Jump to content


Photo

Showdown at Calabria


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 744 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 16 October 2017 - 06:54 PM

I was up to Albany NY this past weekend to visit my son before their hellish winter weather sets in (overnight temps were already dipping into the low-thirties). While there we dug through some stuff I brought up to him, most of which came out of either the collection of a dear friend that passed away earlier this year, another friend who is culling the empire a bit, or from my own piles which have taken a bit of a winnowing of late. Always a fan/collector of rulesets, anything that might be interesting we send his way. This serves two great purposes: (1) it gives him plenty to do on those long cold Upstate evenings, and (2) he can master the rules and then teach us old codgers the finer points. Near the bottom of one of the boxes we found a surprise…a copy of General Quarters Rev 1.0.

GQ 1


This copy, most likely purchased second-hand in the last century, is tagged as having originated from the brilliant, still extant (as far as I know) Boardwalk Hobby Shop in Cincinnati OH. Never been there but I hear it’s quite a place. Sadly nothing remotely similar lies within striking distance for me, but it’s good to know places such as Boardwalk have not all gone to vapor.

We gave Mr. Gill’s first iteration a brief read-through and decided to give it a play, mostly just to understand and appreciate the evolution to the current rev. As to be expected they are exponentially briefer and abstract, yet play remarkably similarly, and the intent of allowing manageable multi-ship actions to be played to a historical-feeling result without having to resort to rivet-counting is successfully evident.

We decided on a brief one-on-one action using a couple of ships from a box of old Axis and Allies/War at Sea figures - HMAS Sydney versus Giuseppe Garibaldi, two light cruisers, the Med, July 1940.

GQ 1a


In this sliver of the action which became known overall as the Battle of Calabria, the Royal Navy made a decent effort to intercept an Italian convoy bound for Benghazi, Libya. Vice-Admiral John Tovey’s Force A (comprised of five light cruisers and a single destroyer) formed the vanguard for Admiral Cunningham’s Force B, the main body (comprised of BB Warspite, CV Eagle and four destroyers) with Vice-Admiral Pridham-Wippell’s Force C bringing up the rear (BB’s Royal Sovereign and Malaya with ten destroyers).

The convoy was directly escorted by two light cruisers, eight destroyers and a pair of torpedo boats. The Italians, hoping to bait the RN into a slugfest, also dispatched Campioni’s 1st Fleet (two battleships, six light cruisers and seventeen destroyers) and Paladini’s 2nd fleet (six heavy cruisers, four light cruisers and twelve destroyers).

At approximately 1510, July 9, 1940, Tovey’s light cruisers ran headlong into Campioni’s force and immediately came under heavy fire. Quickly realizing the superiority of the Italians, Tovey attempted to disengage and withdraw. HMS Neptune was struck by fire from Giuseppe Garibaldi resulting in light damage.

Scenario

HMAS Sydney, following HMS Neptune in column, observes the latter straddled by fire from Garabaldi with some damage and moves to cover Neptune’s withdrawal. Within a few minutes Sydney and Garabaldi find themselves alone on a roughly parallel southerly course at a range of 18,500 yards.

The action will be just ten turns, one scale hour.

After-Action Report

 

A brief run-down of the action:

1524 – Confident of Neptune’s escape to the west, Sydney’s commander Captain John Collins orders his cruiser to open on Garabaldi, his broadside of eight six-inchers yielding a hit and minor hull damage at long range. Garabaldi’s commander Stanislao Caraciotti orders return fire (ten six-inch) but misses long, passing overhead.

1530 – Sydney, continuing ahead at 25 knots, fires again but misses. Caraciotti’s second salvo straddles Sydney which momentarily disappears behind a cloud of spray to emerge unscathed. 

1536 – Collins orders a slight course change to the southeast aiming to converge on the Italian while maintaining his broadside. With the range continuing to shorten, Collins’ and Caraciotti’s next salvos miss.

1542 – The range is now down to 11,500 yards. Collin’s continues his fire on Garabaldi but misses astern. Garabaldi returns fire and again straddles Sydney yielding no damage. Garabaldi shows no sign of relenting, uncharacteristic for the Italian navy.

1548 – Rapidly closing, just 8,250 yards now separates Sydney and Garabaldi. Collins, maintaining his speed of 25 knots, fires yet another broadside, observing hits on Garabaldi’s forecastle (a gunnery hit). Caraciotti’s return main and secondary fire all miss. Collins remains wary despite the Italians abysmal gunnery.

1554 – Collins orders a second course change, turning slightly to the south. Sydney fires yet again yielding a second gunnery hit together with a hull hit on Garabaldi’s stern with damage to the Italian’s rudder. Making turns will now lengthen considerably for Caraciotti’s cruiser. Garabaldi lands a gunnery half-hit with her damaged main battery but misses again with her secondaries.

1600 - At 7,500 yards Sydney continues firing her main battery and misses. Collins orders his bank of torpedoes loosed to port with the expectation that the Italian will continue on a converging course. No sooner is the order given then Garabaldi’s next salvo slams into Sydney penetrating to and destroying her fire-control center and flooding a number of compartments. Sydney’s speed drops to 22-1/2 knots. Meanwhile Garabaldi’s 3.9-inch secondaries rake the British light cruiser but inflict no penetrating damage. Caraciotti orders his torpedoes into the water and a turn to the east.

1606 – Collins continues on his southerly course expecting the same of the Italian, but Garabaldi instead turns away to the east. Sydney’s gunfire misses and all of Collins' torpedoes pass safely off Garabaldi’s starboard quarter. Caraciotti, firing only his stern turrets manages yet another 1/2-hullbox hit on Sydney whose speed now drops to 15 knots. The Italian’s torpedoes miss, passing ahead of and behind the British cruiser.

1612 – Caraciotti continues his broad turn coming around to a northwestward heading. Once again in position to fire what remains of his broadside the Italian does so but misses. Collins, continuing on a southeasterly course, misses badly with his ninth salvo. 

1618 – Collins and Sydney fire a final salvo scoring another ½-hull hit and a further gunnery hit. Garabaldi, down to a final turret, continues her turn to the west and delivers a parting shot, holing Sydney at the waterline yet again. As the distance between himself and Caraciotti lengthens Collins abandons any thought of pursuit.

Results

A look at the victory conditions gives a slight tip to Collins and Sydney, having largely wrecked the larger, better-armed and armored Garabaldi. Caraciotti, his decks littered with smashed guns, splinters and torn up decking while struggling with numerous flooded compartments, limps off hoping to find cover with Campioni’s main body. Mercifully there's no provision for fires in GQ 1.0 (unless we misread).

While Sydney’s main is largely intact, she too has severe flooding and her speed is sharply reduced. The Australians have, however, vanquished their foe and slip off to the west for a spell in the yard at Malta and some hasty repairs.

Given there were only two ships in the engagement, the game played out in just fifty-odd minutes (slightly less than the single scale hour).

 

GQ 1.0 game mechanics are blissfully simple. Ships carry attack strength (main and secondary) and defense strength factors with gunnery boiled down to a roll of three d6's - one to determine whether a hit has been achieved, one to determine topside damage (gunnery) and one to determine below-deck damage (hull). A further single die roll may be necessitated for critical hits. Distances are gauged in inches (took a bit of getting used to) with an inch representing 250 yards. A simplified turn gauge is provided, as is a torpedo gauge. Damage-control is extremely limited in scope. The game is bloody and rapidly cumulative.

A fun exercise, we acquired some insight into where GQ is today and how it got there versus where it began over forty years ago.

Wow, can it really have been forty years? How did I get so freakin' old? I need to add a road-trip to Cincinnati to the bucket list...

 

Healey



#2 simanton

simanton

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 214 posts

Posted 28 October 2017 - 09:34 PM

Nice 1 on 1 intro to GQ1. I even have its precursor North Cape from CinC. I have always liked Mr Gill's approach which combines simplicity and speed with reasonably realistic outcomes. It's a welcome relief from the Chinese Water Torture systems which seem to track each and every shell splinter! Glad you enjoyed it, and hope you will play it again.

#3 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 744 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 29 October 2017 - 07:52 AM

It's always fun when you stumble onto the unexpected. We'd never seen an early version of GQ so this seemed better than just reading through it. We would have gone with more ships if we'd had more models on-hand. Of course you can always use snippets of paper but where's the fun in that?

 

A byproduct of this afternoon's work was a resolution to explore the career of Vice-Admiral Henry Pridham-Wippell if for no other reason than to just say his name repeatedly. A brief look at some notes reveals he was a destroyer man that came up through WWI and the inter-war years to make a name for himself in the WWII battles in the central and eastern Med. He was aboard Barham when she was destroyed...not sure how he survived that but he did (find the film on the web...rather horrific). Survived the war and retired in 1948.

 

I still buy a few things from CinC on occasion. We used to have the Ship Shop in Annapolis that carried a smattering of their stuff but it, like most game shops, is long gone. Sigh...

 

Healey



#4 Phil Callcott

Phil Callcott

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 74 posts

Posted 30 October 2017 - 01:30 PM

Attached File  DSCN0312.JPG   174.72KB   0 downloads

 

Attached File  DSCN0311.JPG   159.61KB   0 downloads

 

Nice AAR, thank you.

 

Regards, Phil



#5 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 744 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 31 October 2017 - 07:16 AM

Nice Phil! The Regia Marina never looked better.

 

What are these? 1/1200's? 1/2400's? Based AnA's? Regardless...very sharp!

 

Healey



#6 Phil Callcott

Phil Callcott

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 74 posts

Posted 31 October 2017 - 08:47 AM

Thank you Healey,

 

The ships are mainly 1:3000 Davco with some 1:3000 Navwar thrown in, both manufactures are based in the UK.

 

The bases with the ensign and ship's names were drawn up in Microsoft Excel before being printed en bloc onto paper and pasted in sheets onto 20 thou plastic card before being separated with a sharp craft knife.

 

Here's a photo of the opposition:-

 

Attached File  DSCN0318.JPG   215.12KB   1 downloads

 

The detail on the carrier's flight deck was a top down view copied from the internet, scaled to 1:3000 and pasted onto the miniature.

 

Regards, Phil



#7 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 744 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 31 January 2018 - 04:22 PM

You know, Phil, sometimes I lament not having gone with 1/3000 rather than 1/2400 for WWII miniatures. At the time I started all this some forty years ago 1/3000 was tough to find (not that 1/2400 was easy). I was fortunate to have The Ship Shop in Annapolis MD with their vast inventory of Superior product at hand, and their gear was 1/1200 and 1/2400. GHQ and CinC eventually came around and the lines started filling out a bit.

 

I have always had heartburn over the 'look' of the models and their place in the games. This has recently driven me to 1/6000 for the WWI fleets, which on the face of it seems counter-intuitive (tiny ships on thick-cut bases does nothing for the 'look'). But when cruisers routinely engaged at ranges of up to 18,000 yards (22-1/2 feet at 1/2400 scale), tangling on a ping-pong table at such a scale can 'look' silly. Not that 1/3000 significantly narrows that variance, lol, but every bit helps.

 

In college I recall a few games using 1/700 scale models. We used the floor of a gym to play.at scale ranges. The 'look' was pitiful, your battle-line sailing serenely over the foul-line in pursuit of a truly distant opponent. One cool thing was we actually used binoculars to observe and identify the opposition (which could be improved by the use of float-planes). One got a true appreciation for the distances at which these battles were fought.  

 

Anyway, a few random thoughts this cold winter day. Your stuff looks brilliant, mate...thanks for sharing.

 

I'll be starting therapy in the spring, lol...

 

Healey



#8 Phil Callcott

Phil Callcott

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 74 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 07:17 PM

Hi Healy,

 

It's good to hear from you again..

 

40 years? We have that in common, this is our club's webpage:-

 

http://stokewargames.../p/gallery.html

 

I've been very lucky to do my gaming there over the years.

 

A couple of photos that show what Operation Cerberus (The Channel Dash) may have looked like had Bismarck made it back to Brest, plus another from our recent attempt at the battle of the Barents Sea:-

 

Regards, Phil

Attached Files



#9 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 744 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 01 February 2018 - 08:10 PM

Too funny, Phil...just got off the phone today with a friend in Norwich trying to diagnose a problem with his Morris Minor, then I see this. I guess I need to pay closer attention.

 

Envious of your club(s)...not much of that happening over here, at least not in my area (or I'm just sorrowfully unaware). Have a few friends that occasionally convene for a run-through, but not too often. Finding time in this modern world is a bit of a challenge for many, given the number of distractions.

 

Thanks for the link and the pics...we'll keep an eye on what's happening. I think we're going to have a go at River Plate next, historical and then maybe juice it up a bit. Just finished reading Bennett's 1972 book...it's got me to thinking...

 

Healey

 

 



#10 Phil Callcott

Phil Callcott

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 74 posts

Posted 02 February 2018 - 07:34 PM

Hi,

 

We've done the River Plate a few times, current score is two victories to one in favour of the Royal Navy.

 

Modesty forbids me from mentioning who it was that achieved the one Kriegsmarine victory...:-)

 

In the game that she won Graf Spee immediately turned away nearly 180 degrees from the RN and ran for it while firing with her main turrets trained fully aft to port at HMS Exeter and engaging HMS Ajax with her secondaries.

 

A few hull hits caused Exeter to slow and fall out of effective range. Spee then switched main guns to Ajax and secondaries to Achilles as they raced in trying to close into effective range.

 

Both took slowing hull hits while Spee danced away, zig-zagging to keep the range long, the British scored hits but could not penetrate anything important leaving an intact Spee free to pound each in turn to scrap. A German victory.

 

 

Both British victories arose because Spee allowed the two light cruisers travelling at full speed to get too close, once they got within "rapid fire" distance they simply shredded their target.

 

Exeter took heavy damage in both games but diverted Spee long enough for her consorts to get in close, then it was game over...

 

We used this map from Wikipedia to set up the starting positions and penalised the RN by not allowing any increase in speed for three moves while they bought their steam turbines up to full power.

 

https://upload.wikim..._battle_map.jpg

 

Spee's diesels of course went straight online.

 

Regards, Phil






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users