General Quarters!

The Lexington-class: America's Only Battlecruisers

2014-12-01T01:00:00.000-06:00

Of the major naval powers at the end of WWI the U.S was the only power not to have built battlecruisers. The British pioneered the concept in 1907 with the HMS Invincible and were quickly followed by the Germans with the SMS Von der Tann. At the beginning of the 20th century it was a recognized deficiency within the U.S. Navy that there were not enough cruisers to scout and support the main battle line. Beginning in the early 1910s the General Board began to develop designs for what a U.S. battlecruiser should look like. In 1916 Congress granted funding for a class of six battlecruisers, but due to WWI construction did not start until 1920 after the U.S. entry into WWI and a major redesign of the class using British experience from Jutland. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, the Lexington-class was one of the classes of ships scraped after the ratification of the Washington Naval Treaty. Of the six ships planned only two were completed (both as aircraft carriers), the Lexington and Saratoga of WWII fame. However, the focus of this post is on the Lexington-class in it's original battlecruiser form.
In the early 1900s the General Board wanted to enlarge the U.S. cruiser fleet to provide scouts for the battle line of the Navy. Congress was unwilling to provide funds for the requested cruisers, rather focusing on battleships. This forced destroyers to take up the slack in acting as the eyes of the U.S. battle line. In 1916 Congress finally gave it's approval for a class of six battlecruisers to be completed by 1920. This first design approved by Congress was to be armed with 10 14in guns, a displacement around 33,500 tons (this first design is comparable to the British Renown), a top speed of 35 knots, and very thin armor. Work was ceased on the design with the American entry into WWI in November 1917 as all shipyard capacity was devoted to merchant vessels and ASW craft. With the U.S. entry into WWI Britain gave the U.S. access to their experience with battlecruisers, especially that gained from Jutland. The two redesigns of the Lexington-class from 1917 until 1919 turned the Lexington-class into what was essentially a fast battleship, combining the speed of a battlecruiser with the firepower of a battleship. Armament was increased to 8 16in guns, armor was increased which resulted in a drop in the class's top speed to 33 knots. This redesign was heavily influenced by the HMS Hood which the British viewed as a hybrid battleship and battlecruiser.
The final design specifications of the Lexington-class are drawn from Norman Friedman's U.S. Cruisers: An Illustrated Design History and Siegfried Breyer's Battleships and Battlecruisers, 1905 to 1970.

Displacement
Light ship	43,500
Deep load	44,938
Dimensions
Length (waterline)	850 feet
Length (overall)	874 feet
Beam	105 feet
Draft (light ship)	30 feet
Armament
Main battery	8 16”/50 Mark 2 guns
Secondary battery	16 6”/53 Mark 13 guns
Anti-Aircraft battery	6 3”/50 Mark 10 guns
Torpedo Tubes	8 21” Tubes
Armor
Main side belt	7” tapering to 5” at the ends of the ship
Upper deck	1.25” to 2.25”
Upper armored deck	1.5”
Lower armored deck	2”
Machinery
Shaft horsepower	180,000 SHP
Maximum speed	33.25 knots
Endurance @ 10 knots	10,000 miles

16"/50 Mark 2 outside the Washington Naval Yard in 1974

The Lexington-class battlecruisers were to carry a main armament of eight 16"/50 Mark 2 guns in four twin turrets. Originally the Lexingtons were to be armed with 14 inch guns, but were upgunned due to the increasing caliber of naval guns worldwide and the longer range and better penetration of 16" guns. The Lexingtons were also to carry 16 6"/53 guns (10 in casemates and 4 in open air) to defend against destroyers. The anti-air armament consisted of 4 3"/50 guns at the time of the design, but by the time the ships were being built the number was upped to 8. Had the Lexingtons been built as planned it is likely that their casemate guns would have been removed and replaced at some point, and the guns mounted in the open would have been removed in the 1930s to make room for an increased AA armament. Their AA armament would have also been exponentially increased with everything from 0.50" MGs in the 30s to twin 5"/38 guns and 40mm Bofors cannons by WWII. To get an idea of the layout of the armament to be carried by the Lexington-class below is a sketch produced by the General Board in 1919 which was one of the later designs and extremely similar to the final design (I know there is an actual line drawing of the Lexingtons produced by the General Board in June of 1919, but the Navy does not seem to have it in their online archives).

(Click on the photo to enlarge)

The armor scheme on the Lexingtons was influenced by the HMS Hood in that the main side belt was inclined outwards at 11.5 degrees to increase it's effective thickness against horizontal fire. The main side belt was to have a maximum thickness of 7 inches tapering to 5 inches at the ends of the ship. The cumulative deck protection was 3.75 inches split between the main deck, the protective deck, and the splinter deck. Turret armor was 11in on the face, 6in on the sides, and 5in on the roof of the turret. Comparatively, the Hood had a main side belt of 8in which thinned to 5-6in at the ends of the ship. Deck armor was 3in amidships, and 7in over the magazines.
The top speed of the Lexington-class as designed was to be 33 knots. The Lexingtons would have had 16 Babcock boilers powering 4 GE turbines, each turbine driving one of four propellers. Total shaft horsepower of each Lexington was to be 180,000 SHP. This powerful machinery would later prove invaluable during the Lexington and Saratoga's days as carriers. To compare against a contemporary battlecruiser, the Hood had a top speed of 31 knots during trials, and that achieved by pushing her boilers beyond design specifications (the design SHP of the Hood was 144,000 but the speed of 31 knots was achieved with 151,280 SHP).
While the Lexington-class was the only class of battlecruisers built (not commissioned) by the U.S. Navy, the Alaska-class have also been referred to as battecruisers in the last few decades in various books. However, the Lexington-class was designed explicitly to act as scouts for the main battle line of the Navy and to act as a fast squadron as part of the battle line itself. The Alaska-class was designed as a "cruiser-killer" meant to take on Japanese heavy cruisers, and escort carriers on operations independent of the Battle Force without detracting from the firepower of the Battle Force. The design requirements were different for the Lexingtons and the Alaskas. The Lexingtons were faster, better armored (relative to the Alaskas), and better armed than the Alaskas to carry out their mission of supporting the battle line. Whereas, the Alaskas were meant to operate apart from the Battle Line supporting carrier operations. Any comparison between the two class is wrong because they were designed for different mission sets.

Rueters: China building second aircraft carrier: reports

2014-01-20T10:27:00.001-06:00

From Rueters:

(Reuters) - China is building its second aircraft carrier, which is expected to take six years, and the country aims to have at least four such ships, Chinese and Hong Kong media reports said on Sunday.

After two decades of double-digit increases in the military budget, China's admirals plan to develop a full blue-water navy capable of defending growing economic interests as well as disputed territory in the South and East China Seas.

The country's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning - a Soviet-era ship bought from Ukraine in 1998 and re-fitted in a Chinese shipyard - has long been a symbol of China's naval build-up.

Successfully operating the 60,000-tonne Liaoning is the first step in what state media and some military experts believe will be the deployment of locally built carriers by 2020.

In comments carried on Chinese news websites, Wang Min, the Communist Party boss of the northeastern province of Liaoning, where the first carrier is based, said the second carrier was being built in the port city of Dalian.

Its construction would take about six years, and in future China would have a fleet of at least four carriers, Wang told members of the province's legislature on Saturday, the reports added.

Dalian is the port where the existing carrier was re-fitted for use by the Chinese navy.

Read the rest here.

Hat tip XBRADTC for spotting this.

