USS Texas and Radar

Discuss the Victory at Sea range of naval games.

Moderator: rcbecker1

r3d8
Cub
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:31 am
Location: Texas

USS Texas and Radar

Postby r3d8 » Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:36 am

I couldn't find this in any other posts so please forgive if it has already been discussed. The special traits for the New York - class Battleship does not list Radar as being on it. Yet historically the USS Texas received the first commercial radar in the US Navy. USS Texas received Radar in 1939.

Is this a typo in the rules or was it left off on purpose?

Thanks,
Alexb83
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1708
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:15 am
Location: Devizes, UK

Postby Alexb83 » Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:15 pm

The Fletcher class was also initially missing Radar too, but that got FAQed. This could be another one that's required to change - as with the odd in-service date.

There are a few odd quibbles that could pop up if you're playing games in different years, too - such as ships that weren't fitted with radar/radar fire control prior to a certain date. Might need adjusting the radar stat to include the year it was installed (where this isn't from build).
Cats! I'm being nibbled to death by cats.

My Photobucket: http://s93.photobucket.com/albums/l69/Alexb83/
oggie x
Stoat
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:02 pm
Location: Birmingham

Postby oggie x » Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:24 pm

I think the ship stats as presented in VaS may be those when the ships were first commissioned. If this is not the case then please correct me. Many larger warships e.g. the Queen Elizabeth class were upgraded throughout their career which in some cases was several decades recieving things like radar, torpedo bulges etc.

oggie x
"What burns apart from witches"?

"Errrm...........MORE WITCHES"!!!!
Poi
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1129
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 10:08 am
Location: Basingstoke, UK

Postby Poi » Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:46 pm

oggie x wrote:I think the ship stats as presented in VaS may be those when the ships were first commissioned. If this is not the case then please correct me. Many larger warships e.g. the Queen Elizabeth class were upgraded throughout their career which in some cases was several decades recieving things like radar, torpedo bulges etc.

oggie x
Unfortunately this isn't the case. Some are their as commissioned stats, some halfway, and some in the final configuration.

Hopefully the new book will sort this out, particularly if tourneys continue to use ISD.
Poi

Honk if Pluto is a planet
oggie x
Stoat
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:02 pm
Location: Birmingham

Postby oggie x » Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:50 pm

I think that it is an issue which I presume was intended to better seperate out ships into priority levels. This is understandable but does lead to confusion when people say hey wait a min this is wrong.

Unfortunatly many of the ship classes recieved upgrades part way through the war e.g. those interwar US battleships e.g. the Pennsylvannia class (apologies for spelling) in various guises e.g. radar, extra AA etc. This makes the classes traits/ weaponary etc hard to calculate without resulting to multiple entries for the same class (depending on time) and would probably as stated above screw up many PL ratings.

oggie x
"What burns apart from witches"?

"Errrm...........MORE WITCHES"!!!!
juggler69uk
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 5:44 pm

Postby juggler69uk » Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:42 pm

Before you get carried away with what ships had any radar whatsover fitted and should get the Radar trait, have a read of this thread

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB ... hp?t=26814


read through all, note especially the last few posts
Last edited by juggler69uk on Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Its not whether you win or lose.......
....... oh wth win anyway
DM
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2422
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:43 pm
Location: Gloucester, UK

Postby DM » Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:03 pm

IIRC, whilst TEXAS received an early radar set in 1939 or 1940 she did not receive fire control radar until 42 or 43.

Unfortunately VAS does not differentiate between search and fire control radar.
DM's naval website, now moved to the NWS site
http://www.navalwargamessociety.org/nav ... links.html
Co-author "Order of Battle"
Author, "Age of Dreadnoughts"
Bloke who paints VAS ships for Matt
Bacon Number of 4 :D
juggler69uk
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 5:44 pm

Postby juggler69uk » Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:45 pm

If you really want to push getting radar just because a certain ship had a radar set then Japanese fleet players could quote this page

http://www.combinedfleet.com/radar.htm

This website avers that, amongst other ships, Yamato and Mushashi got fire control radar in 43, other ships in 42, but was in wide use in 44

It would be a whole heap of research to come up with statistics to account for when individual ships in all Navies actually received effective fire control radar.

The same would have to be done for Sonar.

Then you are going to have to fix games to a specific date and then apply the date to whether a ship is allowed radar/sonar traits etc.

Not only that will getting extra traits alter the priority level. eg will giving a ship one or two extra traits make it one PL higher ??

Is it worth all the hassle
Its not whether you win or lose.......
....... oh wth win anyway
DSV1
Mongoose
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:06 pm

Postby DSV1 » Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:43 pm

Are the rules set as of 1943 then ?
r3d8
Cub
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:31 am
Location: Texas

Postby r3d8 » Sat Apr 21, 2007 2:26 am

I hope nobody thinks I am bent out of shape about this. And I had read the eariler post about Fletchers and Radar. That is what prompeted me to make this post. Like the Fletchers I thought that mabye the USS Texas had a similar error. The game is still playable but I brought it up I guess as a Texas pride.

I have actually worked on restoration of the USS Texas and learned a lot of its history while trying to keep her afloat. As a ship she had an amazing list of firsts.....first Navy ship with Radar, first BB to mount AA guns, first to use fire control dectors and rangefinders, first BB to launch an airplane, and also first BB to become a museum.

So this was just more of an inquiry and I appericate the results. Also for anybody that lives in or near Texas the foundation is always looking for help repairing the ship and donations too.

