Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
kiwi1960

A lady ... murdered before her time... :(

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

285
[1RD]
Members
551 posts

I reckon one of the best old ships ever constructed on this here planet is the humble St. louis....

Not much to look at at, 4 big ugly smoke stacks... drives like a dog.....

But she was GORGEOUS..... and in WoWs .... a real brawler.... a featherweight armed to the hilt...

and how did she die.... not in battle... no, she was denied that. She died because there was a treaty signed by ignorant people that thought limiting the number and size of warships would make the planet a safer place...

St Louis... was dismantled.... I recently found this video on Youtube.... and I nearly cried.... if you still own this ship in WoWs like I do... go give her a cuddle.....
 

 

Edited by kiwi1960
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
285
[1RD]
Members
551 posts
8 minutes ago, francesabyss said:

Scrapped is fine by me.

You sir, insulted a lady.... pistols at dawn! Sir!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
182 posts
728 battles
1 minute ago, kiwi1960 said:

You sir, insulted a lady.... pistols at dawn! Sir!!!

in game its kinda meh least it will make a good fridge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
285
[1RD]
Members
551 posts

You have never really sailed the lady brawler then! Many a times I've circled another ship, often a BB, just pumping shell after shell into it and yes, while the lady took some hits, she always came out the winner...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,383
[RLGN]
Members
8,267 posts
17,289 battles
2 minutes ago, francesabyss said:

in game its kinda meh least it will make a good fridge.

‘meh’ you say...

St Louis has worn the last two-plus years very well; better than some higher tier ships.

She wasn’t called the original flamethrower for nothing, and now with IFHE, she most assuredly has ‘still got it.’

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
1,266 posts
13 battles

I have to admit, it's hard to watch any video of any ship getting scrapped. It's a bit painful actually, haha. Thanks for sharing! :)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,263
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,803 posts
15,265 battles
13 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

St Louis has worn the last two-plus years very well; better than some higher tier ships.

St Louis has ignored power creep and maintains her position as Queen of Tier 3 cruisers; quite an accomplishment when compared to many other ships which were released at OBT. Not a ship to be ignored nor taken lightly.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[SOSL]
Members
147 posts
6,421 battles
1 hour ago, kiwi1960 said:

and how did she die.... not in battle... no, she was denied that. She died because there was a treaty signed by ignorant people that thought limiting the number and size of warships would make the planet a safer place...

Less that it would "make the planet a safer place," more that "if we all keep trying to one-up each other with increasingly bigger battleships we're all going to go broke."

A casualty of the collective action problem, if anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
285
[1RD]
Members
551 posts
2 hours ago, Formerly_Wu said:

Less that it would "make the planet a safer place," more that "if we all keep trying to one-up each other with increasingly bigger battleships we're all going to go broke."

A casualty of the collective action problem, if anything.

Probably true, and because of that, the Washington treaty imposed limits... resulting in the infamous U.S.S. Hornet ... an aircraft carrier just waiting to be sunk (and it was!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,383
[RLGN]
Members
8,267 posts
17,289 battles
23 minutes ago, kiwi1960 said:

Probably true, and because of that, the Washington treaty imposed limits... resulting in the infamous U.S.S. Hornet ... an aircraft carrier just waiting to be sunk (and it was!)

Maybe so, but it didn’t want to sink...

It only went under (as soon as it did,) because when the Japanese found the hulk and decided not to try salvage, they used torpedoes that actually worked to (finally!) sink her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts

That wasn't the Hornet that had the problem. It was the USS Wasp.

The Hornet was a sister ship of the Enterprise & Yorkdown, and all were VERY well constructed and designed. All fought very well, and there's no issue with the Hornet at all.

The Wasp, on the other hand, was essentially an attempt to make a Yorktown-class with about 25% less tonnage due to the Washington Treaty.

Bad idea, because they sacrificed a lot to get that weight down while keeping the same aircraft complement - too much, it turns out.

That wasn't the Washington Treaty's fault - it was the naval brass that refused to accept that a more limited capability was the inevitable result of a lower allowable tonnage.  Basically, they did a "battlecruiser" equivalent here:  stripped out everything that made the Yorktown's survivable, while trying to maximize offensive punch.

 

In addition, the St Louis was absolutely obsolete by the time the Washington Treaty was signed, so she was due for scapping one way or the other. The St Louis (C-20) was a protected cruiser, with awful speed and run on coal with piston engines. She was deficient in armor protection, fire control, and firepower when compared to the cruisers being built then.

She was practically useless by the 1920s, and would have been murdered by anything that was built post-WW1, in any case. Not to mention being fresh meat for any U-Boat, and completely defenseless against them. Heck, she was badly obsolete by the time WW1 broke out - that is, 8 years before she was decommissioned.

