Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
#3238836 - 03/19/11 04:25 PM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,739
zerocinco Offline
Member
zerocinco  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,739
Tchepone, Laos
This was a good idea. It's going to be really nice to have Japanese cruisers as Japanese cruisers.

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#3240900 - 03/21/11 06:37 PM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,445
Wklink Offline
Permanent Latrine Orderly
Wklink  Offline
Permanent Latrine Orderly
Hotshot

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,445
Olympia, Washington
Agreed. I don't know of too many games (short of SHIV) that actually attempted to render IJN warships other than the carriers.

The Imperial Japanese fleet probably had the best heavy cruisers of any nation at the start of the war. Too bad they were quickly outclassed by the Baltimore class and beyond but in 1941 the IJN simply had better heavy cruisers. Light Cruisers, not so much. Better destroyers for sure.


The artist formerly known as SimHq Tom Cofield
#3241179 - 03/21/11 11:25 PM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Hinchinbrooke Offline
Member
Hinchinbrooke  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Minnesota
A number of Japanese heavy cruisers looked good on paper, but reality proved a little different. Grossly overweight on completion, along with dubious welding, led to structural weakness, which had to be attended to later.

Even then, looking at Tone, you wonder if all that weight forward would have done well in a dangerous seaway.

#3241250 - 03/22/11 01:17 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Wklink]  
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,545
Dogsbd Offline
Senior Member
Dogsbd  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,545
SC, USA
Originally Posted By: SimHQ Tom Cofield

The Imperial Japanese fleet probably had the best heavy cruisers of any nation at the start of the war. Too bad they were quickly outclassed ....


No, that wasn't bad at all. sigh


When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. ~Benjamin Franklin

"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." Winston Churchill

ASRock M3A770DE AM3 AMD 770 ATX AMD Motherboard
AMD Athlon II X4 640 Propus 3.0GHz Quad-Core CPU
Sapphire Radeon HD 5770 1GB 128-bit GDDR5
G.Skill Ripjaws Series 4GB 240-Pin SDRAM DDR3 1600
Samsung 1TB 7200 SATA 3.0Gb/s HD x2
#3282423 - 04/29/11 05:34 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,982
wheelsup_cavu Offline
Lifer
wheelsup_cavu  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,982
Corona, California
Looking real nice. smile


Wheels


Cheers wave
Wheelsup_cavu

Mission4Today (Campaigns, Missions, and Skins for IL-2)
Planes of Fame Air Museum | March Field Air Museum | Palm Springs Air Museum
#3283102 - 04/30/11 12:21 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,739
zerocinco Offline
Member
zerocinco  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,739
Tchepone, Laos
Don't forget the cat.


#3284330 - 05/01/11 07:05 PM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: zerocinco]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,739
zerocinco Offline
Member
zerocinco  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,739
Tchepone, Laos
Oops. Wrong float plane.


#3288872 - 05/07/11 12:18 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Hinchinbrooke Offline
Member
Hinchinbrooke  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Minnesota

Last edited by Hinchinbrooke; 05/13/11 12:01 AM.
#3291956 - 05/11/11 05:57 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,982
wheelsup_cavu Offline
Lifer
wheelsup_cavu  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,982
Corona, California
cool


Wheels


Cheers wave
Wheelsup_cavu

Mission4Today (Campaigns, Missions, and Skins for IL-2)
Planes of Fame Air Museum | March Field Air Museum | Palm Springs Air Museum
#3296244 - 05/16/11 02:35 PM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,445
Wklink Offline
Permanent Latrine Orderly
Wklink  Offline
Permanent Latrine Orderly
Hotshot

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,445
Olympia, Washington
Man, the Japanese made funny looking cruisers.


The artist formerly known as SimHq Tom Cofield
#3296628 - 05/16/11 09:29 PM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Wklink]  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,798
DaveP63 Offline
Member
DaveP63  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,798
Indiana, USA
Originally Posted By: SimHQ Tom Cofield
Man, the Japanese made funny looking cruisers.


But extremely lethal.


i5-4460@3.2ghz, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte GTX1050Ti 4GB, 2TB HDD, 500GB SDD
#3297576 - 05/18/11 04:36 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 158
colmack Offline
Member
colmack  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 158
The Tone's were Cruiser/scout seaplane carriers that's why the mains were all up front so they could fit the 6 scout seaplanes on the stern

Last edited by colmack; 05/18/11 04:38 AM.
#3297631 - 05/18/11 08:02 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,739
zerocinco Offline
Member
zerocinco  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,739
Tchepone, Laos
An update from Hinch:



The final 10 missions in Phase Two will be the Battle of Midway. Crucial in the battle was knowledge of where the opposing fleet was arrayed. Each side sent out scouts before dawn. In Rising Sun, the player will fly a PBY from Midway and an E13A1 off the Tone's catapult to find the opposing fleet given a general heading. The player must find the fleet and recover to a water landing at Midway or alongside the Tone at sea. There will be no memorized autopilot courses. You must record the heading and distance to the opposing fleet for the following strike missions to dead reckon. You must seek the fleet as they did, identify your target and press your attack. Then you must fly the reciprocal heading home, find your carrier (if still afloat) and land.

Think it was tough for them? You'll know how difficult it was.

Last edited by zerocinco; 05/18/11 08:14 AM.
#3298430 - 05/19/11 09:33 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2
Vonbaron Offline
Junior Member
Vonbaron  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2
Australia
A lot what some say here is untrue - example: Japanese Heavy cruisers had bad welding etc., were outclassed by the Baltimore class early in the pacific war is not factual. Early Japanese Heavy Cruisers of WW2 vintage like the Mogami was overweight(true), and suffered welding problems but this was overcome. THE MAJORITY of Japanese Heavy Cruisers were some of the best and toughest of cruisers of any nation in WW2. What the biggest fault of IJN cruisers was the very poor anti aircraft guns. Also excessive torpedo mounts and storage although early in the war was a factor in their victories. SO people read for example Osprey books and many like historical books and please get your facts correct before generalising and going on national pride ours is better than theirs please. By the way I think Japanese Heavy Cruisers look the most modern and best looking of just about any WW2 combatants. Mark AUSTRALIA.

#3298898 - 05/19/11 08:07 PM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 243
kverdon Offline
Member
kverdon  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 243
Tigard, Oregon
Everyone's treaty cruisers had their plusses and minuses. I've always wondered about many of the Japanese cruisers lack of turret armor. I also however have to give credit to their gunnery and torpedo firepower. US Cruisers I do think were a match in terms of gunnery and protection, they just lacked the superb torpedo armament the Japanese cruisers had. The pounding some US Cruisers took before going down was impressive (both what they took and what the Japanese could dish out). Comparing them or treaty Japanese Cruisers to later designs like the Baltimores is not really fair.

Where the Japanese cruisers excelled in 1942 was in their tactical use. Their superb night optics and better tactics gave them a clear advantage from Java Sea to Guadalcanal. On the other hand, for many of the early engagements, the US side squandered their tactical advantage of radar. Once that was figured out things got a bit more even.

yes, Japanese cruisers in 1942 were indeed sleek and deadly!

Kevin

Last edited by kverdon; 05/19/11 08:10 PM.
#3299129 - 05/20/11 12:06 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Vonbaron]  
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Hinchinbrooke Offline
Member
Hinchinbrooke  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Minnesota
Originally Posted By: Vonbaron
A lot what some say here is untrue - example: Japanese Heavy cruisers had bad welding etc., were outclassed by the Baltimore class early in the pacific war is not factual. Early Japanese Heavy Cruisers of WW2 vintage like the Mogami was overweight(true), and suffered welding problems but this was overcome. THE MAJORITY of Japanese Heavy Cruisers were some of the best and toughest of cruisers of any nation in WW2. What the biggest fault of IJN cruisers was the very poor anti aircraft guns. Also excessive torpedo mounts and storage although early in the war was a factor in their victories. SO people read for example Osprey books and many like historical books and please get your facts correct before generalising and going on national pride ours is better than theirs please. By the way I think Japanese Heavy Cruisers look the most modern and best looking of just about any WW2 combatants. Mark AUSTRALIA.


Who's talking about a 40-page read by Osprey? Many of the Japanese heavy cruisers were over weight on completion, which led to severe stability problems. Things were rectified, but given the length/width ratio for speed, they were over-gunned and always suffered draught problems.

#3299441 - 05/20/11 09:42 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2
Vonbaron Offline
Junior Member
Vonbaron  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2
Australia
[/quote]
Who's talking about a 40-page read by Osprey? Many of the Japanese heavy cruisers were over weight on completion, which led to severe stability problems. Things were rectified, but given the length/width ratio for speed, they were over-gunned and always suffered draught problems. [/quote]
Fair enough and true for some of the classes (like Mogami) but your line who's talking about a 40-page read by Osprey well I won't comment it obvious what you think but I also mentioned that as one example, I also mentioned historical books which I have and read on all the major combatants which I am sure many others do and read like yourself. As pointed out by others major cruisers of other nations had their fair share of problems. I just liked to balance the books. Have a nice day!

#3299553 - 05/20/11 01:43 PM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Hinchinbrooke]  
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 942
8 L.E.I.N. Offline
Member
8 L.E.I.N.  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 942
Detroit, Michigan USA
Hinch,

Any difference on the Chikuma visibly?

#3300148 - 05/21/11 02:48 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: 8 L.E.I.N.]  
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Hinchinbrooke Offline
Member
Hinchinbrooke  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Minnesota
Mike,

Not really. The two ships served together as a cruiser squadron, and pretty much took refits for the same issues. I'm sure there are detail differences, but for a flight sim.....?

#3300163 - 05/21/11 03:17 AM Re: More for the Future..... [Re: Vonbaron]  
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Hinchinbrooke Offline
Member
Hinchinbrooke  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,360
Minnesota
Originally Posted By: Vonbaron
[/quote]
Who's talking about a 40-page read by Osprey? Many of the Japanese heavy cruisers were over weight on completion, which led to severe stability problems. Things were rectified, but given the length/width ratio for speed, they were over-gunned and always suffered draught problems.

Fair enough and true for some of the classes (like Mogami) but your line who's talking about a 40-page read by Osprey well I won't comment it obvious what you think but I also mentioned that as one example, I also mentioned historical books which I have and read on all the major combatants which I am sure many others do and read like yourself. As pointed out by others major cruisers of other nations had their fair share of problems. I just liked to balance the books. Have a nice day! [/quote]



Notice all the main armament, magazines, etc., well forward on a narrow hull (see cruiser speed). Not a happy combination, especially with seas head on. Massive break up possible.

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Funniest Forgotten Weapons video in a while...
by RSColonel_131st. 05/19/19 09:21 PM
And Now, a Movie About Apollo 8
by F4UDash4. 05/19/19 04:16 PM
Subnautica is amazing and frightening
by VF9_Longbow. 05/19/19 04:28 AM
First Trans Atlantic attempt
by No105_Archie. 05/18/19 02:14 PM
Herman Wouk was 103
by F4UDash4. 05/17/19 04:53 PM
F-16 Crash
by rwatson. 05/17/19 09:33 AM
The Great Molasses Flood
by KraziKanuK. 05/16/19 11:41 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0