Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Discussion regarding the Outsider webcomic, science, technology and science fiction.

Moderator: Outsider Moderators

User avatar
Arioch
Site Admin
Posts: 4486
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:19 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: Flameware Galore!!

Post by Arioch »

Trantor wrote: Spell "Chauvinism". (Yes, this blade is two-sided :D )
No kidding. The German prefers the Bismarck... surprise!
Trantor wrote:Iowas never hit anything of importance. They just shelled coastlines.
Not our fault that the German surface navy had already been sunk by the time we joined the war. ;)

fredgiblet
Moderator
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:02 pm

Re: Flameware Galore!!

Post by fredgiblet »

Arioch wrote:Not our fault that the German surface navy had already been sunk by the time we joined the war. ;)
OR that the Japanese Navy couldn't field anything worth shooting at after the Iowa's came out. The exception of course being the Yamato-class, but the damn Navy pilots wouldn't let the Iowa class have a run at them :( of course it's just as well since the Yamato class would have given them a pretty damn good fight.

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Flameware Galore!!

Post by Trantor »

Arioch wrote:
Trantor wrote: Spell "Chauvinism". (Yes, this blade is two-sided :D )
No kidding. The German prefers the Bismarck... suprise.
:mrgreen:
Arioch wrote:
Trantor wrote:Iowas never hit anything of importance. They just shelled coastlines.
Not our fault that the entire German surface navy had already been sunk by the time we joined the war. ;)
Not all of them. Some stayed in harbors. Logical consequence of a wrong strategy. ;) (Lacking overseas invasion targets OKM should have pushed for Uboats for commerce raiding. (Or better not have pushed for war at all, but this is another story...))

But one of those ships couldn´t even be sunked by two of your nuclear bombs: The "lucky ship" Prinz Eugen was still afloat after Baker, Operation Crossroads.
;)
sapere aude.

TrashMan
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by TrashMan »

Trantor wrote: Bismarcks fire-control was AFAIK the most advanced of it´s time,
Erm...no.
Iowas fire-control system was the msot advanced of it's time.

Iowa is the best battelship ever designed. Period. Read a bit here:
http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm

One of hte fastest bb's ever, with excellently designed defenses, LOADS of guns, accurate, long-ranged adn deadly guns, etc, etc....

Heck it can outrun and outgun the Bismarck. It's no contest at all.

dfacto
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:50 am

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by dfacto »

Well, fine shitstorm the Bismarck started. So let me finish it.

Fairy Swordfish + Torpedo > All
Image

Enjoy riding your battleships around in circles. :D

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Trantor »

TrashMan wrote:Iowa is the best battelship ever designed. Period. Read a bit here:
http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm
Yes, yes. I know this page. A fanboy-site from somebody who doesn´t has the slightest clue. Bismarck the 2nd worst ship...

...you want fries with that? 8-)
dfacto wrote:Well, fine shitstorm the Bismarck started. So let me finish it.

Fairy Swordfish + Torpedo > All

Enjoy riding your battleships around in circles. :D
That´s EXACTLY the point.
And it works the other way round also: ONE long-range Bomber delivering a FritzX (assuming it does not fail as usually) or Hs293 midship -> Everything´s go byebye.
sapere aude.

TrashMan
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by TrashMan »

Trantor wrote:
TrashMan wrote:Iowa is the best battelship ever designed. Period. Read a bit here:
http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm
Yes, yes. I know this page. A fanboy-site from somebody who doesn´t has the slightest clue. Bismarck the 2nd worst ship...

...you want fries with that? 8-)
Ok...so who has the slightest clue then?... Aside from the ubermensch that is you, of course?


Fairy Swordfish + Torpedo > All
Given that the Iowa has the best AA defense of any battleship ever...you're gonna need a bit more than that.

fredgiblet
Moderator
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:02 pm

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by fredgiblet »

TrashMan wrote:Ok...so who has the slightest clue then?... Aside from the ubermensch that is you, of course?
Whichever one says that the Bismarck is the best ship ever of course. To be fair I was reading some other threads on the subject and that site was mentioned as less than reputable, by people who agreed that Iowa was better.

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Trantor »

TrashMan wrote:Ok...so who has the slightest clue then?... Aside from the ubermensch that is you, of course?
Oh, argumentum ad hominem? That will buff out... 8-)

Übermensch or not, i just admire passion for technology and craftsmanship.
I frequently visit museums or fairs of all kinds and when i see excellency it really makes my day.
Eg Submarines: The lone survivor of the XXI-Subs can be visited in Bremerhaven. Compare it to the russian tango-class sub that is moored here in Hamburg. The russian sub is 30 years younger, but compared to the german one it looks clumsy, weld seams are poor, the plumbing ist victorian at it´s best, electrics is a nightmare, room layout is poor etc pp, and then consider that the german boat was build under constant attack while the russian was built in peacetimes.

Also warships. I have close pics of construction details of Bismarck in an old book, and then i compare it to HMS Belfast in London. No match. No wonder there´s nothing left of british industry today.

