Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Forum :: Equipment :: Battleship Discussion

Page 1 of 2 Battleship Discussion
Author	Oldest to Newest
Aquarius1001 Joined: 21 August 2005 Posts in this thread: 5	Posted on 21 August 2005 8:44 PM This thread is for questions and comments about the worlds battleships, past and present. It is for any person that has a question or has a comment about battleship's and battle crusier's. well that pretty much sum's up all of the introduction have fun with this thread !!! And im looking forward to reading your post's. Aquarius !!! Post Reply

Nimrod1001 Joined: 04 February 2005 Posts in this thread: 5	Posted on 24 August 2005 6:44 AM Yep. I don't normally think much about battleships, but every board seems to be filled with them these days, so I'm still working on your Super Iowa. I need to know how much the boilers and tubines weight in an Iowa! I 've found dimensions, and even with the trunking it will be mighty cavernous inside without them! I want weight to put composite armour in, and I want to know how much weight I have. If I can double armour protection, I think main belt could be made mostly resistant to ASM. Anybody have one of those really usefull reference books with all the really pedantic details in them? Post Reply
Aquarius1001 Joined: 21 August 2005 Posts in this thread: 5	Posted on 24 August 2005 10:49 AM I e-mailed some people that are part of the uss missouri museum. two day's ago asking for the weght of the engines. so they should be getting back to me soon when they do i will post it here. Post Reply
Ghauri1003 Joined: 29 June 2005 Posts in this thread: 2	Posted on 29 August 2005 7:27 AM Well I reckon out of them all the IJN Yamato was the best. Biggest baddest and prettiest. Although I believe that the Iowa class is generally beleived to be the best battleship I do not agree with this. The sheer size of the Yamato, its superior stability, shell weight and armor protection I believe would make it the General winner in a 'normal' one on one battle. By normal I mean a battle either at night or day where the two ships just slug it out and excluding any 'lucky hits'. Any ship could take out a another ship with a lucky hit. It is often said that the Yamato's armor layout had many defects, and that the 6.1" turrets were the weak spots in this armor. Also the Join between the side and upper hull armor was shown to be weak after a Torp hit on the Yamato that caused severe flooding, about 4000 tons of seawater, and virtually crippled the ship in terms of fighting abiltiy. But Yamato's armor was designed to defend against BB armement, not bombs and torpedoes. In this area the Yamato was not proven. The Iowa also had excellent armor protection but I doubt the ship could stand to many hits from the 1.6 ton AP rounds of the Yamato's 18.1" guns. On the other had I think the Yamato, with her larger size, could absorb a few of the Iowa's main battery of of 900kg 16" weapons. And the Yamato's looks were unrivalled. Her undulating decks, raked funnel and big guns made her a tough looking ship. The Iowa was most certainly a good ship but her surviving the war is why most people see her as the superior vessel. Everything is known about the Iowa's layout, specs and operation. But with the Yamato alot is not know and never will be. Of cause this is just my opinion and at the end of the day doesnt mean diddly squat. But I like to agree with myself because even when I'm wroung I'm right. ha... ha.... hmmm. Post Reply
Aquarius1001 Joined: 21 August 2005 Posts in this thread: 5	Posted on 29 August 2005 4:31 PM The yamato might have been bigger and had more armor. but it was built out of inferior armor and steel to the iowas class. and the iowa was faster and had much better targeting system's like in radar guided. yamato hjad optical aka eyeball!!!! Post Reply
Ghauri1003 Joined: 29 June 2005 Posts in this thread: 2	Posted on 30 August 2005 1:59 AM I to have heard that the Yamato's steel and armor was inferior but I'm pretty sure that it is all speculation. No one ever has ever recovered any peices of the Yamato or Musashi's wreck. They did recover some armor peices such as the main turret face and various other peices and they did infact peice it with a 45cal 16" ap round after the war. This was achieved at piont blank range though. The Iowa's fire control was aided by a superior radar system, something the Yamato's lacked. But the Yamato's optics were superior to the Iowa's. I just cant see how an Iowa could engage a Yamato and never be seen. If that happened than yes the Iowa would win but in reality the muzzle flashes would give away the Iowa's position. The Yamato's armor was tested and could repel its own artillary so I Doubt the Iowa could do the same. And everybody seems to