Flashback Friday: Junkers Ju 390

2014-01-17T01:00:00.001-06:00

The Junker Ju 390, a development of the Ju 290 with an extreme range and the ability to carry a meaningful payload over that range. One of the aircraft designed from the Amerika bomber project, it was meant to have three different variants. One each for heavy transport, maritime patrol, and a heavy bomber.
Specifications from the Luftwaffe Resource Center:

Type: Long Range Bomber or Reconnaissance aircraft.
Origin: Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke AG
Models: V1 to V3 and A-1
Crew: N/A
First Flight: Prototypes only
Final Delivery: None
Number Produced: V1 and V2 Only

Engine:
Model: BMW 801E
Type: 18-Cylinder two-row radial

Dimensions:
Wing span: 165 ft. 1 in. (50.30m)
Length: 112 ft. 2.5 in. (34.20m)
Height: 22 ft. 7 in. (6.89m)

Weights:
Empty: 81,350 lb. (36,900 kg)
Loaded: 166,448 lb. (75,500 kg)

Performance:
Maximum Speed:
    Clean: 314 mph (505 kph)
    Max. Ext. Load: 267 mph (430 kph)
Service Ceiling (Typical): N/A
Range in Recce configuration:
    6,027 miles (9700 km)
Endurance in Recce configuration:
32 Hours
Payload:
Transport (V1): 22,046 lb. (10,000 kg)
Bomber (V3): 3,968 lb. (1800 kg)

Just looking at the specification of the Ju 390 it is an excellent reconnaissance/patrol aircraft. Extremely long legs, and a relatively high top speed. Like many German bomber aircraft/designs the payload is somewhat lacking compared to Allied aircraft, but it has a vastly improved range compared to other German bombers (to give Germany her due, she never really had any heavy bombers only medium bombers like the He 111, as there was no really focus in that area by the German high command).
The Ju 390 did not make into operational service by the end of WWII in Europe. The first prototype aircraft (of which 26 production aircraft were ordered) was completed on 20 October 1943 and took part in tests (including inflight refueling) until March 1944. A second aircraft (Ju 390V2) was completed sometime in 1943 with the first flight taking place in october 1943, with testing continuing until sometime in February 1945.
The Ju 390 has in recent years become the subject of a rumor stating that a Ju 390 flew from France to within 20km of New York City. This is the subject of some debate, as there is some evidence (Ultra intercepts, and POW interrogations) to indicate such a flight did take place. However, what this rumor does not take into account is any radar system covering the approaches to NYC would have spotted it. NYC was then a hub of shipping, manufacturing, and had many major war contractors in the area. While it would be theoretically possible for A Ju 390 to make such a round trip, it would have to be modified to carry ~50% more fuel and would have been unable to carry any meaningful payload. There are also rumors a Ju 390 carried a Japanese general back to Japan via a polar route, and that a Ju 390 made several transport flights to Argentina before the war ended.
The Ju 390 is an interesting aircraft as one of the few really long range aircraft produced at any level by Germany. It's planned use, bombing the U.S., thankfully was never used, but from a purely aeronautical standpoint the Ju 390 was an excellent aircraft.

Hamas Shows Off Rappelling Skills

2014-01-15T01:00:00.000-06:00

Cool trick, but when will this be usable in a combat situation?

Iran: Aliens Are Behind U.S. Foreign Policy

2014-01-14T20:12:00.000-06:00

From Fars News:

A stunning Federal Security Services (FSB) report on the nearly two million highly classified top-secret documents obtained from the United States Department of Defense (DOD) run National Security Agency-Central Security Service (NSA/CSS) by the American ex-patriot Edward Snowden states that this information is providing “incontrovertible proof” that an “alien/extraterrestrial intelligence agenda” is driving US domestic and international policy, and has been doing so since at least 1945, Whatdoesitmean.com reported.

Edward Snowden is a computer specialist, a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee, and former NSA/CSS contractor who disclosed these classified documents to several media outlets in late 2012 and was granted temporary asylum in Russia in 2013 after his designation by the Obama regime as the “most wanted man on earth.”

This FSB report further states that Snowden, in December, 2012, contacted the highly respected American columnist, blogger, and author Glenn Greenwald by an email headed with the subject line stating, “I and others have things you would be interested in.?.?.?.”

In Snowden’s own words, this report continues, he outlined to Greenwald the reason for his highly secretive group obtaining and releasing these documents by warning that that there “were actually two governments in the US, the one that was elected, and the other, secret regime, governing in the dark.”

As to who is running this “secret regime” Snowden and his cohorts were warning about, FSB experts in this report say, was confirmed this past weekend by former Canadian defense minister Paul Hellyer who was given access to all of Snowden’s documents by Russian intelligence services and stated they were, indeed, “accurate.”

Even though Defense Minister Hellyer’s exact statements to the FSB in regards to Snowden’s documents remain classified, shortly after his “extensive electronic interview” by the FSB he was allowed to appear on Russia Today’s program SophieCo this past fortnight where he shockingly admitted that aliens have “been visiting our planet for thousands of years” and described several types of these extraterrestrials, including “Tall Whites” who are working with the US Air Force in Nevada.

Of the many explosive revelations in this FSB report, the one most concerning to Russian authorities are the Snowden’s documents “confirming” that the “Tall Whites” (further revealed by Defense Minister Hellyer as noted above) are the same extraterrestrial alien race behind the stunning rise of Nazi Germany during the 1930’s.

In just one example of the many outlined in this FSB report, it shows that with this “alien assistance,” at the end of the 1930’s, when Nazi Germany possessed just 57 submarines, over the four years of World War II it built 1,163 modern technologically advanced submarines at its dockyards and even put them into operation.

Snowden’s documents further confirm, this report says, the “Tall Whites” (Nordic) meetings in 1954 with US President Dwight D. Eisenhower where the “secret regime” currently ruling over America was established.

Most disturbingly, this FSB report warns, is that the “Tall White” agenda being implemented by the “secret regime” ruling the United States calls for the creation of a global electronic surveillance system meant to hide all true information about their presence here on earth as they enter into what one of Snowden’s documents calls the “final phase” of their end plan for total assimilation and world rule.

Unbeknownst to the FSB, this report confirms, are those still in the US government backing Snowden, but whose presence Russian intelligence experts note is “unmistakable” and shows a cataclysmic power struggle is currently underway against this “secret regime” now headed by Obama by “forces unknown.”

Most to be feared by Russian policy makers and authorities, this report concludes, is if those opposing the “Tall White” “secret regime” ruled over by Obama have themselves aligned with another alien-extraterrestrial power themselves.

No comment.

Post-War Yamato-class Turret Armor Tests

2014-01-13T01:00:00.000-06:00

THAT is a section of turret armor plating that was slated to be fitted aboard the IJN Shinano. As the Shinano was converted to an aircraft carrier, the turret armor was never fitted. The test was conducted in October 1946, with a 16/50 Mark 7 gun firing a super heavy AP shell. The tests were conducted at point-blank range. Had the armor been inclined back at the 45 degrees as planned, it would have been impenetrable to guns of any caliber at any range, bar point blank. Read more over at the NavWeaps Technical board.

GQ! Update

2014-01-10T18:35:00.003-06:00

Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to announce the christening of a new series here at GQ!. Weapons Grade Stupid. It will showcase amazing levels of stupidity in the the military, law enforcement, and political worlds. It will not be regular, merely as events take place. Moving on. Flashback Friday was not posted today because I didn't finish proofreading before I hit the sack last night, but it will resume next Friday.

Alaska-class CBs: America's Cruiser-Killers

2014-01-08T01:07:00.000-06:00

The United States Navy has never officially completed any ships under the designation "battlecruiser". There was a class of battlecruiser constructed during the early 1920, the Lexington-class, but none were completed as battlecruisers (two were completed as aircraft carriers). However, during WWII the U.S. commissioned two vessels known as the Alaska and Guam. They were designated "large cruisers", but had some characteristics of battlecruisers. This post will cover the mission for which the Alaskas were designed, their specifications, armament, armor scheme, propulsion, and their operational history.
At the time the Alaska-class was designed, the Japanese heavy cruisers were becoming a threat to any then-future carrier operations independent from the Battle Force. At the same time, Germany was building the Duetschland-class "pocket battleships" for commerce raiding. France was also rumored to be developing a class of 17,500 ton commerce raiders carrying 12in guns. Thus, a class of ships was needed to be able to escort carriers, and defend the carriers without detracting from the firepower of the Battle Force. At, the same time this class would have to be able to hunt down and kill enemy commerce raiders. This is the niche that was to be filled by the Alaska-class.
Final design specifications of the Alaska-class are drawn from William Garzke's Battleships: United States Battleships, 1935-1992:

Armor
light ship	25,971 tons
standard	27,000 tons
full load	34,253 tons

Dimensions
length overall	808’ 6” (246.431m)
waterline length	791” 6” (241.249m)
maximum beam	90’ 9.375” (27.670m)
maximum draft	31’ 9.25” (9.684m)

Armament
main battery	9 - 12”/50 (305mm)
secondary	12 - 5”/38 (127mm)
antiaircraft	56 - 40mm/56
	34 - 20mm/76

Armor
main side belt	9.0” tapered to 5.0”, inclined 10 degrees (229mm-127mm)
main deck	1.40” (34mm)
second deck centerline	2.80” + 1.0” (71mm + 25mm)
third deck	0.625” (16mm)

Machinery
shaft horsepower	150,000
maximum speed	33 knots
endurance @ 15 knots	12,000nm

Armament. The Alaska-class was the last class of ship in the U.S. Navy to carry 12in guns, and probably the last in the world. However, the guns that the Alaskas were equipped with actually outclassed the 14"/45 Marks 1, 2, 3 and 5 guns carried by the New York-class and Pennsylvania-class battleships early in their careers. Specifically the guns carried by the Alaskas had better penetration capabilities than the earlier 14in guns at all ranges*. This was achieved by the use of the Mark 18 "super-heavy" AP shell which weighed in at 1,140lbs (517kg). The main battery turret armor was 325mm on the face, 152-133mm on the sides, and 127mm on the roof. The secondary armament consisted of 12 5"/38 guns in 6 twin mounts. Antiaircraft armament consisted of 56 40mm/56 cannons in 14 quad mounts, and 34 20mm/76 cannons in single mounts. The massive secondary and anti-aircraft armament carried on the Alaska-class made them immensely valuable for kamikaze defense late in WWII. Had the Alaskas been kept in service after WWII, it is likely their 20mm cannons would have been removed entirely, and their 40mm mounts replaced by the then-new 3"/50 Mark 27 guns.

