From Sat Dec 06 11:48:04 1997
>X-Authentication-Warning: ecom4.ecn.bgu.edu: mslrc owned process doing -bs
>Date: Sat, 6 Dec 1997 12:46:10 -0600 (CST)
>From: “Louis R. Coatney”
>X-Sender: mslrc@ecom4.ecn.bgu.edu
>To: consim-l@net.uni-c.dk
>cc: “‘mahan@microworks.net‘” ,
> “The Paper Modellers’ List” ,
> marhst-l@qucdn.queensu.ca, Mahan@microwrks.com,
> MilHst-L@ukanvm.cc.ukans.edu
>Subject: RE: BENSON/GLEAVES?-LIVERMORE?-BRISTOL? hist. summ. and questions .
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>On Fri, 5 Dec 1997, Francis.Timothy wrote:
> > I believe John Reilly’s book is pretty self-explanatory.
>
>I’ll check John again, when I can.
>
> > >As I noted, the previous one-stack SIMS class … of similar >
> > dimensions … seemed to have a superior armament. Why were there >
> > more BENSONs produced instead of SIMS?
> >
> > I don’t pretend to be an expert but a quick look in Friedman, and a
> > quick question of John Reilly, seems to indicate that:
> > a) the Sims were top heavy and overweight, a function of putting a lot
> > of stuff in the 1937 design.
>
>And, as I said, the BENSONs were topheavy too. See below.
>
> > b) they were heavily armed with guns and torpedo tubes with fleet combat
> > in mind–i.e. fleet support missions
> > c) the 1939 design Bensons, on the other hand, stressed depth charges
> > and automatic guns, reflecting a growing concern for convoy ASW and
> > defense from air attack–i.e. sea control missions
>
>But the SIMS had extensive ASW, and they had 40mm guns equalling BENSONs,
> too … with 3 more torpedo tubes, to boot. Did the BENSONs *two*
> (tall) stacks make them *more* topheavy? I think height is often
> overlooked as a de-stabilizing factor.
>
> > d) the latter destroyer was being built during the 1940-41 build-up of
> > the Navy, the Sims were not (too early). Plus we needed lots of these.
>
>Latter (and *slightly* larger), yes, but better? ??
>
> > e) the Fletcher’s are basically the successor to the Sims, these big
> > destroyers were freed from the space limitations of the arms control
> > treaties of the 30s.
>
>The BENSONs were heavier than the SIMSs, and their “ideal” 5-5″/10-tube
> prewar configuration was what the larger wartime (treaty-free) FLETCHERs
> could sport. The BENSONs also had … like the FLETCHERs … *two*
> stacks. Weren’t the BENSONs actually more like the FLETCHERs than
> the SIMSs?
>
>Lou Coatney, mslrc@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
> www.wiu.edu/users/mslrc/ (FREE game and model MONITOR and WWII DE)

