PDA

View Full Version : KanColle - Historical references and History discussion


Klashikari
2015-01-31, 16:18
Welcome to the Historical references thread for Kancolle.

As you know, Kancolle makes a lot of references to what actually happened in the Pacific War during World War II. Therefore, it is very likely that some operations or characters are directly referring to these actual events from the past, which might not be obvious for some people.
In order not to clutter too much the other threads, please use this one for discussion related to these historical references.

However, please do not derail this thread to a dedicated thread about WWII or the Pacific War.

Wild Goose
2015-02-04, 22:24
Well, getting things started: the multicolored smoke when the four Kongo sisters pose in Episode 4 is based off the dye marker they used for their shells IRL.

Xero8420
2015-02-05, 10:10
Interesting to note that the CA-class kanmusus are teachers/lecturers, coaches, instructors and staffs. I'm curious about their careers in their fields that made them fitting to be these.

KBTKaiser
2015-02-06, 03:19
during the kongo role call, Hiei, Haruna, and Kirishima were showing their assembly dockyards before their black ship selves.

SaintessHeart
2015-02-11, 16:00
Which is rather ironic, of Zuikaku, considering how that division no longer exists now :heh:

She replaces the 1CarDiv after AKKG got sunk at Midway.

And most of the 1CarDiv pilots dislike the 5CarDiv pilots since the latter are mostly greenhorns.

Does Kitagami not like destroyers for some reason? And moreover why >>

In the game her secretary line grumbles about destroyers.

IRL? We'll have to ask our resident historian here. :heh:

Ashigara down there crying was quite cute, haha. In any case, in my opinion all Myōkos have a fantastic figure and legs. :D

Well their K2 art is all about the disco/bar. They are the adults of Kancolle, in contrast with the 6DD which are the Kancolle lolis.

AC-Phoenix
2015-02-11, 16:07
She replaces the 1CarDiv after AKKG got sunk at Midway.

And most of the 1CarDiv pilots dislike the 5CarDiv pilots since the latter are mostly

I was referring to the admiral having dissolved CarDiv 1 and CarDiv 5 in EP 5.
Technically, and practically too, there are no CharDiv 1 and 5 anymore.

Escept of course this and next episode just tell the story from other ships perspective and are not in the right chronological order. (Would still be btter than the chronological order they pulled at Haruhi...)

Kakurin
2015-02-11, 16:21
I was referring to the admiral having dissolved CarDiv 1 and CarDiv 5 in EP 5.
Technically, and practically too, there are no CharDiv 1 and 5 anymore.
CarDiv1 / 5 (like DesDiv6) are tied to the kanmusus themselves, rather than being solely an organisational unit like Torpedo Squadron 3.

SaintessHeart
2015-02-11, 16:26
I was referring to the admiral having dissolved CarDiv 1 and CarDiv 5 in EP 5.
Technically, and practically too, there are no CharDiv 1 and 5 anymore.

Escept of course this and next episode just tell the story from other ships perspective and are not in the right chronological order. (Would still be btter than the chronological order they pulled at Haruhi...)

I used the CarDiv's as a reference to the original layout in the IJN.

There is alot of factionalism back in the Japanese forces back then when they rolled around the world. The IJA Malayan Command had lots of problems with HQ (some sort of rivalry between the Tojo ball-carriers and his detractors), and they weren't receptive of the IJN, which sat there and do pretty much nothing until Yamashita took over Singapore (the poor guy got sidelined by Tojo and was sent back to Manchuko).

It was until the Americans hammered them in Midway/Guadalcanal and started the Solomon campaign did they start having some sort coordination between the IJN and the 25th Army, under the Southern Expeditionary Army's Tokyo Express.

Ithekro
2015-02-11, 16:30
No reason for Kitakami to dislike destroyers in particular. She was designed as a light cruiser to lead destroyer squadrons. I was thinking it was a collision, but that was with the light cruiser Abukuma. maybe her duty changes when she was converted to a torpedo cruiser. but that would just make her lead of a night attack squadron for torpedo runs.

HandofFate
2015-02-11, 18:36
What's the ship lore of these 4 loli ship foursome group?

Myssa Rei
2015-02-11, 19:07
What's the ship lore of these 4 loli ship foursome group?

The Akatsuki class of ships was the last of the Fubuki superclass constructed, and the only one to feature a member that, along with Yukikaze/Tan Yang, survived well into the Cold War before being scrapped -- Hibiki, who became Verniy (as a spoil of war given to the Soviet Union), then Decembrist.

bhl88
2015-02-11, 19:40
^ then scrapped as she was used for target practice.

Ithekro
2015-02-11, 21:15
Though that was in the 60s or 1970, around the time Yukikaze ended her career with Taiwan.

Azuma Denton
2015-02-11, 22:17
What's the ship lore of these 4 loli ship foursome group?
Inazuma and Ikazuchi are famous for helping the survivors of the US Ships they destroyed during the battle in Java Sea around March 1942. Hence they were designed as the pure little kids.

Estavali
2015-02-12, 11:47
Inazuma and Ikazuchi are famous for helping the survivors of the US Ships they destroyed during the battle in Java Sea around March 1942. Hence they were designed as the pure little kids.

There's a heartwarming doujin based on this: Kantai Collection - Things Which the Girl Saw (http://hijiribe.donmai.us/pools/7932)

Imho one can't talk about Ikazuchi's humanitarian act after the Second Battle of the Java Sea without mentioning her then captain, lieutenant commander Kudou Shunsaku.

7 Jan 1901: Born in to a farmer's family in Higashiokitama District, Yamagata.

1920: Enrolled into the Imperial Japanese Naval Academy in 1920.

1923: Graduated from the Academy and served as a trainee aboard the Izumo-class armored cruiser Iwate, following it far south to the waters of Australia and NZ, etc. Was assigned to Yuubari after completing his training.

Oct 1924: Assigned to Nagato

Dec 1924: Promoted to 2nd lieutenant. Enrolled into the IJN's torpedo and gunnery schools.

1926: Promoted to 1st lieutenant in 1926 and was assigned to the No.2 minesweeper.

1927: Served on DD Tsubaki (Navigating Officer)

1929: Served on DD Hatakaze (Navigating Officer)

1930: Assigned to Tama in 1930. Enrolled for advanced courses in the torpedo academy

1932: Graduation from the torpedo school. Then on until 1927, served on DD Momo, Choukai, DD Sagiri, Kuma, Tama again and Isuzu as torpedo officer except for Choukai, where he served as section commander.

1937: Promoted to Major.

1938: Became captain of DD Tachikaze.

1940: Assigned to shore duty, served as an instructor in the gunnery school and judge advocate in the military court in Yokosuka Naval Base.

Nov 1940: Assigned as captain of Ikazuchi.

Wikipedia's (rather stubby) entry on Kudou: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shunsaku_Kud%C5%8D

According to the Japanese and Chinese entries, Ikazuchi, along with Inazuma, had also saved 376 men from HMS Exeter on the previous day.

Kudou later became Hibiki's CO in Aug 1942 before assigned to shore duties once more from Dec 1942 onward. Due to health reasons, he was placed on standby w.e.f. 15 March 1945.

He returned to his hometown after the war, later moving to Kawaguchi, Saitama to help out at the hospital run by his wife's nephew. He would stay there until his death in 1979 due to stomach cancer. Kudou seldom talked about his experiences during the war, a self-imposed ban after Ikazuchi sank with all hands in 1944. Even his descendants didn't know about his humanitarian deeds until learning about it from Sir Sam Falle.

On his deathbed, he was visited by Ooi Atsushi, his old classmate from the Academy. Kudou's dying words to him were, "Please live on well. I'm just a big useless fellow (貴様はよろしくやっているみたいだな。俺は独活の大木だったよ)".
The man that would probably be like a father to the DesDiv 6 girls was blessed with a strong physique and had a dan in Judo. His warm and broad-minded character led to the nickname "Buddha Kudou" (工藤大佛). Influenced by Suzuki Kantarou (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantar%C5%8D_Suzuki) who was principal during his Academy years, Kudou strictly prohibited the "law of the fist" under his command (which is rare in the oppressive Japanese military environment) and got along well with his men (ships where he was CO were said to have a comfortable feel). He was also a decisive leader and didn't sweat the minor issues, which earned the trust of his men. After the war, he never attended any of the IJN old boy gatherings but would instead pray before the Buddha every morning for the friends and subordinates that had died in battle.

http://i.imgur.com/ziWnPNgl.jpg

panzerfan
2015-02-13, 04:32
Interesting to note that the CA-class kanmusus are teachers/lecturers, coaches, instructors and staffs. I'm curious about their careers in their fields that made them fitting to be these.

All CAs in the Japanese navy function as detached fleet command ships which may lead torpedo squadrons, or they function in cruiser squadrons. As 'warships', they are held in way higher esteem than just inventory of the navy which destroyers were classified as.

Ithekro
2015-02-13, 05:07
The Battle of Savo Island (probably the largest single loss for the US Navy in the war) the Japanese had a line of five heavy cruisers, one of the 10 guns cruisers (Takao-class Chokai) leading the four 6 guns cruisers of the Furutaka and Aoba classes. These five heavy cruisers were leading two light cruisers (the at that time old Tenryuu, and the newer, slightly more advanced, Yuubari) and one destroyer, Yunagi, an old Kamikaze-class, older than the Mutsuki-class. (Yunagi's sistership Hayate has the distinction of being the first Japanese ship sunk in the war..before Kisaragi.)

These ships sank three American heavy cruisers and damaged an Australian heavy cruiser enough that it was scuttled several hours later. Two American destroyers were also damaged. Only three of the Japanese cruisers were damaged. Kako was sunk later by submarine on the way home.

Estavali
2015-02-20, 11:01
Disclaimer: This post contains findings from Japanese sources. As my grasp on the Japanese language is hardly assuring, chances are that I may have gotten something wrong in the process. Corrections if any will be greatly appreciated =3

I was browsing wiki for the 4th Fleet Incident and came across Fujimoto Kikuo, who was the IJN's main naval architect together with his senior, Hiraga Yuzuru.

According to what I've found on the Internet, compared to the conservative and stubborn Hiraga, Fujimoto was more receptive of new ideas and eagerly researched, experimented and incorporated the latest technology, such as electric welding and ship-mounted diesel engines, into his designs. Also, unlike Hiraga, his designs placed less emphasis on ship-to-ship combat and took ASW and AA into consideration. The Fubuki-class DDs that had shocked the world was his masterpiece; other works that bear his mark includes the Hatsuharu-class DDs and Takao-class and Mogami-class CAs.

Despite his talent, Fujimoto was not without faults. An easy-going man, he lacked Hiraga's force of character and was thus unable to reject the unreasonable demands placed on by the IJN higher-ups. An example was shown in the development of the Myoukou-class CAs, which were designed by Hiraga. Hiraga had previously argued against the installation of torpedoes on the Furutaka-class, reasoning that torpedoes had no business on a ship that relied on its main guns and would instead be a fatal liability should they explode on-deck (later developments in the war would prove him right). Though the navy over-rode his concerns on the Furutaka-class, he eventually succeeded in getting it to approve his torpedo-less design for the upcoming Myoukou-class. However, during their construction, Hiraga was sent to Europe for eight months and his successor, Fujimoto, was pressured by the navy to add in the torpedoes along with other changes to Hiraga's original design.

As a result of Fujimoto's compliant attitude, his final designs ended up top-heavy due to the amount of weaponry forced onto them (anime watchers, this is where Fubuki's initial lack of balance came from). His use of electric welding was also questionable at that time since the technology was still new in Japan and subsequently produced ships that were held together far too weakly compared to the more traditional use of rivets. This preference may have been from either an over-enthusiasm for new technology (which might have blinded him to its problems) and/or an attempt to create well-armed ships with tonnage that would still fall within the limit set by the treaties. In any case this created ships that would come apart in a heavy storm, as was what happened.

As a result of the aforementioned, Fujimoto was held responsible for the Tomozuru Incident and was placed under house arrest. A year later in 1935, he passed away with intracranial hemorrhage at the age of 46. As a protest, his supporters at IJN Technical Department held a grand naval funeral at the Aoyama Cemetary and, on the pretext of "doing spring cleaning", burnt much of the IJN's shipbuilding data and models since the Meiji era, leaving little for the returning Hiraga.

Regarding Fujimoto, a historian once said that the progress in IJN naval architecture stopped after Fujimoto died. There are even some who would go as far as to say that it regressed under Hiraga's watch. Personally I feel that neither nor Fujimoto should be solely blamed for the defects in IJN ship architecture. Instead, the real factors imho are Japan's, or rather its military's over-reaching ambitions which led to unrealistic demands on hardware; a battleship-centric policy that opt for a quick resolution instead of a sustainable long-term strategy; and behind all this, Japan's inferiority in financial and industrial strength, especially when compared to the US. To quote "On Seas Contested: The Seven Great Navies of the Second World War" (https://books.google.com.sg/books?id=LuiMAgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA182&ots=Pvta-BkY2X&dq=overview%20of%20Hiraga%20Yuzuru%20designs&pg=PA206#v=onepage&q=overview%20of%20Hiraga%20Yuzuru%20designs&f=false):Because of scarce resources and limited facilities for technological innovation, made worse in wartime when Japanese manufacture found it hard just to replace combat losses, it was difficult to develop, test and produce new weapons and equipment. Even more importantly, the limitations on Japanese science and technology prevented Japan from developing complex and critical "second stage" technologies that were introduced by the United States including the radar, the VT (proximity) fuze, and forward-thrown antisubmarine weapons.

It's very hard for the engineers to work miracles in such unfavorable conditions.

That said, even if Japan had the financial and industrial capacity to meet the US, its chief imaginary enemy, straight-on, Hiraga's conservative approach was still an issue. Hiraga, like many in the IJN, he too embraced the "Big Ship, Big Guns" concept that was central to the battleship-centric strategy and failed to foresee the increasingly important role that submarines and aircraft carriers would come to play. His designs were thus unable to cope with the increasing need for ASW and AA combat, something that Fujimoto might have been averted to some degree had he been given the freedom to do as he wished.

Hiraga's skeptical attitude towards new shipbuilding techniques meant that he was also stuck with faults that came with tried-and-proven methods. For example, rather than to improve on the welding technique, he continued the use of rivets, which, while a sure method to hold the ships together, would also cause the ships to take additional damage when shelled. His mistrust in diesel engines and over-reliance on the "good old ways" also resulted in wasteful designs instead of streamlined ones that would have worked just as well. And what's worse is that he paid little attention to damage control (yet an area that Fujimoto had gone into). We all know what that led to...

