WW2 Weapons Platforms: What accomplished the most with the least?

[grumbler]

They were remarkable in that they had a very short expected life.

Also that almost half of them developed stress fractures during their life.

Ironic that the Hog Islanders (the WW1 equivelents of the Liberty ships) actually out-performed their WW2 counterparts in almost every way.

[Ed Anger]

I like motor torpedo boats.

[Neil]

I like motor torpedo boats.

You're wrong to feel that way.  People who idolize JFK are freaks.

[Ed Anger]

I like motor torpedo boats.

You're wrong to feel that way.  People who idolize JFK are freaks.

Not JFK, the skirmishing in the channel between the MTB's and the S-boats was always interesting to me.

Johnny boy is an overrated dickhead.

[Habsburg]

Some of the pictures of Italian interceptors in HOI2 lead me to think they may have been pretty. 

[dps]

Oh yeah, Liberty ships were a huge factor! They certainly could do a lot with the least - very cheaply and quickly built. Shipyards had contests on building them in record time. A few days or so in many cases. Used pre-fab parts. Astonished the allies with the speed of building and how important a factor it was to obtain all that shipping space, let alone the axis who could only look on in disappointment. Those huge numbers of ships meant that much more war material getting to the fronts.

Disagree that Liberty ships were ships with "the least."  They were not cheap (in fact, they were more expensive on a tonnage basis than standard ships) and their sole real edge was that they could be made quickly.  Other than that, they were just slow, medium-sized freighters remarkable for numbers more than capabilities.

Also kind of a stretch to call them "weapons platforms.

[Razgovory]

Oh yeah, Liberty ships were a huge factor! They certainly could do a lot with the least - very cheaply and quickly built. Shipyards had contests on building them in record time. A few days or so in many cases. Used pre-fab parts. Astonished the allies with the speed of building and how important a factor it was to obtain all that shipping space, let alone the axis who could only look on in disappointment. Those huge numbers of ships meant that much more war material getting to the fronts.

Disagree that Liberty ships were ships with "the least."  They were not cheap (in fact, they were more expensive on a tonnage basis than standard ships) and their sole real edge was that they could be made quickly.  Other than that, they were just slow, medium-sized freighters remarkable for numbers more than capabilities.

Also kind of a stretch to call them "weapons platforms.

They had platforms.  They carried weapons.

[jimmy olsen]

Oh yeah, Liberty ships were a huge factor! They certainly could do a lot with the least - very cheaply and quickly built. Shipyards had contests on building them in record time. A few days or so in many cases. Used pre-fab parts. Astonished the allies with the speed of building and how important a factor it was to obtain all that shipping space, let alone the axis who could only look on in disappointment. Those huge numbers of ships meant that much more war material getting to the fronts.

Disagree that Liberty ships were ships with "the least."  They were not cheap (in fact, they were more expensive on a tonnage basis than standard ships) and their sole real edge was that they could be made quickly.  Other than that, they were just slow, medium-sized freighters remarkable for numbers more than capabilities.

Also kind of a stretch to call them "weapons platforms.

They had platforms.  They carried weapons.

[Viking]

Oh yeah, Liberty ships were a huge factor! They certainly could do a lot with the least - very cheaply and quickly built. Shipyards had contests on building them in record time. A few days or so in many cases. Used pre-fab parts. Astonished the allies with the speed of building and how important a factor it was to obtain all that shipping space, let alone the axis who could only look on in disappointment. Those huge numbers of ships meant that much more war material getting to the fronts.

Disagree that Liberty ships were ships with "the least."  They were not cheap (in fact, they were more expensive on a tonnage basis than standard ships) and their sole real edge was that they could be made quickly.  Other than that, they were just slow, medium-sized freighters remarkable for numbers more than capabilities.

Also kind of a stretch to call them "weapons platforms.

They had platforms called decks and cargo holds and on those platforms there were weapons... lots of weapons....

Think of the liberty ship as part of every weapons system. To drop a bomb on berlin you need to transport the bomb first to the airfield.

[Razgovory]

Destroyers were used for that.

[DisturbedPervert]

I like motor torpedo boats.

[KRonn]

Oh yeah, Liberty ships were a huge factor! They certainly could do a lot with the least - very cheaply and quickly built. Shipyards had contests on building them in record time. A few days or so in many cases. Used pre-fab parts. Astonished the allies with the speed of building and how important a factor it was to obtain all that shipping space, let alone the axis who could only look on in disappointment. Those huge numbers of ships meant that much more war material getting to the fronts.

Disagree that Liberty ships were ships with "the least."  They were not cheap (in fact, they were more expensive on a tonnage basis than standard ships) and their sole real edge was that they could be made quickly.  Other than that, they were just slow, medium-sized freighters remarkable for numbers more than capabilities.

Had the Victory design been adopted instead (as it later was), then maybe an argument could be made.  As it was, I think the LST design was more important among the "less capable" ship designs than was the Liberty ship (and would note for our Anglophiles that both were British conceptions).

Good points. I was thinking about the costs too, the prefab parts, and wondering if they were more expensive to build. Apparently they were, so weren't all that cheap as I said. But getting the ships needed was probably more important than the costs at the time. I can't disagree that it might have been better to build Victory ships sooner.

And I think the thing was that as unremarkable as the Liberty ships were, the sheer numbers allowed the allies to keep up the wartime shipping needs. And that was the big factor in keeping the military forces and civilian needs supplied. Especially after U-Boats had sunk so much tonnage earlier in the war.

The ships weren't really built to last, though a few are running today, or as war memorials. I think one of those memorials still goes on cruises for visitors.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

The ships weren't really built to last, though a few are running today, or as war memorials. I think one of those memorials still goes on cruises for visitors.

Its in Baltimore, and if I was ever in the area with $140 I didn't need I'd probably go on it.

http://www.liberty-ship.com/

[KRonn]

The ships weren't really built to last, though a few are running today, or as war memorials. I think one of those memorials still goes on cruises for visitors.

Its in Baltimore, and if I was ever in the area with $140 I didn't need I'd probably go on it.

http://www.liberty-ship.com/

[Viking]

The ships weren't really built to last, though a few are running today, or as war memorials. I think one of those memorials still goes on cruises for visitors.

Its in Baltimore, and if I was ever in the area with $140 I didn't need I'd probably go on it.

http://www.liberty-ship.com/

OK, now there is one reason to go to Baltimore.