SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Ship Trivia Quiz

452449 views
3119 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Moorefield, WV
Posted by billydelawder on Tuesday, May 6, 2008 11:09 PM
Close enough. Repulse, you have the floor fir the next question
  • Member since
    May 2008
Posted by Repulse36 on Wednesday, May 7, 2008 12:11 PM

In 1942, the epic Battle of Midway was fought in the Pacific between Japanese and United States forces.

True or false: There is actually no Midway Island at that location.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Seattle, WA
Ship Trivia
Posted by Surface_Line on Wednesday, May 7, 2008 12:38 PM

False, strictly.  Midway Atoll is composed primarily of Sand Island and Eastern Island.  There is no particular chunk of land named Midway Island.

Rick 

  • Member since
    May 2008
Posted by Repulse36 on Wednesday, May 7, 2008 5:15 PM

Which makes the answer TRUE--there is no actual Midway Island. Please re-read my question.

However, your explanation outweighs your mistaken entry of "False, strictly", so despite your slip, you get it right (but please don't attempt this in a court of law!Smile,Wink, & Grin [swg])

It has long been a pet peeve of mine to see or hear the term "Midway Island" being used in describing the atoll, in text and film accounts of the battle. 

Okay Rick, good job! I guess it's your question next, I'm tapped-out for awhile!

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
Posted by subfixer on Monday, May 12, 2008 3:37 PM
Hey! Rick!  It's your turn for a question!!

I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Newnan, Ga
Posted by bostonbruins34 on Monday, May 12, 2008 6:40 PM
This thread is moving along about the same pace as a 3 masted ship with no sails...Whistling [:-^]
The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, "I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it." Group Build
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Seattle, WA
Posted by Surface_Line on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 12:58 AM

Really sorry, folks.  I've been cursed with trivia block.  And this may be worse than nothing.

What U.S. carrier since WWII was fitted with ASW sonar?  (not just fitted with spaces for sonar, but actually fitted with the equipment and manned with the Sonar Technicians?) 

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
Posted by subfixer on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 5:24 AM
I believe it was the USS America (CV-66), but it was removed in the early eighties. She also had a stern anchor, which was unique, and one bow anchor instead of two.

I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Seattle, WA
Posted by Surface_Line on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 10:45 AM

true - it was America - thus the bow anchor.  (I didn't know about the stern anchor and that wouldn't have been related to the sonar outfit.  fascinating.)

over to you, finally.  I must restrain myself from answering if I don't have a question prepared.

Rick 

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
Posted by subfixer on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 6:25 PM

Thanks Rick, but from what I understand, the America's stern anchor was indeed due to the sonar. She had to have two and as a second bow anchor would somehow interfere with the sonar dome, the second was placed at her stern.

Next question: What three Royal Navy ships had a US Navy sister that lived in the Chesapeake Bay throughout WWII?

I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
Posted by subfixer on Friday, May 16, 2008 6:06 AM
No nibbles? Anyone need a hint or a nudge? Or, just not interested?

I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Rowland Heights, California
Posted by Duke Maddog on Friday, May 16, 2008 11:16 AM

I'm interested. Very! I jusst have no clue. My searches have turned up nothing so far. I'm waiting and watching with bated breath. 

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
Posted by subfixer on Friday, May 16, 2008 11:46 AM
Well, we don't want any breath that has bait in it, so, here's a hint: they were CVEs.

I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Los Angeles
Posted by dostacos on Friday, May 16, 2008 1:09 PM

 subfixer wrote:
Well, we don't want any breath that has bait in it, so, here's a hint: they were CVEs.

  • (CVE-6) Altamaha became HMS Battler
  • (CVE-7) Barnes became HMS Attacker
  • (CVE-8) Block Island became HMS Hunter

  • (CVE-9) Bogue

 

Dan support your 2nd amendment rights to keep and arm bears!
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
Posted by subfixer on Friday, May 16, 2008 2:48 PM
Nope, sorry dostacos. The key in this one is that the US ship stayed in the Chesapeake Bay for the war. These ships were a different class of CVE.

I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Norfolk, UK
Posted by RickF on Friday, May 16, 2008 6:20 PM

USS Charger (CVE-30) had three  sister ships - HMS Avenger, HMS Biter and HMS Dasher, transferred to the RN under Lend-Lease. All were converted merchant ships .

Charger's area of operations throughout the war was Cheasapeake Bay as a training ship for pilots and ships' crews in carrier operations. She was converted back to a merchant ship after the war. Avenger and Dasher were both sunk. Biter was sold to France in 1945.

Rick

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
Posted by subfixer on Sunday, May 18, 2008 7:52 AM
Correct answer, Rick. You're up.

I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Norfolk, UK
Posted by RickF on Sunday, May 18, 2008 6:24 PM

OK, here's a really obscure one, which I hope will get you all guessing.

What connects Newcastle upon Tyne, Gibraltar, Malta and the Italian battleship Duilio (1876)?

Rick

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Los Angeles
Posted by dostacos on Sunday, May 18, 2008 7:30 PM
Gibraltar & Malta each had 2 very large {450 mm 100 ton guns} mounted to defend against the Battleship Duilio, the guns where manufactured in Newcastle upon Tyne by Lord Armstrong's company
Dan support your 2nd amendment rights to keep and arm bears!
  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Norfolk, UK
Posted by RickF on Monday, May 19, 2008 3:24 AM

Well done - but I thought it would take longer than an hour! I visited Fort Rinella on Malta last year, where the 100-ton Armstrong gun is preserved.

Over to you, dostacos

Rick

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Los Angeles
Posted by dostacos on Monday, May 19, 2008 3:39 PM
 RickF wrote:

Well done - but I thought it would take longer than an hour! I visited Fort Rinella on Malta last year, where the 100-ton Armstrong gun is preserved.

Over to you, dostacos

Rick

I am looking for a ship that started in the private sector {built in 1928}, transfered to the  Royal Navy, then back to the US NAVY and ended under another flag.

names of the ship.....

Dan support your 2nd amendment rights to keep and arm bears!
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Los Angeles
Posted by dostacos on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 12:23 AM
first hint, it started out hauling passengers and cargo
Dan support your 2nd amendment rights to keep and arm bears!
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Los Angeles
Posted by dostacos on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 11:20 PM

second hint. I was named after the President of my company and I carried passengers and freight on the Chesapeake Bay between Baltimore, Maryland and Norfolk, Virginia from 1928 until July 12, 1942

 

what are my NAMES 

Dan support your 2nd amendment rights to keep and arm bears!
  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Norfolk, UK
Posted by RickF on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 10:24 AM

Looks like nobody wants to play, Dan. Obviously no Paul Newman fans out there!

Rick

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:13 AM

Well, that one did it for me.  Originally S.S. President Warfield, named for the president of the line, S. Davies Warfield.  Acquired by the War Shipping Administration in 1942 and turned over to the British for use as a troop transport.  Tansferred back to the U.S. in 1944 and taken over by the Navy as the U.S.S. President Warfield.  Sold in 1946 by the WSA to the Potomac Shipwrecking Co., which was acting as an agent for the Jewish political group Haganah.  Carried Jewish refugees to Palestine under the name Exodus 1947.  (The ship in the movie "Exodus," with Paul Newman, looked nothing like the real thing - which retained the distinctive look of a Chesapeake Bay steamer till the end.)

Great question.  It'll take me a few days to come up with one; I don't want to suffer a reprise of the electronic vegetable-throwing I got (probably deservedly) after my U.S.S. Maine adventure. 

Or maybe I didn't answer the question completely.  The Wikipedia article in which I found all the above - it's titled "Exodus (ship)" - didn't mention a change of name when she went into British service.  I'm assuming she kept the name President Warfield, but maybe not.   

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Los Angeles
Posted by dostacos on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:58 AM
Correct, I did a lot of looking and could not find a new name. I suspect it stayed as SS President Warfield as it was not IN the Royal Navy, but moved by British Merchant marines then docked for the most part until returned to the US Navy and used during the operation Overlord
Dan support your 2nd amendment rights to keep and arm bears!
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Friday, May 23, 2008 1:31 AM

Ok, here goes.  Movie buffs may get this one right away, but I'm running out of ideas.

What's the connection between the commander-in-chief of the German High Seas Fleet during World War I and two identically-named cities in Oregon and Massachusetts?

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Carmel, CA
Posted by bondoman on Friday, May 23, 2008 2:03 AM

Well, I'll flat out admit that I slopped around on the net and found the following, which very well may be wrong.

The Heavy Cruiser USS Salem (CA-139) put in an appearance as the Admiral Graf Spee in the movie "The Battle of the River Plate" which I have not seen (1956, because I was born then) BUT of course will.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Seattle, WA
Posted by Surface_Line on Friday, May 23, 2008 2:21 AM
The low fruit picker in me wanted to shout that out too, but since I couldn't find any evidence that Admiral von Spee was between Tirpitz and Scheer as commander of the High Seas Fleet, I figured he had something more devious in mind.
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Friday, May 23, 2008 2:27 AM

Sheesh, I thought it would take a little longer than that!

The movie (which goes under two titles:  "The Battle of the River Plate" and "Pursuit of the Graf Spee") was on TCM cable a week or so ago; that's why it was on my mind.  It has a lot to recommend it.  The names of the ships that "played" the Graf Spee, Achilles, Exeter, and Ajax are listed in the opening credits; it's the only movie I've ever seen that does such a thing.  In general, the producers seem to have taken a great deal of trouble to make it as accurate as they could - subject to some pretty severe budgetary limitations.  Anthony Quayle plays Commodore Harwood, and a very young Christopher Lee (before he made a name for himself in horror movies) has an interesting role as a radio reporter in Montevidea.  If I remember right, one of the British merchant captains captured by the Graf Spee plays himself. 

It has one strange feature that I've never been able to figure out, in all the times I've watched it.  Captain Langsdorff, played by the distinguished British actor Peter Finch, is presented quite sympathetically.  But the story ends with the scuttling of the ship.  As I remember, the last shot shows Langsdorff standing on board a tugboat, looking pensively on as the Graf Spee burns.  There's no mention of the fact that he went back to his hotel room in Montevideo and shot himself.  I wonder why the moviemakers left that out.

Bondoman - you're up.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.