UNCLASSIFIED

As a gunnery training ship IRON DUKE actually retained six of her 13.5 inch guns and some of her 6 inch. ISTR she was also used for trials and at one stage mounted twin 4 inch BD mounting that was the prototype for the 4.5 inch BD.

CENTURION lost her all her guns as a target ship.

Ric Pelvin

There was even an Iron Duke, the Iron Duke, existing in September, 1939, but without its guns.

IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Australian Defence Organisation and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the Crimes Act 1914. If you have received this email in error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email.

*********************************************************** Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at: http://www.navalstrategy.org for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and Links to other Sites of Naval Interest ***********************************************************

UNCLASSIFIED

_The Great Ships_ is a reprint of Peter C. Smith’s -_The Great Ships Pass_, published, I think, by William Kimber in the ’70s. IIRC it was a history of the last years of the British battleship. It was not reviewed with overwhelming favour at the time, but I doubt Smith would make an error as egregious as that.

Ric Pelvin

—–Original Message—– Of Brooks A. Rowlett Sent: Friday, 24 April 2009 10:45

Thanks to a change in the AP style guide a few years ago, much of the media now calls ANY surface combatant a battleship. Protests that this is absurd tend to fall on deaf ears because the Style Guide clearly demonstrates that the protests are incorrect.

Therefore, any battleship, cruiser, or destroyer under construction in 1939 probably counts.

On Apr 23, 2009, at 7:55 PM, Jonathan D. Beard wrote:

> I got a promo from Amazon.com today, based of course on my previous > purchases. > > It included this statement: > ** > Although naval development before World War II focused on aircraft > carriers, the British nevertheless had seventy battleships–larger and

> more powerful than ever before–under construction at the outbreak of > the war. Indeed, one of the Allies’ first successes came in December > 1939 when British ships hunted down and successfully engaged the > German Graf Spee off the coast of South America. The war would hasten > the battleship’s decline, but not before producing dramatic moments at

> sea. > *** > > 1. Can any list member name all 70 battleships under construction at > the outbreak of the war? > > 2. Failing that, what do you suppose this ignorant person really > meant? I think some of the King George V class were under > construction, and perhaps even some of the Lions, but I don’t know the

> exact number in September 1939. But were 70 warships, perhaps, under > construction in the UK in September 1939? That seems possible. > > > The book Amazon is offering is: > The Great Ships: British Battleships in World War II (Stackpole > Military History Series) by the way. > > — > Jonathan Beard > 820 West End Avenue, 3B > New York, NY 10025 > 212-280-2798 > jbeard@panix.com > > > *********************************************************** > Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at: > http://www.navalstrategy.org > for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and > Links to other Sites of Naval Interest > *********************************************************** >

*********************************************************** Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at: http://www.navalstrategy.org for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and Links to other Sites of Naval Interest ***********************************************************

IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Australian Defence Organisation and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the Crimes Act 1914. If you have received this email in error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email.

*********************************************************** Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at: http://www.navalstrategy.org for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and Links to other Sites of Naval Interest ***********************************************************

I got a promo from Amazon.com today, based of course on my previous purchases.

It included this statement: ** Although naval development before World War II focused on aircraft carriers, the British nevertheless had seventy battleships–larger and more powerful than ever before–under construction at the outbreak of the war. Indeed, one of the Allies’ first successes came in December 1939 when British ships hunted down and successfully engaged the German Graf Spee off the coast of South America. The war would hasten the battleship’s decline, but not before producing dramatic moments at sea. ***

1. Can any list member name all 70 battleships under construction at the outbreak of the war?

2. Failing that, what do you suppose this ignorant person really meant? I think some of the King George V class were under construction, and perhaps even some of the Lions, but I don’t know the exact number in September 1939. But were 70 warships, perhaps, under construction in the UK in September 1939? That seems possible.

The book Amazon is offering is: The Great Ships: British Battleships in World War II (Stackpole Military History Series) by the way.

— Jonathan Beard 820 West End Avenue, 3B New York, NY 10025 212-280-2798 jbeard@panix.com

*********************************************************** Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at: http://www.navalstrategy.org for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and Links to other Sites of Naval Interest ***********************************************************

https://www.usni.org/forthemedia/ChineseKillWeapon.asp

*********************************************************** Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at: http://www.navalstrategy.org for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and Links to other Sites of Naval Interest ***********************************************************

We experienced a profound system failure this morning.

At around 1am on the 13th we installed some pending Windows updates to the server and abound restarting it to activate the updates the operating system of the server failed.

