Is Canberra a Good Cruiser?

[keitho]

I keep wanting to use Canberra, but I can't decide if it's a good value or not compared to the other three UK/Aussie cruiser options. ...Opinions?

[TheJudge]

I don't think it is a great cruiser but I'll rank them just for fun:

1) USS Baltimore

This isn't even close. It is the highest cost at 18 but has the best gunnery, armor, and vital armor of all allied cruisers. With 8 AA, it makes the others look bad. With extended range 4 and torpedo defense 1, it is a lock for top cruiser.

2) USS Boise- A good balanced ship for 13 points. 4/10/3 armor is better than Salt Lake City which is called a heavy cruiser and Boise is a light cruiser? How did this happen? Gunnery and AA are same as SLC with 1 less dice on range 2. AA is 6 which is fair. Rapid Fire is a good SA. Boise is a bargain as far as cruisers go. It also has secondary gunnery. Sweet.

3) Salt Lake City- Again, a good balanced ship with good gunnery for 14 pts. Good guns, secondary shot, and 4/9/3 armor.

4) USS Atlanta- A floating AA battery for 12 points. This ship might make number 2 or 3 on some peeps list only because you stick it next to Enterprise or Iowa and never worry about planes attacking that sector. It's gunnery is lame but that's not what it's there for.

5) Gloire- 14 pts- 4/9/3 armor and ok gunnery. It has a secondary shot and a 1/1/1 torpedo attack but it's true value is in the Excellent Spotting SA. It gets extra dice when a friendly ship attacks an enemy and Gloire also attacks the same ship. Nice. 2-3 Gloire's can wreak havoc.

6) HMS Exeter- 12 pts- 8/8/7/6 guns are ok. 5 AA sucks and 2/2/1 torpedo attack is decent. Determination SA is meh. Nothing to blow your skirt up and no secondary gun. Blech.

7) HMAS Canberra- It's biggest downfall is cost. 15 pts with 3/9/3 armor, same guns as SLC, crappy AA of 5 but a 2/2/1 torpedo attack. No SA's?? If this ship had a good SA of some sort it might be worth the 15, otherwise it is the same as number 6, HMS Exeter. No secondary gun? Why the hell not? Ships like this are what makes the Baltimore so stupidly good.

8) HMS Ajax- 13 pts. 4/9/3 armor is ok but has weak guns, no secondary, and Pursuit Ship SA is lame. 2/2/1 torpedo attack is good and 6 AA is ok.

9) HMAS Sydney- 14 points. Poor Sydney. It's not it's own fault, the designer just took a big giant dump on this card. Weak guns, 6 AA, and 2/2/1 torpedo attack makes this a 10 point ship. Raider Hunter is worth 4 points? Yeah right. lol

So Canberra is towards the bottom of the list. Not a great ship. Nice model for sure and usable in scenario games but as a staple in fleets? Nah.

Onward

[aquarius]

Where would you put the Graf Spee in there? ;)

[Jesse_James]

Where would you put the Graf Spee in there? ;)

Those are for allies only.

But the graf spee has a very special place in my tiny little heart at the lovely spot of number 1. :rolleyes:

[Fleet_Admiral_PF]

Graf Spee and her sisters were in a class of their own, in between battleships and heavy cuisers.

[Jesse_James]

Graf Spee and her sisters were in a class of their own, in between battleships and heavy cuisers.

Thus pocket battle ship.

The stat side of the car lists it as a cruiser.

On the History/image side it reads pocket battleship. So in game play if something were to affect a cruiser, Graf Spee would be affected since its listed as a cruiser.

So in the game it is a cruiser.

[NimitsTexan]

The term "pocket battleship" was actually of British origin; the Germans themselves never considered the ships to be in the Battleship/Battlecruiser class. The original term for the class was "panzerschiffe" (loosely "armored ship," I believe), and later they were reclassified as heavy cruisers.

[Bismarck]

I liked the summary and agree with it for the most part.

In my opinion it´s a pity how bad the British/Aus cruisers are, at least for their cost.
I think it´s a bit silly how much weaker the European theater is in game terms. I don´t care if the ships were of less quality, they should then cost less. You have to be able to mix units between the theaters to get full use of the game, at least until we get more units in set 2.