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Thu Dec 04 20:15:14 1997
>X-Sender: tcrobi@pop.mindspring.com
>Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 21:55:46 -0500
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>From: Tom Robison
>Subject: RIMPAC Reminder
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>NNS5212. RIMPAC `96 to air as Discovery Channel documentary
>courtesy of the Discovery Channel
> Every two years since 1971, the U.S. and its Pacific
>Rim allies have been honing their military skills by
>combining forces in an immense war game. Last year’s
>execution of these maritime exercises — RIMPAC `96 — was
>the largest mustering of naval forces in the history of
>these operations and is the focus of an original Discovery
>Channel documentary. Premiering on Pearl Harbor Day, “Fleet
>Command” tracks this 10-day long war at sea exercise.
>Narrated by Charlton Heston, this world premiere airs
>Sunday, December 7 from 9-11 PM and 1-3 AM (ET/PT). The
>program is rated TV G.
> RIMPAC `96 united two American carrier task groups with
>naval forces from Australia, Canada, Chile, Japan and South
>Korea. More than 40 ships took part, including aircraft
>carriers, cruisers, destroyers, ballistic missile
>submarines, amphibious assault vehicles, helicopter assault
>ships and supply and support ships. Combined aircraft
>numbered more than 300.
> Viewers of “Fleet Command” can log on to DISCOVERY
>CHANNEL ONLINE anytime beginning Sunday, December 7 for the
>online companion to this engaging special. In this two-week,
>”ask-the-experts” feature on Discovery’s award-winning web
>site, viewers will be able to interact with military experts
>about the war games and how they are run. The “Fleet
>Command” online companion will begin Sunday, December 7 and
>continue through Friday, December 21 at
>http://www.discovery.com.
> In the week following the December 7 premiere of “Fleet
>Command,” Discovery Channel gives viewers an up-close look
>at the military personnel who spend their lives on the
>world’s oceans and the incredible machinery they operate.
>”Sea Power!”, a week-long programming event, begins Monday,
>December 8, airing from 9-11 PM and 1-3 AM; and continues
>Tuesday, December 9 through Friday, December 12, airing from
>10-11 PM and 2-3 AM; and concludes Sunday, December 14,
>airing from noon-6 PM. All times are ET/PT. All programs are
>rated TV-G.
> “Sea Power!” features Discovery Channel’s finest
>military programming and includes: “Carrier: Fortress at
>Sea,” Monday, December 8, 9-11 PM & 1-3 AM; Code Red:
>Submarine Rescue, Tuesday, December 9, 10-11 PM and 2-3 AM;
>Battleship: Part I and II, Thursday, December 11 and Friday,
>December 12, 10-11 PM and 2-3 AM each night.
>
>
>Tom Robison
>Ossian, Indiana
>tcrobi@mindspring.com

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Thu Dec 04 06:49:09 1997
>Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 08:48:12 -0500 (EST)
>From: Sanartjam@aol.com
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>Subject: Re: ANATOMY OF THE SHIP Forthcoming?
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>Hi,
>
>Anyone seen the new book on battlecruisers (aptly entitled “Battlecruisers,”
>I think) by John Roberts? White Ensign Models in the UK has it and the Naval
>Institute is
>going to get it in the USA. I don’t know who actually published it in the
>UK.
>
>Art Nicholson

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Thu Dec 04 01:13:49 1997
>X-Sender: brazen@pop3.demon.co.uk
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
>Date: Thu, 04 Dec 1997 08:08:56 +0000
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>From: Frank Dunn
>Subject: Re: ANATOMY OF THE SHIP Forthcoming?
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>At 22:14 02/12/97 -0500, you wrote:
> >Rumor time. I am in receipt of a copy of a British sea books catalog
> >which reports a pending ANATOMY OF THE SHIP volume, by the guy who did
> >YAMATO and TAKAO – this one to be on the FUSO. Has anyone any info?
> >Thanks.
> >
> >-Brooks
> >
> >
>Try http://www.brasseys.com/Connewtitles.html
>
>December 1997
> The Battleship Fuso by Janusz Skulski
>
>
>Frank Dunn, London, UK.
>http://www.brazen.demon.co.uk/

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Mon Dec 01 22:13:02 1997
>X-Sender: tcrobi@pop.mindspring.com
>Date: Tue, 2 Dec 1997 00:16:20 -0500
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>From: Tom Robison
>Subject: RIMPAC
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>Discovery Channel to air RIMPAC `96
> WASHINGTON (NWSA) — The United States and its Pacific Rim
>allies, Australia, Canada, Chile, Japan and South Korea conduct a
>bi-annual war game called RIMPAC.
> RIMPAC `96 is the focus of an original Discovery Channel documentary.
>Premiering on Pearl Harbor Day, “Fleet Command” tracks this 10-day
>long mock war in the Pacific. Narrated by Charles Heston, this world
>premiere airs Sunday, December 7, from 9 to 11 p.m. and 1 to 3 a.m.
>(ET/PT). It will encore on Sunday, Dec. 14 from 6 to 8 p.m. and 12 to 2
>a.m. (ET/PT).
> Fleet Command showcases the ultra-sophisticated technology that
>supports a force of more than 300 ships and 30,000 U.S. and allied Sailors,
>soldiers and pilots as they work together to resolve a hypothetical
>conflict and keep the peace worldwide by using high-tech ships, carriers
>and planes.
>
>(kinda reads like the movie synopses they used to anounce over the PA at
>the 4077th, doesn’t it?)
>
>
>Tom Robison
>Ossian, Indiana
>tcrobi@mindspring.com

