Centurion_1711

All this symphogear, let's get on topic with some Haifuri, eh? Bump

And here I was thinking that was a strange pronunciation of "overrider" or something to that effect... But nice to learn something new anyway.

While we are on the topic of Arpeggio...

I haven't watched ARP for a while. Kirishima was always the more expressive out of her and Haruna, but not screamy if memory serves. Then as a teddy bear (spoiler, but I guess most will have seem it by now) she wasn't all squealing and such. I don't know, maybe WG thought that it was better that she was hysterical to portray the excitement of the game, or something. On a side note...

Oh, yeah, perhaps I could have worded it better. They would be towed by the ship, but fins on the paravanes would be set so they pulled outwards, away from the ship towing them. This would allow them to cover a wider area and like you say, clear a path that friendly ships could navigate. They were also used as an anti-submarine weapon, by loading the paravane up with explosives. Once again they would be towed, the paravane would ride at a deeper depth and behind the destroyer. If it struck the sub, it would explode and result in a very bad day for those submariners. So the paravanes you see on destroyers could be for either purpose. The ones on larger ships would more likely be for minesweeping to protect the ship.

Yeah, like ColonelPete said, they are paravanes. Used for minesweeping, they would be towed behind a ship, and the cables would then hopefully cut the tethers on any mines, causing them to float to the surface. There they could be destroyed with gunfire. I guess you mean towed array sonar? If I recall correctly, that stuff came much later, during the cold war.

Quoting from that Wikipedia article: "On 24 May 1939 the Fleet Air Arm was returned to Admiralty control[7] under the "Inskip Award" (named after the Minister for Co-ordination of Defence overseeing the British re-armament programme) and renamed the Air Branch of the Royal Navy. At the onset of the Second World War, the Fleet Air Arm consisted of 20 squadrons with only 232 aircraft. By the end of the war the strength of the Fleet Air Arm was 59 aircraft carriers, 3,700 aircraft, 72,000 officers and men and 56 Naval air stations." You are right, The FAA was under RAF control prior to WWII. This led to it being a bit under-funded and some, let's say questionable decisions were made. However, it was returned back to RN command on the eve of WWII, where it has remained ever since. A little out of our scope here, but this led to the friction between FAA and RAf over carriers and hence the creation of "through deck cruisers". But this is cold war stuff, not the time period we are concerned with. I guess if the collection refers to the 1930's, then yes it theoretically could be called the RAF. But the Wyvern in the collection is a post war design, when teh FAA was firmly RN. Either way, my point still stands. Call it the British Fleet Air Arm rather than RAF. It matters not who was in control, it was called the FAA anyway. So you are a condescending "adult" lacking basic manners. At least try offering some information to correct me. Believe it or not, I am actually willing to learn, and if I had got anything wrong, I'd be happy to have a proper discussion about it, I find it really interesting. How's that for a millenial, eh?

Hello everyone. I was flicking through the various collections this morning to look at all the stuff I had, when I came a cross the new collection added this update. I must say I like the look of it, as naval aviation and aircraft carriers really interest me (in real life and history, at least). Some of these items look really good, I can't wait to complete this collection! However, refer to the screenshot above. Spotted what's wrong yet? Yep, "British Royal Air Force". Eh? Weren't we just saying that the collection was about Naval Aviation, like the title says? This could do with being changed WG, if you wouldn't mind. The RAF and Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm are most certainly not the same thing. Also, these planes in the collection were never operated by the RAF to the best of my knowledge. And while RAF pilots may have served in the FAA during the war, this did not make them the same organisation. In fact, there is a rivalry between the FAA and RAF, so it is probably best to not confuse them like this. Please correct this so the collection reflects the history you are trying to show. Thanks!

A little more on the guns by the way. Furious' guns can penetrate 457mm of armour at about 14km. Yamato by comparison can penetrate in the range of 500mm at 20km apparently. (source: NavWeaps) Once again, the guns are surprisingly good, but not top tier. Disclaimers: WG will likely apply their own formula that would adjust the penetration accordingly. These figures don't state striking velocities and what armour they were fired at. I suspect Furious' gun was tested against inferior armour to Yamato, for example. Also, I need to try and find proper penetration tables with a range of, er, ranges so the two guns could be properly compared Still, this suggests that these guns will be very strong. If given a standard fuse time they would laugh at any armour in their BR. However, I bet they would suffer from overpens on some cruisers (looking at ships like Emile Bertin, those Italian ones and so forth). It may be worth using the short fuse if it proved effective against these targets. However, the big guns and high speed of Furious lend it to be a hit and runner on all the slow BB's at that tier. Only the Kongou's would be an issue in terms of mobility. It all depends on how people would want this ship to play out. BB balancer, or cruiser crusher?

Fun fact, these 18-inchers fire a heavier shell than Yamato's 18.1" guns. Furious' 18"/40 guns fire a 1506kg shell, while Yamato fires a 1460kg AP shell (HE is lighter). So expect some mean max damage per shell. However, these are by no means a top tier naval gun, at all. The muzzle velocity of the 18"/40 was rather underwhelming on standard charges, at 683m/s. They did up the muzzle velocity using a super charge, to a more acceptable 738m/s. As muzzle velocity is a critical part of penetration as well as part of the shell damage calcs that WG use, this gun won't be so over the top. Not to mention that the shells aren't as pointed as Yamato's, so they are likely to have worse drag figures. I don't see why everybody objects to this ship as a premium, I really don't. If it is crap like most of you suspect, simply don't pay up. Enjoy citadelling this thing from any range in your US heavy cruisers! If it turns out okay, happy days, a truly unique ship has found a place in WoWs. I can't imagine the final release of this ship would ever be OP, it doesn't have the tools (gimmicks allowing) to be OP. The only people that would complain about Furious BC are likely the same people that complain about most "OP" ships on the forums. They eat a citadel in their favourite BB, see it was a cruiser with derp guns, cry OP because nothing should citadel a BB. Also ignoring the fact the Furious is very much exposed to being obliterated in one salvo by said BB. I guess I would like to see it, hell I would even buy it for a laugh!

Sounds interesting, why not? probably would be a T7, and could offer a fun alternative to Hipper or Prinz Eugen

Have some Jervis:

@Aotearas, Great choice! Here, have some more, they are a great band:

Shudders at the thought of it But yeah, I wish I was into Haifuri at the time the collab was on, I should've bought her. Would do in a heartbeat now.