The Guam in Pearl Harbor in February 1945

Armor. Armor was as listed above in the specifications. Additional armor numbers are, 280 to 330mm for the barbettes, and 270 mm on the control tower. As to underwater protection, it was almost nonexistent on the Alaska-class. Rather, the Alaskas relied on internal subdivision as protection against torpedo and underwater shell damage.

Propulsion. The Alaska-class ships were driven by four sets of General Electric geared turbines. The turbines were driven by eight Babcock & Wilcox Express boilers. The max steam pressure for the boilers was 45kg per square cm. The turbines drove four propellers. Top speed as designed was 33 knots, but the trials showed a top speed of 32.72 knots. Electricity was provided by four generators. Each engine room (there were two) had a single General Electric turbo-generator rested at 1,000kW, 450V AC. At either end of the propulsion spaces were single GE generators each rated at 1,062kW, 450V AC.
The Alaska-class did suffer from a number of problems. The Alaska-class lacked sufficient space for a CIC, making conditions extremely crowded. The Alaska-class also had relatively thin armor for her displacement, at a time when it was possible to give ships a high speed even with thick armor (see the Iowa-class). The top speed of 32.72 knots achieved during trials lower than what was predicted or designed. Finally, underwater protection aboard the Alaskas was nonexistent. Any conventional side protection scheme was sacrificed to reach higher speeds, and would have left the Alaskas vulnerable to torpedo attack had the Alaska entered the war earlier than they did. This with a displacement approaching that of battleships.
History. Construction of the Alaska-class was authorized by the Two-Ocean Navy Act in 1940. Six vessels were authorized, of which two were completed, three were cancelled, and one was scrapped before being commissioned. The two vessels that were completed were the Alaska and Guam. The Alaska was laid down on 17 December 1941, and commissioned 17 June 1944. The Guam was laid down on 2 February 1942, and commissioned on 17 September 1944. The third vessel which was constructed, was the Hawaii. She was launched, but never completed (more on the Hawaii later).
Operational History. The Alaskas both had very short careers. The Alaska first screened aircraft carriers attacking the Japanese Home Islands in March 1945, and destroyed two Japanese aircraft on 18 March. She then participated in shore bombardment of Minami Daito Jima on 27 March, and in late July took part in sweeps of the East China Sea. After the Japanese surrender the Alaska supported minesweeping operations along the Chinese coats, supported Army landings at Inchon on 8 September, and sailed to Tsingtao to hold the port by force until Marines arrived to take over. The Guam arrived at Pearl Harbor on 8 February 1945, and sailed for Ulithi on 13 March joining the Alaska. From there the Guam escorted TF 58 on a raid of the Japanese Home Islands, breaking off on 19 March to escort the USS Franklin back to Ulithi. On 27 March the Guam participated in a bombardment of Okinawa. From the Invasion of Okinawa to the end of the war, the Guam participated in a series of raids in the east China Sea and the Chinese coast. After the end of the war the Guam showed the flag along the Chinese coast, and participated in the occupation of Korea.

The Hawaii just prior to the suspension of her construction.

The Hawaii. The Hawaii was never completed, and she was scrapped in 1959. However, before her scrapping there were two proposals to convert her. One proposal was a conversion to a command ship similar to the Northampton, but larger. This proposal was nixed when it was shown that an escort carrier, the Wright, could the same thing for cheaper. The second proposal was a conversion to a guided missile cruiser, carrying an ASROC launcher, twin Talos SAM launchers, and twin Tartar SAM launchers. Other variants of the missile proposal included fitting the Hawaii with 12 U.S.-built V-2 missiles, or later 20 Polaris ICBMs. In the end the missile proposal was scrapped as being too costly.
The Alaska-class cruisers were neither battlecruisers or battleships, regardless of their appearance. They were designed from the beginning as a counter to perceived threats from hostile cruisers. Their main armament was meant not for slugging it out with enemy battlewagons (though it is possible the 12/50 Mark 7 may have been better than the 14" guns carried by the Kongo-class battlecruisers), it was meant to overwhelm an enemy heavy cruiser. The mission the Alaskas were designed was by 1944, non-existent, and in hindsight they were unnecessary. They were anachronisms born from the lifting of the Washington Treaty restrictions on cruisers. Regardless of that fact, they served well and were not inherently bad ships.

*Unfortunately, I cannot link directly to penetration tables for the 12in/50 and 14in/45 guns. If you wish to compare the penetrations for the guns, the requisite tables are on the NavWeaps pages for each gun. The NavWeaps pages are linked to in the post.

Weapons Grade Stupid: "New York homeland security chief used handgun as laser pointer during speech"

2014-01-07T01:00:00.000-06:00

From Albany Times Union:

Jerome M. Hauer, Gov. Andrew Cuomo's director of homeland security, took out his handgun and used the laser sighting device attached to the barrel as a pointer in a presentation to a foreign delegation, according to public officials. It happened Oct. 24 in Albany at the highly secure state emergency operations center below State Police headquarters.

These officials, one of whom claimed to be an eyewitness, said that three Swedish emergency managers in the delegation were rattled when the gun's laser tracked across one of their heads before Hauer found the map of New York, at which he wanted to point.

Hauer, commissioner of the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services, was disabled by a stroke a few years ago and can be unsteady. He isn't a law enforcement official. He carries the loaded 9-millimeter Glock in a holster into state buildings, an apparent violation of state law barring state employees from bringing weapons to the workplace, several witnesses say.

The incident with the Swedish delegation occurred during a two-hour briefing at the operations center concerning the state's response to Superstorm Sandy, according to one of the officials.

Asked about the matter over the course of several weeks, Cuomo's press aide promised to look into it but has repeatedly had no comment. Hauer's communications officer, Peter Cutler, also promised to look into it, but he has declined to respond beyond saying he is unaware that it happened. "I've heard rumors," Cutler said.

Read the rest here.

This man is dumber than a sack of rocks. The mere idea of using a pistol, which he wasn't supposed to have in the room, as a laser pointer is monumentally stupid. He completely disregards any shred of gun safety in his actions, with no regard for the safety of his audience, and could have shot a Swede official in the head. The pistol was in all likelihood loaded to boot. And let's not forget he was carrying a Glock pistol (I'd take the Glock line with a grain of salt as any chunky, black pistol is automatically a "Glock" in the eyes of the untrained, but New York does have a lot police departments using Glock weapons), and Glock pistols don't have safeties. When the trigger is pulled on a loaded Glock pistol, a bullet will fly. There is a reason for that, but this post isn't about that. The fact that a major security official in the State of New York exhibited such flippancy with a loaded firearm requires nothing short of this man's firing and humiliation. This is unacceptable in a law enforcement officer on top of his disregard for the laws which he is supposed to uphold. Fire this asshat.

Flashback Friday: Fubuki-class Destroyers

2014-01-03T01:00:00.000-06:00

This week's Flashback Friday look at Japan's Fubuki-class destroyers. Said to be the first "modern" destroyer, the Fubuki-class featured power-driven and weatherproof twin 5" mounts and torpedo reloads. Built starting in 1928 they remained part of Japan's front line fleet through the end of World War Two.

Fubuki-class specifications:

Displacement (standard): 1750 tons

Displacement (rebuilt): 2050 tons

Length: 118.4m

Beam: 10.4m

Draft: 3.2m

Propulsion: 2 geared turbines driven by 4 boilers

Speed: 38 knots

Range: 5,000nm at 14 knots

Crew: 219

Armament: six 12.7cm/50 3rd Year Type guns (paired)

two 13mm/76 Type 93 MG

nine 533mm torpedo tubes (three triple mounts)

eighteen torpedoes

The Fubukis were unique for their time as they had enclosed turrets for their 12.7cm guns. Most destroyer classes of the Interwar Period had open turrets. The rear of the turret was open to facilitate reloading and maintenance. However, the Fubukis had fully enclosed turrets which allowed use in all weather conditions. At the same time the Fubukis were the first destroyer class to carry reloads for their torpedo tubes. However, the Fubukis were rebuilt in the 30s due to longitudinal strength issues which were discovered after a typhoon damaged most of the Japanese Fourth Fleet. During this reconstruction the Fubukis lost their torpedo reloads.

Beyond their armament there were not many other major innovations in the Fubuki-class destroyers.

The Fubukis were larger than most contemporary destroyers, with a 500 ton advantage in displacement over the U.S. Clemson-class destroyers. They were also faster than the Clemsons, by a full 2.5 knots. They were longer, wider, and had a deeper draft than the Clemson-class or the British A-class.

The Fubukis served from 1928 through 1945 in the service of the Japanese Navy. After World War II one Fubuki, the Hibiki, was turned over to the USSR as a war prize, and served until 1953. Of 24 Fubukis built, all but two were lost. Eight were sunk by submarines, two by mines, at least one by scuttling, and the remainder by air attacks. For vessels built in the late 1920s the Fubukis remained surprisingly potent through WWII. Interestingly, it was a Fubuki-class destroyer, the Amagiri, that rammed and sank PT-109 commanded by John F. Kennedy.

The Fubukis carried an armament that for their time punched far above their weight. They allowed greater flexibility in their use because of their heavy armament and high speed. For this, the Fubukis have earned a place in naval history.

Where Have All The Wargames Gone?

2014-01-02T01:00:00.000-06:00

From Strategy Page:

by James Dunnigan
December 14, 2003

Commercial wargames began in the late 1950s as much simplified versions of systems used by professional soldiers for over a century. Unlike the professional games, those first commercial designs from Avalon Hill were actually historical simulations. The professional wargames concentrated on fighting tomorrow's battles, not yesterdays. Moreover, the professional games concentrated a lot of effort on tactical and operational level operations, while the first commercial wargames were largely strategic level.

There was a reason for this, and the reason was simplicity and accessibility. The professional wargames were complex beasts, requiring many hours of work to master, and equally long hours to play through. The commercial games had to be much more accessible. Even though these games were being bought by an upscale market of well educated men and teenagers, no one would have bought a game done to professional military standards. It was quickly discovered that commercial success meant a game that could be learned in less than half an hour, and played in two or three.

The early game designers were not concerned so much about complexity as they were in making the game historically realistic. This was not as easy as it looked, but most of the development effort went into creating a simulation that could, with reasonable (or at least convincing) accuracy reproduce the historical event it represented.

But then something unexpected happened. As gamers played more of the early games, they became adept at easily handling game procedures that scared off most of the population. Gamers trained themselves, by simply playing a lot, to a level where they could easily handle more complex procedures. Designers, being experienced gamers themselves, also became adept enough to create more complex games that did not collapse under mountains of procedures. The more complex games could thus cover more detail in the historical situation, but too often the more complex games were, well, simply more complex.

Then something less unexpected happened. The more complex a game was, the fewer copies were sold. Many experienced gamers who were capable of dealing with the more complex games decided that, for them, life was too short and they would just stick with the simpler games. Thus, after the first wave of complex games appeared in the mid-1970s, there was something of a backlash as gamers snapped simpler games in large quantities.

I always preferred to add as little complexity as possible to a design, in order to achieve additional (or necessary) realism or play value. I've designed a few complex games, and don't remember the process, or the results, fondly. It always seemed much ado about not much. But I was in the minority among game designers, and after I left the business in 1980, the designers of more complex games predominated. Many went on to design rules for miniatures games, an area that concentrated on detailed simulation of tactical operations.

The point of a historical simulation is to replicate the decision making process of the two commanders. This has more to do with things like decision cycles (which vary from army to army and period to period) and customs and habits among commanders (ditto.) One reason people preferred games that featured outstanding military leaders was that these guys had, in effect, "special powers." They didn't play by the rules historically, so you had to invent new game procedures to replicate the additional capabilities these Great Captains brought to the battlefield. Wellington simplified this effect somewhat when he said "Napoleon was worth 40,000 men." Napoleon was more than that, but it's true that his skills often had the same effect as giving a less able general an extra army corps or two. But a good designer would want to capture those specific skills of Napoleon (insight, speedy decision making, inspiration to troops and commanders alike, and so on) in his design. Other Great Captains would bring a different mix of magic to the battle, although I have found that there is a limited menu of skills for Great Captains to choose from. Still, players enjoyed seeing that kind of specialization.

Through the 1980s and 90s, designers concentrated on items that had previously been hidden from view. But this was often at the expense of simplicity. The details, real or imagined, of mechanized operations, intelligence play and psychological warfare became popular items for designers to spotlight. A game that paid a lot of attention to things logistics was a hard sell, even to the most experienced grognard.

The collapse of the wargame market in the 1980s gave designers an incentive to be even more creative, and they were. There was a lot more innovation in game design, and close attention paid to the shrinking pool of customers. Complex procedures were simplified and new game mechanics were used to keep players involved, without losing them in a morass of procedures. Card based games often dispensed with the map altogether. Random events became more common, and realistic. As the 80s went into the 90s, designers became, quite naturally, more skilled and resourceful.

With the appearance of the Internet, it became a lot easier for designers and publishers to be in regular contact with their customers. BBS systems and email, which proliferated in the 1980s, were limited by the relatively small number of people who were online. This changed in the 1990s and wargamers quickly became a vibrant online community. Wargames, including the manual ones, went online as well. Programs like Aide de Camp and Cyberboard allowed gamers to play their favorite manual games on a PC, and with opponents anywhere on the net. It was no longer a major chore to find live opponents.

When I started StrategyPage in 1999, part of the impetus was the proposition; what would a 21st century "Strategy & Tactics" look like? There are no games on StrategyPage, because wargames are a mature industry. This was not the case in 1999, thus there was no opportunity to do the same thing we did in 1969. Actually, we do have a unique type of wargame planned for StrategyPage, but we like to stay in the black. It's much more time consuming and expensive to create and publish a computer wargame than it is for a manual one. So it will be a while before we get the game element online.

Manual games were turned into a niche market by PCs and role playing games. That is not likely to change. Even computer versions of manual games do not have a large market because of the much greater popularity of fantasy and Science Fiction type games. This has created a situation where many of the best designers develop new game concepts for a very small segment of the game market. Stranger still, few of these ideas make it over to the more popular market segments. In the 1980s and 90s, many of the computer game developers had a background in manual wargames. But this changed as more young designers came into the business who had cut their teeth on video and PC games. Gamers who have been playing manual and computer games since the 1970s have noted that many of the earlier computer games had more meat on them (in terms of game value) than current efforts. A lot of this has to do with the appeal of eye candy (snazzy graphics), which is where a lot of the budget goes. Most current games provide more work for novelists (scenario writers) than for game designers.

Which reminds me of what I used to tell the folks at SPI during the 1970s, "these are the good old days, enjoy them while you can."

This article is ten years old, but still rings true. I'm a small time wargamer myself, I have about a dozen war-games of varying complexities and scenarios. In the 80s war-games really did get massively complicated. Compare Sixth Fleet to 3rd Fleet. Same series, ten years later and the game is massively more complicated. The emphasis on the minutiae of war can at times be a plus or massive negative. Now, with the advent of the Internet we have wargames like World of Tanks (which is a lot of fun, if you have a good computer), or War Thunder which allow platoon level combat on the ground or in the sky. There is no multi-hour set-up for games like 7th Fleet or SPI's Third World War, nor do online games take upwards of 24 hours to play to the end.

Unfortunately, there will probably never be a return of wargaming with the massive community, large number of publishers, and large selection of games that there was back in the 80s. Part of this has to do with the collapse of the USSR which removed a great deal of fodder for war-games back then. So many games were based on a U.S. vs. USSR war, with variants for all theaters. From Western Europe to the Balkans, and the Indian Ocean to the Western Pacific. Perhaps someday there might be return of wargaming with a potential U.S. vs. China war or China v.s. Russia war, but I doubt it. There simply isn't the high demand for physical war-games any more.

And that's a shame, because there is a unique feeling after you set up a big war-game, play it out and finish it. It's hard to explain, but it's something along the lines of that you know the time spent wargaming was time well spent.

2013 In Review

2013-12-31T12:00:00.000-06:00

This list is taken from Strategy Page. Unfortunately, I have been out of the loop for most of the year, and missed a lot of what happened this year. Thus, the use of this list.

That was the year that was and here are the top ten (in no particular order) military events that defined (or defiled) 2013.

1. The Arab Spring Turns Rancid. In 2011 spontaneous uprisings in most Arab countries overthrew several long-standing dictatorships (Tunisia, Egypt, Somalia and Libya). But most of those uprisings failed. Some did so quietly, as in Saudi Arabia where the aristocrats passed out more gifts and made more promises. Others took longer or suffered continued violence and the growing presence of Islamic terrorist groups. This was not the way it was supposed to be and the Arab world is rethinking its options.