[DCal12]

Judge you going to rank the axis now? I enjoyed your first write up.

[LoneWolf]

I often prefer British/Australian cruisers over US. If I am playing a swarm type of game I will pick more UK/Aussie cruisers then american, and mostly take the atlanta to provide a little AA protection.

But I do agree, they kind of sit inbetween US cheap cost cruisers and japanese expensive cruisers. Makes them a little more difficult to fit into fleets.

It is because of the torpedos, they have decent torps, not great but decent.

It adds cost. >_<

[TheJudge]

I liked the summary and agree with it for the most part.

In my opinion it´s a pity how bad the British/Aus cruisers are, at least for their cost.
I think it´s a bit silly how much weaker the European theater is in game terms. I don´t care if the ships were of less quality, they should then cost less. You have to be able to mix units between the theaters to get full use of the game, at least until we get more units in set 2.


There was nothing wrong with British and Aussie/New Zealand cruisers. They were all similar anyway but in this game, US ships get every break.

You can't really argue that the Baltimore was a better ship than the others because it was the newest ship of all those, it had better radar, improved guns, fire control, all that crap. What you can argue is that it has Torpedo Defense 1 and Extended range 4. If anyone can show actual proof as to why it has those 2 things, I'll buy them a cookie. No, simply stated, US ships get extra credit for being US ships. Canberra is 15 points so ER 4 and TD 1, better gunnery and armor is only worth 3 more points in Baltimore???

Or, are torpedos so over priced? It's a joke. Baltimore should be a 22-24 point ship if Canberra is 15.

I'll do an Axis write up but I don't have my cards, I'll have to do it from memory. That should be a hoot. :)

[LoneWolf]

Or, are torpedos so over priced? It's a joke. Baltimore should be a 22-24 point ship if Canberra is 15.


Sadly it seems to be the case, you can see this reflected in japanese cruiser cost.

Sadly with such a high cost on torpedos, it makes US ships so much more versitile in this game >_<

[TheJudge]

Axis Cruisers ranked:

1) Myoko- This is a tough call because Graf Spee has those giant guns but giant guns do not a balanced ship make. Myoko has good gunnery, on par with SLC and just under Baltimore and has those rediculous Long Lance torpedoes. When they hit, it's all over but the cryin. Just be careful with them. A Dauntless can pummel a Myoko and IJN AA is not great. myoko is a 6 so it really needs to ride along with Tone or one of the big carriers that have AA 7. IJN cruisers need air cover or good AA to be effective.

2- Graf Spee- Big guns go BOOM. Lightly armored for a big ship, they had 6 11 inch guns on only 11,000 tons. A neat idea in theory. They made the French wet their trousers and build the Strasbourg ships. In the long run, they were simply over rated, more bark than bite. They couldn't fight a battle cruiser or battleship but could take on heavy cruisers pretty handily so in that regard, it gets a high ranking. 21? points is pricey, I'd almost rather have 2 subs for 22 than Graf Spee for 21 but it is a FUN ship and fun means a lot to me.

3) Tone- 23 points is a lot for a cruiser but this is so such a good balanced ship, it might deserve a higher ranking. AA 7, Long Lance Torpedoes, and decent gunnery make it a good, offensive weapon but Scout Cruiser really puts it over the top. What a terriffic SA. Spot ANY enemy ship and every unit attacking it gets an extra attack dice against it. In a 200-300 point IJN fleet, 2 Tone's are a must. Combined with planes and heavy gunnery, this is a deadly combo.

4) Koln- Hey, I like this ship. It doesn't do anything really special in the gunnery, armor, or torpedo departments but it has an ultra cool SA that let's it start further out on the map and swipe objectives under the right circumstances or protect submarines from prowling Catalina's. This is important! A fleet of 5 U-510 and 4 Koln = 99 points. The Koln's and subs go right to the objective first or 2nd turn and while they might be easy to blow up by bigger ships, they can protect the subs for a couple of turns.

