Bismarck vs Missouri

@abworsham4

Unfortunately, the powers of both sides are not comparable to any of the games, so we can’t just play it out with side switching house rules (and other stuff too, but I’m just saying a new setup will need to be designed). The Soviets were even less modernised than in 1941. The real question is Germany. If Germany fights with the Soviets, (depends on what Hitler’s short term plan is) the outcome is uncertain, especially with Italy’s allegiance. It Germany fights against the Soviets, the Soviets would probably fall, especially if Japan can be convinced to jump into the war.

I don’t get what’s meant…

-AW talks about the Battleship Howe.
-Then IL says Howe was a Battleship like Hood.
-Then CWO points out the hood was a battlecruiser.

No one is saying the Howe was a battlecruiser?  And everyone agrees it was a battleship.  So what’s the point of the whole conversation? lol

Germany wins this matchup.

The IIIJ has a 50mm L60. I would take that against the Valentine any day.
Might need to hit it in flank, but with the extra 10MPH I would hope I could manoeuvre around it, if my first shell(unluckily) bounced off the frontal armour.
Its puny 2 Pounder would not bother me much I suspect.

i like the first three us cruisers designed and build as treaty cruisers, the Pensacola class, the Northampton class, and the Portland class. these to me are beautiful ships, and represent the “best of the heavy cruisers”. they were treaty cruisers and fulfilled their roles beautifully. They packed a punch with 9-10 8"guns, 8 duel purpose 5" guns, and by 1944/5 they had a deadly AA gun compliment. plus the 5"/38 is considered to be the best duel purpose naval gun of the entire war. Their main battery was superb and they helped hold the line in the months after pearl. they were present from coal sea to the Doolittle raid. from midway to Guadalcanal. they were always there, both of the Pensacola class survived the war, the Indianapolis suffered a tragic loss in the closing months and the Northampton class lost half of their numbers. But IMO, they were the best…

@jim010:

Technically the Italian ship should win this one with better speed, but when you throw in Italian caution in how they used the ships and the aggressiveness of the British, I would say it would be inconclusive.  Italians would withdraw at the first sign of trouble.

Good point.  The Royal Navy benefited in WWII from a long tradition of having well-trained crews and of having  commanding officers who were encouraged to act boldly and confidently in combat.  One of the R.N.'s maxims was something along the lines of “No captain can do very wrong if he lays his ship alongside that of the enemy.”

If you’re looking at physically discernible traits in posterity (i.e., the baby boom generation), I’d say they would require considerable epigenetic or even genetic alterations in the parents (i.e., the people living there at the time). That’s not a very likely effect from such levels of pollution. If anyone was affected in any way, it seems more probable that their overall health would suffer to some degree, but it would probably be difficult to attribute that to any specific factor. An extensive epidemiological study may be able to demonstrate some effects, but I don’t know whether anybody has done one.

Also, it’s uncertain how much of the oil even reached the beaches or the fishing grounds. It seems obvious that the marine ecosystem could handle less oil, over a much longer period of time, and at various locations, much better than the massive BP spill. So a lot of that WWII tanker oil may have evaporated, or sunk to the bottom, or gone down with the ship and slowly dissipated.

I don’t think that the war itself would have played a major role in deciding to either clean up or ignore any oil that may have landed on the beaches. If the oil would have arrived in a town like, say, Biloxi, then people would have probably cleaned it up because it posed a direct threat to the livelihood of the local fishermen. On the other hand, if it would have landed in a remote location, it would likely have been ignored, simply because environmental awareness was not exactly a major concern in the 1940’s, war or no war.

In each case, I’m only speculating - we’d need to look for contemporary reports to know the truth.

And of course, the petroleum flavor does little for the shrimps, so I don’t think too many were eaten.  :-)

@calvinhobbesliker:

Are you referring to the Civil War ship when you’re talking about the Monitor?

Calvin, did you not know there was only about 78 years between the Civil War and WWII? That is fairly close what? LOL

@RJL518:

i sometimes wonder what would have happened if Germany had put together a massive battle fleet in the Atlantic like Japan did in the Pacific

They  didn’t have the naval knowhow that Japan and US had. The Germans had plans for building carrier vessels, but they weren’t able to do it.

But if they had done it, it would be much easier to knock out UK pretty early, and then Barbarossa also would be easier, but far from guaranteed.