Shinano is another good example, never saw action and went down to four (?) torpedoes. Not great as a return on investment.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Shinano is another good example, never saw action and went down to four (?) torpedoes. Not great as a return on investment.With hindsight then would Yamato be built? Why not build 3 more Shokakus? Would they be useful?
The IJN thought not as Shinano was not made into a battleship.
So basically 3 giant Uber expensive paperweights were made.
So did Yamato achieve a military aim?
Yes and no. They achieve the old fleet in being but actually didn't do much more. Bit like Tirpitz.
But all a bit tangled. The IJN would have done more if Yamato was melted down and made into mess tins.
Next up. Datsun Cherry v Dodge Charger.
Iowa vs Yamato. Not Iowa with escorts vs Iowa with escorts right?Don't the IJN have escorts too?
The thread is Iowa vs Yamato so…….
(The Clevelands were pretty cool.)
Of course one would change and adapt. And even still what I meant that kirishima did not have radar but Yamato has, so Yamato wouldn't end in the same situation as Kirishima. Besides it's a 1v1 right?hyphothetical 1v1I can't back this up with any documentation but I cannot help but believe that after the actions of 14 November, 1942, Admiral Lee's tactics and methods were applied to the rest of the fleet. The late Admiral Scott had his forces practice night fighting earlier (still needed work). I can't help but believe the USN's night fighting ability would be much improved when this clash of the titans would've happened. Mid 1944? The USN adapted with experience.
I think I know what you meant.Iowa vs Yamato. Not Iowa with escorts vs Iowa with escorts right?
Look, If you are going to buy 70,000 tons of warships, you could get 1 70,000 ton battleship, or you could get 1 45,000 ton battleship (Iowa) 1 x 12,000 ton cruiser (Cleveland) and 13,000 tons worth of destroyers, roughly 4 or 5. Heck, to take on 70,000 ton Yamato, I'd take 25 American destroyers of any class, and even with bad torpedoes, Yamato wouldn't stand a chance.Iowa vs Yamato. Not Iowa with escorts vs Iowa with escorts right?
Of course one would change and adapt. And even still what I meant that kirishima did not have radar but Yamato has, so Yamato wouldn't end in the same situation as Kirishima. Besides it's a 1v1 right?hyphothetical 1v1
Remember, this is a one v. one. With that said, how about an Alaska, 2 De Moines and two or three Fletchers?Think you outdid take just about any 70,000 ton combination of US warships and beat Yamato. With its superior speed, Iowa could hang out at a range where it had a 3% chance of main battery hit, but Yamato had less than 1%. Meanwhile a squad of destroyers could lead a Cleveland-class. Raiser in behind a smokes teen to a point where the Cleveland could use its fire control radar to bury Yamato in hundreds of 6" shells, starting fires and wrecking the topside. This would let Iowa creep in closer and finish her off.
That's would be an interesting set up. I think the equal tonnage matchups are more interesting than the single ship to single ship. That was what was great about the Fighting Steel game (especially with the Fighting Steel Project modifications), you could set up matchups like that.Remember, this is a one v. one. With that said, how about an Alaska, 2 De Moines and two or three Fletchers?
Just a question, what tonnage. Designed, full load, with what modifications, take your pickThat's would be an interesting set up. I think the equal tonnage matchups are more interesting than the single ship to single ship. That was what was great about the Fighting Steel game (especially with the Fighting Steel Project modifications), you could set up matchups like that.
Erm who said the tonnage had to be the same??? If you going with 70000tonnage I go with this:Look, If you are going to buy 70,000 tons of warships, you could get 1 70,000 ton battleship, or you could get 1 45,000 ton battleship (Iowa) 1 x 12,000 ton cruiser (Cleveland) and 13,000 tons worth of destroyers, roughly 4 or 5. Heck, to take on 70,000 ton Yamato, I'd take 25 American destroyers of any class, and even with bad torpedoes, Yamato wouldn't stand a chance.
Which means that Yamato wouldn't get into krishima's position is enough. Considering how Kirishima fired at damaged warship with all its brute scoring multiple hits but not penatrating a single armour plate. The difference was kirishima was unprepared. As if it was ambushed. But either ways your comment was really informative.Once again: the Yamato's radar was not capable of directing gunfire. All it could do was track the battleship shooting at it. Yamato wouldn't be surprised like Kirishima was, but it's still shooting optically, with all that that entails.
The US Navy had several fire control systems in use during World War II, however most share the same general characteristics as the most modern system used by the US Navy's battleships, the Mark 38 Gun Fire Control System (GFCS). This system is centered on the Mark 8 rangekeeper that is the heart of its operation and is used to compute various data such as target, gun orders, director train, time of flight etc.; all the necessary data to hit a moving target. The components that fed information into the Mark 8 rangekeeper were:
Mark 38 Director3
Rangefinding equipment (Stereoscopic rangefinders and radars Mark 3, 8 and 13)
Stable Vertical (Gyro for determining true horizontal plane)
Gyro Compass, and Pitot Log
Miscellaneous Data (wind data, projectile data wear assessment, spot corrections etc.)
The Mark 8 utilized this information to generate the following orders to the guns via electrical output directly:
Elevation Orders
Train Orders
Sight Angle
The Imperial Japanese Navy utilized a different system which was based upon information and techniques practiced by the British Royal Navy. This data was passed on to the Japanese during the interwar period. The components that fed information into the Type 92 Shagekiban computer were:
Rangefinders
Type 94 Hoiban4 director
Type 92 Sokutekiban5
Ship's master Compass
Miscellaneous Data (Ballistic corrections, wind correction, spot correction)
Note that the computer in this system computes future target position and basic gun orders, ONLY. The Type 92 Shagekiban computer then produces the following outputs that are sent back the Type 94 Hoiban director:
Lateral Deflection
Super Elevation6
The output values from the Type 92 Shagekiban computer are added differentially to director setting and training. Afterwards, parallax, roll and cross roll corrections are added and the orders are sent to the guns via a follow the pointer system.7
Note the lack of any radar input into the Japanese system.
He has to swim harder.How effective would a UDT attack be against a leviathan maneuvering at about 25 kts in open ocean?