2. The Syrian Civil War Does Not Turn Out As Everyone Expected. Unwilling to risk supporting Islamic terrorists as in Libya the West refuses to provide support (especially air support) to the Syrian rebels who then squander their initial advantage by fighting each other. The government is now on the offensive and the rebels appear doomed. The rebels might still turn it around, but at the moment it doesn’t look good.

3. Iran Fools Everyone, Again. Unwilling to lose its only Arab ally in Syria, Iran hires mercenaries and convinces Russia to join in a series of unlikely adventures that saves the pro-Iran Syrian government. Iran also undertakes another clever campaign to sabotage the 2012 international sanctions (against the Iranian nuclear program) that have crippled the Iranian economy and made the religious dictatorship even more unpopular inside Iran. All this is yet another example of why Iran has been the regional superpower for several thousand years and why their Arab neighbors are very, very worried.

4. China Rolls On, One Tiny Victory After Another. The Chinese campaign of conquering real, or imagined, nearby “lost territories” by winning many little victories in battles none of the victims is willing to go to war over continues. China has, in the last few years, taken control of sizable chunks of India and large swaths of the South China Sea one tiny piece at a time. The victims are organizing, but have yet to come up with a workable defense against the Chinese tactics.

5. Iraq Finds A Way To Squander Democracy. When the American left in 2011 Iraq had a shrinking terrorism problem and bright prospects. Since then the terrorism has increased and the prospects have dimmed. One reason for that reversal could be seen when the Iraqi ambassador to Afghanistan recently advised the Afghans to not make the mistake Iraq made by forcing all U.S. troops out in 2011. Iraq now wants the Americans to come back, but there is little enthusiasm in the United States for that. Iraq faces the usual massive corruption that cripples so many Arab states and that makes it difficult to crush the Sunni Arab Islamic terrorists who want Sunni minority rule restored.

6. France Finds Glory In A Distant Desert. France unexpectedly takes the Islamic demon by the horns in Mali by leading a January invasion of northern Mali. That area had been turned into a sanctuary for Islamic terrorists in early 2012 and while the West and Mali’s neighbors dithered, France acted. Nevertheless, a year later France is telling Africans that they cannot expect France to always come clean up situations like this and that Africa has to form more peacekeeping forces to deal with the endemic violence and unrest in Africa.

7. North Korea Proves Again Why It Is Better To Be Feared Than Loved. With the economy continuing to crumble, despite Chinese efforts to prop it up, North Korea switches to using firing squads to discourage people from leaving the “workers’ paradise” or watching videos of life in more prosperous China and South Korea. Even senior officials and dictator Kim Jong Un’s own uncle have been executed, in an effort to inspire more discipline and less corruption and entrepreneurial spirit. China is not happy with all this, especially since the uncle was considered their man (and the number two guy in North Korea) but is willing to look the other way if it works. China is, many tend to forget, still a communist police state.

8. The UN Again Finds That Fighting For Peace Works. For years Congo was the largest UN peacekeeping operation, and also the least successful. Finally desperate enough to try the anything, the UN accepted the advice of many military experts (and military history) and resorted to a little ultra-violence. This meant forming a brigade trained and equipped for combat. This largely African brigade was sent after the most troublesome rebel militias and destroyed them in short order. Now the UN is considering trying this approach some more.

9. Russia Discovers That The Legacy Of The Soviet Union Is Poisonous. More than a decade of reform attempts have left the Russian military not much better off. This effort did reveal that the corrupt practices that were created during the Soviet era (including some inherited from the czars) were surviving and thriving in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse. Russia is having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that the corruption that helped bring down the czarist government in 1918 survived that revolution and grew to bring down the Soviet Union. Now it threatens the quasi-democratic Russia that could, if there were enough will, actually do something about it.

10. The Death Of Secrecy. China and political activists inside the U.S. government have made it clear that keeping secrets is a lot harder than it ever was before. Cheap and powerful computers plus over a century of new marketing and data management ideas has produced vast amounts of data about where most people are and what they are doing. This didn’t cause much commotion when it was just commercial firms collecting and using it. But the government was a different matter. A side effect of all this technology was growing difficulty in keeping secrets. China has spent most of the last decade plundering the world’s computers for all manner of commercial and military data. In the last year a lot more of the details of this effort became public knowledge.

Have a happy New Year, and God bless in 2014.

Scharnhorst and Gneisenau: Germany's Last Battlecruisers

2013-12-30T01:00:00.000-06:00

The Scharnhorst-class was a class of battleships or battlecruisers, depending on one's definition, produced by Nazi Germany during the 1930s immediately before WWII. They were meant to serve as a counter to the French Dunkerque-class which was being be built around that time. Built to fight in the North Sea, their armament was limited by the political need not to anger Britain or France. The Treaty of Versailles in 1919 banned Germany from building new battleships, but allowed "armored vessels". However, the Anglo-German Naval Agreement (AGNA) allowed Germany 35% of the total tonnage of the Royal Navy, and new battleships or battlecruisers. This agreement would pave the way for the construction of the Bismarck-class and the H-class.

Three days before the signing of the AGNA on 15 June 1935, the keel of the Scharnhorst was laid down in Wilhelmshaven. One month before the keel for the Gneisenau was laid down in Kiel on 16 May. The designs for these ships had been completed long before, with an armament of 9 28cm/54.5 SK C/34 guns in three triple turrets (one the few German ship classes to be equipped with tripe turrets) being selected. Armor consisted of a vertical 350mm belt tapering off to 170mm at the outboard slope of the armor deck, and deck armor ranging from 50mm to 105mm. The secondary armament consisted of 12 15cm/55 SK C/28 guns mounted in 4 twin and 4 single turrets (these are not be confused with the 150mm AA guns the Scharnhorst-class carried). The armor on the 28cm turrets was 360mm on the face, 200mm on the sides, 150mm on the roof, and a range of 350mm to 200mm on the barbettes*. Displacement was 37,100 tons. One interesting point about their armor is that generally on battleships, the armor corresponded to the main battery (e.g. guns of 406mm, armor of a thickness that would defeat a 406mm shell). This was not the case with the Scharnhorst-class which carried far more than necessary to defeat an 283mm shell.

The Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were considered by the Kriegsmarine to be battleships, but were viewed by the Royal Navy as battlecruisers. Their armor listed above compares very favorably to Britain largest battlecruiser, the HMS Hood. The Hood had a 305mm belt (the belt on the Hood was angled at 12 degrees, whereas the Scharnhorst-class had vertical belts), which tapered off to 127mm and 152mm at the ends of the ship. Turret armor on the Hood was slightly heavier than the Scharnhorst-class, the face of the Hood's turrets was 373mm, 299 to 274mm on the sides, and 124mm on the roof.

The Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were built for combat in the North Sea against French battleships which is why they carried battlecruiser thickness armor. The 28cm guns were selected for their high rate of fire and the fact that the Dunkerque-class was thought to mostly lightly armored. However, when faced with vessels with a greater armament and armor the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were unable to return any meaningful damage.

The operational history is the Scharnhorst-class is excellent with both ships serving well throughout their service lives. During the Invasion of Norway the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sank the carrier HMS Glorious and two escorting destroyers. During this engagement the Scharnhorst was hit by one torpedo launched by one escorting destroyers which did serious damage to propulsion and flooded four watertight compartments. From the sinking of the Glorious for about six month the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were inactive while the Scharnhorst underwent repairs. In January of 1941 both ships sortied from Kiel to attack British convoys. They escaped detection and came upon the convoy HX 106 which was escorted by the HMS Ramilles, causing the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau to break off their attack. The ships returned to Brest where, after undergoing repairs, participated in the infamous Channel Dash in February 1941. Both the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sustained mine damage off Holland during the Channel Dash and were forced to undergo repairs in Kiel. From February 1941 to March 1941 the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau would remain in German waters. In March 1943 the Scharnhorst was deployed to Norway where she was to link up with the Tirpitz and attack convoys sailing to Russia. The Gneisenau was also supposed to sail with her, but took heavy bomb damage from RAF bombers in late February 1942, and was slated to be reconstructed. This reconstruction would have included an upgrade to her armament with 6 380mm guns similar to those carried on the Bismarck-class. From here the ships separated.

The Scharnhorst arrived in Norway on March 22nd. From April 1943 to September 1943 the Scharnhorst and Tirpitz were inactive due to a fuel shortage. Then on September 8th the Scharnhorst and Tirpitz sortied to Spitzbergen where they bombarded shore installations. On December 22nd the Scharnhorst sortied for her final mission (the Tirpitz did not sail with her because she had been damaged by British midget submarines soon after the Spitzbergen operation) to attack convoy JW 55B.

