• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Ship operations

I think you're right, but I guess he mixed things up a little (because the Bismarck was not sunk anywhere near the North Cape). Yeah, I recall that Lütjens insisted on keeping the crew on station almost permanently (though half of them were allowed to sleep there). This was actual beneficial in the first encounter with Hood, not so much in her final fight, I guess.

Regards,

Tobias

P.S.: Can we branch this out to Random Static?
 
By all means, branch away
 
Originally posted by Tobias:
Could you tell me your source for this unusual accentuation of the events? I am especially wondering why the Scharnhorst, at sea for some 24 hours, had been at GQ for nearly two days?
Tobias,

You're absolutely correct, Scharnhorst had only been at sea a little under 24 hours and nothing like the two days I posted about. And it was Duke of York and not King George V. Let me plead a slip of the keyboard and several million misfiring neurons too.

Of course whether it was 24 or 48 hours and DoY or KGV is of no consequence whatsoever to my orignal assertion; Before the sortie was even over, the crew aboard Scharnhorst was exhausted and the ship's command made several odd decisions that can be attributed to fatigue. Consider the following:

1 - Scharnhorst managed to lose contact with their own 4th Destroyer Flotilla early on, never made any real effort to regain contact, and eventually simply ordered the flotilla to return to base.

2 - After ineffectually tangling with the convoy escorts twice, Scharnhorst began her return to Norway apparently unware that the three British CAs of Force I; Belfast, Norfolk, and Sheffield were trailing her at only ~8 nm. This went on for over three hours.

3 - The D/F gear aboard Scharnhorst picked up signals from both Force I and Force II; Duke of York and Jamaica, yet no changes in course or speed occurred. KM stations ashore reported the same contacts to Scharnhorst, had those reports acknowledged and, again, no changes in course or speed were made. Mark that, no changes were made even though speed was Scharnhorst's hole card.

4 - The aft radar installation aboard Scharnhorst somehow did not pick up the approach of Force II. This allowed the British battleship to approach within visual range before firing.

5 - When he felt that he could no longer wait to begin shooting, Fraser, the RN admiral in charge of Force II, ordered Belfast to illuminate Scharnhorst with starshells. Every British observer was shocked to see that the German battlecruiser was steaming on a straight course with her main batteries trained fore and aft.

Scharnhorst was caught napping because her crew and officers were too tired to do any better. The few survivors picked up after the sinking say as much.

IF the crew had been in better condition, Scharnhorst should have easily slipped the British net. She was over three knots faster than DoY, the RN CAs couldn't close on her without risking themselves, and the sea conditions meant that RN destroyers couldn't match her speed.

IF the lookouts had be alert, IF the crew had paid attention to their own D/F gear, IF the crew had paid attention to their own radar, IF the crew had paid attention to the warnings from their shore stations Scharnhorst could have showed the British her heels and steamed easily back to Altafjord.

Yet, despite all that Scharnhorst nearly got away. The shock of finding themselves under the guns of the DoY must have cleared the cobwebs quickly. The German battlecruiser did what she should have done hours earlier when her D/F gear picked up the RN radio signals, she change course and increased speed to slightly over 30 knots. She got smacked around some, but nothing slowed her until DoY's last salvo fired at extreme range under radar control. She lost a boiler room and her speed dropped allowing the British to catch her.

It was a near run thing. Until they noticed her speed decrease on radar, the British had ceased firing and Fraser had even wired home that he had no hope of catching her and was going to support the convoy instead.

There's the http://www.scharnhorst-class.dk/ website for those who are interested. I've a few books dealing with the Battle of North Cape, I guess Death of the Scharnhorst by John Winton, Sterling Publishing, March, 2001 can fill in most of them.

We now have two choices to explain the odd actions of the Scharnhorst. Either they were:

A) Exhausted from over 8 hours at GQ and half of that in combat - from ~0930 when Belfast fired on them near the convoy to ~1650 when DoY caught them with their pants down.

or

B) Stupid.

I prefer to think that they were exhausted.

Anyway, all my fact dumping in theis post really adds nothing to the topic under discussion.

Watches Wear You Out. Period.


Have fun,
Bill

(This post was edited because I am a total JACKASS)
 
I was just asking questions. I'll check out the sources.

Regards,

Tobias

EDIT: Matter peacefully resolved via PM.
 
Tobias,

The Winton book is good, if from a certain viewpoint. He says the Brits were damn lucky to catch her. I agree up to a point. Something went very wrong on the German side that day.

A few minutes on Amazon will give you more titles about the battle than you can ever read.


Have fun,
Bill

(edited because I am a total JACKASS)
 
I didn't disagree with the assertion that "Watches Wear You Out" - actually for me that's common knowledge, having stood quite a few myself.

Regards,

Tobias

EDIT: Matter peacefully resolved via PM.
 
Slips of the keyboard aside, the sinking of the Bismarck might provide another example of the "watches wear you out" phenomenon. As I recall, British destroyer attacks the night before the final battle kept the crew on battlestations for pretty much the whole night, with not much chance of sleep. In the battle the next day, the Bismarck pretty much acted as a stationary gunnery target for the British until they (barely) managed to sink her.