Or on the last fair for landsystems: Compare a clumsy Abrams with a german Leopard. If you´re not a total tech-illiterate, you´ll see the difference immediatly.

And that works an many fields. Being fond of excellency in tech is not a chauvinistic issue. It´s coincidence that most things that fancy me come from germany. Like my cars: My everydays sleepercar is an Audi, my Racecar a BMW M3 (RCN-series). But i´ve also seen good things from other countries: affordable Optics from the US, precision mechanics from Italy (!) and Svitzerland, electronics from far east and so on.
I have no problem to admire Gadgets from overseas.

And on that little flamewar here: The keyword was "Arctic Ocean". As rolly sunny-weather ships it would have been difficult for the Iowas.
I´m not belittling these ships. They were surprisingly well built, with very few serious issues on hull and engines, so it was no surprise that they served so long. Even the engines were surprisingly efficient for an american design of these times.
But there´s little sense in denying their downsides: Panamax demands made them too slender, and their center of gravity was too high. In harsh conditions they were no good gun platform.

TrashMan wrote:
Fairy Swordfish + Torpedo > All
Given that the Iowa has the best AA defense of any battleship ever...you're gonna need a bit more than that.
Try again. Remember: It was a lucky punch from that swordfish. ;)
sapere aude.

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Trantor »

fredgiblet wrote:
TrashMan wrote:Ok...so who has the slightest clue then?... Aside from the ubermensch that is you, of course?
Whichever one says that the Bismarck is the best ship ever of course.
Your hate is my fuel. ;)
sapere aude.

User avatar
Aralonia
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 8:31 pm
Location: San Jose/Walnut Creek, CA
Contact:

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Aralonia »

Trantor wrote: I have close pics of construction details of Bismarck in an old book, and then i compare it to HMS Belfast in London.
Hi there.

Please explain to me why you are comparing the construction of a treaty-violating battleship with the build style of a treaty-compliant 6" cruiser.

At the same time, HMS Vanguard would be a far superior comparison to the KM Bismarck than USS Iowa. Common set of complaints are "BUT IOWA HAS ONE MORE GUN" and "BUT IOWA IS FASTER" and "IOWA'S BOW GOES AWASH IN HEAVY SEA." So, let's give you Vanguard. 4x dual mounted 15" L42 RP12, 'bout 30 knots, and a ship commented on being able to keep her fore end dry in weather that made Iowa's clipper bow a wet beak.
Image
shooting credibility in the foot since now

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Trantor »

Aralonia wrote:
Trantor wrote: I have close pics of construction details of Bismarck in an old book, and then i compare it to HMS Belfast in London.
Please explain to me why you are comparing the construction
Why not? You can always compare the level of craftmanship. Both Ships are from the same time.
Aralonia wrote:of a treaty-violating battleship with the build style of a treaty-compliant 6" cruiser.
That´s correct, but irrelevant in that matter.
sapere aude.

User avatar
Aralonia
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 8:31 pm
Location: San Jose/Walnut Creek, CA
Contact:

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Aralonia »

Treaty-compliant ships needed to undergo a lot of cost-cutting and weight-saving measures to fit within the tonnage as well as possible. As for the Bismarck, that did not need to apply itself to the logic of the Washington Treaty (or, for that matter, the Versailles agreement that defined the design of both the Deutschland class armoured cruiser and early drafts of the Scharnhorst class battlecruiser) more time could be spent on finer parts of ship construction without as much concern for displacement.

To utilise that automobile analogy of yours, it is like comparing an Audi RS6 Avant with a Daihatsu Mira. Both cars have different clientele, different end roles, and different levels of fit and finish.

*Aralonia kisses the local library's copy of Schlachtschiffe und Schlachtkreuzer 1905-1970, then rushes to the bathroom to clear his mouth of bacteria
Image
shooting credibility in the foot since now

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Trantor »

Aralonia wrote:Treaty-compliant ships needed to undergo a lot of cost-cutting and weight-saving measures to fit within the tonnage as well as possible.
Well, that´s still no excuse for poor design in details and sloppy fabrication.

But there´s one occasion when sloppy fabrication came in handy for the brits: Aircraft engines. No joke, their much higher tolerances made them use more oil, but prevented them from piston squeezers in dogfight. Many german engines with their tight tolerances died from squeezers till that interrelationsship was discovered. (And still the german engineers were too proud to just copy their british colleagues, so they invented flower-vase-shaped bores with approx. 4/100mm more bore in the mid-section. Nerds.)
Aralonia wrote:To utilise that automobile analogy of yours, it is like comparing an Audi RS6 Avant with a Daihatsu Mira. Both cars have different clientele, different end roles, and different levels of fit and finish.
Even if it´s not a matter of price-tag, there´s no need for a RS6. An A3 will do.
sapere aude.

