Best World war two warships?

[parsifal]

yes, true, but she and Alaskas, and the fast firing Baltimores (which I dont think were ever built) were all delayed (or not built) as a result of decisions made in 1940, to basically shut the door on the design department and order repeats of the latest treaty designs, upgunned and fitted out to the maximum. The results were repeat orders of the Clevelands, grossly overloaded and topheavy and the Baltimores - neither fish nor fowl, too light to fight on the gunline and too slow firing to take on DDs at night effectively. Not that there was anything inherently wrong with the Baltimores (less validly stated for the Clevelands) all treaty heavy cruisers with manual loading suffeed from a firing cycle too slow to engage destroyers effectively.....but if the Americans had accepted a delayed reinforcment of their fleet, they may have seen the arrival of significant numbers of Alaskas, fast firing Baltimores and/or Worcesters in 1945, but the war dragging on for another year or two because of the delays in new equipment for the USN.

 

[Capt Spanky]

why the Sendai?

gotta love those torpedo cruisers

as for a light carrier the Colossus/Majestic class

 

[Juha]

Hello
Parsifal, I think the fast firing Baltimore design evolved to Des Moines class (3 built post-war). IIRC Worcesters were not much liked by USN and retired early.

On Spanky's list, IMHO HMS Renown was more useful BC than Kongos, mainly because of its clearly better AA suite. One main function of WWII fast heavy ships was the screening of CVs and in that job good AA armament was important.
Alaskas' weak points were lack of decent torpedo protection and an AA armament not much better than that of Baltimores/Cleavlands.

Juha

 

[parsifal]

Sendai was not a Torpedo Cruiser as such. She carried some torpedoes, but then, so too did the much newer Agano class. Japanese viewed their Light cruisers as leaders rather than part of a back line in any engagement. I dont think however that except for the 24 in long lance armement, they were any better than say a J&K class DD, which had a broadsid of 10 x 21 in torps.

A more radical development of the torpedo cruiser was the Kitakami and Oi, that landed nearly all their guns and shipped from memory a broadside of over 40 torpedoes, all Long Lance

 

[stug3]

The destroyer HMS Forester had a very busy war, she participated in sinking U-boats in the Battle of the Atlantic and would soon move to escort duties with Arctic convoys.
Steamed 172,000 miles during the war up to 31st December, 1941, and was at sea for 601 days during that period.

 

[Garyt]

The destroyer HMS Forester had a very busy war, she participated in sinking U-boats in the Battle of the Atlantic and would soon move to escort duties with Arctic convoys.
Steamed 172,000 miles during the war up to 31st December, 1941, and was at sea for 601 days during that period.

 

[Garyt]

Always a fun topic - what were the best warships of class in WW2.

However, you really have to ask is when were they built. Otherwise, it's like comparing a Panzer 3 with its 50mm gun against a late war panther. Both of these were arguably the best tank of their time, but one was built pre war and the other mid war. There were generations of tanks, and the following generation was usually better than what preceded it.

Warships are a bit different, due to both the cost and length of time it took to build. These warships because of these factors also received upgrades, while with tanks with their cheaper costs and production times, you just built new and better ones.

If you look at all warships of WW2, and which were the best from a performance standpoint, the US ships almost always come out best, the biggest reason is because the were built the latest, and most other countries only built a limited amount of ships after the start od the war, at least capitol ships.

You really need to compare warship with other ships of their generation or time. One easy way to break it down would be Ships in service at the start of the European war, and ships in service at the start of the Pacific war, vs. those that were not in service until after the start of the war.

Otherwise, almost every class of ship would have to go to the US, as they built far more 2nd and third genration warhips than any other nation. The only arguable class might be the Battleship, where the Iowa and Yamato are real close, and destroyers, which due to smaller size were made throughout the war by many nations.

Just to break it down for pre and post start of the pacific war, I'd do as follows:

Pre war battleships:

1) Yamato*
2) Bismarck
3) A few here, Nelson Class, Vittorio Veneto Class, North Carolina Class, Prince of Wales Class

* Was comissioned a week after the start of the War

Pre War Carriers
1) Shokaku Class (remarkably durable, the 5" Deck armor helped a lot. This was main deck armor though, not flight deck)
2) Yorktown Class

IMO, the Shokaku was a better carrier, but was limited a bit by carrying 72 planes instead of the 90 of Yorktown. This was due though to the fact that only the Kates of the Japanese planes had folding wings, while the on the US carriers the majority of the planes had folding wings. Hangar space was very similar on the two carriers. This is a real close comparison though, as the Shokaku had better speed but the Yorktown class had better DP weapons, the 5"/38 was probably the best dual purpose weapon of the war.

Oh well, Cruisers and Destroyers later!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Just an observation here, but the Yamato was not commisioned one week before the war, but before hostilities with the allies began. The war had been raging on for several years already.

