The largest and most powerful warships ever built

[abramsteve]

Agreed... the Yamato class had defective belt armor and their gunnery was appaling. Without the advent of radar range finding the Japanese were left in the dark. The Bismark's FuMO (FunkMessOrtungsgeräte) gunnery radar was revolutionary of battleships, at the time she was the deadliest warship afloat.

Love the name of their gunnery radar!!!

I would like to know peoples opinions on a Iowa (anyone of them) V Bismark or even Tirpitz showdown. My moneys still on the Iowa's, but Im biased. Love is blind!

As far as modern vessels are concerned I do love the AB's, I reckon they are the only modern destroyer with classic destroyer lines. Kirovs are an awesome idea, but I have my doubts as to how well she would fair in combat.

As far as carriers, Im gonna say the Enterprise. Nimitz class may be superior, but for the most part they have lame names. (Imagine naming a carrier after Trumman? He may have been insulted) Beisdes, is'nt she longer and faster?

 

[Big-E]

Love the name of their gunnery radar!!!

I would like to know peoples opinions on a Iowa (anyone of them) V Bismark or even Tirpitz showdown. My moneys still on the Iowa's, but Im biased. Love is blind!

Iowa's had more and bigger guns with increased range. The Bismark's steerage was always vunerable and her downfall. Iowa's being a later design had avanced radar range finding. Their armour was comperable with Bismark but Bismark having proven itself indestructable to several heavy hits should count for something in a comparison.

As far as modern vessels are concerned I do love the AB's, I reckon they are the only modern destroyer with classic destroyer lines. Kirovs are an awesome idea, but I have my doubts as to how well she would fair in combat.

Shipwrecker SSMs are very impressive offensive weapons but her defensive suite is only realiable for CIWS systems. It is her sheer number of systems that make it a viable defense. Her ability to shoot down low observable planes or sea-skimmers at range are almost non-existant.

As far as carriers, Im gonna say the Enterprise. Nimitz class may be superior, but for the most part they have lame names. (Imagine naming a carrier after Trumman? He may have been insulted) Beisdes, is'nt she longer and faster?

Enterprise is superior to Nimitz for two reasons... while she has the exact same loadout she has superior speed and survivability. Her eight nuclear reactors provide 4x the failsafes of the Nimitz plus superior propulsion generation. Her top speed is classified but she is more than capable of leaving her escorts in the dust.

 

[LancerMc]

I don't doubt that the Iowa's radar and fire control was superior. The Japanese had only recently began to use that technology and the Yamato's were in the few of the fleet that had such a capability. The reason the IJN didn't put much faith in radar, because they believed in the superior eye sight over Americans. Now that sounds stupid but that’s what many Japanese navy personnel believed. The Yamato was flawed in some ways because of the superiority complex they had over Americans. If the Japanese had believed they had worse eye sight then Americans, I am sure they would have jumped all over radar technology. Thus the Yamato would have been a more dangerous ship. It's strange how these little quirks of history can change things.

True the Yamato's had a lot of teething problem during shakedown but they were a completely new design. A new design more problems getting the bugs out. Where the Iowa's was really a more modern version of the South Dakota Class.

To the point about the Yamato's flawed armor. Little is actually known about the ships since nearly all documentation about the ships was destroyed by the Japanese at the end of the war. The U.S. didn't even learn the ships had 18.2 inch guns until the interrogation of IJN personnel. Could have the armor been flawed; Yes, but we will never really know because the records have been destroyed. Though looking at the amount of bombs and torpedoes required to sink each ship, I doubt there many flaws in their armor.

One criticism of the Yamato's is that they saw little action. The reason was because the IJN Admiralty was hoping to save them until the Great Fleet Battle which the IJN would soundly defeat the U.S. The Yamato's were looked upon by the Japanese as god like, and that they never could be sunk. So the IJN let the Yamato's see battle until the very end.

 

[Big-E]

To the point about the Yamato's flawed armor. Little is actually known about the ships since nearly all documentation about the ships was destroyed by the Japanese at the end of the war. The U.S. didn't even learn the ships had 18.2 inch guns until the interrogation of IJN personnel. Could have the armor been flawed; Yes, but we will never really know because the records have been destroyed. Though looking at the amount of bombs and torpedoes required to sink each ship, I doubt there many flaws in their armor.

Battle testing is the best documentation anyone needs. Considering 1 torpedo nearly crippled her, due to weak belt armor, it is pretty evident it was weak.

 

[LancerMc]

I think you just contradicted yourself. In previous thread you called the Bismark the most powerful ship afloat at that time. It was crippled by a torpedo to the rudder. Did it kill the ship; No, but it caused its future sinking. As in combat luck has a lot to with it.

