Who would Win early 1942

[Vlad]

thats exactly what we were trying to say, yamato is very impressive, but look closely and many ships could do her in if they were conducted carefully

[zach b]

That takes in the latest FC radar and all, i'm talking before any of that was introduced. Using just optics. In force 3 sea state, which is average, during the day. No air cover, no escorts. Unless she is faster, I believe Yamato would be the victor. The closest match she has in that list is North Carolina, and she was designed to be immune to 14" shells whereas the armor of Yamato could with stand 16"/50, and NC carried the 16"/45. Really I don't get it

[Filipe Ramires]

Hard to argue with his analysis of the AA abilities, on the other hand.W

I found no utility for AA guns during a ship-to-ship battle unless you want to board the other ship!!!
TAKE COVER MAN!!! Where's me helmet!?!?!?!?!?

[Werner]

That takes in the latest FC radar and all, i'm talking before any of that was introduced. Using just optics. In force 3 sea state, which is average, during the day. No air cover, no escorts. Unless she is faster, I believe Yamato would be the victor. The closest match she has in that list is North Carolina, and she was designed to be immune to 14" shells whereas the armor of Yamato could with stand 16"/50, and NC carried the 16"/45. Really I don't get it

Your guns are not worth anything if you can't hit the target.

Many things on a battleship do not react well to hits besides the armor deck.

Read the article!

W

[JWintjes]

I found no utility for AA guns during a ship-to-ship battle unless you want to board the other ship!!!

Now THAT I call a good question - which one of the five could be boarded most easily...

Jorit

[Mark Petersen]

In a stand up fight a Gato Class fleet boat could sink any of them

[ArizonaBB39]

Now, I normally don't get involved with these threads, but I'd put my money on the North Carolina. After reading accounts of the battle between the Washington and Kirishima, the North Carolina would be able to (in my opinion) defeat the Yamato, and most likely any of the other ships mentioned.

(The accounts in question are those from the book Battleship At War: The Epic Story of the USS Washington, by: Ivan Musicant. The Washington almost totally single handedly sent Kirishima to the bottom (SoDak had a hand, albeit small, in the sinking))

So that is my vote...

[Werner]

Now, I normally don't get involved with these threads, but I'd put my money on the North Carolina. After reading accounts of the battle between the Washington and Kirishima, the North Carolina would be able to (in my opinion) defeat the Yamato, and most likely any of the other ships mentioned.

(The accounts in question are those from the book Battleship At War: The Epic Story of the USS Washington, by: Ivan Musicant. The Washington almost totally single handedly sent Kirishima to the bottom (SoDak had a hand, albeit small, in the sinking))

So that is my vote...

I agree 100.00%

North Carolina does not have the armor defects of BB-57 or BB-61.

Further, I really wonder about the relative vallue of armor over 8 inches or so. I don't think any heavier plate was ever penetrated by a shell except perhaps under 5,000 yards or so.

The USN fire controls would allow a successful engagement at 25,000 - 28,000 yards, a range at which no enemy will score.

W

[Vlad]

hey, why isn't Vittorio Veneto in the poll? afte all she had the most powerful 15" guns of the lot, barrel wear problems set aside.

[Francisco P. de Nanclares]

I have to give the tip to Bismarck. The Germans have a demonstrably efficient fire control system (as seen vs Glorious and Hood) and worked up crews.

W

I agree with Werner completely. Bismarck is my choice

[Vlad]

on optical FC alone I'd have to say the Germans win. But Bismarck is still a bit vulnerable to plunging fire.

Which brngs up a good point, if this hyopthetical scenario is set in an environment with only optical FC, would it not be necessary for the opponenets to bring the range down. This would favor ships like Bismarck and Vittorio Veneto.

[Filipe Ramires]

All very true on Bismarck but he was the unique battleship of the list and the classes above to be sunk in surface action. A salvo from Rodney got 50% of Bismarck main guns out of the fight at the beggining of that moorning fight. Still I believe that german opticals were the best around when war started. Bismarck might get one hit on the third salvo like he got with Hood but the enemy vessels can get a hit at the first shot and do cripple damage like the Rodney did.

[chuck]

In a stand up fight a Gato Class fleet boat could sink any of them

A gato barely carries enough torpedo to sink an Yamato provided:

1. not even one of the torpedos she fires misses or turns dud.

2. after the 6 bow torpedoes and 4 stern torpedos have hit, the Gato can reload or her tubes while keeping pace with an Yamato that can still do 20+ knots, so the Gato can fire her reloads when they are done reloading.

The conclusion is: Gato can not sink an Yamato.

[JWintjes]

A gato barely carries enough torpedo to sink an Yamato provided:

1. not even one of the torpedos she fires misses or turns dud.

2. after the 6 bow torpedoes and 4 stern torpedos have hit, the Gato can reload or her tubes while keeping pace with an Yamato that can still do 20+ knots, so the Gato can fire her reloads when they are done reloading.

The conclusion is: Gato can not sink an Yamato.

Hah. That's what you thought.

In fact, what will happen is that the Gato's crew will board the Yamato, lock up the crew and open the sea valves...



Jorit

[Werner]

Chuck's analysis assumes the Gato's torpedos are similar to the aircraft torpedos which sunk her. In fact, they are more than twice as heavy.

Yamato would probably be engaged at some status other than full battle quarters.

No prudent skipper would steam on at top speed after taking several torpedo hits. At the very least he would turn stern to the submarine and slow as much as prudent until the status of the bulkheads was determined.

It is reasonable to assume a submarine torpedo strike would breach the torpedo defense system at least to a modest degree, especially if two strike close together. History also shows a characteristic weakness in Japanese warships aft of the aft perpendicular. It is entirely possible the steering machinery would be rendered inoperative by a hit at or aft of the AP.

Four torpedos will not sink Yamato instantly, but history implies strongly any Japanese warship with four hits would sink from progressive flooding some time later.

W

[Timmy C]

turn stern to the submarine

Wouldn't that leave the props and stuff vulnarable?

[Werner]

A ship underway and stern toward a submarine is an incredibly difficult target. One, it is increasing the range, making if nothing else the run of the torpedos longer. Two, a lookout aft can help maneuver the ship to avoid torpedos. Three, you have changed the target from an object 800 feet long to one about 120 feet long.

Remember, except for a 20-25 knot copy of the German electric torpedo, USN torpedos leave a prodigious wake.

W

[Anonymous]

Yamato was torpedoed by a submarine in 1943 and sustained minimal damage.

[Werner]

One hit, and it displaced a segment of the armor belt requiring a yard period. After the damage was assessed, it was decided to change the armor shelf butts requiring substantial additional yard work.

Had this happened in combat, the armor system on that side would have been seriously reduced in effectiveness.

An analysis of Iowa's surprisingly similar system showed the same defect. Illinois and Kentucky plans were modified to correct the armor system flaw. This is one of the reasons the Navy had an interest in completing at least Kentucky after WW.II

W

[Vlad]

did the USN not have (working) magnetic torpedoes designed to blow up under the hull and break the keel? or was that only post WWII?