Admittedly, this is not as clear-cut a case as Bill's, since there were a large number of other factors involved- notably, the Bismarck's rudder was out. However, accounts from survivors (chiefly a Lt. Cmdr. Mullenheim-Reichberg who was the aft gun director officer and the senior survivor) indicate that command and control broke down fairly early during the battle, despite the fact that some accounts have the ship's skipper surviving to the very end.
Granted, the flag bridge was destroyed in the first battle, but it seems to me that in a tactical sea battle the loss of the admiral onboard shouldn't cripple the ability of the ship to fight, particularly since Bismarck was by herself at that point. It seems likely that the lack of sleep the night before probably contributed to the Bismarck's rather poor showing that day.
 
Originally posted by Jeff M. Hopper:
Dosimetry... I was a pseudo-nuke Machinist Mate (busted out of nuke during prototype, limited re-nuke to stand turbine generator watches on USS Nimitz due to undermanning), out of curiosity - what was your rate?
Jeff,

Machinist mate. The old man and his brothers all worked for Brown & Sharpe. I could read a micrometer in grade school. I had the ASVABs for ET, EM, or MM, but chose MM 'cause I thought I'd actually be a machinist! Silly me!

Quickie career recap: Boot, A-school, sub-vol, got USS Dale CG-19 for a pre-school tour. In the yards at Charleston, FBM school was there so they sent all of us (~20 MMs and EMs IIRC) through it. Ho-ho tower, buttercup training, the works. Nuc school in Orlando, prototype in Idaho S1W, then disaster.

S1W had been in a refueling outage, they misjudged the timing, took part of my class, and then were late starting up, very very late starting up. While we couldn't qualify, our classmates at S5G and in New York took all the good billets.

When we finally qualified, only pre-comm on the Vinson and a scattering of cruisers was left. I got California. Pulled in my OCS paperwork the same day I got those orders.

Did the rest of my six. E-6, ESWS, EWS, enlisted EOOW, yadda yadda yadda. Nuc engineering undermanned at around 80% the whole time. FTN.

California was scrapped in '99, sixteen too late to do me any good. Would have loved to have been there to p*ss on her.


Have fun,
Bill
 
Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
FTN.

California was scrapped in '99, sixteen too late to do me any good. Would have loved to have been there to p*ss on her.


Have fun,
Bill
LOL, sentiments are all too familiar.

I got in in '88, went straight to Orlando for A-school, nuke school, then prototype in New York on S8G. Unit was shut-down, cooled-down for reactor vessel and steam generator inspection so the best we could qualify for was 80%. I got in trouble (insubordination), it got blown off, then I got in trouble again (violation of a direct written order, I took time off of my punishment for being insubordinate to study for an upcoming exam).

I ended up in a Correctional Custody Unit for 30 days, busted in rank, half pay for two months, and de-nuked.

Sent to the USS Miller, Knox-class frigate, as a conventional. Got involved in Desert Storm, we tested the CBR equipment and procedures using ourselves as live subjects, yippee skippee. Got my rank back. Then the Miller got decommissioned.

Arrived on the USS Nimitz, was immediately given the Reactor Officer's blessing to stand nuke-only watches because that would free up some nuke MMs. Request to be fully re-nuked denied. Did WestPac, shuttled between Bremmerton and San Diego a lot. Got promoted again, got busted (insubordination) again. Got promoted again.

Left as a MM2 after six and could not run down the gangway fast enough off of that carrier.
 
Would have loved to have been there to p*ss on her.
that's too bad. when I was in I worked with a lot of angry, sick, sleep-deprived people, and I was one of 'em, but I always liked the vinson itself. seemed a good boat.

heading south from the gulf to australia. all the pilots had flown ahead to get an extra two days liberty, almost no aircraft left aboard. I went and sat on the round-down on the bow. the only one there. a bright blue sky, no dust or haze at all, patchy clouds evenly spotting the sky stepping down towards the horizon and then dipping below it. brilliant blue-green water, a slight break, like a jewelled dark turquoise pool. and all the flying fish, seeing the ship, swimming off to the side to escape it, their wings stuck out and their tails kicking the water to keep themselves airborn. very quiet, no sound but a slight breeze and the splash of the bow far below.

I'll never forget that.

'course I won't forget the toilet geysers either, but hey, what can you do.
 
Originally posted by flykiller:
that's too bad. when I was in I worked with a lot of angry, sick, sleep-deprived people, and I was one of 'em, but I always liked the vinson itself. seemed a good boat.
Fly,

Dale was that ship for me. The "Lean, Mean Fighting Machine CG-19". Say it aloud. Great ship, great crew, everything seemed to click. Got a Battle 'E' aboard her.

California on the other hand was just plain snake bit. Nothing seemed to go right aboard. Don't get me wrong, there were some great men aboard her, but the 'Pigboat' was just plain snake bit. Reboiler continually broke down, even weeks after a major yard period. Kept breaking the sonar dome. Always something going wrong during the various 'Ref-Trays'; bad torpedos, gun troubles, radar glitches, etc. We nearly killed someone's granny when the brow collapsed during a dependent's day cruise, lost throttle control in #2 plant while in the Jame's River, the list is endless.