5) Jintsu- This ship sucks. 19 points and wouldn't scare a sick cat off a flower pot. It has Long Lance torpedoes which are scary but if it gets in range to use them, just shoot the allied commander. This might be the easiest war ship in the game to destroy. Another case of LL torpedoes being way over rated points wise.

6) Bolzano/Duca D'Aosta- Sorry, I have no stats handy on these, I will update it later but chances are these ships are better than Jintsu but I've yet to use them in a game and have no solid info.

I think that is all of them. In comparing all the ships and ranking them together, it's going to be US on top but the top 5 has Graff Spee, Myoko, and Tone in it. The rule changes really helped the IJN ships on paper. In actual combat, as long as they stay away from air attacks until gunnery battles take place, they are deadly and worth their points. Baltimore is just stupid good with the extended range and torpedo defense.

[Jesse_James]

The term "pocket battleship" was actually of British origin; the Germans themselves never considered the ships to be in the Battleship/Battlecruiser class. The original term for the class was "panzerschiffe" (loosely "armored ship," I believe), and later they were reclassified as heavy cruisers.

That is interesting. Yet so like the British to do that.

['Warspite']

I don't think it is a great cruiser but I'll rank them just for fun:

1) USS Baltimore

This isn't even close. It is the highest cost at 18 but has the best gunnery, armor, and vital armor of all allied cruisers. With 8 AA, it makes the others look bad. With extended range 4 and torpedo defense 1, it is a lock for top cruiser.




Check my corrections list [see my signature line] for my views on the Baltimore's +1 torpedo SA. It is not warranted either by design or actual battle experience. The one cruiser of this class to be torpedoed was crippled by an air-dropped 18-inch torpedo.

[doganpc]

I'd have to say Bolzano, Jintsu, Koln, Duca d'Aosta.

Bolzano - Flank SA (Blitzer), Secondary guns
Jintsu - Long Lance, Reroll, 3 torpedos at range 1
Koln - Lead SA (Rusher)
Duca - Nothing, well okay 6AA

Yeah the Koln has a nifty SA and can cover your subs from planes, but it's armor doesn't match the Italians nor does it have secondary guns like the Bolzano or the massive torpedo spread of the Jintsu. It is better than the Duca any day though. I place the Bolzano above the Jintsu since it has the guns and the range to be an effective harraser and destroyer killer. With a SA that drops it on unsuspecting sub hunters and not just the first turn. The Jintsu is probably better at bigger ships than the bolzano but you're paying a premium for those torpedos (but man when they hit, they hit hard).

Doganpc
You shouldn't play european vs pacific, it just doesn't add up.

[solitaire77]

6) HMS Exeter- 12 pts- 8/8/7/6 guns are ok. 5 AA sucks and 2/2/1 torpedo attack is decent. Determination SA is meh. Nothing to blow your skirt up and no secondary gun. Blech.

You've got the stats right, but I couldn't disagree more about the SA. When you've seen determination save a ship once, you get a healthy respect for it. When you see determination save the same ship three times in one game and take an objective for an inexpensive 12 points, you rank the Exeter higher than 6th. Obviously I think you're missing a gem here.

The Exeter can have a 33% chance of taking a death-zone-of-an objective where others ships could not. You can't "kill" it twice in one phase! That's big.

-Greg

[TheJudge]

You've got the stats right, but I couldn't disagree more about the SA. When you've seen determination save a ship once, you get a healthy respect for it. When you see determination save the same ship three times in one game and take an objective for an inexpensive 12 points, you rank the Exeter higher than 6th. Obviously I think you're missing a gem here.

The Exeter can have a 33% chance of taking a death-zone-of-an objective where others ships could not. You can't "kill" it twice in one phase! That's big.

-Greg

I'm not a big fan of SA's that you have to roll for. Sure, if you get lucky and it works but odds are, it won't. I like the cost of the ship but it's stats aren't great. I like ships that accomplish things and Exeter doesn't do anything particularily well but it's not bad either. Middle of the road.

[TheJudge]

To change my rankings a bit, Bolzano definitely goes ahead of Jintsu.