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Trantor »

Aralonia wrote:At the same time, HMS Vanguard would be a far superior comparison to the KM Bismarck than USS Iowa.
She wasn´t commisioned until the war was over, 5 years after Bismarcks sinking. ;)

And her mainguns were 30 years old, sez´ the internets. :ugeek:
sapere aude.

User avatar
Aralonia
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 8:31 pm
Location: San Jose/Walnut Creek, CA
Contact:

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Aralonia »

You are still comparing two different shipbuilding philosophies (volume production and "screw it, toss it out to make it weigh less" compared with "JA DEUTSCHLAND IN ORDNUNG") and trying to prove a conclusive point. And yes, an A3 might be able to do the job, but I was applying RS6 in comparison with the Bismarck. Would you rather have had Deutschland-classes making the runs into the North Sea?

I did not mean "same time" as a reference to time period. I mean "same time" in the usage of "as opposed to." My apologies for my overdependencies regarding the English language's highly malleable nature. And so what if the Vanguard's main cannons were old? In a combat situation and at most engagement ranges, naval rifles are naval rifles.

If you would like to examine two battleships of the same period, you can look at the French Richelieu-class, with 15" guns and a ~1940 operational date.
Image
shooting credibility in the foot since now

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Trantor »

Aralonia wrote:You are still comparing two different shipbuilding philosophies
You´re not getting the point.
Hint: Craftmanships is a passion.

Not only in tech, but also in art. Look here: There are plenty of webcomics around. But only very few match Outsider´s standard.
...compared with "JA DEUTSCHLAND IN ORDNUNG"
I´m no chauvinist. ;)
Aralonia wrote:And so what if the Vanguard's main cannons were old? In a combat situation and at most engagement ranges, naval rifles are naval rifles.
There´s a little thingy called "progress"...
Aralonia wrote:If you would like to examine two battleships of the same period, you can look at the French Richelieu-class, with 15" guns and a ~1940 operational date.
As stated before: That´s not the point. ;)
sapere aude.

User avatar
Aralonia
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 8:31 pm
Location: San Jose/Walnut Creek, CA
Contact:

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Aralonia »

If you want to compare ships with equivalent prestige, then use a better example of a ship from a nation. A better comparison for HMS Belfast would be the Koln/Koenigsberg type cruisers. Same role, same level of detail and same level of fit-and-finish. A better comparison for Bismarck would be Vanguard, or maybe Richelieu, perhaps KGV, and definitely the American South Dakotas. Compare cruisers with cruisers, and battleships with battleships. Be fair. How much detail and care do you think Toyota puts into the Matrix versus their LF-A? Or maybe Mercedes and the level of technology present in the SLS AMG versus the Smart fortwo.

Progress may occur, but then why do some nations use the AK series of rifles when better, more reliable, more accurate etc. piston-driven rifles (H&K 416, FN SCAR, LWRC M6A2, Ruger SR-556, etc.) exist? Whatever works does function for a reason.

I think at this point in time though, it's best to quote Arioch.

"No kidding. The German prefers the Bismarck... surprise."
Image
shooting credibility in the foot since now

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Trantor »

Aralonia wrote:How much detail and care do you think Toyota puts into the Matrix versus their LF-A?
That´s laymen problem #1: To understand the finer details of production: There are no big differences in the level of production between a Matrix and a LF-A. They use the same level of machining of cast iron for engine blocks and the same level of spot-welding tech for the body. That´s what to understand.
And that´s were the differences are between Audi/VW and Toyota/rest of world´s carmakers. VW/Audi have their own machine tool r&d division, and they don´t share or sell their technology. That´s why they´re ahead. Come to germany and visit the Audi production plant and see the huge machines. It´s free.
And BTW: Their Aluminium tech was developed together with an american company, Alcoa.
Also their latest cast iron tech (vermicular-graphite) resulted from research on board the spacelab.
Progress may occur, but then why do some nations use the AK series of rifles when better, more reliable, more accurate etc. piston-driven rifles (H&K 416, FN SCAR, LWRC M6A2, Ruger SR-556, etc.) exist? Whatever works does function for a reason.
You compare apples and pears.
Also an AK is reliable and good enough for it´s purpose. And cheap.
Aralonia wrote:I think at this point in time though, it's best to quote Arioch.

"No kidding. The German prefers the Bismarck... surprise."
That´s were you both are wrong.

I don´t prefer Bismarck because of chauvinism, but because of her level of craftmanship.

You illustrated well that you don´t recognize quality (and understand the philosophy behind), so you´ll never appreciate true craftmanship.
But comfort yourself, this is not meant as offence, and you´re not alone. ;)
sapere aude.

User avatar
Ktrain
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 12:39 am

Re: Physiological/psychological effects on Ship Design.

Post by Ktrain »

Sometimes high craftsmanship won't save you when it significantly impacts how much one can produce, but examining how both ships are engineered is a fruitful comparison. If you compare specifications and performance of vessels, then compare within class but if you want to look at manufacturing techniques the class of the ship is less important than the process of construction.
OUTSIDER UPDATE => HALF LIFE 3 CONFIRMED?

Locked