Convoy JW 55B was escorted by three British cruisers, the light cruisers Sheffield and Belfast as well as the heavy cruiser Norfolk (these were known as Force 1). The King George V-class battleship Duke of York was also in the area providing overwatch for JW 55B and another convoy, RA 55A. The Scharnhorst was unable to make contact with JW 55B, but did find the three escorting cruisers. Force 1 detected the Scharnhorst at a range of 33,000 meters from Force 1, 60,000 meters from the convoy. The Scharnhorst was unaware of the British presence since her radar was off to avoid detection. The British opened fire at a range of 8,600 with star shells to illuminate the Scharnhorst at 0840 on December 26th. During this encounter (from 0925 to 0955) the Scharnhorst sustained two 203mm hits, one of which destroyed the forward rangefinders and crippled the Scharhorst's radar capability (the shell sheared off the radar antenna and killed all personnel in the radar receiving room). The Scharnhorst was now blind in the forward sector, as the aft radar had a limited sweep over the forward sector. At 0955 the Scharnhorst was able to break away from Force 1 and escape.

"The sinking of Scharnhorst"

At 1200 the Belfast was able to reestablish radar contact with the Scharnhorst. From this point till about 1315 the Scharnhorst fought with Force 1, scoring a serious hit on the Norfolk around 1223. Around 1315 broke contact and made for Norway. However, in making for Norway the Scharnhorst had to cross the course of the Duke of York. At 1617 the Duke of York made radar contact with the Scharnhorst at a range of 42,500 meters. At 1650 the Duke of York opened fire on the Scharnhorst after she had been illuminated by star shells from the Belfast.

Map of the Battle of North Cape (click to enlarge)

This began the last surface engagement of German and British capital ships of WWII. The duel that began was highly unequal because the Scharnhorst 283mm guns simply could not penetrate the Duke of York's armor at any point. The Scharnhorst was able to damage the Duke of York's superstructure, and temporarily knock out her fire control radar. However, between 1650 and 1842, when the Duke of York ceased firing, the Scharnhorst took at least 13 356mm hits. At the end of the gunnery duel the Scharnhorst was still making around 22 knots, leading to a British torpedo attack around 1850. 4 torpedoes hit, slowing the Scharnhorst to 12 knots, though the chief engineer reported he could still produce 22 knots. At this point a second torpedo attack was made because of the apparent inability to sink German capital ships by gunfire (this was learned from inability to sink the Bismarck by gunfire). At 1900 all confidential papers were burned by order of the Scharnhorst's captain. At 1945 the Scharnhorst sank bow first with her propellers still turning. Out of a crew of 1968 officers and enlisted man, only 36 enlisted men survived the engagement. Thus, ended the Battle of North Cape.

As to the fate of the Gneisenau, work was eventually stopped in early 1943 at the order of Hitler, who was angry at the failure of German surface raiders. The 283mm turrets that had been removed to make way for the new 380mm turrets, were shipped to Norway. There they were installed as coastal defense guns, where one remains there to this day. From 1943 to till 1945 nothing happened to the remains of the Gneisenau. In March 1945 the Gneisenau was towed into the entrance of the harbor of Gotenahfen where she was sunk as a block ship to delay the Advance of the Red Army. Her hull was scraped by the Polish government from 1947 to 1951.

The Scharnhorst-class was never able to fulfill it's mission of fighting in the French or British in the North Sea. They were forced into a commerce raiding role which they were not optimized for, and when faced with superior opponents were unable to deal damage back. Their armor was excellent for their displacement, but they did not have the survivability of German WWI battlecruisers. Germany packed a lot of punch into relatively small hulls, an they would have performed well in a hypothetical North Sea engagement. However, when forced into a commerce raiding role or engaging more heavily armored ships, they simply could not do the job.

* All turret armor numbers are taken from Naval Weapons of World War Two by John Campbell.

Mobile MX Missile Film

2013-12-28T01:00:00.000-06:00

Flashback Friday: O-class Battlecruisers

2013-12-27T01:00:00.001-06:00

Part of Plan Z was the construction of three O-class battlecruisers. The design originated from a proposal to increase the armament of the proposed P-class to 380mm guns.The O-class was designed for commerce raiding and their specifications show this. By mid-1939 all work on the P-class had stopped and was redirected into the O-class.

O-class specifications*:

Displacement 31,142 tons

Full load displacement 35,367 tons

Waterline length 246.0m

Waterline beam 30.0m

Draft (design) 8.0m

Draft (full load) 8.8m

Armament six 38cm/52 SK C/34 paired

six 15cm/48 Tbts KC/36T paired

eight 10.5cm/65 SK C/33 paired (AA)

eight 3.7cm/L83 SK C/30 paired (AA)

twenty 2cm/65 C/30 in five quads (AA)

twelve 533mm torpedo tupes in four fixed triple mounts

four Arado-196 floatplanes

Speed 33.5 knots at designed displacement

Shaft horsepower 176,000

Endurance 14,000 nautical miles at 19 knots

Protection 90mm upper belt

190mm main side belt

30 mm upper deck

60mm armor deck

Let's start with protection. In comparison to the numbers listed above for the O-class, the HMS Hood had a a side belt of 203mm, a 127mm upper belt, an upper deck of 32mm, and a lower deck of 48mm. The O-class had lighter armor than the Hood. On 24 May 1941 the Hood was sunk by a single hit from the Bismarck which penetrated to her magazines, which detonated. The loss of the Hood directly confirmed the insanity of lightly armored capital ships engaging hostile capitals ships. The protection scheme of the O-class was obsolete the second it was designed. The lack of armor may have saved weight, leading to a greater speed, but the cost in staying power was tremendous. For further examples of lightly armored battlecruisers being lost to magazine explosions, look no further than the Indefatigable, Queen Mary and Invincible. All lost to magazine explosions at Jutland. The O-class would have been dead the moment it engaged a battleship.

The explosion of the Queen Mary at Jutland

Moving on to the armament, this is a spot where the O-class wasn't as bad. The O-class was armed with 6 38cm guns. Though while this armament would have been excellent for sinking merchant vessels, in an engagement with hostile battleships the O-class would have been heavily outgunned. However, the O-class had the advantage in speed over almost every class of battleship that served in WWII (the Iowa-class being the exception). Assuming a hostile battlecrusier had been able to catch an O-class, the gunnery duel would have been almost equal. For comparison the Repulse-class battlecruisers carried six BL 15in MK 1 guns, and the French battleship Dunkerque carried 8 330mm guns. As to the secondary anti-aircraft armament, the O-class would have had very light defenses against air attacks. Only 36 guns of varying calibers. This was light even for German vessels. The Bismarck carried 16 10.5cm AA guns, 16 3.7cm guns, and 20 2cm guns in comparison.

The Tirpitz firing her main battery

The power plant for the O-class were eight 24 cylinder MAN diesel engines (V type), arranged four to a shaft. The diesels generated 13750 horsepower each continuously, and had a maximum rating of 15000 horsepower each. The centerline shaft (the O-class would have had three propellers) was driven by a steam turbine and four high temperature and pressure boilers. The operating temperature for the boilers would have been 460 degrees celsius (and could be superheated to 960 degrees celsius), and the operating pressure would have been 55kg per square cm. The steam plant was rated at 55,000 horsepower normally, and 60,000 at maximum. The use of mixture of diesel-steam powerplant allowed a relatively low fuel consumption rate, and an endurance of 14,000nm to 15,000nm at 19 knots. Though, this range would only have been attained with only the diesels in operation.

The method in which these ships were to be used, was commerce raiding. It was planned that a task force made up of 3 H-class battleships, an aircraft carrier, with cruisers and destroyer as escorts, would engage convoy escorts. Allowing the battlecruisers to strike the undefended merchant vessels. How this proposed task force would break out of the North Sea, or the English Channel has not been shown. Had such a force attempted a breakout, the British would have undoubtedly sortied the Home Fleet to engage the force. Any O-class vessel attached would have almost assuredly been lost in an such an engagement. It must be remembered that the British were able to keep the Geramn High Seas Fleet bottled up in the North Sea for the duration of WWI. The location of Germany would have precluded the effective use of an O-class battlecruiser as a commerce raider simply because of the gauntlet that would have had to be run to reach the British convoys.

The O-class is an interesting mental exercise, in what a Bismarck with no armor would look like. However, in combat the glaring lack of armor would have doomed them to penetrating hits to magazine and machinery spaces. The armament was passable, but lacking in the AA role. The mission that was planned for the O-class was, while feasible, do not take into account the location of Germany or the possibility of an encounter with better armored and/or armed opposition. The O-class as designed was a floating coffin, nothing more, nothing less.

