Full Speed Ahead - Edition

>>63830152 (OP)
Tribal Class my beloved!

Lets just get HMS Spanker out the way shall we?

Don't suppose anyone has a good resource that lists all the various ships that would be classed as corvettes, frigates and sloops in WW2? You know stuff like the Flower class but from other navies? From what I have searched so far information seems shockingly sparse on these smaller vessels but they do exist. Know the Itals had an equivalent for example but can't find details on it?

>>63832387
try clicking around >wiki through different languages
or look for terms like aviso or the local equivalent of gunboat, vorpostenboot,
pic rel was a gunboat (kanonneerboot), sloop, or frigate depending on who you asked

I wish I could stop playing World of Warships, but… the models are just so pretty, bros…

i like the (kinda low quality) details on the WT models

HMS SusSEX

C(o)unt(y) SEX

>>63830155
oo that's a good pic

>>63832905
straight off the wiki
i know of a couple other cool pictures but there in a book and i havent yet gotten my hands on a good digital copy (despite the source being listed)

Roma my beloved

>>63832635
Same. You get a nice views of ships you otherwise would not get.

Pretty

I would not want to server on a ship if these were the toilets
The ships themselves are still cool though

>>63833292
it's ridiculous that they couldn't even put up partitions
how much fucking steel do you save on that, cmon

best treaty cruiser

rebuilt standards are so sex

hon hon

Found this in the archive. How true is it?

>>63833292
>not wanting to chat shit with the bros while you shit
Pantywaisted nancyboy, I tell you what.

>>63833571
all thats missing is
>Balkenkreuz will go into the history books as the undefeated and unrivaled God Emperor of Capital ships

>>63833292
>>63833572
That's how the Romans did it, shit and chat in the latrine.

>>63833571
mix of WW1 and WW2 memes

>>63830152 (OP)

>>63833292
It's not a pleasure cruise: take your shit and get out.

>>63833571
princess of colonialism is definitely a capital ship name rather than a heavy cruiser name

>>63837024
Then they went and did...this.

>>63837024
WW1 BB with 4x centerline triple turrets? Very anachronistic-looking.

>>63832905
It's not just good, it's fantastique

>>63836806

>>63837056
Respect to guys who sailed that thing across the Pacific.

>>63832387
Italy had the Gabbiano class corvettes, like pic related. Those were meant primarily for convoy escort and anti-sub warfare. for more general purposes the Italian navy operated several classes of torpedo boats, like the Spica, Ariete and Orsa. Those were considered quite successful, and a bunch remained in service post ww2. They also happens to have some of the coolest names ever used by the Italian navy, as they were all named after stars and constellations.

>>63837367
>torpedo boats, like the Spica, Ariete and Orsa.
the Spica class was equivalent in capability to half a fleet destroyer, except for range; it was more economical for the Regia Marina to build these instead of fleet destroyers like every other navy had to build because they were only going to operate in the Mediterranean

so they were really more than just torpedo boats, they were more capable than other ships which the RN called corvettes and the USN called destroyer-escorts, in respects other than range

>>63837971
is that Rearguard?

>>63838082
>rearguard
lol. But yes, it's HMS "Late to the Party" Vanguard

>>63838089
It was useful as an all-weather fleet combat unit for the 20 years between the end of WW2 and the introduction of the Blackburn Buccaneer
But I've always felt an overwhelming sense of irony that the last battleship ever built had that name

>>63838119
It's a shame. It was floating sex and it would have been cool to see it in battle.

>>63838147
If they preserved her instead of scrapping her there was a good chance she would have been reactivated for the Falklands just to bitch slap the Belgrano. Probably the only time she would have had a chance to see real combat and would have been a hilarious overmatch.

>>63838187
a battleship in the 80s was a waste of money
the only reason the Iowas were reactivated was because they were arguably more useful than building a brand new destroyer, which was what it cost per Iowa
but there's an argument over the annual operating costs of an Iowa, which is much more than a destroyer

>>63830152 (OP)
FULL SPEED !

>>63838215
True but consider the following:
Bitches Love Battleships!

>>63838439
Everyone loves battleships.

>>63838770
This is a SFW board anon!

>>63838813
That much mass bucking like a bronco gives me a funny feeling.

BANZAI!

>>63831845
the rare hi res jap ship pic

A cool future that never was

Not a heavy frontline combat ship, but I've always liked the San Antonio class. Unfortunately, the Flight II ditched the enclosed masts.