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Mon Dec 01 22:12:06 1997
>X-Authentication-Warning: ecom7.ecn.bgu.edu: mslrc owned process doing -bs
>Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 23:10:43 -0600 (CST)
>From: “Louis R. Coatney”
>X-Sender: mslrc@ecom7.ecn.bgu.edu
>To: “The Paper Modellers’ List” ,
> marhst-l@qucdn.queensu.ca, consim-l@net.uni-c.dk, > Mahan@microwrks.com,
> MilHst-L@ukanvm.cc.ukans.edu
>Subject: MERRIMAC notes.
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>Well, I’ve drafted MERRIMAC(K/CSS VIRGINIA) and … as usual … it
> *wasn’t* as easy as I thought … it would be.
>
>I had it pretty well finished when my son observed that my 45-degree
> casemate sides seemed a little steep. As it turns out, they were
> 35 degrees. With a scrap cone, I dead-eyed the pie-shape at
> 295 degrees. Robert did a quick course in trigonometry and found
> that using sine it came out to 294+ degrees. Call me Deadeye. 🙂
>
>The beast is too big for 1:200 on a 11×17 max. sheet, so I had to
> scale it down to 1:240 … and MONITOR will have to be reduced
> accordingly. (So that makes the 100-foot Scale Selector 5″,
> instead of 6″.)
>
>Porter, the Southern naval architect, had to make an ironclad from
> the hull of a wooden warship. The ever-curving lines of MERRIMAC(K)
> are even reflected in the slightly elliptical/curving sides of
> the casemate. I’ll tell you right here: SORRY, *my* MERRIMAC’s
> sides are rail-straight. (Maybe I’ll play with those compound
> curves some *other* time. The top deck’s sides seem to have been
> straight and trying to reconcile the top with the bottom and
> maintain levelness should be great fun.)
>
>What was more interesting was that the side gunports aren’t symmetric.
> I’ve got them located more or less correctly. (In fact, the only
> thing easy about MERRIMAC/VIRGINIA is its stack! … which I nearly
> forgot. 🙂 )
>
>I’ve omitted the lifeboats, but they were in REALLY bad shape by the
> end of the battle, anyway. 🙂 (… and they would make a nice,
> instructive design experience for neophyte cardstock model designers,
> at that.)
>
>I *did* remember the conical conning tower at the front of the top deck.
> It was a far superior design and location than the pilot house on the
> MONITOR’s foredeck (wherein CAPT Worden was blinded).
>
>I checked out William C. Davis’s DUEL BETWEEN THE FIRST IRONCLADS, and
> it is fascinating reading. The Union sailors on the wooden-hulled
> frigates, sloops, etc., were demoralized when they saw how humble a
> little contraption the much-touted MONITOR appeared to be. They seem
> to have wanted to used M. as a rescue/evacuation vessel. 🙂
>
>When the Confederates saw MONITOR, they thought she was a barge, bringing
> a new steam boiler to MINNESOTA. … and the “cheese box” description
> does seem to have been a common reaction.
>
>Moreover, after the day’s Jutland-like slugout-to-a-draw, everyone
> present seems to have been aware that (naval) history had just been
> made.
>
>Anyway, I’ll test-build my little monster sometime this week, and I
> should have it up on my webpage by then.
>
>Lou
> Coatney, www.wiu.edu/users/mslrc/
>
>Incidentally, Robert and I had a great, cliff-hanging 1ST ALAMEIN
> game, over the Thanksgiving weekend. It ended up with 2. Armoured
> Brigade helping me to wrest the initiative from Deutsches Afrika
> Korps deepest penetration past Alam Halfa Ridge … in the nick of
> time.
>
>Robert had also risked and lost some Italian infantry divisions, attacking
> the Alamein Box frontally. He also pushed Recce Gruppe 1 hex too far.
> 🙂
>
>On the other hand, he had my southern box … filled with the New Zealand
> and South African *divisions* AND 4. Armoured Brigade … surrounded.
> He attacked it twice, for the 1/6 chance of eliminating them, but
> failed and then went instead for the deep lunge for C11 — the Coastal
> Road supply/reinforcements/victory hex. If he had taken that box, it
> would have *all* been over, of course.
>
>The game ended in about an hour after 10 full turns. My nephew and
> nieces liked Robert’s “Neat!” tanks and airplanes. 🙂