Bolzano- 18 pts expensive? Yes. Good gunnery with 9/9/8/6 and 5/5/3 secondary make it formidable. 6 AA is ok. Throw in a 2/1 torpedo attack and it suddenly becomes an all around better ship. Same armor as Salt Lake City, 4/9/3 so actually a very balanced design. You're basically trading the 2/1 torpedo attack for 1/1 less armor, less gun dice, no torpedo defense, and no extended range as compared to Baltimore. I like the Flank Speed SA also. It's amazing how big +1 speed can be in a game for getting out of trouble or pinning an opponent. Bolzano goes right to the top 3 Axis cruisers under the new rules.

Duca D'Aosta- 12 points Same armor as Bolzano, weaker gunnery, no secondary, 6AA and a 2/1 torpedo attack. Not bad for 12 points. I'd rate it above Jintsu for being a more balanced design. Jintsu is basically a floating torpedo launcher with cruddy armor and AA.

[weedsrock2]

TheJudge,

Nice insights. I enjoyed reading them.

[aquarius]

But you can't forget that the Jintsu has the +1 flag, even though it is still overpriced. It makes it a good destroyer flotilla leader.

[doganpc]

But you can't forget that the Jintsu has the +1 flag, even though it is still overpriced. It makes it a good destroyer flotilla leader.

I wouldn't call it overpriced, the flagship bonus is big on such an inexpensive ship (good backup to a 2). My claim is that amongst cruisers the Jintsu doesn't stand a reliable chance against Bolzano and better.

To defend my picks against TheJudge (ha!), You get a better deal with the Koln and the Jintsu over the Duca. Yeah the Jintsu has weaker armor and AA, but it's only one dice and easily compensated with 3 torpedo dice dealing 3 damage a piece. Not somthing to laugh at now that the ship gets to send them off consistantly(?). It's pretty much tied with the Bolzano in my eyes, the difference is in what they're good at. Jintsu has the power to threaten heavier ships while the Bolzano is a superior support raider. I understand your placing more value in consistancy over a die roll (on 6 torpedo), but in my experience one 6 out of 3 dice is pretty good odds.

However none of this determines if the Canberra is a good cruiser. . . Which I don't think it is, its got nice guns, but weaker armor, no SA and AA. It's only good in scenario/themed games. It really needs a SA of some sort to make it worth it's points.

Doganpc
Back on topic.

[LoneWolf]

I'm not a big fan of SA's that you have to roll for. Sure, if you get lucky and it works but odds are, it won't. I like the cost of the ship but it's stats aren't great. I like ships that accomplish things and Exeter doesn't do anything particularily well but it's not bad either. Middle of the road.

Is it because you can do it 100 times in a row and then not for 10000000000000 ?

I do also think the exeter is a gem, for her points. When you look at the Canberra compare points and so on, the SA is just simply a bonus that is nice to have as back up.

[MarcusAurelius]

Is it because you can do it 100 times in a row and then not for 10000000000000 ?

I do also think the exeter is a gem, for her points. When you look at the Canberra compare points and so on, the SA is just simply a bonus that is nice to have as back up.

For two almost-identical 1939 cruisers, I can't see any reason to justify why HMAS Canberra costs 3 more points than HMS Exeter.

Speed, armor, vital armor, hull points, AA and torpedo attacks are all exactly the same. While Exeter doesn't have quite the same punch, it's slightly more survivable.

Canberra may not be the worst unit in the game. But it's not that good, either.

[dracos42]

For two almost-identical 1939 cruisers, I can't see any reason to justify why HMAS Canberra costs 3 more points than HMS Exeter.

Speed, armor, vital armor, hull points, AA and torpedo attacks are all exactly the same. While Exeter doesn't have quite the same punch, it's slightly more survivable.

Canberra may not be the worst unit in the game. But it's not that good, either.

That's the thing about Canberra and other ships. They aren't bad units, and they aren't the best at what they do. They're average, the workhorses of their navies.

If I had the Exeter and Salt Lake City, I could form an historically plausible battleline of Exeter, SLC, Boise, Australia, Sydney, and Ajax (ok, need Ajax too) vs. a couple of Kongos and Myoko. That would be a fun fight. I wouldn't even worry about point values until figuring out who won.

Mike L.