>>63838215
GIVE ME PROPER GUIDED MISSLE NUCLEAR POWERED BATTLESHIPS. NO REACTIVATIONS OF CENTURY GONE DESIGN, A PROPPER FULLY OPERATIONAL 21ST BATTLESHIP

>>63830152 (OP)

For me, it's the Nelsons.

>>63844635
The French called, they want their pre-dreadnoughts back!

>>63844790
Non.

Can't be arsed to make a new thread, so I guess this one is closest.
Can I have an ID on this sea drone? It was spotted near finland during NATO training

>>63844381
that photo really shows off the Countys however

>>63833292
Guess what the red one is for.

>>63844838
https://www.exail.com/product/drix-h8-medium-range-usv

>>63833325
kino

>>63845092
Thanks, interesting read

OHP MVP

>>63846299
When it comes to battleships, I like the Americans. When it comes to cruisers, Japanese.

question: did Paris and Courbet ever fire their main guns in WW2?

doubt it, at least not at other vessels
probably lobbed some shells to support the landings in Africa, Italy or France like most other battleships in the ETO

>>63846968
Courbet fired at the 7th Panzer Division during the Invasion of France. Paris supposedly did but no good records exist of it.

>>63847645
>>63847753
thanks mate
just checking to see if their main armament was operational, whatever the mission

>>63847778
They basically were turned into depot ships and AA bunkers.
Think Courbet though was used for the bouncing bomb trials before eventually being used for the Mulberry.
Paris was given to the Poles who used her for training and as a clubhouse.

I'm the only one who thinks that the japanese Maya cruiser is so fucking hot.

The superstructure is so sexy

>>63848983
>The superstructure is so sexy
It's basically just proto-Ticonderoga

>>63844995
Herpes?

>>63848983
>The superstructure is so sexy
She can be even sexier.

>>63848983
(Images appear to be down.)
If you meant IJN Maya then I agree. If you meant JS Maya then I also agree.

>Tries to brawl with the French navy
>Gets ass clapped by an obsolete light cruiser and a bunch of sloops
Were coastal defense ships a meme?

>>63850859
Thais are a meme, more like

>>63846299
Back when Seattle built stuff.
> now it's cruise ships and shitty coffee and chowder-in-a-bag

>>63852515
All those ships were built on the East Coast.

>>63852595
What about ships built in Cleveland?

>>63854789
Not a warship

Now that things are working again, I can profess my recent love for the Akizuki class. Sleek lines like other modern Japanese ships, but the 'wall' at the back makes it unique. I went back and forth on if I liked it or not and decided that I do. Plus, the class has names that are poetic like old WW2 destroyers.

>>63855682
Fact that their Destroyers are also equipped with the Aegis system as well means the looks aren't just all for show. It will be all fun and games till they drop the JS prefix and go back to the IJN.

>>63830152 (OP)
Damn i love the sloped bong dd bridges

>>63856933
They're pure sex

>>63856933
>>63856999
dubs and trips confirm

If your country doesn't have an aircraft carrier, is it even a real country?

HMS Campbeltown, anyone.

>>63857473
You can run but you can never hide.

>>63843850
Seconded.
(But only if it has a ram bow)

Charles Pears did some great warship artwork.

>>63857935
That's a nice painting got any other examples or links to his work?

>>63859725
that's not a Higgins boat, that's a PT boat or sub chaser

>>63837971
where is that?

>>63864081
NTA but I will bet that that's Scotland

>>63837971
That's USS Midway in the background, so I'd guess Firth of Clyde, 1952.

>>63833236
that futurist aesthetic was top notch

>>63864059
they're PT boats built by Higgins

>>63861682

>>63864430
yeah but nobody calls them that because the phrase "Higgins boat" is already occupied by amphibious landing craft

>>63865338
>>63865359
Some of these are outright pornographic.

Anyway imagine surviving for over 140 years of warfare including bombing raids of WW2 only for the Bong government to go "lel scrap her"
That government should have been hung as traitors for the damage they did to the world of maritime history.

I've not seen many ships in person but I've been on the USS Texas in San Jacinto. I remember thinking that it felt small.

>>63857507
but you can be scrapped

So, I just checked an inflation calculator and the US military budget in 1953 was about 500 million (adjusted for 2025). So….so WHY is it that the USN has so fewer ships now than it did during the Korean War era? Has real inflation gutted it?

>>63869768
Shells are cheap
Missiles are expensive

HMS Cockchafer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Cockchafer_%281915%29

>>63869768
They make less ships because they think there are diminishing returns in carrier group strategy.

>>63869749
most (old) warships really arent that big
compare the numbers in pic rel to some of the WW2 'giants'

>>63869768
A ship from 1953 and a ship from 2025 don't have equivalent capabilities, so 'total hull numbers divided by budget' isn't a useful means of comparison.

>>63869768
people have much better quality of life today, and a single Burke-class destroyer can wipe out an entire Korean War CSG all by itself, go home, rearm, and do it again

>>63871089
always found the conning tower a bit goofy, like its wearing a top hat

>>63871119
hmm... why wouldn't battleships flood themselves to the maximum depth when in battle contact

plop down, hide the tender bits

>>63869881
Yep good point.

>>63871148
because the sea gets a vote, landlubber
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_Fleet_(Imperial_Japanese_Navy)#The_Fourth_Fleet_Incident

>>63871089
>>63871124
>be perfidious jap
>cram as much artillery as possible on too-small ships
>build world's tallest battleships
>refuse to build deckhouses
>deadly stability issues
>whatcouldhavepreventedthis.jpg
Jap destroyers look so weird

>>63869881
On adding to that note people tend to forget just how much smaller warships are compared to civilian ships.

>>63871738
well, a smaller ship can move better, and in combat that's important

also, is that the starship enterprise on the deck

>>63871756
I would like to say no but I can't be too sure?

>>63871738
I hate cruise ships so much. They are the ultimate decadence, they are needless luxuries and a waste of resources. These fucking things just epitomize the worst aspects of a late stage industrial and materialist society. The people who go on them are brainrotted; these are the kinds of people who constantly need something to entertain them but who are content to with their entertainment being mindless, shallow bullshit and frivolities. They are the floating, channel hopping couch potato.

Shell all cruise ships.

>>63871797
i don't get it how they are profitable

i understand the era of roaring 20s ships and showing off

now you just go there to get robbed

>>63871797
>>63871825
They're basically for Boomers too frail to fly.

>>63871825
>i don't get it how they are profitable
It's company town shit. You're entirely dependent on them for every single thing you need morning to night for the duration

>meanwhile in Argentina

>>63871865
Yeah, but with how things have gone in the last 5 years (and more broadly since like '08) I bet they are nowhere near as profitable as they used to be. I can only imagine how much they raked in off actual boomer families in the late 90s.

>>63871738

>>63871825
>i don't get it how they are profitable
it's a floating hotel
the catch is that air travel is 10 times more expensive than sea, and in addition, cruise ships build their own land so to speak

for the price of just the flight ticket to, say, the Bahamas, you can cruise there instead. travel, accommodation, hotel meals, maybe even some kind of evening entertainment, all inclusive
even if the drinks are more expensive and the premium dining options are more expensive (they are), that is within your control not to imbibe, and besides, you've already saved a mint on other travel expenses.

also, when you're elderly, you can't go out and do all the crazy activities on a holiday that you did when you were young
(I for example used to sleep no more than 5 hours a day when on holiday. the rest of the time was walking, sightseeing, and eating.)
your body is too frail to do more than go out of the hotel, wander around foreign streets for a few hours, have lunch, and come back to the hotel. so when we young'uns look at the daily schedule of a cruise stopover, and think that it's limited and boring, older folks see a package that is just suited to them... by design.

>>63871896
no company is anywhere near as profitable as they used to be
we are in a recession, buddy

speaking of cruise ships

>>63871890
don't kick a bloke when he's down
the Argies were the most gentlemanly opponents anyone's ever had really

The US Navy has reduced and eliminated portholes. Did they have that much spare power for ventilation and cooling inside the ship?

>>63871920
navies haven't relied on scuttles for ventilation and cooling for a hundred years, anon

>>63871920
If only they could so the same with gloryholes.

Is war thunder navy stuff any better than world of warships? Because WoWs fucking blows ass.

>>63871890
there's a song for that

>>63871980
It goes downhill with every update. The occasional special event battles are kind of fun though, but I wish they'd either run them for longer or do them more often.

>>63871980
i like it better than WoWs but its pretty shit in many creative ways
WoWs is at the very least a function product, WT naval is a halfbaked mess that gets all sorts of content and reworks but leaves glaring issues unresolved for years

>>63872865
>leaves glaring issues unresolved for years
One day, they'll program a bot for naval that doesn't decide that the best direction to steer isn't consistently on a collision course with the nearest human player