Dunno if this has been posted but it’s pretty badass to see the six shells in mid flight. Missouri if I recall correctly.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Ship Photo of the Day
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
Dunno if this has been posted but it’s pretty badass to see the six shells in mid flight. Missouri if I recall correctly.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Pretty good example of a little tech trick of a big guns: one barrel of a turret fires a nanoseconds later than two others just to exclude the mutual influence of a muzzle vapor on the shells' trajectory. Dunno if the Iowa-class used the general pattern - the middle
PS: Soviet cruisers of Kirov-class (1938) of largely Italian design didn't have noted delay for one of a barrel of a turret so the accuracy of the firing was just like in the schoolyard snowball fight
Iowa's main guns were each separate so that they could be elevated and fired independent of the other guns in the turret. I don't know anything about the firing modes that may have been available, eg "fire all" button vs each gun needing to fired individually. I do know that the guns were usually controlled from a central location but could be fired locally (from the turret) with reduced accuracy.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Yes there was independent "personal" cradle for each gun in turret of almost all BBs , that is why in then-existed gunnery parlance such installation had been called "turret" contrary to typical heavy and light cruisers' "gunhouse" where there was the one united cradle for all 2 to 3 guns. Yet that delaying coil had been used in both turrets and gunhouses for one definite barrel. AFAIR, for 14" Big V battleships (Arizona, West Virginia etc) turret this delay was about 60 ms for the middle gun.
Soviets naval gunnery experts had found out this useful feature in 1940 when Uncle Joe Jughashvili bought the unfinished heavy cruiser of Hipper-class from Mr. Hitler (both cock-suckers were kindly friends for awhile), btw
Couple of photos of the Royal Navy's 2 new carriers. Curious to see how this affects their navy with less destroyers and frigates to patrol but now the ability to project serious power with a carrier task group.
HMS Prince of Wales - very nice photo.
HMS Queen Elizabeth
HMS Prince of Wales - very nice photo.
HMS Queen Elizabeth
"Ski jump" <> "project serious power." Call me back when they have an actual air wing.
Convenient how that graphic omits the penultimate Ark Royal. I have a hard time believing anyone can "project serious power" from a CV besides us and the French. #JustSaying
Convenient how that graphic omits the penultimate Ark Royal. I have a hard time believing anyone can "project serious power" from a CV besides us and the French. #JustSaying
Last edited:
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
AFAIK there won't be CVW at all. Funny Brits are sticking with your USMC concept of TAG - Tailored Air Group - with the considerable difference in that TAG includes aviation units from different military branches of a Crown as a basic rule. Look, Brits are the parents of almost all carrier innovations and for a century those innovations led the carrier fleets (their and yours) to a dominant role at sea. But it seems to me that nowadays, while still incorporating the brand new tech concepts in carrier reality, those funny Brits are placing their CVFs in purely supportive position in relation to SSNs and surface small combattants. For short, that TAG is not intended to project serious power but rather to provide the circumstances in which the other ships/subs, RAF, Army and Mr. Bond (James Bond) all are able to demonstrate the most possible efficiency.
And... all Brits carriers since 1978 are ugly. All of them.
Convenient how that graphic omits the penultimate Ark Royal
She wasn't a flagship. Sistership HMS Eagle was
French can't, too. No simultaneous takeoff and landing, not enough power from essentially sub's reactors, little and weak ones, and a lot of problems with electrical circuits and grid. Very good airplane Rafale M, yes, (maybe better than Super Hornet in every aspect), but the ship sucks.
If and when the French turn back to PA2 design (actually CATOBAR CVF with nuke boiler) the situation may become better, but not today.
Thus it's just USN only can project properly. But one need to see how it copes with the breaking of A2/AD and which is the role of a carriers in this job. Nowadays this is much more important than "projecting power"
Last edited:
A mess of Gators: USS Tarawa (LHA-1) leading the amphib big decks of CTF-51. With the Marine Corps experimenting with the "Lightning Carrier" concept and the Commandant moving away from the 1 size fits all MEU, there are a lot of possibilities.
The amphibious assault ships of Commander, Task Force Fifty One (CTF-51) come together in an unprecedented formation during operations in the North Arabian Gulf. This marked the first time that six large deck amphibious ships from the East and West coasts have deployed together in one area of operation. Led by the flag ship USS Tarawa (LHA-1), the ships are (from left to right):
USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6),
USS Kearsarge (LHD-3),
USS Bataan (LHD-5),
USS Saipan (LHA-2), and
USS Boxer (LHD-4).
CTF-51 led Navy amphibious forces in the Arabian Gulf region during Operation Iraqi Freedom. The 32 ships of CTF-51 composed the largest amphibious force assembled since the Inchon landing, during the Korean War. Operation Iraqi Freedom is the multinational coalition effort to liberate the Iraqi people and end the regime of Saddam Hussein.
The amphibious assault ships of Commander, Task Force Fifty One (CTF-51) come together in an unprecedented formation during operations in the North Arabian Gulf. This marked the first time that six large deck amphibious ships from the East and West coasts have deployed together in one area of operation. Led by the flag ship USS Tarawa (LHA-1), the ships are (from left to right):
USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6),
USS Kearsarge (LHD-3),
USS Bataan (LHD-5),
USS Saipan (LHA-2), and
USS Boxer (LHD-4).
CTF-51 led Navy amphibious forces in the Arabian Gulf region during Operation Iraqi Freedom. The 32 ships of CTF-51 composed the largest amphibious force assembled since the Inchon landing, during the Korean War. Operation Iraqi Freedom is the multinational coalition effort to liberate the Iraqi people and end the regime of Saddam Hussein.
You or the photog who did the labeling fail recce or left to right (or both). L to R:
Tarawa (1)
Saipan (2)
Kearsarge (3)
Bataan (5)
And a horse race between Boxer (4) and BHR (6)
For the rest of the masses who may be expeditionary neophytes, you can tell an Tarawa class LHA from an Wasp class LHD by two visual notes:
- The flight deck on the LHA isn't a rectangle, it has two indents up forward. Also the LHA has a single spot on the bow.
- LHA island is a big box. LHD island has more variability in silouette due to the funnels.
The order I believe is for the first picture, and is right. Led by Tarawa, then left to right.
Yep, looks like you're right.
Either way, there's a lot of misery in those pictures. I want to make a song like the 12 days of Xmas:
"6 screaming handlers, 5 broken elevators, 4 leaky boilers, 3 busted CIWS, 2 stupid OODs, 1 decent meal!"
You missed a shot at TACC; you're slipping.
The term is congregation. A congregation of alligators, like a gaggle of geese, a murder of crows, or a congress of baboons.
In that case would it not be an amalgamation of alligators?
Based on my experience in various CAOC-type places, I wonder if the proper plural is "clusterfuck."