[LoneWolf]

That's the thing about Canberra and other ships. They aren't bad units, and they aren't the best at what they do. They're average, the workhorses of their navies.

If I had the Exeter and Salt Lake City, I could form an historically plausible battleline of Exeter, SLC, Boise, Australia, Sydney, and Ajax (ok, need Ajax too) vs. a couple of Kongos and Myoko. That would be a fun fight. I wouldn't even worry about point values until figuring out who won.

Mike L.

Hrmmmm, I would almost be inclined to put my money on the USN and RN/RAN task force.

But myoko would be the tide turner. :(

[TheJudge]

6 Allied cruisers vs 2 Kongos and 1 Myoko? Hmmm...should be a slaughter for the IJN if you maneuver correctly. That range 4 is HUGE. Myoko would get sunk for sure but likely would take at least 1 ship with it.

[dracos42]

6 Allied cruisers vs 2 Kongos and 1 Myoko? Hmmm...should be a slaughter for the IJN if you maneuver correctly. That range 4 is HUGE. Myoko would get sunk for sure but likely would take at least 1 ship with it.


I would add some destroyers to both sides. Fletchers and Javelins for the Allied force. The Javelins could lay smoke. When I get home, I'll try this battle, with Bolzano and French CL standing in for missing Allied cruisers.

The range 4 of the Kongos would be a big problem. The Allies either have to charge into range 3 and closer. Or set victory conditions so that one side or the other is guarding a convoy or beachhead. Another idea, playing at night, with visibility limited to, say, range 2. It would be another First Guadacanal. For a night battle, add Jintsu and Atlanta for even more mayhem. :D

I've got an Italian fleet of 2 Bolzanos, 3 CLs, and 3 DDs. I want to take them up against an Allied force sometime.

Mike L.

[Torps]

On the 'value' of Canberra, I've got to say that I am disappointed. I'll wear the Canberra not having a flagship rating even though she served as a task group flagship and national flagship before war broke out with Japan.
Her deck armour was same thickness as that of the Sydney, her turret and tower armour was 1/2 to 1" thicker and due to her size had more compartments but gets one less armour point than the Sydney.
Her sister, also a flagship (in this case she commanded a task force including American cruiser and DDs) survived 5 Kamikaze hits in about as many days and stayed in the gunline until the last one struck.
This class of ship has been short changed by points cost. Either SAs are too cheap of torpedoes are to expensive. I suspect both.
Being down to having only two of their original five fleet cruisers (as opposed to the old ships used to patrol home waters) the Australian crews made tremendous efforts to keep their ships afloat and fighting. Indeed Canberra was afloat but unable to make way under her own power after Savo Island but unfortunately had to be torpedoed by the USN, otherwise she could have been saved.

For these reasons I use the 'Canberra class' with SA of Damage Control and Flagship rating of 1. Sadly, I agree that the points system heavily favours the US Navy in WaS. Some minor tweaks could improve balance quite a lot.

[TK421]

I've used Canberra as an escort or the Hood and/or Nelson. Her AA is not the best, but with the new rules Destroyer mobs can be alarming. Being able to hit destroyers at range 3 with some assurance of at least crippling can be handy.

In night game Canberra's torpedoes stole a tie.

You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes you get what you need! ;)

[Torps]

Well said, TK421.
I just needed to have a whinge about how the fleet I served in feels like it has been dudded.:confused:
Nice irony to use a line from my fovourite Rolling Stones song to put me in my place too.:cool:

[Conjurer]

I want to like Canberra, I really do. The mini is pretty well done, and it looks very much at home on the WAS maps. But, as others have stated, there's simply nothing she offers that you can't get from another Allied cruiser in a more attractive package. An SA would certainly help...

["Sink the Bismark"]

To change my rankings a bit, Bolzano definitely goes ahead of Jintsu.

I'd rate it above Jintsu for being a more balanced design. Jintsu is basically a floating torpedo launcher with cruddy armor and AA.

