From: Adam Flinton 

George Sherwood wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:11:58 +0100, Adam Flinton wrote:
>
>
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/uk_trafalgar_200/html/1.stm
>>
>>Pickie 8 is great. (A) the Turk under sail & (B) is it just me or are US
>>& FSU ships just so recognisable?
>>
>>Shows how frigates have grown...
>>
>>Adam
>
>
> Something about a ship under sail.  Rough way to make a living though. 
> I just finished a book called "Decision at Sea", in the
author's opinion
> the 5 Naval Battles that shaped American History.
>
> 1.  The Battle of Lake Erie. (Sorry about that one. )

Get orrf moi lake yaou colonial!!!

> 2.  The Battle of Hampton Roads. (Virginia vs Monitor)
> 3.  The Battle of Manila Bay.
> 4.  The Battle of Midway.
> 5.  Operation Praying Mantis. (Persian Gulf 1988)
>
> I thought he did a nice job, but wasn't sure why the last was included.
> Guess he wanted to show a little bit of a missile battle at sea.  Overall
> an interesting read.
>

No one has yet really done a missile battle. Etendard+Exocet is the nearest.

> Guess I have taken enough reco classes that most ships are very
> recognizable.  I have always thought most of the HMS/HMCS/HMAS ships to be
> very recognizable from the softlines.

HMAS? What like a Perry you mean?

>  I never really like the look of FSU
> ships.

Here we differ. I like the long bow shape. I find USN ships to be boxes with a bow.

>  Although big and heavily armed just never seemed to be a blue
> water navy.  Just come out pop off a bunch of missiles and hope for the
> best. 
>

Ah right....nowt like swinging in from the rigging then? 

Nah I always liked their raked bow that goes for all of them (esp the
Kirovs, Slavas & Krivaks). I think they remind me of battle cruisers
like the Scharnhorst.

Then again VL Missiles have made most warships more boring. "Oh look a
large area filled with hatches..."

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5