Technology passed her by, so there's no shame in that, but the fact remains that the Washington Treaty actually BENEFITTED navies heavily - they allowed them to get rid of a large amount of dead weight in terms of obsolete ships, stopped the building of a whole generation of ships that would have been obsolete before even completed, and forced the navies to come to terms with what WW1's lessons taught about the future of naval power.

 

 

Edited by EAnybody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
289
[JFSOC]
Members
934 posts
2,823 battles
2 hours ago, EAnybody said:

Technology passed her by, so there's no shame in that, but the fact remains that the Washington Treaty actually BENEFITTED navies heavily - they allowed them to get rid of a large amount of dead weight in terms of obsolete ships, stopped the building of a whole generation of ships that would have been obsolete before even completed, and forced the navies to come to terms with what WW1's lessons taught about the future of naval power.

 

 

This is true for everyone but Britain.  The WNT really hit them hard.  They had a choice of retaining obsolescent WW 1 ships and trying to upgrade them, or scrapping far more vessels to allow for their replacement.  The sop that was the Nelson and Rodney was given to them because of that position and they ended up with two relatively iffy battleships on the allowed tonnage.

Then, you have the bulk of their remaining fleet.  The R class, with the exception of Royal Oak really were never modernized.  They had weak armor, poor torpedo defenses, and relatively short ranged guns as they never got the elevation upgrade.  The QE's did a bit better, but even they were very much hit and miss in terms of upgrades and reconstruction.

The same goes with cruisers.  Initially, they tried to keep up with the US and Japan building the 8" County class.  But, these were simply too expensive to build in quantity and the RN had to accept going back to much smaller and individually less capable 6" cruisers to get numbers in service.  They were also forced to keep a large quantity of obsolescent and even obsolete WW 1 cruisers in service.

Their large destroyer fleet was the same way.  They went for numbers rather than quality and retained a large number of very iffy, by the 1940's, classes in service due to the inability to produce the numbers necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
200
[90THD]
[90THD]
Members
2,755 posts
2,067 battles

#kiwi1960

Same thing happened to the Big E. But you never asked veterans what they thought of their ships being scrapped. One veteran said that after experiencing the museum ships, he actually prefer Big E to be broken down by the breakers.

This is adhering to the adage of beating swords into plows.

Edited by Hurlbut

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
83
[WOLF9]
[WOLF9]
Members
165 posts
3,702 battles

My St. Louis is a keeper and she always delivers when called upon.  Thanks for finding this video for us.  These little glimpses into the past are so rewarding and really add some depth to our understanding.  My enjoyment of the the game is partially based on my understanding of the ships I'm driving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
75
[LRM]
Members
368 posts
6,277 battles

Almost all warships are scrapped at the end of their lives regardless of what services they may have rendered.  I remember the outcry when Oriskany was made into a reef rather than a museum ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[BLHK]
Members
350 posts
3,442 battles
11 hours ago, Hurlbut said:

#kiwi1960

Same thing happened to the Big E. But you never asked veterans what they thought of their ships being scrapped. One veteran said that after experiencing the museum ships, he actually prefer Big E to be broken down by the breakers.

This is adhering to the adage of beating swords into plows.

I toured the USS Midway in San Diego with a veteran who'd served on her. Afterwards he seemed surprisingly down beat, and explained it broke his heart to see the old girl stripped down like that.

Having had the pleasure of visiting the ship in the early 70s. I kinda agreed with him.

 

And back to the topic. I love my St Louis. If I have had a bad run up tier or just thought I was playing like crap. I take her out for a spin, and suddenly remember the pleasure this game gives me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
626 posts
1,630 battles

While this is sad, almost every historically notable ship has been scrapped. There's 1 non US battleship in existence. Dreadnought, Warspite, Enterprise(probably the most important single ship in US history), the Titanic's sister ship Olympic(not a battleship but a ship that should not have been sunken given it's history),  after the insane amount of historically not just important, but transformative ships that have been sent to the scrap yard, I just can't bring myself to really care about the St Louis. A vessel being sunk is honestly in most cases the best preservation it can be given.  

This is why this game is so important, it brings all these ships back to life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
289
[JFSOC]
Members
934 posts
2,823 battles

There is one non-US battleship in existence.  The Japanese battleship Mikasa:

Japanese_battleship_Mikasa_in_Yokohama.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
178
[70]
Members
974 posts
3,846 battles

I see a shipgirl screaming as she is being torn apart and melted down for raw material.

Like what happened to the colonists in Mass Effect 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×