Says it all about the Japanese light cruisers.:D

[LoneWolf]

On the 'value' of Canberra, I've got to say that I am disappointed. I'll wear the Canberra not having a flagship rating even though she served as a task group flagship and national flagship before war broke out with Japan.
Her deck armour was same thickness as that of the Sydney, her turret and tower armour was 1/2 to 1" thicker and due to her size had more compartments but gets one less armour point than the Sydney.
Her sister, also a flagship (in this case she commanded a task force including American cruiser and DDs) survived 5 Kamikaze hits in about as many days and stayed in the gunline until the last one struck.
This class of ship has been short changed by points cost. Either SAs are too cheap of torpedoes are to expensive. I suspect both.
Being down to having only two of their original five fleet cruisers (as opposed to the old ships used to patrol home waters) the Australian crews made tremendous efforts to keep their ships afloat and fighting. Indeed Canberra was afloat but unable to make way under her own power after Savo Island but unfortunately had to be torpedoed by the USN, otherwise she could have been saved.

For these reasons I use the 'Canberra class' with SA of Damage Control and Flagship rating of 1. Sadly, I agree that the points system heavily favours the US Navy in WaS. Some minor tweaks could improve balance quite a lot.

It is the torpedos.

They really do add the points.

Just need to look at the Rodney vs Washington in points.

Personaly I would love to give the Canberra flag ship bonus, and maybe a little something else. I know what it is I would want to give her, though it is a little overpowering hehehe >:)

[seahawk]

Personally I would like the Canberra to get a SA like determination and/or a flagship bonus, but do we really want to see every ship getting some sort of SA to make them playable.

[Torps]

I'm sure you enjoyed sinking my Canberra last weekend, Seahawk.

Welcome to the forum!

[LoneWolf]

Personally I would like the Canberra to get a SA like determination and/or a flagship bonus, but do we really want to see every ship getting some sort of SA to make them playable.

If Kamikazes come out in set2.

We might see something like; All Kamikaze attacks against this unit get -1 or -2. Something like that.

I have a feeling Kamikaze attacks are going to have something to do with the Vital armor, like bombs and gunery except something a little else as well. It might just be Kamikazes can't be aborted.

Though determination would be cool.

Edit: Kick arse! more Aussies on the forums, though i was feeling specail feeling like i was the only one :D

Fighting urge to start Australian sporting chants. :D

[seahawk]

Aussie aussie aussie oi oi oi

[doganpc]

Personaly I would love to give the Canberra flag ship bonus, and maybe a little something else. I know what it is I would want to give her, though it is a little overpowering hehehe >:)

That just reads really dirty.

Doganpc
bow chica bow bow

[Torps]

The British County class cruisers were designed to use compartmentalisation to absorb damage in order to save weight. Armoured sides would have taken them over Washington Treaty weight limitations.
So I'll retract what I hinted at earlier about HMAS Canberra's armour being too weak. Trying to allow for the extra compartmentalisation by adding another hull point would not work under the game's mechanics.

In short, the ship's statistics in WaS look just about right. The trick is to use her in company with the right ships to get the most from her guns and torpedoes.

[PaulG]

The other issue that isn't addressed in this game (or any other naval game I know of) is that British ship designers paid a lot of attention to sea handling, much more so than any other navy. Japanese and German ship designs were often top heavy and had poor sea keeping abilities in rough weather and the Italians and French were designing ships to muck about in the (usually) calm Med.

So whilst British designs are undergunned and underarmoured compared to other ships, I'd much rather ride out a cyclone in a British designed warship than any other.

[babs]

The other issue that isn't addressed in this game (or any other naval game I know of) is that British ship designers paid a lot of attention to sea handling, much more so than any other navy. Japanese and German ship designs were often top heavy and had poor sea keeping abilities in rough weather and the Italians and French were designing ships to muck about in the (usually) calm Med.

So whilst British designs are undergunned and underarmoured compared to other ships, I'd much rather ride out a cyclone in a British designed warship than any other.

Very true, I can remember that the US lost some destroyers to a hurricane in the pacific....

Babs out!

[Jameson]

Very true, I can remember that the US lost some destroyers to a hurricane in the pacific....

Babs out!

Correction: Very true, I can remember that Halsey lost some destroyers to 2 hurricanes in the Pacific....