Thanks,
Hugbiel
Stoat
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 1:08 am
Location: Montreal

Postby Hugbiel » Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:05 am

DSV1 wrote:Are the rules set as of 1943 then ?
I have already asked a similiar question and AFAIR the answers is the ship are set in their most famous state. ( It was about the Richelieu who was finshed with a Radar in New York )

A ship must not only have a radar to have the radar trait but also be able to use it for fire control. ( so a DD for radar piquet may not have it )
During the times ships are refitted with up to date equipement or test the operational use of new one. And during the war they are adapted to the situation. For WWII ship it mean often give them a Radar, throw the cranes and seaplanes away and add a lot of AA weapon.
More a question of campain refit.
juggler69uk
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 5:44 pm

Postby juggler69uk » Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:04 pm

juggler69uk wrote: http://www.combinedfleet.com/radar.htm

This website avers that, amongst other ships, Yamato and Mushashi got fire control radar in 43, other ships in 42, but was in wide use in 44
DM wrote: A ship must not only have a radar to have the radar trait but also be able to use it for fire control. ( so a DD for radar piquet may not have it )
DM going by this website and your comment Does that mean Yamoto and all the others should have it ??
Its not whether you win or lose.......
....... oh wth win anyway
DSV1
Mongoose
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:06 pm

Postby DSV1 » Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:45 pm

Looking throught the VAS book the dates indicate trials date not commisioned .

Some of the service dates are a bit misleading too as sister ships were sometimes 2 -3 years behind. Possibly it would be best to play a ceratin year, 1942 for example and then just look up which ships had radar that year ?
DM
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2422
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:43 pm
Location: Gloucester, UK

Postby DM » Sat Apr 21, 2007 5:04 pm

DM going by this website and your comment Does that mean Yamoto and all the others should have it ??
The data I have to hand says air search in late 1942, surface search in early 1944 and fire control radar in October 1944 (along with several other Japanese heavy units), so I'd be tempted to give Yamato radar for a 1945 scenario. I have some more reliable sources ferreted away. I'll take a look to see what they suggest.

EDIT - the more reliable source (Conways "Anatomy of the Ship" book on the Yamato) suggests that no fire control radar was fitted - Type 21 air seach in September 1943, Type 22 surface search radar in April 1944. Neither are shown as used for fire control, hence if Conways is correct Yamato would not get an FC bonus. More checking with other sources required :)

EDIT2 - Lacroix's "Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War" states that there was a version of the Type 22 that could be used for fire control, fitted to ships of the Second Fleet in September 1944. Yamato formed part of the second fleet, if so she would have been one of the prime users. So I'd go back to my original thought and allow yamato FC radar in late 1944 and 1945 scenarios.
DM's naval website, now moved to the NWS site
http://www.navalwargamessociety.org/nav ... links.html
Co-author "Order of Battle"
Author, "Age of Dreadnoughts"
Bloke who paints VAS ships for Matt
Bacon Number of 4 :D
Alexb83
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1708
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:15 am
Location: Devizes, UK

Postby Alexb83 » Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:39 pm

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_Radar_WWII.htm is quite a handy resource for US battleships (though not dates) with radar fittings.

Perhaps there needs to be a further degree of depth to the rules - split Radar and Radar FC into two traits (although obviously many ships will have both). One will give a distinct benefit to small picket ships (although obviously you will have to allow for shared detection between ships for this to have any meaning, as per http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/shi ... rigao.html), the other allows for v. accurate gunfire in all weather conditions.

Mark 13 FC radar (the latest I can find reference to in WW2 US deployment on main battery directors) could apparently range shell splashes out to 42 thousand yards, and those at Leyte Gulf which were managing a 5/6 hit rate at night, at 23000 yards were using earlier marks (SK search) and Mk8 mod 2 FC (from the action report above).
Cats! I'm being nibbled to death by cats.

My Photobucket: http://s93.photobucket.com/albums/l69/Alexb83/
DSV1
Mongoose
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:06 pm

Postby DSV1 » Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:27 pm

DSV wonders how much DM has spent on books during his lifetime. :shock:

More than I have spent on wargamming figures perhaps, ah no wait I have GW ones and they are £200 each now to buy :D
jfox61
Mongoose
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:21 am

Postby jfox61 » Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:07 pm

DSV I would never admit to owning GW stuff :( I am willing to put on money though that DM was reading Naval books long before mr Jackson though of GW. Not that I am saying you are an old git DM. Digging deeps holes for myself methinks
DM
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2422
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:43 pm
Location: Gloucester, UK

Postby DM » Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:18 pm

DM was brought up on tales of derring do during WW2 from his dad at the tender age of 6 (over 30 years ago) :D
DM's naval website, now moved to the NWS site
http://www.navalwargamessociety.org/nav ... links.html
Co-author "Order of Battle"
Author, "Age of Dreadnoughts"
Bloke who paints VAS ships for Matt
Bacon Number of 4 :D
Ben2
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1470
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:35 pm

Postby Ben2 » Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:28 pm

Ben thinks splitting Radar FC and Radar detection into two distinct traints is a good idea for an advanced rule and might make a goos S&P article.
Old B5W developer and professional shut in.
timberwolf a
Shrew
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:58 am

Postby timberwolf a » Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:03 am

DM wrote:DM was brought up on tales of derring do during WW2 from his dad at the tender age of 6 (over 30 years ago) :D

Your still a young buck. :wink:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest