The best Glorious v the 'Twins' option

The best Glorious v the 'Twins' option - IMO - is with a different Captain, it is still with the Ark Royal, and they all head back to base together. Forward recon., and anti-sub duties shared between aircraft of both carriers. The Twins are spotted, fortunately not on a converging course - Allied ships left too early for that. The Twins, were hoping to catch convoys going to, not evacuating from.
The attack could be a mixed bag, I think there were some Skuas still left - take off last, even some Glad's (depending on the range) that could act as a distraction, and of course the Swordfish available from both carriers.
With a cruiser or two and destroyers available to attack anything crippled.
Seems, more plausible than OTL.
 
What is your point?

Situations do not change, only tactics? Situation does change and tactics do not? What are you willing to change at all?

BTW, What twins are you refering too? Some mention it to be USS North Carolina and USS Washington, Some say HMS Edinburgh and HMS Belfast. Both were not present here I guess? Scharnhorst and Geniesnau perhaps, Or Bismarck and Tirpitz? Just name the ships by name and not something else.
 
What is your point?

Situations do not change, only tactics? Situation does change and tactics do not? What are you willing to change at all?

BTW, What twins are you refering too? Some mention it to be USS North Carolina and USS Washington, Some say HMS Edinburgh and HMS Belfast. Both were not present here I guess? Scharnhorst and Geniesnau perhaps, Or Bismarck and Tirpitz? Just name the ships by name and not something else.
Scharnhorst and Geniesnau
 
Scharnhorst and Geniesnau

Why these two ships calling "twins" while they had more differences between them than for instance HMS Edinburgh and HMS Belfast, or USS North Carolina and USS Washington? It might be better to call them sisterships, as they were just that, nothing more, or less. Even their history is different, as they only operated combined in a handfull of operations, with more missions and operations carried out independently, or in other combinations.
 
Why these two ships calling "twins" while they had more differences between them than for instance HMS Edinburgh and HMS Belfast, or USS North Carolina and USS Washington? It might be better to call them sisterships, as they were just that, nothing more, or less. Even their history is different, as they only operated combined in a handfull of operations, with more missions and operations carried out independently, or in other combinations.
it's interesting question. Are they really twins?
 
most posters on this material have heard of "THE TWINS" , we know who he's referring to...

I've never heard of EDINBURGH & BELFAST being twins.
 
"Ugly Sisters" is a name for the S & G I recall from a translation of a German naval officers personal document. I'll try to recall who that was & where I read it.
 
Twins is soooo much easier to 2 finger type than sister ships let alone their real, difficult to spell, names.
 
Were any of the pre-1945 warship classes with possible exception of those from the USA truly twins, with interchangeable parts?
 
Guns, most of the time. Electric service motors, auxiliary motors. Hatches & portals?
I wonder....if electrics and motors were universal across the class? Imagine Rodney (built in Newcastle) calling over to Nelson (built in Birkenhead), do you have a spare something or other, and it doesn't fit.

Somewhat back on topic.... did Glorious and Courageous share the exact same build spec?
 
I wonder....if electrics and motors were universal across the class? Imagine Rodney (built in Newcastle) calling over to Nelson (built in Birkenhead), do you have a spare something or other, and it doesn't fit ?

It seldom does fit in any industrial setting. So you have artificers, mechanics, plumbers, millwrights, electricians, & others to come with hammers and beat the item into submission.

Neither is it best to simply order off the shelf. When sending off for a generator of specified capacity it's best to pass along some specs and drawings for the mounts, the connectors, ect... The manufacturer can modify on the shop floor, or send it out for that.
 
It seldom does fit in any industrial setting. So you have artificers, mechanics, plumbers, millwrights, electricians, & others to come with hammers and beat the item into submission.

Neither is it best to simply order off the shelf. When sending off for a generator of specified capacity it's best to pass along some specs and drawings for the mounts, the connectors, ect... The manufacturer can modify on the shop floor, or send it out for that.
I ride old British motorbikes and belong to the https://cvmg.ca/. A common complaint from those trying to restore old British motorcycles (and cars AIUI) is that the factories simply used whatever components they had available - meaning that you could have two bikes of the same model and year with legitimately different components or assembly.
 
That's what separates the manly men from the dilletante boys.

Back in 1979 I replaced the corroded tail lamp socket on my Suzuki motorcycle with similar bits off a Detroit made Ford automobile.

Your excellent observation illustrates why warships carried machine tools and millwrights, and service ships were essential components of the expeditionary fleet.
 
Top