Who would Win early 1942

[richter111]

Just got done reading the book

"Battleship Bismarck- A Survivor's Story"

by Baron Burkhard Von Mullenheim-Rechberg

Excellent book on the Bismarck. All other issues aside, Bismarcks faulty design for her rudders and the inability to effectively steer the ship by props really ahndicap this otherwise excellent ship.

Also th eoptics, were most excellent, but his turret was put out of comission early in the battle when the optics/rangefinders were sheered off by a lucky shot. Thus negating his turret when it was most needed.

Ric

[Vlad]

this ones an odd question, but does the number of guns and rate of fire affect the probability of a hit? I mean, if your FC can put a group of shells in a designated area around the target, then srely the mroe shells you pump into that area the more likely it is one will hit.

Also, people keep complaining KGV had "weak" 14" guns. How bad were they and does the number not make up?

[Werner]

Which would you rather be down range from: a guy with an M4 rifle or a guy with an M60 machine gun?

Seriously, the "hang time" at 25,000 yards is nearly a minute. If you're firing deliberate ranging salvos, when you get the solution the target is going to have a cone a half-mile long to move into before your next salvo arrives.

The alternative, which was employed by the rapid fire cruisers is to fire a ladder of salvos until they bracket, then switch to continuous fire. In this mode a Des Moines can put up to 108 shells into the cone in one minute. Based on the historical record, these could be 10% hits. Possibly much more.

While these hits may not penetrate the armor deck, they will start fires, derange equipment, tear up personnel and demoralize the damage control party. Musashi's damage control officer went to his cabin and shot himself fairly early in the battle.

W

[JWintjes]

Chuck: Yamato
Werner: Des Moines!!!!

The outcome would be easy to predict...



Jorit

[Mark Petersen]

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

In case you couldn't figure it out, the above post was meant as a joke.

[Vlad]

Which would you rather be down range from: a guy with an M4 rifle or a guy with an M60 machine gun?

the guy with the M60, because on full auto he wont be able to aim, and if he takes aimed shots his RoF will have to diminish to that of the M4. I really dont think thats a good analogy.

yes, the target can manouver into a large cone, but why would it? why would it mess up its own firing solution?

[Werner]

Which would you rather be down range from: a guy with an M4 rifle or a guy with an M60 machine gun?

the guy with the M60, because on full auto he wont be able to aim, and if he takes aimed shots his RoF will have to diminish to that of the M4. I really dont think thats a good analogy.

yes, the target can manouver into a large cone, but why would it? why would it mess up its own firing solution?

A US ship's stable element allows freedom of maneuver without hurting the solution.

[Vlad]

I thought that only applied to late-war radar FC, not 1942 optics

[Werner]

I thought that only applied to late-war radar FC, not 1942 optics

No, it is the fire control computer which allows for more degrees of freedom in the equation combined with gyroscopes which can sense the ship's own relative motion.

W

[chuck]

Which would you rather be down range from: a guy with an M4 rifle or a guy with an M60 machine gun?

At 1000 yards, a M60 at any time. Now to make it more realistic. If you are to be hunkered inside an bunker 1000 yards down range from someone's firing position. Would you rather that person be armed with a M60 or with a 105mm howitzer?

[Vlad]

the howitzer, because I can run out and snipe the operator while he's reloading

[Werner]

Which would you rather be down range from: a guy with an M4 rifle or a guy with an M60 machine gun?

At 1000 yards, a M60 at any time. Now to make it more realistic. If you are to be hunkered inside an bunker 1000 yards down range from someone's firing position. Would you rather that person be armed with a M60 or with a 105mm howitzer?

That's not an accurate analogy. It would be a howitzer against a Hummer with a machine gun on the ring mount.

W

[Anonymous]

That's not an accurate analogy. It would be a howitzer against a Hummer with a machine gun on the ring mount.

W

More like a Sherman tank against a Humvee with a machine gun on the ring mount. Shoot, I'll even spot you a Mk 19 grenade launcher on that one.

[Werner]

No, if that's your choice, give the Hummer a 30mm D-U chain gun. Then maybe it's closer. Unless you honestly believe Yamato could never be sunk by a surface opponent.

I honestly believe the accounts of the sinking of Yamato and Musashi are inaccurate. The attacker usually overestimates his hits. In this case the Japanese interviewees (JANAC after the war) agreed with what was put to them.

The first several hits and a ship is doomed unless there is a drydock immediately at hand. Only time separates Yamato from the seabed after the first few hits.

W

[RNfanDan]

In fact, the record shows no hits were ever scored by Japanese guns greater than 14-inch caliber!

Only one 14-inch hit after 1942!

W

Let the record stand. There are indeed no official records of a hit by an 18.1-in shell from either Yamato or Musashi that I can locate. I am confusing the account I read (some 30 years or more ago) with an 8-inch hit, not an 18" hit.

My apologies. I do not wish to muddy this excellent discussion with factual errors.

However, the following is correct: 3 hits/75 shots.