[The_Lucky_Y]

The other issue that isn't addressed in this game (or any other naval game I know of) is that British ship designers paid a lot of attention to sea handling, much more so than any other navy. Japanese and German ship designs were often top heavy and had poor sea keeping abilities in rough weather and the Italians and French were designing ships to muck about in the (usually) calm Med.

So whilst British designs are undergunned and underarmoured compared to other ships, I'd much rather ride out a cyclone in a British designed warship than any other.


but dont ride out inside the front turret of the KGV class.....

[LoneWolf]

The other issue that isn't addressed in this game (or any other naval game I know of) is that British ship designers paid a lot of attention to sea handling, much more so than any other navy. Japanese and German ship designs were often top heavy and had poor sea keeping abilities in rough weather and the Italians and French were designing ships to muck about in the (usually) calm Med.

So whilst British designs are undergunned and underarmoured compared to other ships, I'd much rather ride out a cyclone in a British designed warship than any other.

British ship were built very well weathered, Sea Fairing nation for quite some hundreds of years now, they have to have learnt a thing or two in that time. :)

[PaulG]

Correction: Very true, I can remember that Halsey lost some destroyers to 2 hurricanes in the Pacific....

Well depending on whether he was north or south of the equator he would have lost them to a typhoon or a cyclone, we don't have no stinking hurricanes in Pacific.

[Jameson]

Well depending on whether he was north or south of the equator he would have lost them to a typhoon or a cyclone, we don't have no stinking hurricanes in Pacific.

I had already corrected him on enough, I didn't want to make it too harsh. ;)

[Torps]

Yes, it was to typhoons and on two different occasions. It amazes me that Halsey did not learn from his mistake the first time.

With regard to the County class cruisers, such as Canberra, the big hull meant the design could only carry a small superstructure and still maintain a low centre of gravity. They were still regarded as notorious 'rollers'.

[UncaBret]

The term "pocket battleship" was actually of British origin; the Germans themselves never considered the ships to be in the Battleship/Battlecruiser class. The original term for the class was "panzerschiffe" (loosely "armored ship," I believe), and later they were reclassified as heavy cruisers.

The Germans also considered the Panther a medium tank. Go figure.

[Conjurer]

Well, when you're making the Tiger/TigerII, I can understand thinking of the Panther as a medium tank.:p

[PaulG]

Yes, it was to typhoons and on two different occasions. It amazes me that Halsey did not learn from his mistake the first time.



In Halsey's defense he was hit whilst in the middle of refeuling and at the later enquiry they attributed the loss of the destroyers to the fact that they were very low on fuel and didn't have fuel in the bunkers acting as ballast. Although this does provide the basis for the Caine Mutiny.

There was the incident late in the Pacific war when a HMS Belfast (a North Atlantic veteran) was attached to the American 7th Cruiser Squadron that had a near miss from a typhoon. On being asked how they were faring with the storm, Captain Royer Dick replied with the signal "What Storm?"

[swarbs]

In Halsey's defense he was hit whilst in the middle of refeuling and at the later enquiry they attributed the loss of the destroyers to the fact that they were very low on fuel and didn't have fuel in the bunkers acting as ballast. Although this does provide the basis for the Caine Mutiny.


But then again he was warned about the typhoons and still elected to wait on refeuling until it was too late for some of the destroyers. He also elected not to try to steam around the typhoon. The weather was a bit worse than they thought, but there's not too much of an excuse.

[LoneWolf]

In Halsey's defense he was hit whilst in the middle of refeuling and at the later enquiry they attributed the loss of the destroyers to the fact that they were very low on fuel and didn't have fuel in the bunkers acting as ballast. Although this does provide the basis for the Caine Mutiny.


The dutch would remove the Ballast and trade it for extra cargo.


Mind you we are talking about oak ships. Or well i am now.


New Holland FTW

[LoneWolf]

But then again he was warned about the typhoons and still elected to wait on refeuling until it was too late for some of the destroyers. He also elected not to try to steam around the typhoon. The weather was a bit worse than they thought, but there's not too much of an excuse.

The sea is an unforgiving mistress.

She holds all the keys and keeps all her secrets