forget that the it was widely acknolegded that the fragile radar systems of world war 2 to were very prone do damage from the concusive effects of the main guns. A likely scenario if you will is that the two ships meet in the middle of the ocean, the Iowa spots Yamato first maybe gets a couple of hits in early but sooner or later the Iowa is going to pop into the crosshairs and suffer a floggin. Remeber to that the Yamato's had radar from 44 onwards, although primtive. And one hit on either ship and you can pretty much garuntee that all those fragile valves etc are going to pop like popcorn and it will be back to eye vs eye, which is in the Yamato's favor. Japan also had more experience in ship vs ship engagements so that to would come into it. But we will never know anyway so I'm right. But so are you but I'm righter. No you are, no no, I am. etc etc etc. Post Reply
Nimrod1001 Joined: 04 February 2005 Posts in this thread: 5	Posted on 30 August 2005 4:01 AM Iowa also had armour problems, related to rushing her into service. All wartime built battleships did. Her MAin armour belt was also short for a ship of her size, and the internal belt design, while powerfull, meant that any hit lets water into the ship. Also, Yamato did have radar as well, and her gunnery was good, achieving first round hits at 32 km on the escort carriers she engaged on 25 october. http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm I don't know enough about battleships to answer my own question, but my feeling is that with Bismark free to set hard fuses on her shells, and Prince Eugen firing rapid salvos of HE into optics, fire control, secondary gun batteries etc. the Geramns would have the upper hand, as the range is about 20 Km I think. Even Yamato is not immune to gunfire. Post Reply
Nimrod1001 Joined: 04 February 2005 Posts in this thread: 5	Posted on 30 August 2005 4:05 AM OOPS! Which thread am I in :( Post Reply
Aquarius1001 Joined: 21 August 2005 Posts in this thread: 5	Posted on 30 August 2005 11:04 PM the iowas armor belt covers about 75% of the hull on the sides. so iowas actually had a good lenght armor belt for her size. yamato only had a armor belt that covered about 53% of her hull so she had a short armor belt for a ship of her size. although yamato's armor was thicker but it was found that japanese armor and sells were more brittle compared to american armor and shell's. Post Reply
Nimrod1001 Joined: 04 February 2005 Posts in this thread: 5	Posted on 01 September 2005 11:51 PM http://f24.parsimony.net/forum61242/messages/1712.htm "Both ships had very short citadels relative to other designs, leaving them vulnerable to bow and stern damage form even light weapons – a common curse in all-or-nothing designs. However, one key difference was that the Iowa’s deck armor did not extend to the ship’s sides, and this left about 7-8 percent of its width unprotected. The impacted regions were in the wing-tank areas, which left the water-plane far more vulnerable to damage from bombs and shells of many calibers. This was exacerbated by the Iowa’s use of an inclined internal armor belt, with the main concern here being to stop diving shells. Indeed, both ships were designed to combat this possibility, albeit at the cost of a lot of other passive protection characteristics." The weakness in Iowa armour protection are related to giving her 33+ knot speeds. Long bows improve the fineness ratio of the ship, and inclined belt, while it saves weight and allows for de-capping plates outboard, also leaves a fair volume of the ship unprotected. I have always thought that the Iowas should be considered the ultimate Battlecruisers (I love Battlecruisers :), in that they gave up some protection in return for speed. There is other discusion of Iowa on this site. I am not sure where you got 75% belt armour, but main belt only goes out to bulkheads fore and aft of the turrets, which would make it closer to 60 - 65 %. Iowa has the same protection scheme as south Carolina and is 60 metres longer. If I fudge my figures and measure from unloaded waterline length, I can get about 70%. However, you are clearly the battleship expert on these forums, so I defer to you :) Yamato's short armour length is easily apparent, but I'd never really looked at it. She does have very long bow and stern. Several pictures I have seen of Mushashis sinking show her down by the bows. Tell me, am I right in saying the website I've linked to has the captions for those two pictures reversed? http://www.atomicmuseum.com/tour/nav2.cfm Pssst. How much does Iowas machinery weigh? I think I can cheat and double the weight of the powerplant of the replenishment ships that got half each of the unfinished Iowas powerplants. Post Reply
2 1

Copyright © 2003 - 2008 deagel.com. All Rights Reserved.