If Yuubari and the Furutaka, Aoba, Myoukou, Sendai and Yamato sisters, all of whom were designed by Hiraga, can be considered to be his daughters, then Hatsuharu-class as well as the Mogami and Takao sisters would be Fujimoto's. In fact, some feel that Fujimoto should be credited for Yuubari instead, claiming that he was the real architect behind her creation =3


Btw, just in case you're wondering why the sudden interest in the 4th Fleet Incident, that's because of today's Fubuki Ganbarimasu (chapter 74) =3

Sources:

Wikipedia:

On Fujimoto Kikuo: JP entry (http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%97%A4%E6%9C%AC%E5%96%9C%E4%B9%85%E9%9B%84), CN entry (http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%97%A4%E6%9C%AC%E5%96%9C%E4%B9%85%E9%9B%84)

On Hiraga Yuzuru: JP entry (http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B9%B3%E8%B3%80%E8%AD%B2)

Baidu (CN):

藤本喜久雄 (Fujimoto Kikuo) (http://baike.baidu.com/view/5000091.htm)
平贺让 (Hiraga Yuzuru) (http://baike.baidu.com/view/3176380.htm)
二战霓虹海军的急先锋..... (an article of the history of the IJN heavy cruisers) (http://tieba.baidu.com/p/1921323134?see_lz=1)

Additional:

平賀「譲らないもん絶対」の平賀博士 @ 軍事ちゃんねる!!(JP) (http://military2013.blog.jp/archives/2166164.html)

bhl88
2015-02-24, 14:41
So Yuubari's little armor and top heavy was Fujomoto's idea? (was surprised at the lack of seaplanes for the light cruiser....)

Estavali
2015-02-25, 01:06
So Yuubari's little armor and top heavy was Fujomoto's idea? (was surprised at the lack of seaplanes for the light cruiser....)

That's if we can take the word of those who support that claim =3. In any case, I doubt Yuubari was meant to be anything but a sandbox for those two to play with. They probably just implemented everything that came to mind, like pot luck :heh:

Ithekro
2015-02-25, 04:14
It was early as well. The Tenryu-class didn't have seaplanes either. Though Yuubari was more a large destroyer with nice guns than a light cruiser. Built to have the firepower of the Sendai-class at roughly half the tonnage.

panzerfan
2015-02-25, 04:25
You can't necessary blame Hiiraga on this issue of welding. Japan had to bring in German experts and import compounds to address the welding issues. It was unfortunate that Japan only went back to welding for the Matsu/Tachibana class when it was just too late, but Japan really didn't have the maturity to deploy arc welding in the 20s and 30s.

Ithekro
2015-02-25, 04:37
While the Long Lance torpedo was intended a great equalizer against the more numberous Allied ships for night battles, the oxygen torpedoes probably sunk or heavly damaged more Japanese ships than Allied ships. This includes ships that had their torpedoes explode in the tubes due to fires (and possibly scuttling other ships).

The planned tactic would be to use the Long Lance at long range, outside the normal American visual range (at night) as the Japanese had excellent optics and night training. Then they might open fire with flashless powder to not give away their position to the enemy. This sort of worked, save several captains and crews did not follow procedure. There were several instances of the use of spotlights, which tended to get the ship using them blown out of the water by all the Allied ships, as it was the only clear target. Plus by the time the American radar fire control systems became more reliable, the Japanese could expect the Americans to fire before the Japanese launched torpedoes. The Americans also whiching to flashless powder helped later in the war to counter the Japanese night fighting.

When the Japanese torpedo tactics did work, the American did not know they had been attacked by torpedoes and assumed they had run into a minefield, and acted accordingly.

bhl88
2015-02-25, 05:16
That's if we can take the word of those who support that claim =3. In any case, I doubt Yuubari was meant to be anything but a sandbox for those two to play with. They probably just implemented everything that came to mind, like pot luck :heh:

Like not putting any space in the armor (merging the armor with the structure itself to save weight).... yeah, Yuubari looks like a science experiment...

@Ithreko: Oh I thought it was a gimped light cruiser (as opposed to Tenryuu being a destroyer+)

Ithekro
2015-02-25, 05:36
She was a scout cruiser. The American Omaha-class light cruisers were suppose to be scout cruisers to go with a new wave of fast destroyers (Clemson-class) and the original design for the Lexington-class battlecruisers. A 35 knot scouting fleet.

bhl88
2015-02-25, 16:09
I mean Madoka Melon-chan Yuubari

Top Sergeant
2015-02-25, 18:38
And now we have come to Truk, a major forward fleet base for the IJN, and Yamamoto's headquarters for awhile.

Ithekro
2015-02-25, 21:16
I mean Madoka Melon-chan Yuubari


I mean Yuubari as well. She was designed as a scout cruiser.

Tenryuu was designed as an enlarged destroyer leader, except the speed of the new destroyers was greater than expected from when Tenryuu was designed.

Wild Goose
2015-02-25, 22:38
As for the Abyssals breaking Kanmusu codes, that's a reference to the US Navy's codebreakers, who broke Japanese codes just prior to Midway.

bhl88
2015-02-26, 00:40
I mean Yuubari as well. She was designed as a scout cruiser.

Tenryuu was designed as an enlarged destroyer leader, except the speed of the new destroyers was greater than expected from when Tenryuu was designed.

It seems they forgot to give her planes and just stacked her with weapons....

Ithekro
2015-02-26, 00:41
Only fit so much in under 3,000 tons.

bhl88
2015-02-26, 04:16
Only fit so much in under 3,000 tons.

So the firepower of a heavy cruiser with the armor/speed of a destroyer...

Ithekro
2015-02-26, 04:30
More like the firepower of a 5,000 ton light cruiser on a large 3,000 ton destroyer. She had no plane, and only a fewer and lighter torpedoes compared to the other light cruiser and special type destroyers. She was fairly fast.

bhl88
2015-02-26, 16:29
Fairly to refer to the destroyer engine's installed into her...

They also said something about merging the armor with the structure.

SaintessHeart
2015-02-27, 00:26
Two Kamikaze Pilot's Reprive (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-26/two-kamikaze-pilots-two-reprieves-one-pacifist-view)

Considering that the IJN lost air superiority after Midway after 1CarDiv was sunk, the Kamikaze was a desperate option.

bhl88
2015-02-27, 19:32
For some reason, Bismarck has less armor and firepower than the Yamato... did the builder realize that they will only fight land battles?

(Maus, part of Hitler's love for big things, could have worked as a ship than a tank...)

Klashikari
2015-02-27, 19:36
Considering the huge difference between the two, I don't see how they could possibily have the same stats.
Yamato had 46cm cannons and a belt armor of 410mm, Bismark "merely" had 38cm and a belt armor of 320mm.

As to why the germans didn't copy the Japanese, most likely due to how they didn't have the same technology and how Yamato is pretty much impracticable. I'm pretty sure the germans didn't share the same philosophy about the battleships anyway.

Ithekro
2015-02-27, 20:08
The Germans were building what is basically a large surface raider that could challenge the Royal Navy one on one. Germany was behind in naval construction due to the treaties and aftermath of World War One. So Bismarck is based somewhat on the last class of battleship Germany built in 1916.

bhl88
2015-02-27, 20:11
Ah okay, Germany wants 1 on 1 and Yamato is: everything vs everything....

Sheba
2015-02-27, 20:11
IIRC, German battleships were mostly pushed by Hitler for "prestige" reasons. And war came too early for the Kriegmarine to build a sizeable surface combat fleet.

AC-Phoenix
2015-02-27, 20:14
Considering the huge difference between the two, I don't see how they could possibily have the same stats.
Yamato had 46cm cannons and a belt armor of 410mm, Bismark "merely" had 38cm and a belt armor of 320mm.

As to why the germans didn't copy the Japanese, most likely due to how they didn't have the same technology and how Yamato is pretty much impracticable. I'm pretty sure the germans didn't share the same philosophy about the battleships anyway.

The armor alone doesn't really say much, german engineering back then was a bit different than on the rest of the world and Bismarck was pretty sturdy.
(Just look at her Wreckage)

It took a very lucky hit (her rudder) as well as 2 entire fleets to put eventually put her down.
Even when her rudder was damaged it took over 250 shells and several torpedoes to make her stop shooting.

Some of the scientists who went down to her sinking spot even discribed the damage to her hull as 'not enough to sink her'. While all of them share the common opinion that the honor of the kill goes to the UK, some of them think it was sabotage rather than the damage she took (so basically they think the German's scuttled her).

Some survivors even claimed to have seen her captain standing at her front when she sunk.

Another huge difference is: Bismarck was actually pretty damaged, she had fractured fuel tanks from her battle with the Prince of Wales and the Hood, while the two fleets attacking her where still in excellent shape.

Basically: Before her sinking Bismarck went through 2 battles.
The sea archelogists mentioned above are debating whether she would have stood still on the sea for at least a day or just a few hours btw.


As to why I think the German's didn't copy the Yamato:

It was definitely not the absence of the necessary technology, given everything that was researched there during the war.
The biggest difference between the two ships is that Bismarck doesn't violate the Washinton Treaty while Yamato does. - So maybe that has something to do with it.

Only thing I am personally surprised is that they didn't give her bigger cannons or at least triple cannons.

Ithekro
2015-02-27, 21:25
The Germans had designed the barbettes of their twin 15" gun turrets the same size as their triple 11" gun turret so they could swap out the triple turrets of their battlecruisers with twin 15" turrets once the new guns were built in enough numbers. (The Japanese did something similar with the Mogami-class cruisers. Built them with 155mm guns in triples but swappeed them for 200 mm twins after they left the treaties behind.) The war started about six years before the German Navy might have been somewhat viable as a surface fleet.

Bismarck's successor class, the H-39, was to have twin 16" cannon turrets and still more or less have the silouette of their heavy cruisers and Bismarck.

bhl88
2015-02-28, 00:54
As to why I think the German's didn't copy the Yamato:

It was definitely not the absence of the necessary technology, given everything that was researched there during the war.
The biggest difference between the two ships is that Bismarck doesn't violate the Washinton Treaty while Yamato does. - So maybe that has something to do with it.

Only thing I am personally surprised is that they didn't give her bigger cannons or at least triple cannons.

Just that considering Hitler's love for grand things, I was thinking that he'd say: "MAKE IT BIGGER DAMMIT"

He wanted a Maus after all... A big tank that consumed as much gas as a light cruiser... Was expecting the Bismarck to have a bigger caliber (and they were hiding a lot of stuff before they went to war anyway)

Ithekro
2015-02-28, 03:36
Guns like that take steps to make. They had a new 11" gun and barely finished making the 15" guns for Bismarck and Tirpitz. They were planning on going up to 16" on the next ship class (H39). Their "make it bigger" ship, the H44 was to use 21" guns. But that ship would take as much steel as an entire Panzer Division, and they needed Panzer Divisions in Russia rather than one mega battleship in the Baltic or Atlantic. Even that ship would have a hard time using the giant rain gun Schwerer Gustav (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwerer_Gustav), a 80cm cannon, (31"). The giant H44 could possibly mount two of those guns in massive single turrets and still be able to use them.

Kakurin
2015-02-28, 03:42
The armor alone doesn't really say much, german engineering back then was a bit different than on the rest of the world and Bismarck was pretty sturdy.
(Just look at her Wreckage)

It took a very lucky hit (her rudder) as well as 2 entire fleets to put eventually put her down.
Even when her rudder was damaged it took over 250 shells and several torpedoes to make her stop shooting.

Some of the scientists who went down to her sinking spot even discribed the damage to her hull as 'not enough to sink her'. While all of them share the common opinion that the honor of the kill goes to the UK, some of them think it was sabotage rather than the damage she took (so basically they think the German's scuttled her).
That's mainly because the British actually were too close to Bismarck and as such the angle of impact was unfavourable. Bismarck's armour protection scheme makes it very difficult to penetrate at close distance. However, the very same scheme is vulnerable at long-distance, where the angle is steeper. Had Tovey not chosen to shorten the distance after spotting Bismarck he could've done more damage to her. Moreover Bismarck's underwater protection wasn't too good, as shown by Prince of Wales' hit below the waterline that damaged her fuel tanks. That said, Bismarck was designed for North Sea / North Atlantic battles with the experience of Jutland. And as such the expectation was for the battle distance to be short with low visibility (in the absence of radar based fire control).

In good visibility conditions at long range Bismarck couldn't have realistically stood up to Yamato and with the Americans' radar-based firing control of the late war years she would've had no chance against Iowa.

Some survivors even claimed to have seen her captain standing at her front when she sunk.
That's not very likely. Lindemann and Lütjens were probably killed when the bridge was hit by shells from the British battleships.

Only thing I am personally surprised is that they didn't give her bigger cannons or at least triple cannons.
One is simply experience. The Germans had experience with 38cm guns (the last battleship class completed by Imperial Germany, the Bayern-class, had 38cm ones). Any gun above that size would have to be designed from scratch. And Bismarck's 38cm guns were good compared to contemporary 38cm or 40cm guns. Very accurate, good range and a fast firing cycle. Two is, while they could've gone 40cm, such a gun would have no doubt been a provocation to the Royal Navy. The last point regarding the triple cannons: the Germans feared more guns within a turret would lower the firing cycle (Bismarck's firing cycle of 20 seconds was at least 10 seconds faster than that of any other World War II battleship), more risky to have a higher percentage of the ship's firepower taken out by a single hit and last but not least, four twin turrets allowed for a better field of fire and firing sequence.

Ithekro
2015-02-28, 03:48
The Japanese, on the other hand, had continued building warships since the Great War. So they didn't have to start over like the Germans did. They had plans for a 18" gun fast battleship to follow the Tosa and Amagi class ships as part of the 8-8 Plan in the 1920s. The Americans and British had also made 18" guns. The British mounted one (of two planned) on HMS Furious when it was a hybrid Light Battlecruiser/Carrier. It rattled the ship massively, so they took it off and made her a full carrier. The Americans tested there gun, but never really had a design to put it on. They found their upgraded 16" guns with longer barrels and super heavy shells worked better for the limitations American battleships were under at that time (not just Treaty restrictions, but also the limits of the Panama Canal.) The Montana-class would break the Canal limit, but would still have long 16" guns that can fire super heavy shells like the Iowa-class. Just a fourth triple turrets.

Yamato was designed to make sure it could defeat Treaty battleships armed with standard 16" guns or less. It was armored well enough to defeat 15" guns at almost any range. 16" was more difficult, and the Japanese had not planned on the American super heavies, so Iowa-class ships could take on Yamato. But the Iowa-class was not designed to take 18.1" cannon fire in return. It would matter who it first and most consistantly. The Iowas have radar fire control and the Yamato does not. However Yamato's optics are really good, having a debatable near miss that crippled an American ship at Samar from something like 30,000 meters.

Bismarck has no chance against Yamato. On paper at least. On paper, Bismarck has a 10 meter zone around 34,300 meters where Yamato is vulnerable to Bismarck's 15" guns. Other than that, they can't reliably penerate Yamato's armor. Belt or deck. Hitting a 10 meter target at 34,300 meters? That's Skywalker territory. Unless Bismarck wants to get in close. Close in she could probably penetrate Yamato's armor, but then Yamato will have been brutally hammering away at Bismarck the entire way in.

AC-Phoenix
2015-03-01, 11:07
That's mainly because the British actually were too close to Bismarck and as such the angle of impact was unfavourable. Bismarck's armour protection scheme makes it very difficult to penetrate at close distance. However, the very same scheme is vulnerable at long-distance, where the angle is steeper. Had Tovey not chosen to shorten the distance after spotting Bismarck he could've done more damage to her. Moreover Bismarck's underwater protection wasn't too good, as shown by Prince of Wales' hit below the waterline that damaged her fuel tanks. That said, Bismarck was designed for North Sea / North Atlantic battles with the experience of Jutland. And as such the expectation was for the battle distance to be short with low visibility (in the absence of radar based fire control).


The main reason she even sunk were bad decisions by Lütjens, if it wasn't for Lindemann she might have already sunk against Prince of Wales and Hood.

