 19:11:54 »
There's a huge difference between the North Sea and the Pacific, and two nations at war, activily looking for engagement, and a surprise attack.  ::)  The only effective branches of the Kreigsmarine were the U-boots and S-boots, anything from a destroyer on up simply were either sunk rapidly after deployment, or sat in dock doing nothing because they couldn't go out.  A single carrier or two would have made no difference.

Offline SirGutz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1355 on: 02-11-2009, 19:11:09 »
not possibly perhaps not only very much involving heavy losses on German side
we take to the Graf Zeppelin would be 41 together with the Birsmarck run out with the entire German deep-sea fleet toward Atlantic
1 carrier
3 battle ships
2 battle cruisers
2 heavy cruisers
2 became outdated liners +
10 - 15 small ships such as destroyer etc.
25 ships against the Royal Navy, everything determines to would have set the carrier and the entire the Kriegsmarine to sink

Offline Rustysteel

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 176
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1356 on: 02-11-2009, 19:11:33 »
My point about pearl harbour was that the japanese did something at the time that was considered impossible by others it wasn't a direct comparison, of course there's a huge difference between the north sea and the pacific.

This is all hypothetical so why do you guys only assume that they would only have the two they actually built? If they did truly grasp the importance of the aircraft carrier over the battleship for control of the sea they would have a lot more than two and they certainly wouldn't have wasted valuable resources building battleships. Instead they went for submarines which in the long run meant they lost the battle.

Offline Paasky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.801
  • DON'T PANIC! DON'T PANIC!
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1357 on: 02-11-2009, 20:11:29 »
So aircaft carriers wouldn't have been useful in the battle of the atlantic no?
Would have yes. But how do you get an aircraft carrier from Hamburg/Kiel into the Atlantic? The brits sent half the Royal Navy to look for Bismarck, you'd think an aircraft carrier would've been even more important to destroy.

One little Aircraft Carrier in the Atlantic would've also been pretty soon bombed out of the sea by Heavy bombers from Britain, Iceland, Greenland, Canada, East US or Bermuda.

A big ship is easier to spot than a small submerged cylinder.
« Last Edit: 02-11-2009, 20:11:56 by Paasky »
It's half naked people on boats. That's all.
Here in Finland we call that "summer".

Offline SirGutz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1358 on: 02-11-2009, 20:11:55 »
Because supmarines was more effectively as big Battleships for the German side
1 They was small so they could drive without larger attention into the Atlantic
2 A smaller crew was needed
3 As a weapon for the economic war perfectly sufficiently
4 Fewer resources were bulged out, which one could use for other things
5 faster production for a submarine

the big problem was that the British cracked the Enigma so soon :-\
« Last Edit: 02-11-2009, 20:11:09 by SirGutz »

Offline Rustysteel

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 176
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1359 on: 02-11-2009, 21:11:13 »
Yes breaking enigma was a big factor but it wasn't the only one, technology was just as important. The U-boats couldn't stay under for very long and were easy pickings on the surface, advancements in radar & sonar made it easier for escorts to locate them and better aircraft ment the gap with no cover in the middle of the atlantic was closed.


Offline SirGutz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1360 on: 02-11-2009, 21:11:43 »
You don't consider that the u boats technology was developed too.
everything an asks from reaction and counterreaction :P

U 2601(Type XXI) at Blohm & Voss shipyards

Offline Rustysteel

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 176
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1361 on: 02-11-2009, 21:11:15 »
Another wonder weapon blighted by technical problems, I know german submarine development wasn't static, sorry if I implied that what I meant was that they couldn't keep pace with the allies, they couldn't make enough of those boats in time to make a difference that's my point.

Offline SirGutz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1362 on: 02-11-2009, 22:11:48 »
The problem was also that at this time (44-45) the attention on other branches of arms lay, like new wonder weapons e.g. V2 or other stupid non effectiv weapons  ::), to build than far new submarines.   :-\

Offline Captain Pyjama Shark

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 5.281
  • Captain of the Gravy Train
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1363 on: 02-11-2009, 22:11:03 »
You have a good point, if they couldn't keep up on u-boots, how the hell would they even try with aircraft carriers?

Offline Battlefieldfan45 (CroPanzer)

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.531
  • Gebalte? Anyone?
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day
« Reply #1364 on: 02-11-2009, 22:11:06 »
How the hell can you put a picture here? [newb]

 
Playing WoT with ingame nick: CroPanzer