Vesuvius refit

Like in the Dead Zone... they entered it and their systems shut down, but they were able to turn around using the steering column in the center of the bridge.

BTW, I think the 'island' on the Vesuvius and Ranger class carriers are more of a tower than an island. :p
 
They still had basic systems that allowed them to do a 180 and leave the dead zone. They just had no sensors.
 
I call that a island since its the name that the towers on US carriers are called.

And I can see a US carrier right now since the USS Enterprise is in my field of view.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
I would disagree with even the assertion that the Ranger is a capable carrier -- aside from weak shields, weaponry and launch capabilities, its fighter complement is pathetically small compared to almost any other class of carrier.
Click to expand...

Well, it's capable for the Border Worlders. :) Beggers can't be choosers. I would take a purpose built carrier over a scratch conversion like the Intrepid, and I would choose it over the CVEs like the Tarawa becuase it can field heavy bombers, which gives some power projection capability.

Best, Raptor
 
Originally posted by LeHah
I'd trust a Ranger far more than a new class carrier since the Ranger has proven it's self time and again.
Click to expand...

Although I can understand the sentimental value, that, as Mr. Spock would say, "is illogical". The Brown Bess musket proved itselved at Waterloo, but would you want to equip your forces with one today? And remember, in WWI generals sent their troops chgarging like in the old days...only to get them slaughtered by machine guns.

Interesting-dull fact 'bout carriers: The Japanese and Amricans designed their carriers for CARRYING in WWII, with the consequence that their ships were ill-protected. The Brits armored their fleets CVs and placed guns all around their "box hanger", but in the end the US carriers proved more capable, as they could carry more planes. The Essex class is considered the best example of this, and is comparable to the Ranger. Most of them are either scrapped or in mothballs- of course, theyr were extensivly modified which allowed them to perform in Vietnam, 20 years after they were designed.

In spite of all their faults, I still like the Ranger, if mainly as a museum piece... :)
 
Originally posted by Raptor
Well, it's capable for the Border Worlders. :) Beggers can't be choosers. I would take a purpose built carrier over a scratch conversion like the Intrepid, and I would choose it over the CVEs like the Tarawa becuase it can field heavy bombers, which gives some power projection capability.

Best, Raptor
Click to expand...

Interesting... I, personally, would prefer the CVE's for Border Worlds use -- transport replacement parts are cheaper and easier to come by, a CVE has a better fighter capacity *and* it's got some kick in a standup fight... (and, of course, the ability to run from a destroyer...)
 
I think any kind of carrier that can launch 40 fighters and be able to outrun a pursuring destroyer (maybe a crusiser) is worth it's weight in gold and platnum.

The possibilities are endless, as long as you don't need to do a stand-up captial ship fight with a CVE. Any kind of ship thats quick and can drop a seperate strike contingent to do it's dirty work has at least three dozen uses in the Ambush catagory alone.

[Edited by LeHah on 07-04-2001 at 15:24]
 
Whoops, my bad!

We now return you to your previous thread discussion, already in progress... :)
 
Oy, yeah, I tend to really rabble when I make posts at 2:27 am! Sorry about that. It's now 9:36 where I am, so I'm better now, thanks. :D
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
We were talking about CV(L)'s, though... (CVEs carry *45* fighters...)
Click to expand...

I thought that CVEs were just converted transports; I've looked through my WW2 ship manuals, and while most large carriers have around 60 planes (about half the number most WC large carriers have), Escort Carriers only have about 8 planes max.
 
It's a bit differant in WC. The CVEs (of the same type as the Tarawa) have 45 combat craft, 15 each of light, medium and heavy fighters. The Ranger class CVLs have 40 (10 each of light, medium and heavy fighters, plus ten heavy bombers.)

Best, Raptor
 
That's right -- CVEs are manufactured the same way, but they carry far more fighters than their naval equivalents.
 
So why does the supposedly smaller CVE (even in WC) carry more fighters than a Light Carrier? Does the CVL carry more hvy. fighters or bombers, or mount more weaponry?
 
The CV(L) carries bombers, when the CVE does not... *however*, the *point* is that CV(L)'s are cheaper and older than CVEs... <G>
 
Tarawa was a CVE. Which is a modified transport. It carried Rapiers, Ferrets, and Sabres(yeah!). In End Run, at some point during the end run, Jason is notified that they have lost 11 of their fighters, and he says that that is 25% of their fighters. So, that would mean that they carry 44 fighters+barely enough room for Marine Transports. I'm guessing that they carry:
22 Rapiers
11 Ferrets
11 Sabres.

This could be wrong (and probably is) but it just seems that they would have enough escorts for the Carrier(ferrets) and the Sabres(11 Rapiers) and then 11 left for dog fighting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top