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Mon Dec 01 16:39:14 1997
>X-Errors-To:
>Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 18:36:35 -0500 (EST)
>X-Sender: rickt@pop3.cris.com
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>From: rickt@cris.com (Eric Bergerud)
>Subject: Navy-Army Rank
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>
> >
> >Can anyone recommend a source that would show the equivalent WWII ranks &
>grades between the US Army and US Navy? I think I have the officers down
>pretty well, but the enlisted ranks are not altogether clear. Want to keep
>the moron-level errors in my research to a minimum. Cloudy thought and poor
>judgment are beyond remedy I fear.
> >
>Eric Bergerud, 531 Kains Ave, Albany CA 94706, 510-525-0930

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Mon Nov 10 22:53:03 1997
>X-Errors-To:
>Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 00:52:02 -0500 (EST)
>X-Sender: rickt@pop3.cris.com
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>From: rickt@cris.com (Eric Bergerud)
>Subject: Re: Biography
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
> >At 10:02 PM 11/10/97 -0500, Tom Robison wrote:
> >
> >>I had forgotten that Halsey made 5-stars. I thought there were only five
> >>who made 5-star rank, namely Eisenhower, MacArthur, Bradley, Nimitz, and
> >>Arnold.
> >
> >You’re still leaving out a couple. Leahy, Marshall, King, MacArthur,
> >Nimitz, Eisenhower, Arnold, and, later, Halsey, and finally, Bradley. I
> >believe that is the correct order of their seniority but I haven’t a
> >reference at hand to check.
> >
> >No picture of all of them together was ever taken. The most would be
> >Leahy, Marshall, King, and Arnold, though there are a lot of pictures of
> >King and Nimitz and Nimitz and Halsey and a few of Marshall and MacArthur.
> >Not an easy group to gather together amicably!
> >
> >Marc
> >
> >
>Pity there isn’t some way to give Washington an extra star. I’ll grant that
>Marshall deserved the fifth, but none of the others were in the same league
>with father George. Good men all mind you, in their own ways, but I don’t
>see a Hap Arnold obelisk on the Mall in Washington DC any time soon.
>Eric Bergerud, 531 Kains Ave, Albany CA 94706, 510-525-0930

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Mon Nov 10 20:44:56 1997
>X-Sender: msmall@roanoke.infi.net
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.3 (32)
>Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 22:33:21 -0500
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>From: Marc James Small
>Subject: Re: Biography
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>At 10:02 PM 11/10/97 -0500, Tom Robison wrote:
>
> >I had forgotten that Halsey made 5-stars. I thought there were only five
> >who made 5-star rank, namely Eisenhower, MacArthur, Bradley, Nimitz, and
> >Arnold.
>
>You’re still leaving out a couple. Leahy, Marshall, King, MacArthur,
>Nimitz, Eisenhower, Arnold, and, later, Halsey, and finally, Bradley. I
>believe that is the correct order of their seniority but I haven’t a
>reference at hand to check.
>
>No picture of all of them together was ever taken. The most would be
>Leahy, Marshall, King, and Arnold, though there are a lot of pictures of
>King and Nimitz and Nimitz and Halsey and a few of Marshall and MacArthur.
>Not an easy group to gather together amicably!
>
>Marc
>
>
>
>
>
>msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315
>Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Mon Nov 10 20:03:10 1997
>X-Sender: tcrobi@pop.mindspring.com
>Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 22:02:56 -0500
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>From: Tom Robison
>Subject: Biography
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>Just in case anyone forgot, Biography on A&E is showing bio’s of “5-star
>Heroes” this week. Tonight was Eisenhower. Tuesday night is Halsey,
>Wednesday is Hap Arnold, Thursday or Friday is Bradley or Nimitz.
>
>I had forgotten that Halsey made 5-stars. I thought there were only five
>who made 5-star rank, namely Eisenhower, MacArthur, Bradley, Nimitz, and
>Arnold.
>
>Which brings to mind a question. Were all the men who made 5-star rank ever
>photographed together? If so, where could one find a copy of such a
>remarkable photograph?
>
>Tom
>
>
>Tom Robison
>Ossian, Indiana
>tcrobi@mindspring.com

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous