quote:

Tin Can is a nickname for a destroyer...lightly armored, if at all, and inexpensive to build. Anti-sub warfare requires A LOT of assets to saturate a search area and the ability to box-in a contact. Destroyers & destroyer escorts fit the bill given their low overall costs, small maneuverable size and enough endurance to outlast a sub's batteries.

You know, I wondered about that in the movie. If I remember the only other destroyer was the Eagle who took some extensive damage towards the end of the film. I would have normally guessed that the escort destroyers would have larger numbers. I may have missed something in the film like them having a shortage of available assets.

quote:

Originally posted by just1tym:

quote:

Tin Can is a nickname for a destroyer...lightly armored, if at all, and inexpensive to build. Anti-sub warfare requires A LOT of assets to saturate a search area and the ability to box-in a contact. Destroyers & destroyer escorts fit the bill given their low overall costs, small maneuverable size and enough endurance to outlast a sub's batteries.

You know, I wondered about that in the movie. If I remember the only other destroyer was the Eagle who took some extensive damage towards the end of the film. I would have normally guessed that the escort destroyers would have larger numbers. I may have missed something in the film like them having a shortage of available assets.

I haven't seen the movie yet, but destroyers were CONSTANTLY in short supply throughout the war. Besides anti-submarine/convoy use, they were vital to protecting fleet units. A battleship or aircraft carrier is useless if it gets torpedoed by an enemy submarine, and destroyers also played an important role in fleet engagements (read about Taffey 3 at the Battle off Samar, where 2-3 destroyers and a Destroyer Escort (smaller, less capable ships optimized for anti-submarine duty) held off an entire Japanese surface fleet).

In the 1942-43 time frame, a convoy might have 2-3 destroyers and 4-5 sloops/frigates/trawlers/Destroyer Escorts, if it was 'well-protected.' Often, all an escort ship could do was drive a submarine under water, where it was harmless so long as it was not in the convoy's path (as somebody else indicated, WWII subs were surface ships that spent short times under water, at very slow speeds). Often, an escort could not 'prosecute' a U-boat, meaning it could not launch a sustained attack. Once it drove a sub down, it might make one or two passes, dropping depth charges, but then it would have to return to the convoy, which was now vulnerable due to the loss of even a single escort vessel.

The U-boats had the advantage of numbers in 1942, and could often overwhelm a convoy's defenses. By mid 1943 (May, specifically), the tide turned. The 'Black Hole' air coverage gap was closed allowing near-constant daylight air cover over all convoys, escort vessels were more plentiful and equipped with better weapons and equipment (Squid/Hedgehog launchers, newer better radar, direction-finding gear), escort carriers provided even more air cover. Dedicated hunter/killer groups were allocated to stick with an prosecute known subs, allowing the escorts to continue with the convoy while they killed the U-boat (this could hours, but it was far more effective). Tankers were provided to refuel the notoriously short-ranged escorts (some escorts had to withdraw from convoy duty to head towards Greenland/Iceland to refuel earlier in the war, further reducing the convoy's protective cover). Dedicated rescue ships were available to rescue survivors, which meant escorts needn't stop to pick up merchant crews (this made them vulnerable to attack themselves, and further reduced the convoy's protection).

quote:

read about Taffey 3 at the Battle off Samar, where 2-3 destroyers and a Destroyer Escort (smaller, less capable ships optimized for anti-submarine duty) held off an entire Japanese surface fleet).

Hound Dog, I did some reading doing an internet search and Wikipedia and there is so much information of these battles, to include 3 Youtube videos on the battle. I've never even heard about these battles and actually surprised that they haven't did any full length movie on it yet. Or maybe they have and I just missed it. From the reading I did do there was so much going on in various stages of the battles. Thanks for pointing to this, definitely worth more reading into.

I found this excerpt from Wikipedia about the Japanese fleet shooting different color dyes on their rounds to differentiate between them of interest...
"Each Japanese battleship used a different color of dye marker so they could spot their own shells. Lacking the Americans' gunnery radars and Ford Mark I Fire Control Computer, which provided co-ordinated automatic firing solutions as long as the gun director was pointed at the target, Japanese fire control relied on two mechanical calculators (one for ballistics and one for own and target course and speed) fed by optical range finders aided by color-coded dye loads in each shell. Only the Type 1 AP projectiles of the battleships carried dye loads: Nagato used a brilliant pink, Haruna used a greenish yellow variously described as green or yellow by the Americans, and Kongo used a blood red dye which could appear red, purple, or even blue in some circumstances. Only Yamato which had relatively primitive fire control radar, used no dye loads, so her shell splashes appeared white."

We watched this minutes after I was notified it was available. While there may have been certain technical issues (I'm unaware of what they are), I too REALLY enjoyed this. While portraying the Capt as a man of faith, it never was in a mocking way. It also never preached or tried to sell you on America being bad...

Whats interesting is my wife and I have been watching a bunch of 80s and 90s action flicks. In several ways, they're awful, but we're really enjoying them too. We finally realized part of what makes them watchable is what made Greyhound enjoyable. No SJW themes, no preaching, etc.

Watched it last night and thought if was great. I liked how taut and action packed it was... and of course, it just told a war story instead of trying to make any sort of statement. Kinda like Danger Close.

CGI, I thought was pretty good. Ships knifing through the ocean were beautiful and I loved the pound of the big guns. The Naval way of speaking is fun to listen to, as well. It has a poetic cadence to it.

Where/how is this movie available? Didn't see it on Netflix DVD rental.

quote:

Originally posted by PHPaul:
Where/how is this movie available? Didn't see it on Netflix DVD rental.

Exclusively on Apple TV+ right now. You can sign up for a free week and then cancel. It's only $4.99 per month after so no big deal if you forget to cancel for a month but I haven't seen much other content that I'm terribly excited about on there, either.

quote:

Originally posted by YellowJacket:

quote:

Originally posted by PHPaul:
Where/how is this movie available? Didn't see it on Netflix DVD rental.

Exclusively on Apple TV+ right now. You can sign up for a free week and then cancel. It's only $4.99 per month after so no big deal if you forget to cancel for a month but I haven't seen much other content that I'm terribly excited about on there, either.

Ah. Thanks.

Well, poop. My TV isn't compatible and the fine folks at Apple won't let me log in on my Windows computer.

Guess I'll have to wait for it to come out on DVD.

quote:

Originally posted by just1tym:

quote:

read about Taffey 3 at the Battle off Samar, where 2-3 destroyers and a Destroyer Escort (smaller, less capable ships optimized for anti-submarine duty) held off an entire Japanese surface fleet).

Hound Dog, I did some reading doing an internet search and Wikipedia and there is so much information of these battles, to include 3 Youtube videos on the battle. I've never even heard about these battles and actually surprised that they haven't did any full length movie on it yet. Or maybe they have and I just missed it. From the reading I did do there was so much going on in various stages of the battles. Thanks for pointing to this, definitely worth more reading into.

If you really want to dig into this subject, I'd suggest picking up two books:
The Last Stand of Tin Can Sailors
Neptune's Inferno
Both written by James Hornfincher, who's books, hopefully Hanks or, another screenwriter has taken an interest, as I find the Navy stories of the Pacific Theater much more compelling and complete than the Atlantic. Both were important however, the Atlantic gets a heavy amount of coverage while the Pacific tends to get shorted.

Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors is an excellent book.

Signed up to watch this and the Beastie Boys documentary. Will cancel today as I don't see anything else I want to watch on their service. Before my take on the movie I will say the picture quality was excellent but the soundtrack sucked. That's streaming for ya though. Had to crank my AVR way up (compared to a disc, either blu-ray or 4k) and even then limited range. Even LFE from large gun shots should have been rattling the room. Nope, but that's streaming audio, it's always terrible.

The movie was great. I also like how it was done all matter of fact and no bullshit. CGI was decent and Hanks was good as ever. Grey Wolf antagonizing on the radio was pissing me off so it was glorious to see it get strafed and blown the fuck up. I also thought his faith was extremely well done. Nice to see a decent NEW film during this time. New films have come to a baby's crawl and it sucks.

I listened to Dan Carline's Hard Core History Podcast with Tom Hanks today. Well worth an hour of my time.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair: If you really want to dig into this subject, I'd suggest picking up two books:
The Last Stand of Tin Can Sailors
Neptune's Inferno
Both written by James Hornfincher, who's books, hopefully Hanks or, another screenwriter has taken an interest, as I find the Navy stories of the Pacific Theater much more compelling and complete than the Atlantic. Both were important however, the Atlantic gets a heavy amount of coverage while the Pacific tends to get shorted.

Thank you Cosair, bookmarked for future purchases. Currently have a few hundred pages left from my current read, and will check into these after!

quote:

Originally posted by just1tym:

quote:

Tin Can is a nickname for a destroyer...lightly armored, if at all, and inexpensive to build. Anti-sub warfare requires A LOT of assets to saturate a search area and the ability to box-in a contact. Destroyers & destroyer escorts fit the bill given their low overall costs, small maneuverable size and enough endurance to outlast a sub's batteries.

You know, I wondered about that in the movie. If I remember the only other destroyer was the Eagle who took some extensive damage towards the end of the film. I would have normally guessed that the escort destroyers would have larger numbers. I may have missed something in the film like them having a shortage of available assets.

Three Destroyers, Two Brit, The Greyhound and a Royal Canadian Navy Flower Class Corvette. Early war I read of having a single Destroyer for escort in a convoy. One of the main reasons the Brits were willing to take 40 WW1 Flush deck Destroyers to augment the fleet. There were never enough ASW Platforms to go around.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Thank you for the reply and correction! Doing some further web searches I now see that those names were just the codenames, USS Keeling/Greyhound, HMS James/Harry, and the Polish destroyer ORP Victor/Eagle. That is if in fact this information is correct.

***EDITED*** I watched it once again, and this time was much more exciting and interesting. This time around I caught the Canadian Flower Class Corvette codename Dicky. What a battle!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: just1tym,

I finished watching Greyhound today.
I found it gripping, very well done, and was particularly struck by the reverence with which the subject, the characters, the deaths of the sailors, and the deep faith of Captain Krause were treated.

If Apple is going to deliver movies like that, they can definitely count on me to watch.

By the way I started watching on my computer, having failed to get my old Apple TV module set up properly. So I ordered the new Apple TV 4K setup, and it is fantastic! Setup almost automatic—didn’t have to enter my long Wi-Fi password with the no-keyboard remote; the remote has a built-in trackpad which makes tracking the cursor much easier (but it’s very sensitive).

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
I finished watching Greyhound today.
I found it gripping, very well done, and was particularly struck by the reverence with which the subject, the characters, the deaths of the sailors, and the deep faith of Captain Krause were treated.

If Apple is going to deliver movies like that, they can definitely count on me to watch.

It was originally supposed to have been released in-theater by Sony mid-June. With theater biz on the rocks, Apple bought the distribution rights from Sony and launched it on their platform.

The script and screen writing is very well considered, clean, to the point, conveys enough information without exposition or, the obvious. Hanks and his team are very familiar with combat stories, at least via the WWII lens, combine that with deft story writing and camera work makes for some impactful shows.

Excellent movie


A very refreshing change to the garbage coming from hollywood

I watched it for the second time last night. Even having seen it just a few weeks ago, it was a great watch and still incredibly tight viewing experience. That 90 minutes goes by fast!