*Garzke, William and Dulin, Robert. Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in WWII.

Painting at top by Richard Allison.

Japanese PM Abe Visits Controversial Shrine Honoring WWII Dead

2013-12-26T15:49:00.000-06:00

From the Wall Street Journal:

TOKYO—Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's surprise visit to a shrine linked to the country's militarist past threatens to damage ties with the U.S. and has raised concerns that he may be shifting the spotlight to a nationalist agenda from a focus on the economy.

Mr. Abe visited Tokyo's Yasukuni Shrine on Thursday, triggering strong criticism from Beijing and Seoul, but also a rare disapproval by Washington, which has pushed the Asian neighbors to mend ties that are strained by territorial disputes and differences over wartime history.

Many Asian nations that suffered from Japan's wartime actions view Yasukuni as a symbol of Tokyo's past militarism because it honors not just Japan's war dead but also some convicted World War II war criminals, including Hideki Tojo, who was prime minister for most of the war.

"The United States is disappointed that Japan's leadership has taken an action that will exacerbate tensions with Japan's neighbors," said the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo on its website, in an unusual direct criticism of Japan's leader by its main ally.

Mr. Abe has repeatedly said he regretted not visiting the shrine during his first tenure as prime minister from 2006 to 2007 and said his critics misunderstood his intentions. "I offered my respects to those who lost their precious lives for our country, and prayed that their souls may rest in peace," he told reporters after the visit. "I have no intention at all of hurting the feelings of the Chinese or the South Korean people."

Although a well-known conservative who has stated that changing the pacifist constitution drafted by the occupying U.S. forces was his "life's work," Mr. Abe had adopted an economy-first policy after taking office in December 2012, putting his nationalist agenda on the back burner.

Read the rest here.

This is not good. The fact that this shrine honors bastards like Tojo, is only the surface of this issue. What we are seeing here is one of the precursor events to the return of Japan as a military power in the Western Pacific. Abe's government has already proposed a spending increase for defense, and Abe himself has advocated amending the Japanese constitution to allow for war. A well armed Japan is not a bad thing, rather it is a very good thing. However, a Japan that returns to a militaristic version of the Shinto religion, is a very bad thing. It was the Shinto religion that gave Japan the basis for it's perceived racial superiority in WWII and Bushido, and was instrumental in fueling popular support in Japan for WWII. To have a state endorsement, even a tacit endorsement, of this religion would allow it eventually to seep back into mainstream Japanese culture. This spread could be fueled by tensions over China's aggression with the establishment of their new ADIZ, tensions over the Senkakus, and tensions with South Korea over various small islands.
Abe stepped over a major line with these actions, not only symbolically spitting in the face of South Korea, but also angering China (though that's not necessarily a bad thing). It is interesting to note that Abe's grandfather on his mother's side (Nobusuke Kishi)was a member of Tojo's WWII cabinet, and made some remarks implying his condoning the actions of Tojo in WWII. In other words, Abe's grandfather supported Tojo and Tojo's actions in WWII.
Watch Abe and the Liberal Democratic Party over the next few years. Expect rearmament, a possible amendment to the Japanese constitution revising Chapter 2, Article II, and more power given the national government.

Merry Christmas

2013-12-25T00:00:00.000-06:00

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and yours.

A Movie For Christmas Eve

2013-12-24T01:30:00.000-06:00

A true classic. Gather the family 'round and watch the British Empire at it's peak. A story of victory in the face of almost impossible odds.

Russia Facing A Sub Crunch

2013-12-24T01:00:00.000-06:00

From Strategy Page:

December 23, 2013: In late 2013 the Russian navy announced that plans to refurbish its nine Akula class SSNs (nuclear attack subs) would take longer than expected. In fact, the first Akula will be out of service for three years for the upgrade. The other eight subs will get done more quickly, but the entire job will take at least a decade and probably closer to fifteen years. The refurb involves replacing most if the wiring and electrical systems as well as the missile handling equipment. Many mechanical systems will be replaced of upgraded. The end result will be a much quieter sub and that’s very important in undersea warfare.

In early 2013 the Russian Navy announced more optimistic plans for upgrading its nine Akulas. The first of these entered service in 1984, and fifteen were built. Several were cancelled after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, and some have been retired already. The latest Akula entered service two years ago and was then leased to India.
These 8,100 ton boats were to be replaced by the new Graney (Yasen) class subs. That has not worked out so far because of problems with the Graneys. Moreover, the Russian Navy is not getting enough money to replace their rapidly aging nuclear subs, so it was decided to invest a year or two and over $100 million each for the existing Akulas to be upgraded and refurbished so they can remain in service for another decade or two.

The refurb on the first Akula will take at a lot longer (at least three years) because since the end of the Cold War in 1991 a lot of technical documents on the Akula have been lost and many of the skilled engineers and technicians for this sort of work have retired or gone to work in more lucrative non-defense jobs. This was not fully appreciated when the initial upgrade plans were announced earlier in 2013. So recruiting sufficient skilled staff and sorting out how to take apart an Akula and put it back together again will mean more time will be required to upgrade all nine of the Akulas.

Meanwhile, the Graney SSGNs (nuclear powered cruise missile sub) were delayed twice in 2012. Sea trials revealed that the nuclear reactor did not produce the required power and that the ability of the boat to remain quiet while under water was not what it should be. An underpowered and noisy sub is not acceptable, and the navy is demanding that the builder make it all better before 2014. That was not possible because of the shortages of qualified people to do this sort of work. This problem has produced a growing list of embarrassing failures.

Earlier, undisclosed problems with the first Graney have postponed it from entering service for at least a year. That will mean, if the latest delay is the last one, the first Graney will enter service twenty years after construction began. These problems are not restricted to the Graney, as other new subs are also encountering numerous construction and design problems.

In early 2011, the fifty man crew of the first Graney took their boat to sea, or at least around the harbor, for the first time. Sea trials were to begin three months later but first the sub took baby steps to ensure that everything worked. These harbor trials were seen as a major progress. Things went downhill again after that, with a growing number of delays as more and more problems were encountered.

Read the rest here.

The short and sweet of the story is that Russia is have a problem with getting enough money to replace the Akula-class boats. Thus, the Russians are going to upgrade the existing Akulas to be useable for another ~20 years. However, the Russians are having trouble finding the technological know-how to make the upgrades. Not only that, but supposedly a lot of documentation of the Akulas was lost in the collapse of the USSR.
This is indicative of how things are going to look for a lot of countries through the next few decades. All the ships that were built in the 1980s and 1990s to fight the Cold War are going to reach the end of their lifespan, leaving a gap in fleets. Some ships might have the potential to be modernized to get a few ore years out of them (like the Akulas), but the industry memory from their construction is gone. And, the money to build replacement will be unavailable as it gets put into other areas of government. Expect what the Russians are going through to be repeated here in the U.S. in the near future as the defense budget is cut, and the deficit grows.

Mikhail Kalashnikov Dead at 94

2013-12-23T16:11:00.004-06:00

From Defense News:

MOSCOW — Mikhail Kalashnikov, the designer of fabled AK-47 automatic rifle, died Monday, the office of the presidency in the Udmurtia region where he worked said. He was 94.

Kalashnikov designed a weapon that became synonymous with killing on a sometimes indiscriminate scale but was seen in the Soviet Union as a national hero and symbol of Moscow’s proud military past.

“He died about one-and-a-half hours ago,” Viktor Chulkov, the spokesman for the Udmurtia leader Alexander Volkov, told AFP.

Lavished with honors including the prestigious Hero of Russia prize for designing the iconic rifle, Kalashnikov has said he had never intended for it to become the preferred weapon in conflicts around the world.

“I created a weapon to defend the fatherland’s borders. It’s not my fault that it was sometimes used where it shouldn’t have been. This is the fault of politicians,” he said during an award ceremony at the Kremlin to mark his 90th birthday.

Read the rest here.

The AK-series has been in pretty much every flare up since Vietnam. It's been used to kill a lot of Americans. But, a man cannot be faulted for defending his country. And to give credit were it is due, the AK is probably the most reliable weapon every produced. RIP Kalishnikov, you earned it.

Poland Picks Up 119 Leopard 2s

2013-12-23T01:30:00.000-06:00

From Strategy Page:

Poland has agreed to buy 119 more German Leopard 2 tanks for about $2 million each and the deal includes lots of spare parts and support equipment. Most of these are 2A5s although 14 are older 2A4s. Back in 2003 Poland obtained 128 of these tanks from Germany for the bargain basement price of $21.6 million along with 23 MiG-29 fighters for only $30 million. The tanks were selected by Polish tank experts from among the three hundred Leopard 2s recently placed in storage after being taken out of service by the downsized German Army. The original 128 Leopards still had at least 75 percent of their operational life remaining. That deal includes 8 Buffel armored recovery vehicles, four Biber bridgelayers, four Keiler mine-clearing tanks, and ten M577 command post vehicles.

Read the rest here.

This is a major upgrade for Poland, currently they are using upgraded T-72s known as the PT-91. Not only that, but this is a further effect of Poland arming up to warn off Russia. Relations between Russia and Poland are not exactly the warmest Europe at the moment. Keep an eye on Poland for more arms buys in the near future.

Opinion: EDC Kit Basics

2013-12-21T01:00:00.000-06:00

I don't usually talk about myself or my life, they simply don't fit with the purpose of GQ! most of the time. However, today I'd like to talk about what I view as the key essentials for every man and woman to have on their person at all (or almost all) times.

1. The first and most important of all is a wallet. Your wallet contains ID, a CHL (if you have one), and money. All three of which are key to daily life, or identification if forced to deal with law enforcement. This should be the foundation of a person's EDC kit. I use an old leather Columbia tri-fold and it serves quite well.

2. Phone. A phone is ranked for the sole purpose of communication. If cut off from home for whatever reason a phone allows you to contact family or friends to secure aid or see how they are doing. It also allows you to contact law enforcement if something is going on that shouldn't be going on. Make sure whatever phone you have is durable, has good battery life, and you have a carrier with good coverage.

3. Knife. A sturdy pocket knife can be invaluable. Good steel, good edge retention, and quick deployment. Make sure any knife you carry is legal in your area. My personal choice for a pocket knife currently is a Kershaw Brawler, with an SOG Trident as backup. I carried a Kershaw RJI for years before I messed up the Speedsafe mechanism when I opened the knife up. I really like Kershaw's combination of their Speedsafe system in tandem with a liner lock. The combination allows one handed use (if you know what your doing, it takes some practice not to cut yourself) and speed in deployment. But, it really is a matter of personal preference. Do your research and find what fits your budget.

4. Flashlight. A flashlight can be used in working on a car, crawling around in the attic, or anything in a low light environment. I like Four Sevens lights a lot, but they can be a bit pricey. Find a light with a good output, varying brightnesses, durable, and batteries that be easily found.

These four items are the basics of my personal kit which I carry daily. Here are a couple more items which I have found are excellent additions, but are not essential.

A multitool. A solid multitool can be a major asset in doing anything from making minor car repairs to fixing a door hinge. There are a lot of good multi-tool makers out there, Gerber, Leatherman, Victorinox, and others. I carry a Leatherman Wave, which I like a lot. It's a bit on the pricey side though. 60 on Amazon. The thing that sealed the deal for me on Leatherman was the ability to use a bit kit and an extender with it. A bit kit is a set of 20 double sided 1/4in bits ranging from a 1/4in hex bit to a Torx #25 bit. It allows you to carry a miniaturized set of screwdrivers with you. Regardless of what model or maker a multi-tool is a great addition to an EDC kit.

Fixed blade knives. I don't always carry a fixed blade simply because I am unable to conceal it satisfactorily with what I'm wearing. I generally carry them more to use as a box cutter or something innocuous like that. I carry a CS Kobun and a S&W HRT7T in my boots, and occasionally a SOG Seal Pup on my belt under a jacket. These tend to be the least used items on my person, but they are good to have just in case.

A pistol. If you have a CHL I highly recommend you use it. If you have jumped through the hoops to get a CHL you probably know the legal implications and rules governing your actions using a pistol. So, I won't bother going there. I don't have a CHL at the moment. I intend to get one when I have the funds to so. I won't give my opinions on what make a good carry piece, because I don't have any experience conceal carrying (if someone does have experience, recommendations on a carry piece would be greatly appreciated in the comments). Regardless, if you have a CHL, use it. A pistol is a game changer in self-defense and allows you to go on the offense against most assailants.

I write this post to give my opinion on what I think an EDC kit should look like, and my opinions on certain tools. These are my opinions and mine alone. Take what you see here and do your research. If you buy a knife, multitool, flashlight, hell even a wallet, research the item. Find out about problems this or that item may have had, find a solution, see what people are saying about that piece of kit. Learn from what others put out there and make your decisions wisely.

Finally, with whatever you carry, be sane, be normal, don't attract attention, and don't do any thing stupid. Keep your mouth shut about what your carrying unless asked by a police officer, don't flip out a knife in public unless you really have to, and keep you kit concealed. Thanks for reading this, and be safe out there.

Flashback Friday: Plan Z

2013-12-20T01:00:00.000-06:00

This week's Flashback Friday is an overview of Nazi Germany's Plan Z. In January of 1939 Adolf Hitler ordered a build up of the Kriegsmarine, which by 1945 would have looked something like this:

2 Aircraft Carriers
10 Battleships (Six H-class, 2 Bismarck-class, and 2 Scharnhorst-class)
3 O-class battlecruisers
12 P-class Panzerschiffe (pocket battleships)
3 Deutschland-class Panzerschiffe
5 Heavy cruisers
36 M-class light cruisers
24 Spahkreuzer (large destroyers or reconnaissance cruisers)
68 Destroyers
90 Torpedo boats
249 U-boats

A few things stand out from this plan. First, the emphasis is on surface ships which fits with Hitler's intent on challenging the Royal Navy. Second, too few destroyers are planned compared to the number of cruisers and battleships. Only two destroyers for every BB and cruiser, in comparison the U.S. had about four destroyers for every BB or cruiser. Third, few U-boats. Plan Z did not plan for the massive U-boat campaign in the Atlantic, and the planned U-boat numbers show this. Finally, there is a distant emphasis on surface commerce raiding in the form of the 12 P-class pocket battleships in addition to the 3 Duetschland-class vessels.

Plan Z had the sole mission of giving Nazi Germany the ability to challenge the Royal Navy for control of the North Sea, the North Atlantic and nearby waters. Had the plan the plan been completed it would have easily broken local Royal Navy control*. However, had the two fleets met in battle a la Jutland the outcome is debatable. The Royal Navy would have had all the KGVs, Lion-class, and the Vanguard. 12 new BBs in addition to the Hood, Nelson, Rodney, and 12 other WWI-era BBs. 27 battleships, of which 14 of which were modern, against 10 modern German BBs of varying capabilities (the Scharnhorst-class was more of a battlecruiser design). This also leaves out the question of escorts and the influence of naval air power which was instrumental in the Pacific and in sinking the Bismarck.

In the end Plan Z was another Nazi pipe dream because of the titanic economic costs and British naval and shipbuilding superiority. It provides fodder for what-if scenarios today, but was of little practical value in WWII.

*Clarification, the German Navy would have been able to break out of the North Sea and Bay of Biscay (assuming France would have fallen if the war had started in 1945) with relative impunity.

Brazil Goes Swedish

2013-12-18T19:42:00.003-06:00

From International Business Times:

After a decade of discussion, Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff announced Wednesday the acquisition of 36 Gripen NG fighter jets, from Sweden’s Saab (STO:SAAB-B), for the FX-2 program of the Brazilian Air Force.

Defense Minister Celso Amorim and Gen. Juniti Saito, the air force's chief of staff, said at a press conference after the official announcement that the planes will be delivered in 4 years. The total cost of the deal will be $4.5 billion.

"The choice took into account performance, technology transfer and cost, not only for acquisition but also for maintenance. The decision was based on the best balance of those factors," Amorim said.

The decision puts an end to 10 years of speculation and delays on the transaction, which started as a plan under former President Luiz Inácio (Lula) da Silva. Three contenders stepped up to the bid: France’s Dassault (EPA:AM), with the Rafale model; Boeing Co. (NYSE:BA), with the F/A-18 e/F Super Hornet; and the eventual winners, with the smaller Gripen. In the early stages of the negotiation, Lula expressed preference for the Rafale, but the French contender fell out of favor at the end of Lula's second and last term in 2010, and was finally rejected on Tuesday due to its high cost.

The article goes on to cite the NSA scandal as the reason for Brazil picking Saab over Boeing who was offering the Super Hornet. Regardless, congratulations to Saab as this decision is a decade in coming and is well deserved in my opinion.

I Am Still Here

2013-12-16T10:44:00.000-06:00

This picture has been GQ! for the last four months. Run aground, spilling oil, and not doing much in general. For that, I apologize. Work and family commitments have kept me away from Blogger. However, I will begin posting this week, expect the first Flashback Friday in a very long while with some other odds and ends. For the long term posting will not be daily, but will be something like every other day.