Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

China & North Korea Vs. South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and Philippines 2014

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    South Africa has those? I mean what could be worse than Zulus riding sharks with laser beams on their heads!
    China collapsing the Bitcoin, sending the world back into the dark ages...
    The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by johns624 View Post
      What could the BB's and CA's have done. The only thing the carriers were vulnerable to were American planes. Their added AA fire wouldn't have been enough to make a difference.
      Japan had lost a lot of planes and scarce pilots in the Coral Sea (and PH, DEI, Philippines, Ceylon, etc,) and was not even building Kates and Vals and had few left. It is absurd to send them to bomb an island. Japanese planes had no armor nor self sealing fuel tanks, why use them for bombing and strafing an island with plenty of AAA and MGs? in the process exposing the Jap carriers to the 500 lb bombs and torpedoes from the Island, which can sink a carrier but not Yamato.
      You use the Jap planes only to sink carriers and use 8" to 18" guns to blast Midway, beyond range of the 5" coastal artillery, in the process eliminating the planes in Midway and attracting some of the US carrier planes away from Jap CVs.

      The weak Japanese wave of 108 planes (weak Darwin was bombed by 188 planes, also from 4 carriers) that bombed Midway lost several planes and did not destroy the landing strip or the American bombers, but left the Jap carriers vulnerable while they retrieved the planes. The failure to destroy the landing strip induced Nagumo to remove torpedoes and AP bombs and arm the planes with HE bombs, dooming his fleet. All this would have ben avoided had the extremely expensive Yamato, etc, been used, instead fo just sailing from Japan to Midway and back without doing anything other than burning recious fuel. Although the Japs had fuel in Borneo, etc, they could not transport it to Japan, because the USN subs sank the tankers, so they had little fuel in Japan.

      A final remark on the subject, had the B-17s in Midway dropped a 6,000 lb HE bomb on the carriers from 5,000 ft, even near hits would have sunk any carrier. They used smaller bombs, hoping to hit them from high altitude and they never worked. Mitchell used 2,000 lb bombs from biplanes to sink a battleship.


      lets get back to China
      Last edited by Draco; 01 Mar 14, 13:38.

      Comment


      • #18
        The marines had mostly .30 cal MGs to defend Midway (as can be seen in Ford's film), although there were a lot of .50 cal guns in the useless B-17s. I would have had at least 100 .50 cal guns there and no .30 cal toys.
        In the Yamamoto vs Nimitz thread, you say that the Marines had mostly ineffective .30cal MG's.


        Originally posted by Draco View Post
        Japan had lost a lot of planes and scarce pilots in the Coral Sea (and PH, DEI, Philippines, Ceylon, etc,) and was not even building Kates and Vals and had few left. It is absurd to send them to bomb an island. Japanese planes had no armor nor self sealing fuel tanks, why use them for bombing and strafing an island with plenty of AAA and MGs?
        Yet here, you claim that Midway has "plenty of AA and MGs". Which one is it.
        PS-Cut out the tequila, it's affecting your cognitive thinking...

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Draco View Post
          Intelligence is a bitch.
          Hitler had no clue about the large numbers of T-34s and KV-1 (about the same number of PZ III and IV he had), nor even the true number of Soviet divisions or the existence of Katyushas or 76 mm AT guns before Barbarossa.
          Yea, Hitler should have listened to Warner Von Braun earlier and built that space station. He could have had killer spy satellites and SS space marines if he did...


          The US had no clue about huge Yamato until it was too late,
          Too late for what? The Yamato participated in one surface naval action during the war. The second time it was at sea in combat it was on a suicide mission and the US Navy used it for target practice.


          ...the whereabouts of a large fleet before Pearl Harbor, the battle of the bulge or the thousands of Jap planes in caves ready to be used as Kamikazes during the invasion of the mainland. Hell they didn't even know about hundreds of Muslim terrorists preparing in American pilot schools.
          The US wasn't without knowledge of those things entirely. Intelligence failures happen, and not just to the US. On the other hand you are selling non-sense. You us to believe that somehow the Chinese can load bunches of civilian airliners pulled from regular service and then fly these such that they all land at disparate international airports all over Southeast Asia simultaneously. The same goes for the cargo ships.
          You really don't have a clue about how things work do you? Today, anyone can track commercial flights real time.

          http://flightaware.com/

          And do the same with maritime shipping.

          http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/home/

          If you think your teenage wet dream plan is realistic...


          How can Intelligence know if the Chinese have 10,000 fighters, attack helicopters and transport helicopters underground?
          Because they have to be manufactured first...

          The Russians appear to have the best intelligence (they informed Clinton about Obama, etc,). But if they decide to allow the Chinese to expand to the east and South, that intelligence will not reach Japan, Taiwan or the Philippines.
          So our resident expert tells us....

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Draco View Post
            Right, Obama was cought overnight, so the Chinese stand no chance of building planes underground or in mountain caves in Tibet.



            The shoe bomber was also cought by satellite intelligence when he repeatedly tried lo light up his shoe with a match in an airplane.

            You don't understand the whole concept of space-based surveillance do you ?
            Scientists have announced they've discovered a cure for apathy. However no one has shown the slightest bit of interest !!

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by johns624 View Post
              In the Yamamoto vs Nimitz thread, you say that the Marines had mostly ineffective .30cal MG's.


              Yet here, you claim that Midway has "plenty of AA and MGs". Which one is it.
              PS-Cut out the tequila, it's affecting your cognitive thinking...
              They had .30 MGs guns an a lot of other weapons. I said that I would have had at least 100 0.50 cal MGs and no .30 MGs.
              They have a much longer range and more destructive power. I see no justifications for having any small caliber guns in an island that expects an invasion by a huge armada.
              You can kill a person with a .22 short, but I would not arm my troops with that. Similarly, you can shoot down a plane with a .30 cal MG at short range with a hit in a critical part, but you can shoot one with a .50 cal gun with explosive, AP or incendiary rounds from farther away and cause a lot more damage on the pilot, engine, fuel tanks, etc, The same applies for a landing craft.
              Does it make sense to have .50 cal guns on B-17s or a SHerman tank and .30 cal guns in nests on the ground?

              It simply makes no sense for Yamamoto to waste scarce pilots and planes when you have massive, idle ships. In this scenario it is irrelevant whether they have .50 or .30 cal MGs or 5" or 40 mm guns, they are blown to bits by shelling from 16 km away.
              Last edited by Draco; 01 Mar 14, 14:12.

              Comment


              • #22
                You have a habit of dramatically overestimating what naval gunfire can do.

                Originally posted by Draco View Post
                Right, Obama was cought overnight, so the Chinese stand no chance of building planes underground or in mountain caves in Tibet.
                The shoe bomber was also cought by satellite intelligence when he repeatedly tried lo light up his shoe with a match in an airplane.
                Can't test aircraft underground, can't train pilots underground and you can't build runways underground.
                "Artillery lends dignity to what might otherwise be a vulgar brawl." - Frederick the Great

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Draco View Post
                  You can kill a person with a .22 short, but I would not arm my troops with that. Similarly, you can shoot down a plane with a .30 cal MG at short range with a hit in a critical part, but you can shoot one with a .50 cal gun with explosive, AP or incendiary rounds from farther away and cause a lot more damage on the pilot, engine, fuel tanks, etc, The same applies for a landing craft.
                  Does it make sense to have .50 cal guns on B-17s or a SHerman tank and .30 cal guns in nests on the ground?
                  You are so full of shite. They didn't have explosive shells for the .50BMG. Also, I'd rather have a .30 for use against the troops getting off those landing craft.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by frisco17 View Post
                    You have a habit of dramatically overestimating what naval gunfire can do.



                    Can't test aircraft underground, can't train pilots underground and you can't build runways underground.
                    It can do a lot of damage to a landing strip, coastal guns, Catalinas, etc,
                    Just 2 destroyers with 4.5" guns shelled Midway for a short while on their way back from the PH raid and caused some damage. They had to cut short the shelling, because they were within range of the coastal guns and had little fuel.
                    Several BBs and CAs would cause a lot of damage in an hour. A lot more than 1 or 2 wimpy waves of flammable planes facing fighters and AAA.

                    You can train pilots on the surface with planes that everybody can see and with advanced simulators. You can test each system independently and the plane in a wind tunnel.
                    Last edited by Draco; 01 Mar 14, 14:30.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Draco View Post
                      It can do a lot of damage to a landing strip, coastal guns, Catalinas, etc,
                      Just 2 destroyers with 4.5" guns shelled Midway for a short while on their way back from the PH raid and caused some damage. They had to cut short the shelling, because they were within range of the coastal guns and had little fuel.
                      Several BBs and CAs would cause a lot of damage in an hour. A lot more than 1 or 2 wimpy waves of flammable planes facing fighters and AAA.
                      British destroyers shelled Midway? Really? The IJN doesn't use 4.5" guns you know....

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        British destroyers shelled Midway? Really? The IJN doesn't use 4.5" guns you know....
                        Please illuminate me with the vital information of the exact caliber and weight of shells they used. Reinforcing my point that if a few small guns can cause damage in a while, many 8" to 18" shells can cause a lot more.
                        Last edited by Draco; 01 Mar 14, 14:40.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Draco View Post
                          Please illuminate me with the vital information of the exact caliber they used.
                          I thought that you were the IJN expert? BTW- they used 4.7" and 5".

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by johns624 View Post
                            You are so full of shite. They didn't have explosive shells for the .50BMG. Also, I'd rather have a .30 for use against the troops getting off those landing craft.
                            You can see what planes strafing with .50 cal guns did to landing craft carrying troops to the battle of Milne Bay.

                            You can shoot at the craft 1 mile away and do a lot of damage to it, or wait until they debark and fire at them with .30 cal.
                            Why put .50 cal guns on Shermans and even Jeeps?
                            In my book, .30 cal guns are used when you have to transport them and the ammo on your shoulders, not when you defend a fixed position or a vehicle.

                            I wonder why they came up with the Barret, if .30 cal is just as good.
                            Last edited by Draco; 01 Mar 14, 14:54.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Draco View Post
                              You can see what planes strafing with .50 cal guns did to landing craft carrying troops to the battle of Milne Bay.

                              You can shoot at the craft 1 mile away and do a lot of damage to it, or wait until they debark and fire at them with .30 cal.
                              Why put .50 cal guns on Shermans and even Jeeps?
                              In my book, .30 cal guns are used when you have to transport them and the ammo on your shoulders, not when you defend a fixed position or a vehicle.

                              I wonder why they came up with the Barret, if .30 cal is just as good.
                              He wrote a book!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                                He wrote a book!

                                Must have been a comedy
                                Scientists have announced they've discovered a cure for apathy. However no one has shown the slightest bit of interest !!

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X