After spending considerable time trying to resurrect the OS and bring the server back on line we were forced to replace the drive to save the data that was on the drive in the event that a system restore from backup proved ineffective.

Whatever was causing the issue (corruption or a compromise) was included in the backup because bringing the system on line after the restore we saw the same problem.

We ended up having to rebuild the server from scratch and then copying the data from the saved original drive and modifying the configuration of the software to access the saved data.

The server started accepting mail again around 7pm.  The web server was brought back on line around 8pm and with most of the additional services back to function around 9pm.

Within about 45 minutes of the mail server coming on line we could see that there were almost 800 inbound emails sitting in the queue waiting to be processed.

PORT ROYAL MAKEOVER
Preliminary assessment costs: $25 to $40 million
Where: Dry Dock 4, Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard
Duration: Unknown
Work details:
» Repair or replace sonar dome.
» Repair or replace (if required) devices for measuring speed and water
depth located on ship’s underside.
» Refurbish two propulsion shafts.
» Repaint underwater hull.
» Replace propeller blades.

http://www.starbulletin.com/news/20090307_port_royal_repair_bill_will_be_at_least_40m.html

***********************************************************
Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at:
http://www.navalstrategy.org
for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and
Links to other Sites of Naval Interest
***********************************************************

http://www.fugro.com/downloads/corporate/news/Danton_wreck_investigation.pdf

has a nice article and good photos of the wreck of the Danton.

Jonathan Beard

***********************************************************
Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at:
http://www.navalstrategy.org
for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and
Links to other Sites of Naval Interest
***********************************************************

Not a good thing.

Frank

***************************************************************************************************

—– Forwarded by Frank A Mcbride/US/Raytheon on 02/16/2009 08:57 AM
—–

“Richard Czernik”
02/15/2009 05:00 PM

By TOM NEWTON DUNN
Defence Editor

February 15, 2009

BRITISH and French nuclear submarines which collided deep under the
Atlantic could have sunk or released deadly radioactivity, it emerged last
night.

The Royal Navy’s HMS Vanguard and the French Navy’s Le Triomphant are both
nuclear powered and were carrying nuke missiles.

Between them they had around 250 sailors on board.

A senior Navy source said: “The potential consequences are unthinkable.
It’s very unlikely there would have been a nuclear explosion.

“But a radioactive leak was a possibility. Worse, we could have lost the
crew and warheads. That would have been a national disaster.”

The collision is believed to have taken place on February 3 or 4, in
mid-Atlantic. Both subs were submerged and on separate missions.

As inquiries began, naval sources said it was a millions-to-one unlucky
chance both subs were in the same patch of sea. Warships have sonar gear
which locates submarines by sound waves.

But modern anti-sonar technology is so good it is possible neither boat
“saw” the other.

A senior military source said: “The lines between London and Paris have
been hot.”

The MoD insisted last night there had been no nuclear security breach. But
this is the biggest embarrassment to the Navy since Iran captured 15
sailors in 2007. The naval source said: “Crashing a nuclear submarine is
as serious as it gets.”

Vanguard is one of Britain’s four V-Class subs forming our Trident nuclear
deterrent. Each is armed with 16 ballistic missiles.

She was last night towed into Faslane in Scotland, with dents and scrapes
visible on her hull. Triomphant limped to Brest with extensive damage to
her sonar dome.

Triomphant has a crew of 101. Vanguard weighs 16,000 tons, is 150 metres
long and has a crew of 140.

The MoD said it did not comment on submarine operations.

***********************************************************
Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at:
http://www.navalstrategy.org
for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and
Links to other Sites of Naval Interest
***********************************************************

> I had three tours in Viet Nam. So far I have not been able to connect
with any of the activities I was involved with. Oh well. I will keep
looking and pass this site along to interested vets and others looking
for info on the war.

For info: My first tour (May ’64 – Jul ’65) was with the Military Sea
Transport Service as MSTS Liaison Officer Southeast Asia, based in Saigon.
My second and third tours were with Commander Amphibious Squadron One. On
two deployments in 1966 and 1967 we were involved with putting Marines
ashore in various locations in Viet Nam, including the first American
operation in IV Corps in early 1967. The Commodore liked to brag it was
the first US riverine operation since the Civil War.

Phil Riddle

***********************************************************
Visit the Mahan Naval History Discussion List WebSite at:
http://www.navalstrategy.org
for info on Subscribing/Unsubscribing and Digest and
Links to other Sites of Naval Interest
***********************************************************