February 16, 2016
As always, CTX and FDM can't play until I take them off the leash. Everybody else, remember the rules: no image searching, no google, nuthin' like that. Just good ol' detective work. You get one guess, so make it count. The winner (as declared by me, and my decision is final) will get a post of their very own about anything they want (no pr0n, politics or religion, however) within reason.
So what are you waitin' for? Get t' guessin'!
UPDATE: Brickmuppet wins with his text message to the Duckphone late this afternoon. A post on this ship (at which point, the name will be revealed!) will be up later tonight. If anybody names the ship before then, I'll be royally peeved, so please don't.
So, starting off, I have no idea and while ex-military, I am not a former naval person. Let's see if we can logic our way into something.
1. It has military lines, so it's not a civilian conversion. It didn't used to be a Liberty Ship or something.
2. Not a destroyer -- too fat.
3. Not an antiaircraft cruiser -- not enough guns.
4. Not an oiler -- too many guns.
5. Peering closely at the rigging, I see lots of support lines (cables? hawsers? wires? sailors always gotta be different). Maybe supports for HF antennae. Also a number of smaller antenna-like squares and spikes. Maybe communications support of some kind.
6. Big picture windows up front, suitable for admirals/generals to gather behind in wet weather. A number of protrusions that might be gun tubs, or that might be viewing balconies for when it's sunny.
Conclusion: amphibious assault command ship, class unknown
Posted by: Found On Web at February 16, 2016 05:29 AM (5AEjT)
Posted by: Wonderduck at February 16, 2016 08:16 AM (KiM/Y)
I don't have any idea what ship it is, but there are a lot of very curious things about it. The guns, for instance: those are 3" guns, not even 5's, which means about all they're good for is antiaircraft fire.
And there are a ridiculous number of places for lookouts on the superstructure. I'd wonder if this was a purpose-built picket ship, except that no one has ever done that to my knowledge.
Just based on the quality of the photo I think this is from the 1950's, and I think FoW is right: amphibious assault command ship.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 16, 2016 01:42 PM (+rSRq)
Posted by: AlanL at February 16, 2016 02:08 PM (WHgmW)
You picked a great one. I actually laughed a bit when I saw it (Which given how things have been recently, was a relief.).
Posted by: cxt217 at February 16, 2016 03:42 PM (wdX8B)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 16, 2016 05:19 PM (+rSRq)
Not sure where you're seeing dazzle camo, unless it's just the interplay of light and shadow.
Also, though I can understand why you'd think they're 3" guns, they are in fact 5"ers, they just look teeny tiny on that biiiig ship.
Posted by: flatdarkmars at February 16, 2016 06:09 PM (cXPa7)
Which is good, since FDM seemed to enjoy dropping hints. Naughty.
Posted by: Wonderduck at February 16, 2016 06:32 PM (KiM/Y)
So TELL US already!
FDM look at the side just below the bank of lights, there's a dark patch. That's not the only dazzle but it's the easiest to spot.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 16, 2016 07:01 PM (+rSRq)
Duck, my bad for hint-dropping. It's just been so long since we had a mystery ship that I couldn't control myself...
Posted by: flatdarkmars at February 16, 2016 07:09 PM (cXPa7)
Posted by: cxt217 at February 16, 2016 07:21 PM (SF1+q)
Posted by: Ben at February 16, 2016 08:35 PM (DRaH+)
Posted by: flatdarkmars at February 16, 2016 08:51 PM (cXPa7)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 16, 2016 08:58 PM (+rSRq)
I know what this ship is. I'm going to drop two hints.
First, she has an awful number of 5-inch guns, doesn't she? I mean, if someone welded a Fletcher and a Gearing onto a lighthouse ship, you might end up with this. Lots of lookout points, 5-inch single and double mounts everywhere, and all on a real slow hull.
Second, when she was commissioned, her armament was actually much heavier than it is in this picture.
Posted by: asdfsdf at February 16, 2016 09:17 PM (KuYJd)
And risk royally peeving our host? (As per the update above). I think I'm on probation already.
Posted by: flatdarkmars at February 16, 2016 09:45 PM (cXPa7)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 16, 2016 10:03 PM (+rSRq)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 16, 2016 10:09 PM (+rSRq)
Posted by: cxt217 at February 16, 2016 10:15 PM (SF1+q)
48 queries taking 0.1431 seconds, 173 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.