The flaw could have come from repairs after the Battle Leyte Gulf. The Yamato was damaged from torpedo and bomb strikes during the battle. After the battle, Japan was on its last legs. USN sub's were starving the fleet of materials including steel. Repairs could have been subpar, also its important to understand where the Yamato was torpedoed. The torpedo hit the ship past the main guns on the bow, the armor belt was considerably less there, as with most battleships. Survivors account that the damage control teams were killed during a torpedo strike, so they were unable to seal the water tight doors. Water flooded throughout the whole ship, dooming it to sink.

When the Musahi was lost she had taken on over 30,000 tons of water to keep her from listing before she finally sunk. This tactic was common on many battleships during that period.

It was overwhelming fire power from aircraft that sunk both Yamato's.

 

[eckherl]

I think you just contradicted yourself. In previous thread you called the Bismark the most powerful ship afloat at that time. It was crippled by a torpedo to the rudder. Did it kill the ship; No, but it caused its future sinking. As in combat luck has a lot to with it.

The flaw could have come from repairs after the Battle Leyte Gulf. The Yamato was damaged from torpedo and bomb strikes during the battle. After the battle, Japan was on its last legs. USN sub's were starving the fleet of materials including steel. Repairs could have been subpar, also its important to understand where the Yamato was torpedoed. The torpedo hit the ship past the main guns on the bow, the armor belt was considerably less there, as with most battleships. Survivors account that the damage control teams were killed during a torpedo strike, so they were unable to seal the water tight doors. Water flooded throughout the whole ship, dooming it to sink.

When the Musahi was lost she had taken on over 30,000 tons of water to keep her from listing before she finally sunk. This tactic was common on many battleships during that period.

It was overwhelming fire power from aircraft that sunk both Yamato's.

In regards to the Bismark, hasn`t been proven that it wasn`t torpedos that sunk her, but instead it was the crew that scuddled her.

 

[LancerMc]

I was referring to the torpedo strike that froze the Bismark's rudders. While that hit did not sink the ship, it caused the ships sinking. When the rudder became damaged; the Bismark was heading northwest, this was towards the waiting British fleet that sunk her.

 

[Big-E]

I think you just contradicted yourself. In previous thread you called the Bismark the most powerful ship afloat at that time. It was crippled by a torpedo to the rudder. Did it kill the ship; No, but it caused its future sinking. As in combat luck has a lot to with it.

"Christmas day, 1943 the USS Skate hit the IJN Yamato with one Mark 14-3A torpedo on the starboard hull near turret No. 3 at 10-5N, 150-32E. A total failure of the main armor belt system occurs due to a flawed joint between the upper and lower side protection belts." This laid her up for 4 months.

She hadn't recieved ANY battle damage preceding this incident. The Bismark steerage problems don't make the Yamato any better in that department either... she had only ONE rudder! Add to that Bismark had taken many hits and still under steam. The entire armor belt of the Yamato was flawed due to flawed joints. The Japanese didn't use the superior construction techniques of the Germans.

 

[Big-E]

I was referring to the torpedo strike that froze the Bismark's rudders. While that hit did not sink the ship, it caused the ships sinking. When the rudder became damaged; the Bismark was heading northwest, this was towards the waiting British fleet that sunk her.

The only thing we can infer from the deaths of any of the mighty BBs is how much damage they could take. Out of the 4 BBs of both nations both Japanese ships were sunk by the Allies, only the Turpitz was sunk at the hand of the Allies on Germany's side, and that was due to Tallboys. The fact that the hull remained intact after three 20,000lb bombs should be a testimate to their construction.

 

[LancerMc]

Of the 4 major enemy battleships during WW2, the Bismark, Tirpitz, Yamato, and Musashi, 3 were essentially sunk because of hits on their bows or sterns. Since these sections were not heavily armored, when they were hit they caused enough damage that it would lead the ships to be essentially sitting ducks. Thus leading them all to get sunk.

The Musashi was hit in the bow during the battle. Her bow began to flood, slowing her, making her an easy target for attacking aircraft. She later capsized from bombs and torpedo strikes.

The Yamato in her finally engagement took hits both to her unarmored bow and stern. This caused her to flood and slow becoming an easier target for more air attacks thus leading to her explosion then sinking.

The Bismark was hit in the unarmored bow during the engagement with the Hood and PoW. Her fuel oil was contaminated and she was taking on water, thus slowing her and forcing the Bismark to run for France. She was then hit in her unarmored stern at her rudder gears by a torpedo, and forcing her to sail into the direction of the British fleet. There is some speculation that the Bismark was scuttled, though historians are still researching that answer. Even if the German hadn't tried to scuttle her, she still would have sunk from the continual fire from the British.

I don't doubt the Yamato took damage in an earlier event, but when it took 7 bombs and 10 torpedoes to sink her at the end of the war, I highly doubt the possible earlier problem with her armor belt was the cause of her sinking. The survivors of the Yamato say she took to many hits to her unarmored stern and bow to stay afloat, but a massive explosion took her down before that could happen.

In the end, 3 BB's were taken out because of hits to their unarmored sterns or bows. I don't doubt their armor belts became damaged or failed during those battles, but all of them were doomed because of hits in unarmored sections.

 

[Big-E]

In the end, 3 BB's were taken out because of hits to their unarmored sterns or bows. I don't doubt their armor belts became damaged or failed during those battles, but all of them were doomed because of hits in unarmored sections.

Your taking this discussion out of context. This has nothing to do with which BB is the most powerful. Given any continous air assault your BB will sink, my point was the Yamato's belt armour was defective. In a one on one fight with the Bismark I think that and their poor gunnery would take it's toll.

 

[LancerMc]

Yes, because of the lack of radar the Yamato's were at a disadvantage to other BB's of the period. The poor gunnery skills in combat were due to the fact the crew saw little combat throughout the entire war. Like I said in previous post, it is hard to judge the true abilities of a Yamato class ship, because the IJN coveted them so much they saw little combat, so their crew gained little experience in using their big guns.

Though if the Yamato fought the Bismark in perfect conditions and experience for both sides, they would probably be fairly evenly matched in most ways. The Bismark may have superior control of their guns, but the Yamato had better and longer range guns. All this is hypothetical and in hindsight so we'll never know for sure, but the Yamato's, Bismark's, Iowa's, and KGIV's were all the zenith in BB designs.

 

[Big-E]

The poor gunnery skills in combat were due to the fact the crew saw little combat throughout the entire war.

Practice makes perfect... they didn't practice. Combat usage of guns on naval targets hardly ever happened for a gunner to do it twice.

Though if the Yamato fought the Bismark in perfect conditions and experience for both sides, they would probably be fairly evenly matched in most ways. The Bismark may have superior control of their guns, but the Yamato had better and longer range guns. All this is hypothetical and in hindsight so we'll never know for sure, but the Yamato's, Bismark's, Iowa's, and KGIV's were all the zenith in BB designs.

What good are better guns if you can't hit your target?

 

[bd popeye]

USS Iowa, supported Normandy invasion and lived up through the Korean war. She was the lead ship of her battleship class.

You need to check your USN history friend. the Iowa was in the Pacific during the time of the Normady invasion aka "D-Day"

http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/battleships/iowa/bb61-ia.html

In the opening phases of the Marianas campaign, Iowa protected the flattops during air strikes on the islands of Saipan, Tinian, Guam, Rota, and Pagan, 12 June. Iowa was then detached to bombard enemy installations on Saipan and Tinian, 13-14 June. On 19 June, in an engagement known as the Battle of the Philippine Sea, Iowa, as part of the battle line of Fast Carrier Task Force 58, helped repel four massive air raids launched by the Japanese Middle Fleet. This resulted in the almost complete destruction of Japanese carrier-based aircraft. Iowa then joined in the pursuit of the fleeing enemy fleet, shooting down one torpedo plane and assisting in splashing another.

 

[Waylander]

Remember that the newest Burkes enter service without Harpoons and CIWs onboard but just prepared for them.
But when full equipped they are lovely.

 

[alexsa]

Your taking this discussion out of context. This has nothing to do with which BB is the most powerful. Given any continous air assault your BB will sink, my point was the Yamato's belt armour was defective. In a one on one fight with the Bismark I think that and their poor gunnery would take it's toll.

Actually both vessel and armour problems. The armoured coning tower on the Bismark was penitrated by an 8" shell from a county class cruiser during her final combat.

 

[riksavage]

armor vs size of armament vs speed

The relative merits of battleship armor thickness Vs main armament size Vs speed are discussed at length in the following book: Castles of Steel: Britain, Germany, and the Winning of the Great War at Sea by Robert K. Massie. Highly enjoyable read, once you start you won’t put it down.

He clearly demonstrates the British approach to battle cruiser design (Beatty’s ‘fast cats’), which combined dreadnought caliber main armament with the speed and armor-plate of fast cruisers proved a fatal mistake. Sheers, slower, less heavily armed, but extremely heavily armored ships won the day, not helped by Beatty’s blind enthusiasm to take his ships to close to Sheers thus removing the advantage of range, which his vessels enjoyed .

 

[riksavage]

Correction

Correction - Sheer was aided by Beatty's stupid decison to close the range, instead of using the advantage of bigger, longer ranging guns!

 

[Big-E]

Actually both vessel and armour problems. The armoured coning tower on the Bismark was penitrated by an 8" shell from a county class cruiser during her final combat.

Is that a problem? I have been on USS North Carolina and her con couldn't take a direct 8' hit.

 

[LancerMc]

Even if a WW2 area BB bridge could take a direct hit from an 8 inch shell; I highly about any could, if the armor was able to stop the hit from penetrating, it would still rain down small pieces of shrapnel everywhere inside the bridge. These pieces of shrapnel can easily kill and injure people.

Many of the sailors on the Yamato during the Battle of Samar Islands died from shrapnel wounds caused from shells strikes on armor. Well it didn't help the fact the Japanese didn't put much protective armor around most of the lookout and AAA sections on their ships.