There were some good spots. We won 'Surface Raider of the Year' in '84. Everything seemed to go right for once and the curse stayed away, but then we +1 million USD damage topside in a storm north of Japan and lost the ship's bell. It was to the old snake bit routine after that.

ObTrav - Does anyone inject the ships in their TU with something akin to 'personalities'?


Have fun,
Bill
 
Wasn't there a thread somewhere around here that (at least eventually) talked about "personalities" with ships? It was talking about tweaking the ship, and the maintenance difficulties that might mean, I think.

Bill, your description of the California sounds a lot like the JFK the last few years - constantly broken boilers, busted captains left and right, catapult problems....
 
Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
ObTrav - Does anyone inject the ships in their TU with something akin to 'personalities'?


Have fun,
Bill
Always!
The ship should be treated as just another NPC for the players to interact with. Some are cranky and put-upon, while others are smoothly responsive to every whim of the crew.

My own PC has a barge that gives a low metallic groan every time it enters jump. Kinda like an old man protesting any strenuous effort he has to make.

Lets face it, one of the best scenes in The Empire Strikes Back was when Han Solo is trying to start the ship, switches power on only to watch all the lights flicker off, and then hits the panel to get all the lights to come back on. Priceless.
 
And, when you add AI, your personality can become very interactive, indeed. (Cf Tusk's fighter in the Blood Sword trilogy...)
 
Originally posted by Jeff M. Hopper:
Left as a MM2 after six and could not run down the gangway fast enough off of that carrier.
Jeff,

LOL! Now that is a real navy career!

The actuality of our two naval careers versus our planned naval careers is one reason why I dislike point-based chargens; too much is left up entirely to the player. They can tweak and tailor their PCs far more precisely than Real Life allows anyone to tweak and tailor their actual lives.

Feces happens, and it should be reflected in a chargen.

While a totally random chargen isn't right, a totally controlled chargen is just a different side of the same coin. There should be a mixture of randomness and control, just as exists in Real Life.

Of course, this should only apply to RPGs that feature 'ordinary' PCs such as Traveller and not those that feature 'extra-ordinary' or 'fantastic' PCs such as GURPS or T20.

YMM and should V.


Have fun,
Bill
 
I've generally favored the approach of permitting random point totals for Traveller Characters. Either that, or random die rolling of stats, social standing, etc - and then treat such characters (every blessed one of them) as 18 year olds. The player then has to build the life story based on random rolls. No more "You have 100 character points available for the building of your character". From there, follow the standard concepts of rolling for every term the character is in where ever they are. Like TNE, add in various things such as contacts, friends, enemies, etc - and take it from there. The process defines what the character looks like in the end, rather than the player building the character to suit themselves. Just thoughts...
 
Hal: such a process would definitely feel more traveller than the "Zillion-Skill Templates" that turn out fairly carbon-copy characters.

But that methodology is:
1) Directly opposed to the modality of the game design's CG mechanic
2) Opposed by the majority of GURPS players
3) going to be cumbersome with the narrowness of GURPS skills
4) far more trouble than just rolling a CT/MT character and converting it.

People willing to take that approach already play either 2300, T20 or TNE, or will gravitate towards same.


To be honest, GT and GPD both suffer "templatitis"... the templates have a lot of skills, at very low levels (1/2 or 1 pt), and are very fuzzy, ie, do not provide a concrete "Type" with some nook, and are designed to require adding to specialty skills above the template base, and also to use (IMO, ludicrously high) attribute levels in many cases; of course, this objection is based in part upon the designer's notes for FIRST ed GURPS, and the expected levels of attributes therein.
 
Since this thread has already been completely derailed...
Do any of you know the MechWarrior 3rd Edition (Or Classic BattleTech RPG, as they now call it) character generation rules? These are a combination of point-buy and lifepath, and can put out really interesting results, while the player still retains a good amount of control.

Regards,

Tobias
 
In answer of Aramis: What the bulk of GURPS players want versus what GURPS TRAVELLER players want versus those who remember CT with fondness are of course, three different things right there ;)

The point is, GURPS TRAVELLER players could enjoy the same things about CT's generation system as has any other player of TRAVELLER if they would but experiment. Clearly, creating a style of character generation that is like that of CT and/or MT would require a little attention to detail, but that level of detail was also present in TNE to a certain degree.

As for Mechwarrior - I never really played that game <I know, that's akin to being a 40 year old virgin ;) > Sorry I can't answer that one...
 
For my largely GT-based game, I had my players build characters in a different version of Traveller and then convert them using the GT templates as inspiration for filling in holes in skillsets based on profession. I did not worry much about the characters being different point values. This allowed for the benefits of both types of character generation with the disadvantage of having to 'build' the character twice.

In our specific case, I was the most familiar with the GT rules so all but one of the players opted to build the original character and then hand them over to me to do the initial conversion to GT. Of course, they used T20 to build their characters so the conversion did not go as smoothly as it would have if they had used CT/MT/T4 or even TNE.
 
Back
Top