History, Politics And Current Affairs

Opinions expressed here are personal views of contributors and do not necessarily represent the companies, organizations or governments they work for. Nor do they necessarily represent those of the Board Administration.
It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:48 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Ship Ranking Library
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 7:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:41 am
Posts: 6155
Location: Cambs, UK
Stuart,

following on from the conversation about ranking men o' war over the last week or so, how would you feel about renaming this section "Vehicle Ranking Library" and splitting it into A/C & ships?

I've just received a splendiferous book on Victorian ironclads which should help contribute towards some data, and I'm very happy to crunch numbers if you're willing to share the template.

_________________
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Bernard, Ministers should never know more than they need to. Then they can't tell anyone. Like secret agents, they could be captured, tortured.
Bernard Woolley: You mean by terrorists?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: By the BBC, Bernard.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Ship Ranking Library
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 7:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:49 pm
Posts: 10595
This one won't work for ships; I'll have to evolve a new one. What concerns me about doing a ship one is how to deal with armor. Cases in point are the endless coma-inducing discussions of tiny differences in armor protection on Warships1 by people desperate to prove their favorite warship was invulnerable. I think we could do one on wooden warships simply because armor isn't a factor there. The big problem is getting enough information to give a rounded picture. Broadside weight is easy, crew is easy and those are the two most important factors. I've got the formula for displacement so that's dealt with. It's sail area that's an issue. Information there is very patchy. If we can calculate ship displacement per square foot of sail area, then we're in with a chance.

_________________
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Ship Ranking Library
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 9:40 pm
Posts: 5610
But a variant can work for largely unarmored ships like torpedo boats and destroyers. Something covering the period from 1890 to 1945.

Using the parameters:
Speed
Range
gun armament
torpedoes
And a size factor to account for durability. That's the tough one, since most countries do not account for the hull weight in the same way.

I agree that for battleships and large cruisers, the armor layout and details control too many factors for easy ratings. Such that http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm is still about the best that can be done, and that has a lot of subjective thinking in it.

_________________
(English doesn't) just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.--James D. Nicoll


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Ship Ranking Library
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 6:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 3:07 pm
Posts: 300
How about tanks as well?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Ship Ranking Library
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 11:26 am
Posts: 2399
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Timbo W wrote:
How about tanks as well?

The problem with tanks is that while some of the more obvious characteristics are easy - gun, armour, mobility - others are not unless one is very expert. For instance, the Panther gets very high marks for the three factors I mentioned while the Sherman gets lower ones. Most people know about the Panther's maintenance issues. How many know that because the Sherman had a gunners periscope as well as a sight, it could get on target and hit faster than the Panther? How much of the Shermans much vaunted maintainability was due to the fact that the US devoted a much larger percentage of production capacity to spare parts while the Germans preferred to make more complete vehicles? It can be done - gamers like World of Tanks do it - but I don't know who here has the time and expertise to make one for us here.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Ship Ranking Library
PostPosted: Sat Aug 26, 2017 3:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 3:07 pm
Posts: 300
I should think you're right Dave, the reliability issue could be part of the mobility score, but needs data on vehicle serviceability which is there for sherman, panther etc but not so much for eg turan or toldi. Likewise the changing targets bit could be factored into firepower, but where's the data for more obscure tanks. On the other hand Stuart has not included serviceability in the aircraft rankings, eg the Scimitar got high marks! The point being where the bits we know conflict with historical usefulness then something more is going on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Ship Ranking Library
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2017 3:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:41 am
Posts: 6155
Location: Cambs, UK
That is the whole point of the ranking. Straight performance data only, so we can then study what aspects of performance came from other causes (crew training/ fatigue/ serviceability etc).

Sorry, I should have made my original request clear, as it was in the context of the conversations around the sloops on Culloden Field ;) a warship ranking library, for ships/ ship classes that we can get data for, up until the point at which it becomes too complex to do so.

(Point about World of Tanks (and World of Warships for that matter)- the armour models they use are extremely simple indeed. I've seen the armour models for aeroplanes & tanks however in War Thunder and they are much more complex, like orders of magnitude more (modeling specific pieces of applique armour for example).)

_________________
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Bernard, Ministers should never know more than they need to. Then they can't tell anyone. Like secret agents, they could be captured, tortured.
Bernard Woolley: You mean by terrorists?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: By the BBC, Bernard.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Ship Ranking Library
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2017 7:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:49 pm
Posts: 10595
One approach on ships might be to use total weight of armor and leave it there only we would have to get figures that are comparable and that's much harder than one might think. Pretty much every navy classifies weights in a different way and very often people quote armor weight without specifying how it was calculated.

_________________
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group