Don´t worry, I don´t believe in that too!!!Regarding that other famous boat, try reading Genesis, Chapter 6.
Search found 1857 matches
- Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:09 pm
- Forum: Naval History in General
- Topic: Admiral Zheng He (Cheng Ho) treasure ship design
- Replies: 47
- Views: 78538
Re: Admiral Zheng He (Cheng Ho) treasure ship design
- Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:12 am
- Forum: Naval History in General
- Topic: Admiral Zheng He (Cheng Ho) treasure ship design
- Replies: 47
- Views: 78538
Re: Admiral Zheng He (Cheng Ho) treasure ship design
Which one?I would have to say that also discredits another famous ship that was measured in cubits...
- Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:30 pm
- Forum: Naval History in General
- Topic: Admiral Zheng He (Cheng Ho) treasure ship design
- Replies: 47
- Views: 78538
Re: Admiral Zheng He (Cheng Ho) treasure ship design
Sorry Hermill. Until I read the detailed description of the construction technics and see the blueprints of the ships, I am sceptical that such a large ship could be built in those years, as I expressed in my previous posts. Moreover, no ship longer than about 75 m was ever built of wood alone (with...
- Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:54 am
- Forum: Naval History in General
- Topic: Admiral Zheng He (Cheng Ho) treasure ship design
- Replies: 47
- Views: 78538
Re: Admiral Zheng He (Cheng Ho) treasure ship design
Hi guys. Those still believing the crazy theory of the giant ships should read this page http://www.1421exposed.com/.
Regards
Regards
- Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:17 pm
- Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
- Topic: Submarine + Surface Ship Actions
- Replies: 12
- Views: 4285
Re: Submarine + Surface Ship Actions
Combined fleets involving surface ships and subs were discarded already in WWI if I am not wrong.
- Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:15 pm
- Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
- Topic: Battleship Top Ten
- Replies: 626
- Views: 131998
Re: Battleship Top Ten
Very few people would disagree at this... It seems that it is easier to choose the ugliest than the most beautiful.The ugliest Battleship of all time:
1. HMS Rodney and HMS Nelson
- Fri Sep 12, 2008 11:49 pm
- Forum: Naval Weapons
- Topic: Radar fire control
- Replies: 30
- Views: 12286
Re: Radar fire control
I also do!!!!
- Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:08 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
- Replies: 462
- Views: 67236
Re: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
Brad, it was a static target?Brad Fischer wrote:It was a battleship constructive target which is basically a box surrounding the point of aim that measures 188 yards in deflection by 70 yards in range (at 35,000 yards). I believe the actual point of aim was offset a cruiser or destroyer.
Brad Fischer
- Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:26 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
- Replies: 462
- Views: 67236
Re: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
Brad, what was the target?South Dakota in the fall of 1943 scored multiple hits on several salvos at 35,000 yards and ended up scoring a total of 22% for the shoot.
- Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:05 am
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Battleship Vanguard Armor
- Replies: 65
- Views: 96043
Re: Battleship Vanguard Armor
I am not an expert but I don´t like the armoured deck seated on TOP of the belt, it is exposed to incoming shells. I would prefer the belt reaching one deck up and the armoured deck being one deck down. But sure there is some good thing in the used scheme, so I will listen to the experts.
- Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:58 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
- Replies: 462
- Views: 67236
Hit probability
I have done my homework. Lets analize what the 8.7% hit probability at 40.000 yards means. I understand that 8.7% is the probability of a single shot hitting Yamato at that distance. Each shot is trial, with a 0.087 success probability and 0.913 failure probability. This is called a "binomial d...
- Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:00 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
- Replies: 462
- Views: 67236
Re: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
If the engagement starts at 25,000 yards the Iowa needs to make smoke, open range, and pray. This is the key of the thread. Iowa CAN win, nobody argues that. But always needs some type of collaboration from Yamato: keep at long range, don´t fire at all or with little accuracy, keep the damage contr...
- Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:27 am
- Forum: Naval Weapons
- Topic: Radar fire control
- Replies: 30
- Views: 12286
Re: Radar fire control
Thanks my friend, I have read some parts from the Eugene Slover web. But I think that it lacks some details.
- Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:09 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
- Replies: 462
- Views: 67236
Re: RFC equipped Yamato vs. Iowa
Well, this is getting tricky. Brad, do you have in English something called "binomial distribution of probablity"?
- Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:05 pm
- Forum: Naval Weapons
- Topic: Radar fire control
- Replies: 30
- Views: 12286
Re: Radar fire control
Thanks Brad for your long explanation. So I understand that the radar only changed the instrument used to measure the range and bearing, the plot still being necesary to determine range rate. Am I right? And a couple of questions: -Bearing was plotted too? -Teoretically you can derive target course ...