On a side note--at the Third Battle of Savo Island (11/42), the USS Washington had the advantage of almost complete surprise when she snuck up to deadly short range to blast away at a Japanese battleship, which itself had been hammering away at a helpless South Dakota. Despite Washington using its FC radar and at practically point-blank range from the target, it only managed three hits out of some 75 rounds of 16" shells fired---a pretty poor showing, considering the extremely favorable circumstances she found herself in.

Putting North Carolina in a much less-favorable scenario against Yamato, at ANY range, with NC's mediocre armor, even a single 18.1" shell hit could cause havoc in the right place. Give the Yamato three 18" hits on the American BB, and it's a foregone conclusion....North Carolina was not armored to withstand 18.1" shellfire.

[Werner]

During the running engagement, at least one Japanese 18.1-inch shell hit a US carrier, passing clean through its flimsy hull without exploding. Whether the shell was a dud (unlikely) or simply fused for AP delay (more likely), is uncertain, but it was a hit, nonetheless.

Dan, Gambier Bay's after action report (3) indicates only a possible 14-inch hit. In fact, if you look at the maps in Morison(1) and read the JANAC (2) interrogations, Yamato was taken out of the fight with the CVEs almost immediately because she and Nagato turned stern toward torpedos and were chased out of the area. If you have a reference, I urge you to publish it, because it runs contrary to the record as currently understood.

There is simply no evidence the Japanese 46cm gun ever hit any enemy target.

Putting North Carolina in a much less-favorable scenario against Yamato, at ANY range, with NC's mediocre armor providing the necessary resistance to actually trigger the AP fuse, even a single 18.1" shell hit could cause havoc in the right place. Give the Yamato three 18" hits on the American BB, and it's a foregone conclusion....

You miss the long standing point that the USN has the advantage of electromechanically integrated fire controls with RADAR and a computer able to do the differential calculus necessary to keep the salvos close to the target. The Japanese were crippled by a line of sight system and a World War.I vintage computer which multiplied errors during the shift from spotting patterns to full salvos. The historical record at Sunda, Komondorskis and Leyte only prove the accuracy of this diagnosis. Beyond 13,000 yards the Japanese were essentially shooting blind. A hit beyond this range is pure luck for them, unlike the USN which could and did score on distant targets using RADAR only fire control beyond visual range at night in the Central Solomons late 1943.

W

(1) Morison, Samuel Eliot. History of US Naval Operations in World War II, Vol. XII, pp. 246-285; Little Brown, 1966.
(2) JANAC Interrogations of Japanese Officers and Officials USGPO. Excepts on line.
(3) Ross, A. Anatomy of the Ship: The Escort Carrier Gambier Bay, pp.13-19 (including damage report).USNI Press, 1993.

[Victorious]

I'm no technocrat, but in my reckoning I think the Yamato has to be the favorite. For a start, she is more heavily armed than any other Battleship, could probably stand out of range of any of the others and have enough umph to hurl a shell well out of the others range.
A couple of hits from her 18" shells would more than likely render an opposing ship dissabled as far as gaining any ground.
The Japanese were no push over when it came to naval warfare, they gave the Americans quite a few headaches before the tables turned.

As did the Germans with the Bismark when she sank the Hood. Lucky shot, as it penetrated Hood's deck and blew the magazine.

[Werner]

I'm no technocrat, but in my reckoning I think the Yamato has to be the favorite. For a start, she is more heavily armed than any other Battleship, could probably stand out of range of any of the others and have enough umph to hurl a shell well out of the others range.
A couple of hits from her 18" shells would more than likely render an opposing ship dissabled as far as gaining any ground.
The Japanese were no push over when it came to naval warfare, they gave the Americans quite a few headaches before the tables turned.

As did the Germans with the Bismark when she sank the Hood. Lucky shot, as it penetrated Hood's deck and blew the magazine.

• Range is the issue. Beyond 13,000 yards the Japanese are crippled by an ineffective fire control system governed by optical fire controls. In less than perfect weather, at night or other circumstances, the optical horizon will be far lower than the maximum range of Japanese 46cm or USN 16-inch guns. The USN RADAR is not bothered by weather or the optical horizon and is accurate to within the dispersion radius of the US salvos.
• The USN can fire three salvos to every two of the Japanese ship (Naval History, Nov 2005). The USN ships move many thousands of feet between Japanese salvos at long range. Effectively, the Japanese have to guess which of several possible places to fire. On the other hand, the USN has updated data between salvos (from RADAR) and a computer to keep track of the potential movement of the enemy. More shells and less uncertainty equals more hits.
• The differences in maximum range between the USN and Japanese ships is only a few miles. It is well known that these Japanese ships had trouble elevating their guns beyond 30 degrees because of hydraulic machinery problems. To fire at maximum range their rate of fire will drop dramatically.
• The record of all modern naval gun battles prove that it is unnecessary to penetrate the citidel to render a modern battleship useless. All one of the penetrating hits does as suddenly and catastrophically end the battle. Bismarck, Yamato and Musashi were all rendered worse than useless by hits that did not penetrate the citidel.

W

[Victorious]

Who am I to argue with. America 1 Japan 0

[Werner]

I really don't think armor over 25cm (10 in.) was ever penetrated in combat during the 20th Century.

W