 

[Glider]

Bismark was also commissioned during the war

For all its faults the best battleship commisioned before the start of the war in Europe was the KGV
Best Battlecruiser Scharnhorst
Best Heavy Cruiser French Algerie
Best Destroyer British JK
Best escort British Black Swan

 

[Garyt]

"Just an observation here, but the Yamato was not commisioned one week before the war, but before hostilities with the allies began. The war had been raging on for several years already."

I look at 2 periods largely, before the start of the war in Europe, and prior to the Japanese declaring war on the Allies. The Yamato gets comissioned right as the Japanese declare war on the Allies.

It's tough to say exactly when lessons learned from the war impacted ship development, but I try to use these dates. In all actuality, capitol ships are laid down months or longer prior to their completion, though there can be modifications as they are being constructed.

"For all its faults the best battleship commisioned before the start of the war in Europe was the KGV"

Well, the KG5 was comissioned AFTER the Bismarck.

 

[Glider]

"

Well, the KG5 was comissioned AFTER the Bismarck.

Fair point, I should have known better. Any comments on the others?

I think the lessons learnt can be seen not so much in the design of the ships as in their equipment in particular radar and weapons. If you use the start of the war in Japan as the deadline then my choices alter but only a little.

The best Battleship was the KGV as she would have had the best Radar and AA defences and they were far more important than the limitations of the 14in Gun
Best Battlecruiser Scharnhorst
Best Heavy Cruiser French HMS Belfast again due to its AA and radar fit in Dec 1941. If you want to go with the traditional definition i.e. 8in guns substitute HMS London
Best Destroyer British LM class destroyers with 8 x 4in guns
Best escort British Black Swan

 

[Shortround6]

It's tough to say exactly when lessons learned from the war impacted ship development, but I try to use these dates. In all actuality, capitol ships are laid down months or longer prior to their completion, though there can be modifications as they are being constructed.

If by months you mean 36-48 months (with exceptions) you are right.

Basically only very few capitol ships saw much development due to war experience with the exception of larger amounts of light AA and electronics and fire control.

Even the HMS Vanguard kept what was pretty much the KGV secondary armament/heavy AA when it might be argued that shifting to 20/24 4.5/4in AA guns might well have been more effective for the BB primary role near the end of WW II.

 

[pinehilljoe]

The Iowa's.

 

[swampyankee]

Define "best."

My vote? Essex class carriers.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The more I think about this thread 11+ years later, the more I think the question is to vague.

Also, kind of hard to vote for any BB, since the Carrier pretty much doomed them. The Battleships day's were over.

 

[pinehilljoe]

Define "best."

My vote? Essex class carriers.

the Essex's are underrated. I agree. Some accounts call the Essex's the most successful warships in history. Well built, serving 30+ years. They had their faults, but they proved hard to sink.

 

[pinehilljoe]

I have to say that the USS Worcester is pushing the definition of WW2, she wasn't commisioned until 1948.

the Worcesters and Newport News Classes were one of my favorites. FADM King urged completing the two classes to have a modern force for the post war period, but budget got in the way. There was a proposal to fit two auto loading 8 inch turrets to one of the Baltimore's to have the hope of getting at least one ship with the 8 inch turret to sea during the War.

Can you imagine a couple Worcesters or a Newport News at Guadalcanal in '42.

 

[nuuumannn]

the more I think the question is too vague.

I agree. Different nations ships incorporated different approaches to the same requirements and good versus bad design features. Far too many variables.

the Essex's are underrated.

You contradict yourself in your sentence, Pinehill Joe. Stating the Essexes are underrated, then pointing out they are regarded as the most successful ships is a contradiction.

I don't agree about them being underrated, either. Being underrated means that they are not regarded as well as they should be; with the Essexes, that's not the case. They are very highly regarded today as they have been for years; They were an enormously successful design and proved able to absorb considerable damage, and proved adaptable to subsequent extensive modification post war.

 

[swampyankee]

the Worcesters and Newport News Classes were one of my favorites. FADM King urged completing the two classes to have a modern force for the post war period, but budget got in the way. There was a proposal to fit two auto loading 8 inch turrets to one of the Baltimore's to have the hope of getting at least one ship with the 8 inch turret to sea during the War.

Can you imagine a couple Worcesters or a Newport News at Guadalcanal in '42.

Well, the Newport News had guns that actually worked.

 

[Glider]

the Worcesters and Newport News Classes were one of my favorites. FADM King urged completing the two classes to have a modern force for the post war period, but budget got in the way. There was a proposal to fit two auto loading 8 inch turrets to one of the Baltimore's to have the hope of getting at least one ship with the 8 inch turret to sea during the War.

Can you imagine a couple Worcesters or a Newport News at Guadalcanal in '42.

I can as I served on HMS Tiger with the fast firing 6in and 3in, pretty impressive I have to say.