U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-01-2019, 05:20 AM
 
Location: London
3,992 posts, read 3,439,669 times
Reputation: 1719

Advertisements

The Japanese Mikasa is a pre-Dreadnought British Formidable class of battleship, built at Barrow in England. She was commissioned in 1902. The only British ship of that era...and she was Japanese and in Japan.


Wikipedia

Last edited by John-UK; 02-01-2019 at 05:35 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-01-2019, 05:33 AM
 
Location: London
3,992 posts, read 3,439,669 times
Reputation: 1719
HMS Vanguard should not have been built being obsolete on commissioning. She was laid down in late 1941, however when it was obvious battleships were obsolete, work should have been stopped. She took up an amazing amount of skilled men and resources to build. Imagine how many tanks could have been built from its metal.

Battleships in WW2 were not much more than super expensive floating gun batteries for shore bombardment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2019, 05:47 AM
 
19,011 posts, read 12,439,918 times
Reputation: 12698
Quote:
Originally Posted by John-UK View Post
HMS Vanguard should not have been built being obsolete on commissioning. She was laid down in late 1941, however when it was obvious battleships were obsolete, work should have been stopped. She took up an amazing amount of skilled men and resources to build. Imagine how many tanks could have been built from its metal.

Battleships in WW2 were not much more than super expensive floating gun batteries for shore bombardment.

True, but a bit of background: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...yal-navy-28962


Which takes much from : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Vanguard_(23)


In terms of "amazing amount of skilled men" being used to build HMS Vanguard, apparently there wasn't enough of such men and that shortage is in part what delayed completion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2019, 01:50 PM
 
Location: San Diego CA
4,203 posts, read 3,089,435 times
Reputation: 6635
Quote:
Originally Posted by John-UK View Post
HMS Vanguard should not have been built being obsolete on commissioning. She was laid down in late 1941, however when it was obvious battleships were obsolete, work should have been stopped. She took up an amazing amount of skilled men and resources to build. Imagine how many tanks could have been built from its metal.

Battleships in WW2 were not much more than super expensive floating gun batteries for shore bombardment.

Yes indeed. Naval traditions are hard to break. Witness HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse off Malaya in 1941 sent out from Singapore to thwart Japanese landings. Without aircover they were sitting ducks for enemy air attack.


And battleships weren't even very good at shore bombardment with their flat trajectory anti ship ammunition. Places like Tarawa and Iwo Jima were subject to prolonged intense battleship bombardment with little effect against deep dug in enemy positions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2019, 04:55 PM
 
Location: London
3,992 posts, read 3,439,669 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
In terms of "amazing amount of skilled men" being used to build HMS Vanguard, apparently there wasn't enough of such men and that shortage is in part what delayed completion.
Of course there was shortage of skilled men. All though WW2 skilled men were in demand. However those involved in building this white elephant could have done something more useful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2019, 04:58 PM
 
Location: London
3,992 posts, read 3,439,669 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgsing View Post
Yes indeed. Naval traditions are hard to break. Witness HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse off Malaya in 1941 sent out from Singapore to thwart Japanese landings. Without aircover they were sitting ducks for enemy air attack.
They were ordered to sail for Australia. The commander never sailed.
Quote:
And battleships weren't even very good at shore bombardment with their flat trajectory anti ship ammunition.
Only good with HE shells.

Last edited by John-UK; 02-01-2019 at 05:34 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2019, 06:18 PM
 
19,011 posts, read 12,439,918 times
Reputation: 12698
When you get right down to it there is no small number of ships both military or not that shouldn't have been built late in war and the immediate years afterwards.


SS United States comes to mind. Yes, she was a great ship, a tour de force if you will, but arrived too late in the transatlantic sea crossing game to have a very long useful life. She's spent more time laid up than on the seas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2019, 07:11 PM
 
Location: San Diego CA
4,203 posts, read 3,089,435 times
Reputation: 6635
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
When you get right down to it there is no small number of ships both military or not that shouldn't have been built late in war and the immediate years afterwards.


SS United States comes to mind. Yes, she was a great ship, a tour de force if you will, but arrived too late in the transatlantic sea crossing game to have a very long useful life. She's spent more time laid up than on the seas.


Once the piston engine Lockheed Constellation and later the Boeing 707 started regular trans ocean flights the old stately ships that did the trans Atlantic and Pacific passenger crossings floated off into history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2019, 09:49 AM
 
Location: London
3,992 posts, read 3,439,669 times
Reputation: 1719
When jets started the tarns-Atlantic runs, they were expensive to travel on, and were regarded as being the transport for the rich. Of course that changed as planes became cheaper and more seats put in.

BTW, you may find the Comet 4 was the first jet trans-Atlantic service.

Last edited by John-UK; 02-02-2019 at 10:01 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2019, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Cupertino, CA
855 posts, read 1,713,396 times
Reputation: 1138

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKxxbqynRIU


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdNbzYvwL3Q
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top