I suggest watching James Cameron's documentation on it + oneothers for more detailed information.
The one from James Cameron is special because he actually shows interior shots of the damaged hull parts, and animated diagrams of where the shells hit actually hit and went through.

Only areally small number of shots actually penetrated the Bismarck's armor and none of them seemed enough to sink her.


In good visibility conditions at long range Bismarck couldn't have realistically stood up to Yamato and with the Americans' radar-based firing control of the late war years she would've had no chance against Iowa.).

Uff, if we start with later technology, then I can assure you that the Bismarck would have gotten serious refits by the time she and Yamato would have inevitably clashed.
In the first place Germany put a lot of money into researching new weapons.

A notable refit we can assume Bismarck would have been the strengthening of her stern, as the Prinz Eugen recieved them too.

In the end it still took serious efforts and two fleets to sink her/get tthe German's to scuttle her.

Another thing you shouldn't forget is that the Yamato actually exploded, while the Bismarck's wreck is still in rather good condition with none of the torpedoes actually having damaged her Torpedo bulges.

So yeah all in all the Bismarck would have still had a good chance against Iowa.

Sinking a ship via artillery fire is generally not as easy as people think and takes precise shots to vital points such as the ammunition storage.


That's not very likely. Lindemann and Lütjens were probably killed when the bridge was hit by shells from the British battleships.).

Its likely a sailor's myth. However you can somewhat argue it out using 9/11 as an example where people survived being in one of the offices the plane crashed in, or very close to it.
I'm personally more concerned how he would have survived the shockwave than the actual explosion tbh.




Yamato was designed to make sure it could defeat Treaty battleships armed with standard 16" guns or less. It was armored well enough to defeat 15" guns at almost any range. 16" was more difficult, and the Japanese had not planned on the American super heavies, so Iowa-class ships could take on Yamato. But the Iowa-class was not designed to take 18.1" cannon fire in return. It would matter who it first and most consistantly. The Iowas have radar fire control and the Yamato does not. However Yamato's optics are really good, having a debatable near miss that crippled an American ship at Samar from something like 30,000 meters.

TbH I doubt any modern ship could seriously withstand the Yamato's cannons. The USS Nimitz armor is mostly classified though, so thats up to speculation.



Bismarck has no chance against Yamato. On paper at least. On paper, Bismarck has a 10 meter zone around 34,300 meters where Yamato is vulnerable to Bismarck's 15" guns. Other than that, they can't reliably penerate Yamato's armor. Belt or deck. Hitting a 10 meter target at 34,300 meters? That's Skywalker territory. Unless Bismarck wants to get in close. Close in she could probably penetrate Yamato's armor, but then Yamato will have been brutally hammering away at Bismarck the entire way in.

tbH I wouldn't say any of the Iowa/Bismarck/Yamato combination would win against the other.
We don't know what kind of refits the Yamato or the Bismarck would have gotten had they survied their battles.
Well we can from Yamato's plans, in Bismarck's case we only know that she would have gotten a strengthening of her stern, from what the Prinz Eugen got.

Iowa and Yamato are two ships you can actually let run against in Battlestations Pacific, and believe me I rued having gotten oo close to Yamato pretty soon.

Most the Iowa's Class cannons just gave me a note that they were ineffective at all and the only thing I could rely on were her 16 Inch guns.

Ithekro
2015-03-01, 13:10
Iowa verses anything is a different matter.

Bismarck doesn't stand a chance against Yamato unless they get really close to each other. The reason being that Yamato's much thicker belt armor can stop a 15 inch shell from penetrating it outside 10,000 meters. And the extremely thick deck armor cannot be penetrated at all by a 15 inch shell (save for that 10 meter wide region around 34,300 meters were it might be able to take out a boiler room by putting a shell down the armored stack). Even with Yamato's inferior armor plating (the Japanese were still using World War One British designed armor plate making methods for extremely thick armor plating, which was inferior to what the British and Americans were using.)

Bismarck's deck armor cannot stop a 18.1 inch shell effectively at longer ranges, nor can the belt armor stop the same shell inside around 15,000 meters. Basically, if the captain of Bismarck wants to get in close enough to be able to damage Yamato, they have to go through Yamato's fire for 20 kilometers or more before even having a remote chance of doing damage.

Night battle though.....

Kakurin
2015-03-01, 13:59
I suggest watching James Cameron's documentation on it + oneothers for more detailed information.
The one from James Cameron is special because he actually shows interior shots of the damaged hull parts, and animated diagrams of where the shells hit actually hit and went through.
I know the documentaries. And you fail to get the issue: The British were too close to Bismarck, so the angle the shells hit Bismarck's armour was too flat. Bismarck's armour was designed to withstand exactly those hits. Had they kept a larger distance, the angle would've been much steeper and Bismarck's armour wouldn't have hold up nearly as well against high angled hits. Moreover they could've then also taken advantage of Bismarck's unfavourable deck armour protection. For this purpose I advise you to read about ballistics simulations based on the protection scheme of the armour. In the end it's all about physics:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/okun_biz.htm

Bismarck's own guns could've penetrated her belt armour at a distance of 29k yards. Whereas the distance needed for Yamato would've been 17.7k and for Iowa around 16.4k.

Bismarck's underwater belt armour was insufficient. The Germans (and to a lesser degree the British) underestimated the dangers of diving shells. Not only did the armour not extend far enough below water, the Germans also didn't put in a space bulkhead to protect the liquid-faced holding bulkhead. Prince of Wales' hit below the waterline that damaged the fuel tanks is a direct result of this neglection.

Uff, if we start with later technology, then I can assure you that the Bismarck would have gotten serious refits by the time she and Yamato would have inevitably clashed.
In the first place Germany put a lot of money into researching new weapons.
We don't assume an engagement in the 1950s. We go by the features the ships had when they were operative at around the same time. Yamato was commissioned in December 1941. They were contemporaries and as such can be compared. Besides, you can't change the core characteristics of a ship, no matter how much you refit. Yamato would've been always superior to Bismarck.

A notable refit we can assume Bismarck would have been the strengthening of her stern, as the Prinz Eugen recieved them too.
I don't know what you've heard. But Prinz Eugen got a new stern because her original one was damaged beyond repair after getting torpedoed by the HMS Trident. Her old stern got completely cut away and not merely strengthened.

Another thing you shouldn't forget is that the Yamato actually exploded, while the Bismarck's wreck is still in rather good condition with none of the torpedoes actually having damaged her Torpedo bulges.
You are completely missing the context. Yamato didn't explode because of a hit. She exploded because of interior fires. And regarding the torpedoes you have to factor in a great deal of additional information. First of all, the number of torpedoes. Bismarck was hit by only about three torpedoes during her final battle. Yamato took eleven confirmed and another two suspected. Then you also have to consider the torpedoes themselves. The British 21 inch MkVII torpedo carried 336kg of TNT. The American 22.5 inch Mk13 had 270kg of Torpex, which is 50% more powerful than TNT.


So yeah all in all the Bismarck would have still had a good chance against Iowa.
I think you should familiarise yourself with Iowa's technical capabilities. American radars were significantly better than anything the Germans (or the Japanese had). Iowa's SG surface radar had a range of 41km. The German FuMO 23 on Bismarck (and the more modern FuMO 26 which was perhaps installed on Tirpitz after a refit) topped out at 25km. Meaning, Iowa could've spotted Bismarck when the latter didn't even have an idea that Iowa was in the vicinity. The fire control of Iowa was also vastly superior. The Americans could blindfire using radar-based fire control, whereas the Germans were reliant on optics the entire war. And as Guadalcanal showed, radar-based firing is superior to optics-based.

So, Iowa could've spotted Bismarck from a far greater distance. She could've also launched salvos more accurately regardless of environmental conditions. So Iowa could've dictated the battle and simply maintained a distance where Bismarck couldn't damage her, but she could damage Bismarck. And Bismarck would've had no way of closing the distance since Iowa was three knots faster. No, unless Iowa suffers a catastrophic failure to her electronics equipment Bismarck would've had no chance in hell.

Sinking a ship via artillery fire is generally not as easy as people think and takes precise shots to vital points such as the ammunition storage.
Whether you actually sink the ship is irrelevant. What is relevant is to render the ship inoperative. Who cares if Bismarck is still floating if she's a smouldering hull incapable of firing back? The Americans at Midway for example didn't sink a single Japanese carrier. The integrity of neither Akagi, nor Kaga, Hiryū or Sōryū was ever compromised. But it didn't matter since they were left as burning husks.

AC-Phoenix
2015-03-01, 15:47
I know the documentaries. And you fail to get the issue: The British were too close to Bismarck, so the angle the shells hit Bismarck's armour was too flat. Bismarck's armour was designed to withstand exactly those hits. Had they kept a larger distance, the angle would've been much steeper and Bismarck's armour wouldn't have hold up nearly as well against high angled hits. Moreover they could've then also taken advantage of Bismarck's unfavourable deck armour protection. For this purpose I advise you to read about ballistics simulations based on the protection scheme of the armour. In the end it's all about physics:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/okun_biz.htm

Bismarck's own guns could've penetrated her belt armour at a distance of 29k yards. Whereas the distance needed for Yamato would've been 17.7k and for Iowa around 16.4k.

Too long for today, tomorrow.
The same side also shows statistcs that Iowa's and Bismarcks guns could have both penetrated Yamato's deck armor. Bismarcks penetration being slightly below

And I pointed to the documentary because it was generally interesting, due to having interior shots as well as the precise damage done by all weapons inspected from really close range.
in the end a total of over 2000 (2800 I think?) Shots were fired with, according to Wikipedia ~400 hitting, with a penetration of mere 4 shells at the armor belt.

In other worlds less than 1 percent of all fired shots during that battle actually penetrated her hull.
Up until here its still fine, but the english battleships also fired from afar. Even if you take flat 2000 shells fired in total thats a hit rate of less than 1 % on a ship that could only go in circles.
So unless the Bismarck was still pretty good at escaping those shotsm a lot of the hits that were close enough(Edit: as in impacted close enough) to damage her still didn't manage to do so.


Bismarck's underwater belt armour was insufficient. The Germans (and to a lesser degree the British) underestimated the dangers of diving shells. Not only did the armour not extend far enough below water, the Germans also didn't put in a space bulkhead to protect the liquid-faced holding bulkhead. Prince of Wales' hit below the waterline that damaged the fuel tanks is a direct result of this neglection.

Which I never doubted. The point that she took several Hundred shells is still a standing fact though.


We don't assume an engagement in the 1950s. We go by the features the ships had when they were operative at around the same time. Yamato was commissioned in December 1941. They were contemporaries and as such can be compared. Besides, you can't change the core characteristics of a ship, no matter how much you refit. Yamato would've been always superior to Bismarck.

Superior is not unsinkable, as both ships have proven. I wouldn't want to be on any of the 3 ships if they pointed main batteries at each other. Also the Yamato had refits before Okinawa.

And 1950 or so engagements are exactly what you have to assume in the case of Yamato and Bismarck, as it wouldn't have happened earlier than that.
Examples for things you can change on a ship are for example the radar, and its guns. You can do a lot more things if you get he back into dry dock, the question is just whether cost/expenditure would still make you want to do that instead of building a new one.

And here back to Kancolle - the expenditure might have even been taken.

Again in the end both ships needed considerable effort on the allied side to be taken down.



I don't know what you've heard. But Prinz Eugen got a new stern because her original one was damaged beyond repair after getting torpedoed by the HMS Trident. Her old stern got completely cut away and not merely strengthened.

German Ships probably had stern instabilities, which is why they got refits in that regard after Prinz Eugen was damaged.


Bismarck was hit by only about three torpedoes during her final battle. Yamato took eleven confirmed and another two suspected. Then you also have to consider the torpedoes themselves. The British 21 inch MkVII torpedo carried 336kg of TNT. The American 22.5 inch Mk13 had 270kg of Torpex, which is 50% more powerful than TNT.

The Yamato class was known for being able to take a lot of torpedoes, I think Musashi holds the record with about 20.

We an't say how many Iowa or Bismarck would have been able to take.

Yamato is generally a class of its own, due to her cannons as well as her tonnage violated the washington treaty (the tonnage part goees for the Bismarck too though)



So, Iowa could've spotted Bismarck from a far greater distance. She could've also launched salvos more accurately regardless of environmental conditions. So Iowa could've dictated the battle and simply maintained a distance where Bismarck couldn't damage her, but she could damage Bismarck. And Bismarck would've had no way of closing the distance since Iowa was three knots faster. No, unless Iowa suffers a catastrophic failure to her electronics equipment Bismarck would've had no chance in hell.

Precision aside, that still doesn't warrant 'no chance' the first thing being that both ships had recon planes, so its not like they wouldn't have known the other one was there.
And that is a reason a pointed to Cameron's documentation - Bismarcks planes were unable to launch.
Edit:(During their engagement with the british forces of course)

And yes Iowa was/is (depending on how much they butchered her when turning her into a museum), a formidable battleship, which is why I didn't wonder that they used an Iowa Class ship for Battleship

In the end there are many factors deciding a naval battle, so I stick to my comment that I wouldn't want to be on either of those 3 if they had ever clashed.

Iowa verses anything is a different matter.
. And the extremely thick deck armor cannot be penetrated at all by a 15 inch shell (save for that 10 meter wide region around 34,300 meters were it might be able to take out a boiler room by putting a shell down the armored stack). Even with Yamato's inferior armor plating (the Japanese were still using World War One British designed armor plate making methods for extremely thick armor plating, which was inferior to what the British and Americans were using.)


http://www.combinedfleet.com/f_guns.htm
Maybe I'm reading those numbers wrong(Considering that I'm bad at math very possible) - But her deck armor would have gotten penetrated at Bismacks maximum Range which was roughly 40'000 km

Kakurin
2015-03-01, 17:33
Too long for today, tomorrow.
The same side also shows statistcs that Iowa's and Bismarcks guns could have both penetrated Yamato's deck armor. Bismarcks penetration being slightly below

[...]

http://www.combinedfleet.com/f_guns.htm
Maybe I'm reading those numbers wrong(Considering that I'm bad at math very possible) - But her deck armor would have gotten penetrated at Bismacks maximum Range which was roughly 40'000 km
To be blunt, it's much more complicated than that. While Bismarck's guns could've penetrated up to 9.3" of armour at maximum range it only factors in a single sheet of that thickness. Ships' deck armour layout, however, is much more complex. Some ships have more than one armoured deck. Then there are also other objects and layers obstructing the path, so even if the initial deck is penetrated the damage will be limited. And Yamato's deck armour was pretty much impenetrable for Bismarck's 38cm guns. There was only a single 6.1x12.2m window where Bismarck's shell could've penetrated and then the damage would be limited to a single boiler room only (there are 12 total in the area). The complete analysis of Yamato's deck armour against Bismarck's 38cm guns is here:

The Japanese IJN YAMATO had an armored third deck with a 7.87" (200 mm) flat central deck and a 9.06" (230 mm) sloped outer region that took up about 25% of the deck area from each of the side edges. The main armor deck was set at the top edge of the main armor belt and the slope connecting the 7.87" flat central region to the belt edge was only 8o from the horizontal and lifted the armor deck slightly to allow the boilers and engines more space. This deck was made of Japanese Molybdenum Non-Cemented (MNC) homogeneous armor (slightly inferior to U.S. STS, but not by much) and were totally proof against a deck hit from the German 38 cm gun. Even the funnel uptake armor grating plate, which was drilled through with many holes to allow the stack gases to pass through the armored deck and was thus only equal to about 40% of its actual thickness of solid MNC armor without holes, was 14.96" (380 mm) thick, giving a 6" (152 mm) effective thickness. This grating is surrounded by a cylindrical 1.97" (50 mm) homogeneous CNC armor plate wrapped around the raked funnel base and rising several decks into the superstructure, which is a unique armor arrangement used in these ships only. For the BISMARCK's gun projectile to reach the grating through the weather deck at an obliquity where penetration is worth calculating requires passing through a lot of superstructure bulkheads and decks that would probably reduce the striking velocity somewhat, but this is hard to determine (I am going to use the full 1.97" thickness of the grating shield instead of reducing it by 5%, which I would normally do with CNC, because of this).

The YAMATO's flat middle deck region (with the grating at its center over the boilers) could only be reached from above after passing through two lightly armored decks spaced 8.5' (2.6 m) apart and 8.5' above the main armor deck or from the side through a lightly armored upper hull side 17' (5.2 m) high. The upper two decks and upper side hull were made of single plates or two laminated plates of British-type D-steel, which I give a quality factor of 0.9, as given in the table above. The plates were arranged so that they were thickest at the hull side for the decks and thickest at the top of the upper side hull. This meant that the more steep the angle of fall and, thus, the slower the attacking projectile was going, the thinner the upper hull or deck plating that was hit near the centerline, allowing the plates near the side that would be hit at more shallow angles of fall by more rapidly moving projectiles to be reinforced considerably. Incidentally, this also was the best arrangement for strengthening the ship for bad weather, since heavy waves would bear down mostly near the ship's side. The weather deck had only 0.5" (13 mm) D-steel at the centerline, giving an effective STS thickness of 0.45" (11 mm), but this increased in regular steps to 1.42' (36 mm) at the hull side edge, made up of two laminated plates 0.79" (20mm) over 0.63' (16 mm), giving an effective D-steel thickness of 1.29" (33 mm) and an effective STS thickness of 1.16" (30 mm) at its thickest. The second deck only used single plates and it started out at the centerline at 0.39" (10 mm) - equaling 0.35" (9 mm) of STS - and gradually thickened to 1" (25 mm) - equaling 0.9" (23 mm) STS - for the 25% area directly above the outer sloped portion of the main armor deck. The lower half of the upper side hull between the second and third decks was made of a 0.31" (9 mm) D-steel plate laminated to a 1" D-steel plate, giving an effective D-steel thickness of 1.22" (31 mm) and an effective STS thickness of 1.1" (28 mm). The upper half of the upper side hull between the weather (first) and second decks was made of a 0.71-0.87" (18-22 mm) D-steel plate laminated to a 1" D-steel plate, giving an effective D-steel thickness of 1.56-1.7" (40-43 mm) and an effective STS thickness of 1.4-1.53" (36-39 mm).

This plate arrangement would always set off the 38 cm projectile's base fuze, usually on the first plate hit, but only the outer edge of the weather deck or upper half of the upper side hull would decap the projectile.

The 6"-effective-STS-thickness armored grating seems to be a design flaw in the YAMATO and the only vulnerable spot on the deck amidships. Could a "down the stack" hit from the BISMARCK damage the YAMATO? Let's see!

The lower half of the upper side hull is marginal for setting off the projectile's fuze and it would not decap the projectile but the surrounding 1.97" cylinder would slow down and decap any incoming projectiles which try to get hits on the armored gratings reducing their penetration ability somewhat. Also, the impact would be at most at an angle of fall of 8.9o assuming that the grating was 20' (6.1 m) wide and centered on the ship centerline, giving an obliquity of 81.1o which I consider impenetrable, anyway.

The top half of the upper side hull would absolutely set off the 38 cm projectile's base fuze and decap the projectile and the angle of fall at the grating would be at most 17.8o, which for the German 38 cm gun occurs at a striking velocity of 1624 feet/second (495 m/sec) at 23,000 yards (21,000 m), giving an impact obliquity of 72.2o. The analysis of the SOUTH DAKOTA showed that this was too oblique for penetrating a 6" plate, making the grating invulnerable even if the projectile could reach the 56.7' (17.3 m) slant distance to the near edge of the grating prior to its fuze setting it off. The top half of the upper side hull and the second deck plating together cost the 38 cm projectile about 15 feet/second (3.7 m/sec), which gives a nominal 56.3' (17.2 m) travel for the designed 0.035-second German base fuze delay at 1609 feet/second (490 m/sec). This means that only about half of the striking 38 cm projectiles would even reach the grating after an upper side hit, even if penetration were possible which it isn't.

The German 38 cm projectile hitting the upper side hull could only damage a boiler if it hit the armored grating and exploded before ricocheting off, where the downward blast might rupture an uptake pipe and cause the nearby area to be abandoned due to poison fumes. Pretty small chance!

The path through the weather and second decks to the grating is now the only one left. The angle of fall for the 38 cm gun at 37,580 yards (34,300 m) is 39o with a striking velocity of 1506 feet/second (459 m/sec), which gives a 51o obliquity against the deck armor and a minimum 39o vertical obliquity against the circular 1.97" funnel shield. The slant distance is 27' (8.2 m) from the weather deck to the grating. If the average 30o horizontal obliquity for a vertical cylinder is added in, the average total obliquity far the 1.97" funnel shield at maximum range is 47.7o, which requires a minimum striking velocity of 394 feet/second (120 m/sec) for complete penetration. At this angle of fall we would be going through the weather deck where it is about 0.63" (16 mm) thick - a 0.57" (14 mm) STS equivalent - and where the second deck is only 0.5" (13 mm) thick - a 0.45" (11 mm) STS equivalent. These would not decap or deflect the projectile, but it probably would set off the base fuze. The weather deck requires about 138 feet/second (42 m/sec) to penetrate and the second deck about 108 feet/second (33 m/sec) to penetrate at 51o obliquity. These decks reduce the striking velocity on the 1.97" funnel shield to 1496 feet/second (456 m/sec). The remaining velocity after penetrating the funnel shield is 1443 feet/second (440 m/sec) and the projectile is decapped, though not deflected. Without an AP cap we switch to my U.S. penetration formula and this gives at 51o obliquity a necessary striking velocity to completely penetrate the 6"-effective-STS thickness armored grating of 1447 feet/second (441 m/second), which is essentially right on the money. Therefore, the German 38 cm projectile can destroy a centerline boiler room (one of the 12 in that area!) of the YAMATO (but nothing else) if it hits the armored grating region, which is about 20' wide by 40' long (6.l x l2.2 m) just behind the forward conning tower, at a range over 37,500 yards. (Calling Luke Skywalker!)

And I pointed to the documentary because it was generally interesting, due to having interior shots as well as the precise damage done by all weapons inspected from really close range.
in the end a total of over 2000 (2800 I think?) Shots were fired with, according to Wikipedia ~400 hitting, with a penetration of mere 4 shells at the armor belt.

In other worlds less than 1 percent of all fired shots during that battle actually penetrated her hull.
Up until here its still fine, but the english battleships also fired from afar. Even if you take flat 2000 shells fired in total thats a hit rate of less than 1 % on a ship that could only go in circles.
So unless the Bismarck was still pretty good at escaping those shotsm a lot of the hits that were close enough(Edit: as in impacted close enough) to damage her still didn't manage to do so.
Bismarck's side armour was pretty weak. Her strength stemmed from an internal armour behind the main belt. Factoring in the loss of the AP cap and speed from the belt armour Bismarck's internals were pretty much impenetrable. So yeah, just looking from a single penetration angle the armour looks fantastic.

However, that design also had shortcomings that make it doubtful whether it really provided a benefit. First, the weak side armour meant that the upper hull area (where some critical equipment and cables were stored) could be taken out at far greater ranges than for other battleships. Meaning it's easier to cripple the ship's ability to actually carry out the fight. Second, this design cost considerable weight - weight that could've been spent to beef up the weak deck armour that was quite vulnerable. Third, the belt armour's shallow extension allowed for dangerous penetration below the waterline, as shown during the engagement with Prince of Wales. There are also additional drawbacks, for that I refer back to the link I posted.

The British ships closing the distance therefore just reduced their chances to actually deal mortal damage. All they did was bang their head against a brick wall. Had they maintained a bigger distance they could've dealt significant damage either via the deck, or through underwater hits.

German Ships probably had stern instabilities, which is why they got refits in that regard after Prinz Eugen was damaged.
Do you have a source for that? I suspect you may confuse that for the problems with the stem the Germans had. Due to the rough Atlantic the German ships (especially the Gneisenaus) tended to take on much water which caused floodings in some areas and damage to the equipment. So they refitted practically all capital ships with a so-called "Atlantic bow". Bismarck already had that when she went out to sea.

Precision aside, that still doesn't warrant 'no chance' the first thing being that both ships had recon planes, so its not like they wouldn't have known the other one was there.
And that is a reason a pointed to Cameron's documentation - Bismarcks planes were unable to launch.
A couple of recon planes make little difference. First of all, they can cover only a small part of the area. Then, launching them is a very delicate affair that quite often didn't go as planned. Last but not least, spotting by recon plane proved to be prone to human mistakes. Like mistaking ships, reporting the wrong position etc. Radar is far more accurate in this regard.

AC-Phoenix
2015-03-01, 18:01
The British ships closing the distance therefore just reduced their chances to actually deal mortal damage. All they did was bang their head against a brick wall. Had they maintained a bigger distance they could've dealt significant damage either via the deck, or through underwater hits.
My point is that there must have been more than just 4 underwater hits from long range in the first place with 2800 shells fired.
Less than 1 % actually hitting sounds unlikely considering how her course was pretty much predictable.


Do you have a source for that? I suspect you may confuse that for the problems with the stem the Germans had. Due to the rough Atlantic the German ships (especially the Gneisenaus) tended to take on much water which caused floodings in some areas and damage to the equipment. So they refitted practically all capital ships with a so-called "Atlantic bow". Bismarck already had that when she went out to sea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Bismarck

In 1942 Prinz Eugen was also torpedoed in the stern, which subsequently collapsed. This prompted a strengthening of the stern structures on all German capital ships.



A couple of recon planes make little difference. First of all, they can cover only a small part of the area. Then, launching them is a very delicate affair that quite often didn't go as planned. Last but not least, spotting by recon plane proved to be prone to human mistakes. Like mistaking ships, reporting the wrong position etc. Radar is far more accurate in this regard.

Oh I hope so, otherwise Radars would be useless anyway.

Human mistake is a good catchphrase here as it played a vital role in the Bismarcks sinking. (twice)
First Lütjens decision to not open fire or even shoot back., second his decision to make the maneuver that took out her rudder.

Ithekro
2015-03-01, 18:52
As far as I can tell there is no practical way for Bismarck to hit Yamato at 40 kilometers. Unless Yamato is sitting stationary at Truk with the spotting plane.

The only way I can think of these two Axis battleships to engage in a fight where they can be able to hurt each other is a fight at night. Night battles are generally done at close range compared to a daylight battle, which would be rare in the Pacific due to the strength of air power in that area.

Kakurin
2015-03-02, 02:09
My point is that there must have been more than just 4 underwater hits from long range in the first place with 2800 shells fired.
Less than 1 % actually hitting sounds unlikely considering how her course was pretty much predictable.
The British were too close for underwater hits to happen. Most of the shelling happened from a distance of well below 10 km. The flat trajectory of the shells would've led them to ricochet off the surface of the water and fly into the upper hull or superstructure.

And you have to clarify the number of shells. The number 2800 (of which about 300-400 actually hit) doesn't tell that much. More relevant are how many were fired from which guns? KGV fired 660 5.25" shells and Rodney 716 6" ones. Those can be taken completely out of the equation since they are only capable of damaging the unprotected upperworks. Likewise the 781 8" shells from Dorsetshire and Norfolk can be taken out of the equation. They concentrated on the superstructure of Bismarck. So actually relevant for the hull are only the 339 14" ones from KGV and the 380 16" ones from Rodney.

Additionally the British somewhat hindered their own efforts by bombarding both sides of the ship. So the floodings that occured offset each other. Note the difference to the American approch against Yamato where they only targeted the port side to force her to capsize.

In 1942 Prinz Eugen was also torpedoed in the stern, which subsequently collapsed. This prompted a strengthening of the stern structures on all German capital ships.
Ah yes, this. But again one has to be careful here. The stern structure problems on the German ships were a result of the welding technique used to attach the stern to the hull. So it's a structural problem. It is debatable how much a strengthening would've actually helped.

First Lütjens decision to not open fire or even shoot back., second his decision to make the maneuver that took out her rudder.
I don't know what you are blaming him for the rudder. This was a combination of inadequate protection of the rudder area and design choices.

AC-Phoenix
2015-03-02, 03:20
The British were too close for underwater hits to happen. Most of the shelling happened from a distance of well below 10 km. The flat trajectory of the shells would've led them to ricochet off the surface of the water and fly into the upper hull or superstructure.

The entire thing didn't happen within minutes, they started shooting at her pretty soon. Even if they were that close, its still an aweful hit rate.



And you have to clarify the number of shells. The number 2800 (of which about 300-400 actually hit) doesn't tell that much. More relevant are how many were fired from which guns? KGV fired 660 5.25" shells and Rodney 716 6" ones. Those can be taken completely out of the equation since they are only capable of damaging the unprotected upperworks. Likewise the 781 8" shells from Dorsetshire and Norfolk can be taken out of the equation. They concentrated on the superstructure of Bismarck. So actually relevant for the hull are only the 339 14" ones from KGV and the 380 16" ones from Rodney.
The 2800 were all shells together.


Additionally the British somewhat hindered their own efforts by bombarding both sides of the ship. So the floodings that occured offset each other. Note the difference to the American approch against Yamato where they only targeted the port side to force her to capsize.
Well to be fair to them Churchill even told them that he doesn't care how he just wants it done.


Ah yes, this. But again one has to be careful here. The stern structure problems on the German ships were a result of the welding technique used to attach the stern to the hull. So it's a structural problem. It is debatable how much a strengthening would've actually helped.
Well the Prinz Eugen survived long enough to Capzize after operation crossroads, so the problem was probably solved well enough.


I don't know what you are blaming him for the rudder. This was a combination of inadequate protection of the rudder area and design choices.

The exact instance was when the Topeedo hit her stern, ultimately causing the rudder to shake hands with the propellar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2av7lz2lkQk
35:00 onwards to about 36:20

Ignore the title, btw it made me smirk a bit too :heh:


A bit questionable how accurate it is due to coming from Survivor reports. If I remember it right from Cameron's dive the rudder actually got cought in the propeller - is what it looked like that is.

Kakurin
2015-03-02, 06:51
The entire thing didn't happen within minutes, they started shooting at her pretty soon. Even if they were that close, its still an aweful hit rate.
Rodney and KGV opened fire from about 23km at 0847. The course of the British ships and Bismarck was more or less directly towards each other. Meaning when firing commenced it was anything but a favourable shelling position (with the underwater part practically unable to get hit). By the time the British could use the broadsides at aorund 0910 they were already below 10km in distance, which was too close for having the right angle to penetrate the underwater part of Bismarck.

The 2800 were all shells together.
And as I said, this number is irrelevant when looking at potential damage to the side armour, above and below the water. The only number that count are the 339 14" shells from KGV and 380 16" from Rodney, since only they could effectively penetrate the side armour. And then you still have to factor in that for some time the British were aiming at the superstructure to take out Bismarck's ability to carry out the fight.

Well the Prinz Eugen survived long enough to Capzize after operation crossroads, so the problem was probably solved well enough.
This has nothing to do with the stern problems. I don't know what makes you think that light damage from a nuclear blast is proof that structural failings of the stern had been solved. For that you would need an actual hit by a shell or by a torpedo against the stern that strains the structural integrity of that specific part.

The exact instance was when the Topeedo hit her stern, ultimately causing the rudder to shake hands with the propellar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2av7lz2lkQk
35:00 onwards to about 36:20
Which isn't really a fault of either Lütjens or Lindemann. Zig-zagging is standard procedure during a torpedo attack. Just happened to be unlucky in this specific instance, which was made worse by the construction decisions when building the ship.

Ithekro
2015-03-02, 21:54
The wreckage of Battleship Musashi has reportedly been found at the bottom of the Sibuyan Sea. (she seems upright and relatively intact so far)

https://twitter.com/PaulGAllen/status/572431062522982400


She sank there over 70 years ago.

Sheba
2015-03-03, 06:44
The wreckage of Battleship Musashi has reportedly been found at the bottom of the Sibuyan Sea. (she seems upright and relatively intact so far)

https://twitter.com/PaulGAllen/status/572431062522982400


She sank there over 70 years ago.

Uchuu Senkan Musashi can be done????

Qikz
2015-03-03, 07:01
The wreckage of Battleship Musashi has reportedly been found at the bottom of the Sibuyan Sea. (she seems upright and relatively intact so far)

https://twitter.com/PaulGAllen/status/572431062522982400


She sank there over 70 years ago.

Oh man that's both amazing and horrible. So many men died when that boat sank :(

JokerD
2015-03-03, 09:25
Oh man that's both amazing and horrible. So many men died when that boat sank :(

Wiki says 1,376 of her 2,399-man crew were rescued so 1023 died. Also need to add about 100+ people from the Maya which was on the Musashi after it sank as well.

Uchuu Senkan Musashi can be done????

Well better than the Yamato anyway, which is lying in 2 pieces on the sea floor...

LoweGear
2015-03-04, 10:25
More images and the first videos of the Musashi discovery (http://www.paulallen.com/Galleries/Musashi-Discovery)

Cosmic Eagle
2015-03-04, 10:27
While the Long Lance torpedo was intended a great equalizer against the more numberous Allied ships for night battles, the oxygen torpedoes probably sunk or heavly damaged more Japanese ships than Allied ships. This includes ships that had their torpedoes explode in the tubes due to fires (and possibly scuttling other ships).

The planned tactic would be to use the Long Lance at long range, outside the normal American visual range (at night) as the Japanese had excellent optics and night training. Then they might open fire with flashless powder to not give away their position to the enemy. This sort of worked, save several captains and crews did not follow procedure. There were several instances of the use of spotlights, which tended to get the ship using them blown out of the water by all the Allied ships, as it was the only clear target. Plus by the time the American radar fire control systems became more reliable, the Japanese could expect the Americans to fire before the Japanese launched torpedoes. The Americans also whiching to flashless powder helped later in the war to counter the Japanese night fighting.

When the Japanese torpedo tactics did work, the American did not know they had been attacked by torpedoes and assumed they had run into a minefield, and acted accordingly.

That's selling the Type 93 short.....That weapon, while highly vulnerable to enemy gunfire, was the single deadliest threat possessed by the Imperial Navy's surface force. And it worked on too many occasions to more than justify their short comings (Java Sea, Savo Island, Tassafronga, the Solomons...almost every major surface campaign really)



More images and the first videos of the Musashi discovery (http://www.paulallen.com/Galleries/Musashi-Discovery)


So she's upright? Wouldn't be too surprising since it should be quite deep where she went down no?

Ritzu07
2015-03-04, 10:50
i stumbled on this vids (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr-qp4oB9ik) @ 4:35.. and i didnt know musashi use different ammo color to its AAA guns...

well those guys really paid attention into the smallest detail right??

Qikz
2015-03-04, 13:55
i stumbled on this vids (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr-qp4oB9ik) @ 4:35.. and i didnt know musashi use different ammo color to its AAA guns...

well those guys really paid attention into the smallest detail right??

I love the footage from WW2 and I know I mentioned something similar before but it's so horrible yet amazing to watch. The sheer scale of it all and the footage while being so old and primative compared to what we can film now brings a harsh reality to everything that happened.

When people read about WW2 in history books they don't get the full story and I mean heck even with footage like this, as in only the footage that painted the war in the way the victors wanted has ever officially been released (so far). Books especially allow people to somewhat remove the sheer scale and horrifying war that was WW2 and it reallly is scary to think what our species plunged the world into at that time.

bhl88
2015-03-07, 04:33
Does Aoba really have a journalist? And did Junyou's captain really got drunk?

Myssa Rei
2015-03-07, 19:04
Does Aoba really have a journalist? And did Junyou's captain really got drunk?

a.) Sano Shōichi (佐野 昌一), who is considered the Father of modern Japanese SF, was a crewman aboard Aoba. His experience during the war apparently colored the work he wrote (under his pen name Unno Jūzō/ 海野 十三) after its end.

b.) You'll need to be an actual IJN nerd to confirm this, but apparently one of her captains was a laid-back fellow who wasn't above joining his crew during off-hour drinking... Unannounced.

Ithekro
2015-03-07, 20:03
Aoba saw it all (and was to blame for some of what happened).

bhl88
2015-03-07, 20:30
a.) Sano Shōichi (佐野 昌一), who is considered the Father of modern Japanese SF, was a crewman aboard Aoba. His experience during the war apparently colored the work he wrote (under his pen name Unno Jūzō/ 海野 十三) after its end.

b.) You'll need to be an actual IJN nerd to confirm this, but apparently one of her captains was a laid-back fellow who wasn't above joining his crew during off-hour drinking... Unannounced.

Oh okay so he was the war correspondent...

As for Junyou, I got it from a KanColle panel...

chaosprophet
2015-03-08, 16:03
Kongou is the oldest Japanese warship that was active during WW2 (or just the oldest in the game?). Is there warships from other WW2 active countries that were older?

Kakurin
2015-03-08, 16:13
Kongou is the oldest Japanese warship that was active during WW2 (or just the oldest in the game?). Is there warships from other WW2 active countries that were older?
Schleswig-Holstein, the ship that fired the first shots of the war in Europe, was commissioned in 1908. Although as a pre-dreadnought, unlike Kongō, she was outdated even in the First World War.

Ithekro
2015-03-08, 18:08
Japan had a few armored cruisers that were still around that were older than Kongo. but most were not combat worthy.

kct
2015-03-08, 19:45
Kongou is the oldest Japanese warship that was active during WW2 (or just the oldest in the game?). Is there warships from other WW2 active countries that were older?

Texas had the distinction of being one of the ships that served in both world wars.

Kakurin
2015-03-09, 02:13
Texas had the distinction of being one of the ships that served in both world wars.
Serving in both World Wars actually isn't that special. All Kongō-class, Fusō-class and Ise-class ships were in service by the time World War I ended. Ships of the British Queen Elizabeth-class and Revege-class were present at Jutland. And the Renown-class battlecruisers were active during World War I as well. All of them (Texas as well) are younger than Kongō though.

Ithekro
2015-03-09, 02:40
The only active American battleships in World War II that are older than Kongo are Wyoming and Arkansas. Wyoming was a training ship for the war. Arkansas was convoy escort and shore bombardment duty in the Atlantic until the fall of Germany, then transfered to the Pacific in time for Iwo Jima and Okinawa. She was at Bikini Atoll with Nagato for the Atomic Bomb tests.

Both served with the British fleet in World War One...Sixth Battle Squadron.


USS Utah, USS Kearsarge, and USS Illinois was also active, but not as a battleship. Utah was a target ship tuned AA gunnery training ship. Kearsarge was a crane ship. Illinois was an armory ship. (USS Oregon was a museum ship until the war, then scap and storage barge)

Top Sergeant
2015-03-09, 22:18
The only active American battleships in World War II that are older than Kongo are Wyoming and Arkansas. Wyoming was a training ship for the war. Arkansas was convoy escort and shore bombardment duty in the Atlantic until the fall of Germany, then transfered to the Pacific in time for Iwo Jima and Okinawa. She was at Bikini Atoll with Nagato for the Atomic Bomb tests.

Both served with the British fleet in World War One...Sixth Battle Squadron.


USS Utah, USS Kearsarge, and USS Illinois was also active, but not as a battleship. Utah was a target ship tuned AA gunnery training ship. Kearsarge was a crane ship. Illinois was an armory ship. (USS Oregon was a museum ship until the war, then scap and storage barge)

USS Utah was sunk at Pearl Harbor. She lies not far from the Arizona.

Ithekro
2015-03-10, 02:06
And that counts as active since she gets one battle star. Utah, Arizona and Oklahoma lasted less than half an hour into the war, but they were part of it.


As for recent episodes, Yuudachi's upgrade includes a small white saile on her back. This references something really bad that happened involving her getting sunk. The Japanese version of events has it that the crew put up some form of sail to boost morale during her last battle.

The Americans on USS Portland, thought it was a white flag of surrender and started to ignore Yuudachi is accordance with the standard conventions of war. Then Yuudachi started firing again (or more torpedoes). That pissed off the Americans. They sank Yuudachi ("That S.O.B." according to her captain) and for about a year afterwards started to give "no quarter" to the Japanese. No surrenders taken, just kill them...("honorless bastards" I think would be the phase after that). Yuudachi did a bad thing that got a lot of Japanese killed over having that sail out that night.

Klashikari
2015-03-10, 18:37
Not exactly a music video, so putting this video here. it is quite an interesting watch I should say:

From Pearl Harbor to the end of the Pacific war, Kancolle engine style
T38PRsnv8Yw
While I'm not sure about the absence of certain kai2, and some actions being a bit simplified (like Fusou sinking instantly with everyone else at the same time, same for Yahagi), the guy certainly took time to replicate most major battles with a custom game engine.

Be warned that it isn't really a pleasant ride, especially with all the sinking lines. That said, I couldn't help but had some dry laughs at some occasions due to how ludicrous the bullying was, like what happened to Nishimura's Fleet or Yamato. :heh:

Darsovin
2015-03-10, 19:45
Wow that is a rather shocking depiction of just how stacked the odds were against Japan and it was conveyed with just simple graphics. The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot was especially painful to watch. And Nishimura's encounter at Leyte was completely insane. Interesting that one of theme songs from Attack on Titan was played during those battles. The US fleet was truly a sleeping giant that had awoken. Still, it was a testament to Yamato and Musashi's legend to see just how much effort it took to sink theme even with airpower. I also liked the nod to American damage control, bringing some ships back into the fight. Unlike Taihou... :heh: Speaking of I don't recognize the graphic for the sub that sank her, who was that?

Myssa Rei
2015-03-11, 01:26
Speaking of I don't recognize the graphic for the sub that sank her, who was that?

That might be the USS Sealion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Sealion_%28SS-315%29), though as to the sprite itself, I think it's original (or maybe from the Chinese knockoff perhaps?).

KBTKaiser
2015-03-11, 01:39
Credits mention the chinese knockoff, yes.

Kakurin
2015-03-11, 01:42
That's was some dedicated work, despite some minor errors. But it's a hard watch with all those sinkings and scuttlings... definitely not enjoyable. Although I did laugh at the depiction of a couple of situations, like the endless streams of planes against Yamato, or Shigure retreating before Nishimura's force got obliterated. :heh:

Myssa Rei
2015-03-11, 01:53
Kind of wondering about why the Aircraft Carrier Hime wasn't used to represent the Yorktown though, as her sprite was already available, seeing as the video maker was able to use Amagi...

Ithekro
2015-03-11, 02:18
Probably keeping all the Lexington-class and Yorktown-class ships as Wo made more sense to the author. With Enterprise being the yellow flagship and the Essex-class being even worse. Knowing that was Enterprise each time made it seem like she was the primary denial system for 1942.

Ithekro
2015-03-16, 18:26
Iron Bottom Sound

Resting place of many, many ships.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Wrecks_in_the_Ironbottom_Sound.jpg

bhl88
2015-03-17, 02:01
Looks like Kongou was the best ship at that time.... Ordered construction for the best ship and the British were saying: "Shit, let's correct the Tiger"

Wild Goose
2015-03-19, 05:02
Wow that is a rather shocking depiction of just how stacked the odds were against Japan and it was conveyed with just simple graphics.

Combined Fleet has an article on this (http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm), but tl;dr the US ridiculously outnumbered Japan. Japan could have sunk every single ship in the US Navy and the US could still make good it's losses. Hell, look at merchant shipping. The United States built more merchant shipping in the first four and a half months of 1943 than Japan put in the water in seven years. As another example, Japan built two (2) carriers in 1943. The US built sixty five (65).

Kakurin
2015-03-19, 06:08
The US built sixty five (65).
This number's a bit misleading since most of them were small escort carriers which were of very limited use in fleet combat. Most of them were used to protect convoys and provide some support during amphibious landings. More useful, but no less impressive, is a look at true fleet carriers commissioned. Namely the Essex-class. Until 1946 the US completed 24 of them and the rain of Essexes started in 1943 with six of them put into service. The IJN compared to that only completed four true fleet carriers during the entire war - Taihō, Unryū, Amagi and Katsuragi. The latter three weren't of any use since they were completed after the Battle of the Phillippine Sea which practically eliminated the Japanese carrier arm. Moreover they were based on Hiryū's design, meaning they were significantly inferior to the American Essex-class, or the Shōkakus and Taihō for that matter.

Ithekro
2015-03-19, 07:08
Lots of Hiryus would make a difference. Lots of Shoukaku would have be a nightmare if one on one to the Essex, as they were fairly even with the Yorktowns.

Trouble is too little, too late. The Japanese did figure out what they were doing wrong about half the time and tried to fix it. But the Americans had designed their own fixes for thing before the war started.

Yamamoto and several other Admirals knew exactly what the Americans could do industrially if they could not secure a peace were America basically sticks its nose out of Japan's business within six to seven months. They knew they were out numbered. They just figued the Americans would not have the will to fight a long distance war over islands. They might have gotten that, if things hadn't gone as they had at Pearl Harbor. Americans don't like a long fight. We've seen this in Vietnam and in out more recent Gulf War situation. However, Americans have a low tolerance for sneak attacks, and are very willing to give ten-fold in return in a straight up fight. The Japanese didn't know. I doubt we even knew we would do that.

One wonder if the Japanese could get the Americans to negotiate a peace if they managed to take Midway and destroy at least two or three of the Americans six carriers? Yorktown, Enterprise and Hornet are at Midway/Hawaii. Saratoga is on her way to Hawaii after being repaired. She also has replacement aircraft wth her. Wasp and Ranger are in the Atlantic for the Torch Landings in Africa. Wasp will soon be transfered to the Pacific. Ranger is not going to the Pacific. She has been rated as not having enough spare capacity for the needed AA guns to combat the Japanese. She just was not designed for this sort of combat. She remains the small fleet carrier in the Altantic. (Lexington has been sunk at Coral Sea, and the old Langley was converted to a seaplane carrier and sunk at Java Sea). The Essex and Independance class carriers won't be fully in combat service until the Summer of 1943, more than a year after the Battle of Midway.

Sheba
2015-03-19, 07:21
The thing about Pearl Harbor is that the Japanese diplomacy was supposed to send the formal declaration of war JUST WHEN the attack was being launched. It just so happened that the japanese embassy staff who were supposed to type it out were on sunday leave, leaving the diplomats, unfamiliar with typing machines, doing it. And when they were done typing it, it was already too late.

Let's not get started on how Japanese neglected to bomb the fuel depots, the dry docks, etc... They could have bought six more months at least if they had done it. Pearl Harbor was definitely not the master stroke that many made it to be.

Ithekro
2015-03-19, 07:42
I wonder if the American reaction would really be any different if the declaration of war was given basically moments before the bombs fall in Hawaii. Sure they announce, "hey were are going to attack you" but then quite obviously have been moving toward Pearl Harbor before that. It would depend on the spin of the papers, but I can still see if being called a sneak attack if there basically wasn't time to get warning to Hawaii from Washington, D.C..

As for everything else. There wasn't enough planes and fuel to do all that. They had fuel for just the two strikes. There was no plan for a third strike at Pearl. They needed the fuel for other things. The pilots being a little zealous about ships is understandible. Large battleships are nice targets. It has been noted that they did tend to keep attacking the same things. The carriers were not there. That was one failure that Yamamoto had hoped to avoid. The rest of it was mentality.

Japanese submarines...with their proven long range Long Lance torpedoes...sank so little of the American forces. They had submarines off the coast of California for a bit and yet did not spot any targets. How do you not spot a target of opportunity at the mouth of a mayor bay and trade route (San Francisco)? It seems the sub commanders thought th ships were out of range, or were only going after warships. Ths another mentality error for the Japanese.

Kakurin
2015-03-19, 07:43
The thing about Pearl Harbor is that the Japanese diplomacy was supposed to send the formal declaration of war JUST WHEN the attack was being launched. It just so happened that the japanese embassy staff who were supposed to type it out were on sunday leave, leaving the diplomats, unfamiliar with typing machines, doing it. And when they were done typing it, it was already too late.

Let's not get started on how Japanese neglected to bomb the fuel depots, the dry docks, etc... They could have bought six more months at least if they had done it. Pearl Harbor was definitely not the master stroke that many made it to be.
I doubt it would've changed anything had they passed the message in time, since in the mind of the people it still would've been a sneak attack. The Japanese just turned the situation from bad to worse when they encountered troubles with their decryption (funnily, the Americans decrypted the message to the embassy faster than the Japanese themselves). Besides, the message was not a proper declaration of war as stipulated by the Hague Convention and the Japanese knew it. It was a notification that the negotiations were likely to be terminated.

But in any case, with the failure to catch any carriers Pearl Harbor was actually a minor disaster for the Japanese. The battleships there were obsolete in any case and even then they only managed to sink two of them (Arizona and Oklahoma). All others returned to service, Tennessee and Maryland in February 1942, Nevada in October 1942, California in January 1944 and West Virginia in July 1944.

The criticism of Nagumo for not ordering another strike is also overblown. The Japanese already experienced increasing losses from anti-air as the day went on and Nagumo had orders to preserve the fleet. He wasn't going to risk Kidō Butai thousands of miles away from home when messages indicated that the American battleships there had been ravaged.

Ithekro
2015-03-19, 08:02
One thing that helped the American by doing the attack at Pearl was to shake out the old battleship admirals. The old plan Orange has bee setup to send a large force from Pearl to relieve Guam and the Philippines. The Japanese plan to have a Deceive Battle would have worked for this plan. Nagato, Mutsu and Yamato with the Ise and Fuso class ships would have been and interesting fight against the American battleline, even without the Kongos. Only a few of the American fast battleships wer finished by December of 1941, and they were in the Atlantic being trained and worked up. They might be able to get them out in time to send a relief for to the Philippines...assuming the Americans could gather up an Army to do so. They would within a year. Within a year, assuming they Americans do mostly nothing but gather for the big Plan Orange push, the Japanese have built a massive defense net and the Americans would steam right into it. In the battleships get sunk on near Gaum...they aren't coming back like they could at Pearl.

Several of the battleships were "sunk", but were in shallow water, at a harbor that had dry docks. West Virginia and California sank from torpedo hits. Maryland and Tennessee were protected from most torpedos by West Virginia and Oklahoma. Pennsylvania was in drydock at that time already. Nevada managed to get moving, and ran aground to avoid sinking in the channel. Arizona was blown up. Oklahoma capized which did a lot of damage to the structure. They still got her to float again. It was just the work needed to get her worked wasn't worth it. She broke her tow back to California and sank somewhere off Hawaii after the war was over.

Estavali
2015-03-19, 08:14
Whether Pearl Harbor had worked or not, I think another factor to be considered is whether the Japanese would be able to hold onto their newly-acquired territory. The inability to win the hearts (or at least co-operation) of its new subjects means it would have to worry about sabotage and civil unrest, both which would test the fidelity of its defenses. Effort and resources that could have be directed towards the enemy without would be wasted on flushing out those within.

JokerD
2015-03-19, 08:31
This number's a bit misleading since most of them were small escort carriers which were of very limited use in fleet combat. Most of them were used to protect convoys and provide some support during amphibious landings. More useful, but no less impressive, is a look at true fleet carriers commissioned. Namely the Essex-class. Until 1946 the US completed 24 of them and the rain of Essexes started in 1943 with six of them put into service. The IJN compared to that only completed four true fleet carriers during the entire war - Taihō, Unryū, Amagi and Katsuragi. The latter three weren't of any use since they were completed after the Battle of the Phillippine Sea which practically eliminated the Japanese carrier arm. Moreover they were based on Hiryū's design, meaning they were significantly inferior to the American Essex-class, or the Shōkakus and Taihō for that matter.

The 2nd part of it is the ability to put pilots in those planes. By the mid/end of the war, both the quality and quantity of the Japanese pilots declined to next to nothing. An example was those kamikaze pilots were just trained in the basics of keeping the plane in the air and pointing it in the direction they wanted to go (into an enemy warship) even navigation was not taught which was why they had a senior pilot guide them to the enemy fleet (the senior pilot needed to come back to lead the next batch) Sure they had experienced and deadly pilots left but replacement became a serious problem.

Ithekro
2015-03-19, 08:51
Having most of their skilled pilots on Akagi and Kaga, along with their deck crews took care of the first part of the gutting of the naval air groups.

The Americann managed to field 9 new light carriers and 14 new fleet carriers into action before the war ended. In addition to the 7 carriers that existed before the war started. The other 10 Essex were not finished in time to see combat against the Japanese (and a few of the last ones that did see combat were over Okinawa and Japan, after Operation Ten-Go) The two other light carriers of the Saipan-class and the three large Midway-class carriers also missed the war.

The US lost four fleet carriers in the war (all four in 1942) and one light carrier at Leyte Gulf. Two other fleet carriers were permanently put out of action near the end, but did make it home.

The Japanese lost basically all their carriers. I think one was still around at the end, but there were no pilots for what planes were left, and no fuel to fly anyway.

Kakurin
2015-03-19, 08:55
The 2nd part of it is the ability to put pilots in those planes. By the mid/end of the war, both the quality and quantity of the Japanese pilots declined to next to nothing. An example was those kamikaze pilots were just trained in the basics of keeping the plane in the air and pointing it in the direction they wanted to go (into an enemy warship) even navigation was not taught which was why they had a senior pilot guide them to the enemy fleet (the senior pilot needed to come back to lead the next batch) Sure they had experienced and deadly pilots left but replacement became a serious problem.
Pilots was a serious problem. The Japanese made life difficult for themselves by artificially restricting their pilot output prior to the war. Some of their measures were more meant to wash out recruits, rather than actually assess the true abilities of a pilot. Moreover they were very indifferent to the human capital aspect. Whereas the Americans would rotate out experienced pilots, promote them to squadron leaders or use as teaching personnel, the Japanese simply left their pilots on their own until they died. So, the experience of the veteren airmen were not passed on to the young ones in training and the effectiveness of Japanese aviation declined from late 1942 onward.

The Japanese spent most of 1943 and early 1944 rebuilding their aviation corps, that had taken a severe hit in the meatgrinder over the Solomons, which was then decimated at Phillippine Sea. Afterwards the remaining carriers (among them Zuikaku) were practically useless and sent out there as decoys during Leyte Gulf.

Having most of their skilled pilots on Akagi and Kaga, along with their deck crews took care of the first part of the gutting of the naval air groups.
While losing the experienced deck crews was a blow, the airmen losses amounted to less than a quarter of the total embarked personnel at Midway. Akagi's pilot losses were 7 and Kaga's 21. Total losses of the carrier air personnel amounted to 110, most of them from Hiryū.

Whether Pearl Harbor had worked or not, I think another factor to be considered is whether the Japanese would be able to hold onto their newly-acquired territory. The inability to win the hearts (or at least co-operation) of its new subjects means it would have to worry about sabotage and civil unrest, both which would test the fidelity of its defenses. Effort and resources that could have be directed towards the enemy without would be wasted on flushing out those within.
I don't have much knowledge on this, but I think unlike the quagmire in China resistance in the newly conquered areas wasn't all too significant for most of the war. In the Dutch East Indies for example Sukarno, who would become the first president of Indonesia, worked with the Japanese to the very end. In Burma people like Aung San supported the Japanese in the first couple of years, before becoming disillusioned with Japanese promises, in addition to the changing fortunes of the war.

Cosmic Eagle
2015-03-19, 09:28
Japanese submarines...with their proven long range Long Lance torpedoes...sank so little of the American forces. They had submarines off the coast of California for a bit and yet did not spot any targets. How do you not spot a target of opportunity at the mouth of a mayor bay and trade route (San Francisco)? It seems the sub commanders thought th ships were out of range, or were only going after warships. Ths another mentality error for the Japanese.

Their targets were warships


Japanese subs did not carry the 93 BTW.


Having most of their skilled pilots on Akagi and Kaga, along with their deck crews took care of the first part of the gutting of the naval air groups.


Another myth about Midway....the Japanese aviator losses in that battle were not as high as commonly assumed.

In fact the losses from Santa Cruz and the Eastern Solomons were actually higher.

The real decimation of the carrier aviator force came at the Philippine Sea and the Formosa Air Battle before Leyte.

Kakurin
2015-03-19, 09:35
Japanese subs did not carry the 93 BTW.
They carried the Type 95, which was basically a smaller version of the Type 93.

Another myth about Midway....the Japanese aviator losses in that battle were not as high as commonly assumed.

In fact the losses from Santa Cruz and the Eastern Solomons were actually higher.
Shows the challenge in attacking an USN carrier force. The combination between AA fire, CAP and low level attacks is pretty harsh. Hiryū's two strike forces against Yorktown (Kobayashi and Tomonaga) lost 48 airmen in their attacks. Total aircrew losses of the Japanese side at Midway was 110.

Cosmic Eagle
2015-03-19, 09:58
It is but the term Long Lance applies only to the 93 no?

Besides, in a WWII sub, there's a limit to how far you can fire your torpedoes anyway.


Still 110 was nowhere near the decimation of the naval aviator cohort. If anything the reason why attacking US carriers is so deadly is that their AAA is the best of any ship. The escorting Zeroes when flown competently could deal with the CAP but the AAA of US carriers could not be avoided effectively

JokerD
2015-03-19, 10:09
The Japanese lost basically all their carriers. I think one was still around at the end, but there were no pilots for what planes were left, and no fuel to fly anyway.

An interesting point about oil. After the loss of the Philippines, the navy had 2 choices for the ships, stay in south where the oil is and suffer the lack of manpower and ammo, which was manufactured in Japan. Or return to Japan for ammo and suffer the lack of fuel since they had none in their north asia holdings

I don't have much knowledge on this, but I think unlike the quagmire in China resistance in the newly conquered areas wasn't all too significant for most of the war. In the Dutch East Indies for example Sukarno, who would become the first president of Indonesia, worked with the Japanese to the very end. In Burma people like Aung San supported the Japanese in the first couple of years, before becoming disillusioned with Japanese promises, in addition to the changing fortunes of the war.

Speaking of working with the Japanese, they actually raised an Indian army in Singapore in the hopes of getting India to rebel against British rule. Didn't work too well I think.

Kakurin
2015-03-19, 10:21
An interesting point about oil. After the loss of the Philippines, the navy had 2 choices for the ships, stay in south where the oil is and suffer the lack of manpower and ammo, which was manufactured in Japan. Or return to Japan for ammo and suffer the lack of fuel since they had none in their north asia holdings

This was basically the rationale for the total committment of the IJN to Leyte Gulf. With the IJN in no position to help defend the homeland after a loss of the Phillippines (and unwilling to surrender) the only option was to throw in the kitchen sink in an attempt to derail the American landings by getting after the invasion fleet.

Speaking of working with the Japanese, they actually raised an Indian army in Singapore in the hopes of getting India to rebel against British rule. Didn't work too well I think.
Yeah, the Indian National Army recruited from the prisoners captured after the fall of Singapore led by former INC leader Subhas Chandra Bose. Who by the way made quite a journey to get to Singapore. After put under house arrest by the British he first escaped to Germany via Afghanistan and the Soviet Union in 1941. And in 1943 he made his way to Singapore by first getting on board a German sub, travel around the Cape of Good Hope before getting on board a Japanese sub near Madagascar. :heh:

Wild Goose
2015-03-19, 19:59
This number's a bit misleading since most of them were small escort carriers which were of very limited use in fleet combat. Most of them were used to protect convoys and provide some support during amphibious landings. More useful, but no less impressive, is a look at true fleet carriers commissioned. Namely the Essex-class. Until 1946 the US completed 24 of them and the rain of Essexes started in 1943 with six of them put into service. The IJN compared to that only completed four true fleet carriers during the entire war - Taihō, Unryū, Amagi and Katsuragi. The latter three weren't of any use since they were completed after the Battle of the Phillippine Sea which practically eliminated the Japanese carrier arm. Moreover they were based on Hiryū's design, meaning they were significantly inferior to the American Essex-class, or the Shōkakus and Taihō for that matter.

Fair point, and the Combined Fleet link did mention that. A more salient point would be DD production totals: Japan built 63 DDs from 1942 to 1945. The US built 128 destroyers in 1943 alone and 82 DDs in 1942. Yep, the US built more DDs in one year than Japan did in four years.

gral
2015-03-19, 20:46
Fair point, and the Combined Fleet link did mention that. A more salient point would be DD production totals: Japan built 63 DDs from 1942 to 1945. The US built 128 destroyers in 1943 alone and 82 DDs in 1942. Yep, the US built more DDs in one year than Japan did in four years.

IIRC, the US built more warship tonnage in 1944 than Japan had in the 1930-1944 period.

Ithekro
2015-03-19, 21:28
Yamamoto knew that. He did warn that if Japan went to war with the United States, Japan would have six months to get the Americans to leave the conflict. Any longer and the industrial weight would begin to hit Japan. Interesting that it was actually a year to a year and a half before the industrial might of the Americans was really felt in the Pacific. The Americans were aiming to liberate Europe first than deal with Japan.

Wild Goose
2015-03-19, 21:48
Basically what Stalin said was true: quantity has a quality of its own. The problem when fighting America is that America has both quantity and quality.

Qikz
2015-03-20, 12:07
Basically what Stalin said was true: quantity has a quality of its own. The problem when fighting America is that America has both quantity and quality.

Just look at the Red Army's tanks. The Tiger and Panzer III/IV were pretty much better in every single way compared to the T34, but the sheer ease of production and sheer scale of the Russian manufacturing of them meant that even the Panzer divisions of Germany eventually fell to them. Russia just had more men and more tanks to throw into the meat grinder and they eventually wore down the German advance with a little help from old mother Winter and the Germans own missmanagement of their forces to go on an insane counter push straight to Berlin. It wasn't the quality of the T34 that won the Russians the Eastern Front, it was the quantity.

AC-Phoenix
2015-03-20, 13:26
Basically what Stalin said was true: quantity has a quality of its own. The problem when fighting America is that America has both quantity and quality.

Quality isn't always a good thing either though. - let my bring an example in human ressources:

One of Enterprise's top pilots vanished during the first US Night Air combat ever and neither his plane nor his corpse has been found up to today.
He was a someone the other pilots looked up to with one hell of a battle record.
Now try to imagine the moral blow him being listed as MIA caused on board of the ship.

In a later mission, something similar happened to another one of her top pilots.
He was later found though and was worth tons of icecream right from Enterprise's kitchen :heh: .

bhl88
2015-03-20, 17:21
Did the Aleuitan Zero ensure the loss of Japan?

Ithekro
2015-03-20, 19:12
No. It made it easier, but American pilots were already using tactics that could defeat the Zero.

The outcome, if one looks at just the numbers, was an inevitable Allied victory. It might have taken longer, but the only thing that would stop the Americans would be if the people finally got tired of it at home. Major losses bring down morale at home, and a massive defeat around Midway or a failure in the Solomons could have done it for Japan and got the Americans to sue for peace.

Japan wins and they get to do whatever they please in Eastern Asia and in the island west of Hawaii. The Americans then decide to shift everything to crushing Hitler.

Cosmic Eagle
2015-03-21, 03:37
Yamamoto knew that. He did warn that if Japan went to war with the United States, Japan would have six months to get the Americans to leave the conflict. Any longer and the industrial weight would begin to hit Japan. Interesting that it was actually a year to a year and a half before the industrial might of the Americans was really felt in the Pacific. The Americans were aiming to liberate Europe first than deal with Japan.

And yet Yamamoto himself was perhaps the greatest threat to the Imperial Navy. The person who knows keenly the US economical potential ironically pushed outdated policies which crippled the navy's warmaking. There's very good reason he is roundly criticized both in Japan and outside

Putting aside his role in the policy of hitting Pearl Harbor, his over emphasis on battleships, his bullying of other officers to get his way, his overly complex plans which he forced through against opposition from others and strangely, his squandering of the same battleships he championed by sequestering them in Truk instead of having Rengo Kantai meet the Guadalcanal invasion force in open battle are just some examples


Did the Aleuitan Zero ensure the loss of Japan?

More like irreplaceable aviator losses and the inability of Japanese industry to produce (NOT DESIGN) newer planes.

Tech-wise the Zero was a stopgap that would be replaced by the Reppu and Shiden-kai. Japanese plane design did always keep pace more or less with Western ones. It's just their industry was too broken to produce them in the quantity of the Zero


So no...getting a wrecked Zero alone would not have meant much in the way of advantage to the allied side had the above not been a factor.

Also, a competently flown A6M5 could hold its own against the later F6Fs and pre F4U-4 Corsairs. Competently being the key

bhl88
2015-03-21, 03:38
No. It made it easier, but American pilots were already using tactics that could defeat the Zero.

So they didn't make the tactics after capturing one (after piloting it and realizing that it had its own fair share of problems besides the plane being made of paper [a few shots setting the plane on fire])

AC-Phoenix
2015-03-21, 03:43
So they didn't make the tactics after capturing one (after piloting it and realizing that it had its own fair share of problems besides the plane being made of paper [a few shots setting the plane on fire])

They had to make tactics to fight the zero until the Enterprise finally got her Hellcats, which were more than just a match for the Zero.

Cosmic Eagle
2015-03-21, 03:50
So they didn't make the tactics after capturing one (after piloting it and realizing that it had its own fair share of problems besides the plane being made of paper [a few shots setting the plane on fire])

The tactics were taught as early as 1941

bhl88
2015-03-21, 03:53
The tactics were taught as early as 1941

Oh okay so even without the Zero, they would have won anyway....

http://www.history.com/news/the-akutan-zero-how-a-captured-japanese-fighter-plane-helped-win-world-war-ii (got the idea from this one)

Cosmic Eagle
2015-03-21, 03:58
Yes....due to economic reasons mainly.

And without the Aleutian Zero, the F4Us would still be made anyway while the numbers of Shiden-kai and Hayates would still be too low to counter them for much of a difference


Or put simply, the Zero was not, in Jiro Horikoshi's eyes, a finished product. The Nakajima Sakae did not provide the horsepower he wanted (2000+) and this was the Zero's biggest weakness...it was too slow compared to late war planes.

Meanwhile the Pratt and Whitney engines for the Corsairs were readily available when the engine Horikoshi wanted did not arrive until the war's end

Ithekro
2015-03-21, 05:04
Helped win the war is a thing. It did provide valuable information that the Americans did not have yet. But They had started using anti-Zero tactics at Midway with F4F-3 Wildcats. The P-40s in Asia were also learning to deal with the Ki-43 "Oscar" which has similar performance to the Zero and the same problems of the Zero (didn't have the 20mm wing cannons of the Zero however).

What they learned was more about how advanced the Japnese actually were. The Zero is an impressive engineering feat. The American pilots were impressed by its tight turning radius. But the captured Zero mainly confirmed what pilots in the field had already figured out. The Zero could be taken in a dive. While the Zero could turn tightly, it could not keep up with the Allied fighters in high speed maneuvers. They had seen Zeros blow up at Midway and the like. The captured Zero just proved that the Zero's fuel and pilot were poorly protected. American and British machine gun fire would be enough against a Zero, while the Zero had to use its big 20 mm cannons to quickly down the heavier and armored American fighters.

Cosmic Eagle
2015-03-21, 05:38
Most of which would be known from combat anyway. Knowing your opponent has no armour whatsoever only tells you that your standard 6 x 50 cals are enough, while using your higher speed is a natural consequence of having a stronger engine.

Use your own strengths to the max is something pilots on both sides did as a matter of intuitive logic and the capture of the Aleutian Zero served simply as a confirmation of the principle than provide anything new

Ithekro
2015-03-21, 07:24
There are a limited number of countries with battleships to choose from that are not German (and not Japan of course) If they say they are going to add a foreign battleship , but not a German ship...than what is left?

Historically this is what was around in World War II.

British (lots - 12 super dreadnoughts, 3 super dreadnought type battlecruisers, 6 fast battleships)
American (lots - 15 super dreadnoughts and 10 fast battleships)
French (some - 3 dreadnoughts and 4 fast battleships)
Italian (some - 4 dreadnought and up to 4 fast battleships)
Russian (three dreadnoughts of Kongo's age, but with 12 x 12" guns)
Argentia (two dreadnoughts, American built)
Brazil (two deadnoughts, British built, older than Kongo)
Chile (one super dreadnought, served in Royal Navy as HMS Canada, fought at Jutland)
Turkey (one old German battlecruiser about Kongo's age.)
Greece (two American pre-dreadnoughts)
Netherlands (three coastal defense battleships from the early 1900s)
Norway (Four old coastal defense battleships from about 1900)
Sweden (three modernized coastal defense battleships)
Finland (two relatively new coastal defense battleships)

For completion:

Japan (lots - 4 super dreadnought type battlecruisers, 6 super dreadnoughts, 2 fast battleships)
German (some - two pre-dreadnoughts, three armored cruisers (the pocket battleships), four fast battleships)

That is it.

JokerD
2015-03-21, 09:04
Most of which would be known from combat anyway. Knowing your opponent has no armour whatsoever only tells you that your standard 6 x 50 cals are enough, while using your higher speed is a natural consequence of having a stronger engine.

Use your own strengths to the max is something pilots on both sides did as a matter of intuitive logic and the capture of the Aleutian Zero served simply as a confirmation of the principle than provide anything new

Which goes back to pilot rotation. The US had the ability to rotate the old aces from the front line back to the states to become instructors and pass on this information to the newbies. Japan couldn't.

Cosmic Eagle
2015-03-21, 09:25
Which goes back to pilot rotation. The US had the ability to rotate the old aces from the front line back to the states to become instructors and pass on this information to the newbies. Japan couldn't.

Partly also due to the way they kept the air corps elite... unlike the US air program, Japan never accepted large numbers of cadets until it was too late


Germany had a similar type of problem in that their aces fought until they were killed...no rotation (Japan did rotate aces into instructor roles)


Japan vs US is in a simple way...katana vs a bulldozer. You need to ensure the blade is sharp and strong enough and wielded skillfully to fight the raw brute mass of the opponent...and the top brass of Imperial Japan is infamously incompetent politically and militarily

SaintessHeart
2015-03-21, 16:57
dcaxitheZxA

Ithekro
2015-03-23, 20:52
There was a fan made page a day or so ago listed as historical kanColle which brings up the question of what foreign battleship they might be adding to the game this spring. Discounting the Germans the artist went with the last class built from each of the powers involved. The listing for HMS Vanguard is funny as the two characters doing the speculating are Hiei and Kongo (the two most foreign capital ships in the Japanese navy by World War II. Kongo being built in Britain while Hiei's parts were made in Britain, but put together in Japan). Kongo thinks Vanguard is too young (finished after the war ended) and does't want a copycat tea lover that throws out random English.

Then there is Iowa. Everything looked reasonable, until Hieie reads off her weapons (her outfit in 1990) with harpoon and tamahawk missiles. Iowa OP please nerf.

Estavali
2015-03-23, 21:12
There was a fan made page a day or so ago listed as historical kanColle which brings up the question of what foreign battleship they might be adding to the game this spring. Discounting the Germans the artist went with the last class built from each of the powers involved. The listing for HMS Vanguard is funny as the two characters doing the speculating are Hiei and Kongo (the two most foreign capital ships in the Japanese navy by World War II. Kongo being built in Britain while Hiei's parts were made in Britain, but put together in Japan). Kongo thinks Vanguard is too young (finished after the war ended) and does't want a copycat tea lover that throws out random English.

Then there is Iowa. Everything looked reasonable, until Hieie reads off her weapons (her outfit in 1990) with harpoon and tamahawk missiles. Iowa OP please nerf.

You're talking about this one, I believe? =3 http://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/1961374

AC-Phoenix
2015-03-23, 21:53
Only slightly related to kancolle, but...
Was the Amagi class intended to be superior the Nagato class oO?

A WoWarships video popped up in my youtube recommendations that had nagato as a T7 ship - wth?

Kancolle kinda gave me the impression that the historical strength would be more like
Nagato --> Yamato oO
I checked some other ships out of interest then too and Kongou is also below other ships you'd never imagine her to be oO

Any historical justification for that?

Ithekro
2015-03-23, 22:38
The Amagi-class battlecruiser would have ten 16 inch guns over Nagato's eight 16" guns. Amagi was supposedly close to being a fast battleship, though I'd have to look up her armor thickness. Akagi would have been fast.

The Tosa-class was the next battleship after Nagato. Same amount of main guns as Amagi, but more armor, though again I am not sure how thick or fast she was verses Nagato and Amagi. Kaga would have been tougher than Nagato had she been completed as planned.

Yamato is faster than Nagato, much thicker armored and armed with nine 18.1" guns.

Marcus H.
2015-03-24, 04:06
Is it too late for me to realize that the Fubuki in the Admiral's dream may be the 1905 incarnation?

chaosprophet
2015-03-24, 04:28
Is it too late for me to realize that the Fubuki in the Admiral's dream may be the 1905 incarnation?

Where did you get that from?

Kakurin
2015-03-24, 04:43
The Amagi-class battlecruiser would have ten 16 inch guns over Nagato's eight 16" guns. Amagi was supposedly close to being a fast battleship, though I'd have to look up her armor thickness. Akagi would have been fast.

The Tosa-class was the next battleship after Nagato. Same amount of main guns as Amagi, but more armor, though again I am not sure how thick or fast she was verses Nagato and Amagi. Kaga would have been tougher than Nagato had she been completed as planned.
Planned armour for Amagi would've been 254mm main belt, 98mm deck, 73 mm torpedo bulkhead, 229-280mm barbettes and 76-356mm conning tower.

For the Tosa-class it would've been 254-280mm main belt, 102mm deck, 229-305 barbettes and 76-356mm conning tower.

Marcus H.
2015-03-24, 04:44
Where did you get that from?

I just found out on Wikipedia that there are actually two Fubukis in the IJN, the Harusame-class destroyer used in the Russo-Japanese War, and the Fubuki-class destroyer we know.

chaosprophet
2015-03-24, 04:54
I just found out on Wikipedia that there are actually two Fubukis in the IJN, the Harusame-class destroyer used in the Russo-Japanese War, and the Fubuki-class destroyer we know.

Yes, but why would the one in the dream be it?

Marcus H.
2015-03-24, 04:59
We're not yet sure if the dream was a premonition or a recollection of the past, but there's a possibility that the Fubuki in his dreams is a different one.
It would be easy if the admiral could actually speak directly about what's on his mind.

basinz123
2015-03-26, 01:06
I really want to imagine when Enterprise sees the carriers that bombed Pearl Harbor.

Qikz
2015-03-26, 07:40
I really want to imagine when Enterprise sees the carriers that bombed Pearl Harbor.

Thing is though the ship girls are not the ships from before, just ships with the souls of those before. Akagi remembers what happened to Kaga, her and the other carriers and ships at Midway and wanted to try to change fate to stop it from happening again. I'd hope that if they add Enterprise she'd be clever enough to not hold grudges against people who had nothing to do with what happened in WW2.

Ithekro
2015-03-26, 09:27
Depends on Enterprise's personality. Would she have Halsey's personality? She saw the whole war, and lots of battles and honors. There are a few things that only she has (only foreign ship to have a British Admiralty penate in 400 years). She was one of he few American night carriers by the end. Only survivor of her class. She was the survivor without being the black cat of the fleet.

basinz123
2015-04-01, 03:08
for me I imagine Enterprise as a caring, over-protective, serious at times in need, and a glutton. XD
I really like to imagine who wins the eating contest between Akagi, Yamato, and Enterprise... heh

FunnyGuy
2015-04-01, 04:38
From a source in another site: It simply changed the possible outcome for the Battle of Midway in KanColle's episode 12 which tried to be close to the actual battle.


> Bombs drop on Kaga, destroying her bow and deck.
> Akagi tries to help her from drowning but got hit by bombs as well. Though wounded like Kaga, she managed to help Kaga and pulled her.
> Soryu got hit but tries to help Akagi and Kaga.
> Hiryu covered for them, trying to launch more planes for a counter attack.
> Soryu got hit again and fell down on her knees, slowly sinking but urge Akagi and Kaga to go on. Soryu sunk.
> Hiryu got hit but kept on fighting.
> Akagi and Kaga kept moving until a bomb separated them apart. Kaga is no where to be found. Kaga sunk
> In grief, Akagi lost sight of a bomb falling on top of her.... "Sorry, everyone." Akagi sunk.
> Fubuki and K**** reached them only to see Hiryu hit for the last time....but smiling at them.... Hiryu sunk.

What can you guys say about this alternate ending?

Ithekro
2015-04-01, 04:51
Eh. To make it close to the actual battle, the carriers are sunk by their escorts. Every single one of them. Or Fubuki when she arrives late.

FunnyGuy
2015-04-01, 05:11
Eh. To make it close to the actual battle, the carriers are sunk by their escorts. Every single one of them. Or Fubuki when she arrives late.

Wait, I'm pretty sure it was planes that sunk the ships and not escorts.:confused:

Kakurin
2015-04-01, 05:16
Wait, I'm pretty sure it was planes that sunk the ships and not escorts.:confused:
The American torpedo bomber performance at Midway was abysmal, most of them were massacred by Zeroes. The carriers were only hit by dive bombers. Dive bomber by themselves can't sink a ship as big as a carrier. They burned out and were inoperable. But they didn't sink until the Japanese scuttled them with their own torpedoes.

basinz123
2015-04-01, 05:20
Eh. To make it close to the actual battle, the carriers are sunk by their escorts. Every single one of them. Or Fubuki when she arrives late.
I thought too that Enterprise's planes mafe 3 of the 4 carriers be immobolized if Im not mistaken.

FunnyGuy
2015-04-01, 05:21
The American torpedo bomber performance at Midway was abysmal, most of them were massacred by Zeroes. The carriers were only hit by dive bombers. Dive bomber by themselves can't sink a ship as big as a carrier. They burned out and were inoperable. But they didn't sink until the Japanese scuttled them with their own torpedoes.

I see, so it has to be"Poi" and the others to sink Akagi, Kaga, Soryu and Hiryu for the sake of "shortening" their suffering? That would be heart breaking.:upset:

Ithekro
2015-04-01, 05:30
The dive bombers from Enterprise and Yorktown did the damage that crippled the carriers and set them on fire. Hornet's dive bombers kept missing the area or targets. The Japanese managed to evade and shoot down most of the American torpedo bombers before the dive bombers attacked.

However they would not sink with that damage. They were unusable, or at least it would be nearly impossible to get them back to a Japanese base with the Americans still around. They need help to sink. The destroyers escorting them sank the four Japanese carriers.

(Enterprise's planes wrecked Kaga as two squadrons hit her. Akagi was hit by three planes and only one bomb...but that one bomb was enough. Yorktown's planes took out Soryu. Hornet's dive bombers never found the Japanese on that trip. Later a combined force of planes from Yorktown and Enterprise (launching from Enterprise) wrecked Hiryu. Hornet's planes attacked the escorts but missed.)


In anime context? They wouldn't be able to escape under tow with so many Abyssal ships around, and if left they might be converted into Abyssal ships or bases. So to prevent that, Yuudachi, Tone, Chikuma, and Kitakami would need to do the honors until Fubuki arrives. Fubuki might be tasked to finish the job if the others are out of torpedoes. Hiei gets out of it due to not having torpedoes.

basinz123
2015-04-01, 05:59
and this is the battle That Yorktown sank right? Sorry if I'm wrong bcoz I only watch battle360 for reference XD

FunnyGuy
2015-04-01, 06:04
and this is the battle That Yorktown sank right? Sorry if I'm wrong bcoz I only watch battle360 for reference XD

Yeah. It is

basinz123
2015-04-01, 06:14
Yeah. It is
tnx for clarifying that man. I really mess up my history bcoz of limited resources and I will just w8 for the appearance of the USN on kancolle XD

Ithekro
2015-04-01, 13:52
Yorktown was damaged by the Japanese planes twice, but still tried to make it home under tow. She was torpedoed again by submarine I-168 a few days later along with destroyer USS Hammann. Hammann sank quickly, but Yorktown stayed afloat a while longer. She eventually sank from all her damages.

basinz123
2015-04-03, 02:01
dammit can't upload my ship girl...... can someone give me link to instructions on how to upload pics tnx

basinz123
2015-04-03, 08:35
dammit can't upload my ship girl...... can someone give me link to instructions on how to upload pics tnx
sorry for double post but I will post my en-chan!
http://image.free.in.th/v/2013/if/150221044542.jpg

Cosmic Eagle
2015-04-06, 22:43
The American torpedo bomber performance at Midway was abysmal, most of them were massacred by Zeroes. The carriers were only hit by dive bombers. Dive bomber by themselves can't sink a ship as big as a carrier. They burned out and were inoperable. But they didn't sink until the Japanese scuttled them with their own torpedoes.

Hermes and Franklin would like a word....

True, most carriers sunk to torpedoes but a well placed bomb hit is enough to burn out a ship especially if it hits munitions. More would be a sinking as Hermes shows

Ithekro
2015-04-06, 22:49
Franklin made it home.

Kakurin
2015-04-07, 00:16
True, most carriers sunk to torpedoes but a well placed bomb hit is enough to burn out a ship especially if it hits munitions. More would be a sinking as Hermes shows
Hermes was tiny compared to a Japanese fleet carrier like Akagi and Kaga. The latter was ravaged by American bombs with entire parts of the ships' upperworks getting blasted away from ordnance explosions. But she didn't sink.

Ithekro
2015-04-07, 00:28
HMS Hermes, was basically the British Houshou. The first carrier every designed as one. She was old and not designed for what she got in the end. She'd been the training carrier before the war forced her back into service.

USS Franklin and USS Bunker Hill survived being attacked and made it home. Both were never to see active service again, but both lasted at least two decades after the war. Franklin was sold for scrap in 1966 while Bunker Hill wasn't sold until 1973 (after an effort to keep her as a museam ship).

Cosmic Eagle
2015-04-08, 12:14
Franklin made it home.

But with one of the highest casualty counts of US ships in the war and the inside virtually gutted by fire.

She would have sunk if she weren't in the heart of a fleet with adequate support; the boilers were in danger of explosion and she was gradually listing. She would eventually sink in such circumstances if she were abandoned even without a torpedo coup de grace


And this was caused by a single Suisei or Ryusei hitting with a 250 Kg bomb and another smaller bomb



It really depends on where it hits.....Destroying the flight deck does nothing if the interior of the ship isn't gutted and holed or flooded from fire-fighting efforts.


Ultimately, it's just that it's easier to confirm a kill by torpedoes due to flooding below waterline and higher chance of destroying critical components due to location of the blast, but yes...it's very possible to sink carriers by bombs alone

Kakurin
2015-04-08, 12:54
The Japanese got Franklin in the best condition possible - with dozens of planes fueled and armed. That's a very lucky situation that doesn't happen often. Meanwhile the number of carriers that were not in danger of actually sinking after getting hit by bombs only is far longer. All four Japanese Midway carriers had to be scuttled. Yorktown took a couple of bomb hits at Coral Sea but was ready for Midway a month later. At the same battle Shōkaku took a number of hits, but made it all the way back to Japan. During the Battle of the Eastern Solomons Enterprise was hit a few times, but was back in action two months later to engage at Santa Cruz. There she, like Shōkaku, again took a number of bomb hits without ever being in danger of sinking.

Ithekro
2015-04-08, 13:11
Yet, Franklin made it home.

It is possible, had the Japanese managed to secure the area, that they could have gotten Akagi and even some of the others home as well. But the general knowledge would put the Americans as more likely to save a ship with their damage control teams than the Japanese would.

USS Franklin (CV-13) could be considered the unlucky ship just because she was numbered 13, yet she made it home. To the Japanese, the numerically unlucky one of the American carriers would have been CV-4, USS Ranger, but Ranger never ventured into the war in the Pacific. Or CV-40 USS Tarawa, which never saw combat (to my knowledge), nor was ever really modernized. She was finished too late to see action in World War II and when reactivated for the Korean War was set to the Atlantic Fleet to fill in for the carriers that had been assigned there that had been rushed to Korea. She then was deactivated in 1960 and scrapped in 1968.

Marina2
2015-04-08, 22:22
Is there any record about what equipments/weapons Russian gave to Hibiki/Vernir?

Ithekro
2015-04-08, 23:21
According to Wikipedia:


On April 5, 1947, Hibiki was turned over to the Soviet Union at Nahodka as a prize of war, and placed in service with the Soviet Navy under the name Verniy (Russian: Верный "Faithful", after being rearmed with Soviet-made weapons (six 130 mm guns, seven 25 mm guns, four to six 12.7 mm machine guns, and six 533 mm torpedo tubes). She was placed in service with the Soviet Pacific Fleet based at Vladivostok on July 7, 1947. She was renamed again on July 5, 1948 as Dekabrist (Russian: Декабрист "Decembrist"). She was retired from service on February 20, 1953 and subsequently scrapped.


Though other listing have her sunk as target ship.

Marina2
2015-04-08, 23:47
Thank for the answer.

Developers should give those equipments to her kai2 :(

it shouldn't be that hard to make up the in-game status for those equipments.

Cosmic Eagle
2015-04-10, 00:23
The Japanese got Franklin in the best condition possible - with dozens of planes fueled and armed. That's a very lucky situation that doesn't happen often. Meanwhile the number of carriers that were not in danger of actually sinking after getting hit by bombs only is far longer. All four Japanese Midway carriers had to be scuttled. Yorktown took a couple of bomb hits at Coral Sea but was ready for Midway a month later. At the same battle Shōkaku took a number of hits, but made it all the way back to Japan. During the Battle of the Eastern Solomons Enterprise was hit a few times, but was back in action two months later to engage at Santa Cruz. There she, like Shōkaku, again took a number of bomb hits without ever being in danger of sinking.


Indeed it was a very lucky shot but my point was, bomb damage can be fatal to a ship so no, you can't really say a carrier or any capital ship is proof against bomb damage.

Of course I would still prefer a torpedo for a surer kill in operational conditions, so no, I am not disputing that torpedoes are the better choice for capital ship destruction. But the point still stands.... A dive bomber wave alone is still a legit threat to the survival of capital ship.

On the other hand, look also at the critical torpedo damage scored on US fleet carriers in the Coral Sea and Solomons. Broken avgas tanks which set off a massive fire that gutted the ship and forced its abandonment for Lexington and the knocking out of Hornet's engines that crippled the ship and enabled the further torpedo hit from Ryujo's kanko to be fatal.

It is not impossible for these components to be damaged by bomb strikes instead, just that their placement would mean torpedo blasts have a much higher chance of hitting them.

Yet, Franklin made it home.

It is possible, had the Japanese managed to secure the area, that they could have gotten Akagi and even some of the others home as well. But the general knowledge would put the Americans as more likely to save a ship with their damage control teams than the Japanese would.


Because Franklin was supported by friendly craft. If it were Guadalcanal or the Solomons where she was facing Kido Butai instead of piecemeal attacks by individual aircraft it may not have gone so well.

Again, this amount of devastation was done by a single kanbaku....what if it were a full strike in heavily contested waters?

Marcus H.
2015-06-01, 22:51
The November/AURA artwork of Pacific ships really are something of a different level to all the others. I read about the design concept of the USS Langley and they really put a lot of effort into going through the same brainstorming and research that the original Kancolle team has done. I also like how the USS Fleet Girls are much more mature looking than their IJN counterparts.

I bet their dream come true is for the concepts to be integrated into the game, but I wonder how the balancing will be handled.

AC-Phoenix
2015-06-01, 23:01
The November/AURA artwork of Pacific ships really are something of a different level to all the others. I read about the design concept of the USS Langley and they really put a lot of effort into going through the same brainstorming and research that the original Kancolle team has done. I also like how the USS Fleet Girls are much more mature looking than their IJN counterparts.

I bet their dream come true is for the concepts to be integrated into the game, but I wonder how the balancing will be handled.

In the Yorktown class case I'd prefer if they wouldn't.
At least not the final versiions.

I personally prefer their other version of Enterprise for example (Seeable on the Blog above too; link below).
Enterprise in particular looks more like jrHigh to me while all other Yorktown class carriers look like Last High School year/ Early college years.

The other things with them i find rather ironic is that they are all dressed as native americans, given how said people were pretty much screwed over by the colonists.
The native American skirts also look a bit out of place if you look at all the other ships they have drawn.

My suspicion is that it was done to justify the bows, which are again rather strange with all of them/almost all of them having also having a colt.
Said colt is what I would have expected them to launch their planes from btw, given the Americans trigger happy nature :heh:

That being said, putting Enterprise(not the linked design now) below Zuikaku's fuel tanks/plane storage level (ship design here) kinda surprised me. Especially since the other two carriers (of the same class) are apparently even in that regard.
And notably I wasn't even specifically looking there, the difference between the 3 of them is just so obvious that it jumps you right in the eye.

Peronsal opinion on it is:
Let them launch the planes from their colts and fix enterpise's chest and they'd be perfect.
The native amrican skirt just mad eme say 'Oh the irony'.

That being said, I almost got a E (haha E, get it?) in Art once so my opinions on art are probably just worth the trash bin anyway.

And don't get me wrong here I don't say the Yorktown class carriers look bad (In fact they look pretty good) above is just personal taste/wondering about certain design decisions.




The other designs, especially the Battleships, yes please!

yulinard
2015-06-01, 23:56
I think USN ships can fit into the game if they dont taking AA Queen crown from Maya. Older battleships, scout cruiser, destroyers and subs... lattest Battleship and cruiser is a no. Also ships that have wonky history and part of someone famous history like USS San Jacinto

Theres World of Warship giving 3d models for fans to work with. Only Langley is flat for now but seaplane tender as kai-2 is weird.

JokerD
2015-06-02, 01:00
In the Yorktown class case I'd prefer if they wouldn't.
At least not the final versiions.

I personally prefer their other version of Enterprise for example (Seeable on the Blog above too; link below).
Enterprise in particular looks more like jrHigh to me while all other Yorktown class carriers look like Last High School year/ Early college years.

The other things with them i find rather ironic is that they are all dressed as native americans, given how said people were pretty much screwed over by the colonists.
The native American skirts also look a bit out of place if you look at all the other ships they have drawn.

My suspicion is that it was done to justify the bows, which are again rather strange with all of them/almost all of them having also having a colt.
Said colt is what I would have expected them to launch their planes from btw, given the Americans trigger happy nature :heh:

That being said, putting Enterprise(not the linked design now) below Zuikaku's fuel tanks/plane storage level (ship design here) kinda surprised me. Especially since the other two carriers (of the same class) are apparently even in that regard.
And notably I wasn't even specifically looking there, the difference between the 3 of them is just so obvious that it jumps you right in the eye.

Peronsal opinion on it is:
Let them launch the planes from their colts and fix enterpise's chest and they'd be perfect.
The native amrican skirt just mad eme say 'Oh the irony'.

That being said, I almost got a E (haha E, get it?) in Art once so my opinions on art are probably just worth the trash bin anyway.

And don't get me wrong here I don't say the Yorktown class carriers look bad (In fact they look pretty good) above is just personal taste/wondering about certain design decisions.




The other designs, especially the Battleships, yes please!

Can you imagine the the space you would need to have for the Essex class carrier sisters, all 24 of them, and that's not even counting the 50 Casablanca class escort carriers :heh:

DarkJak2050
2015-06-02, 01:51
that was pre WWII though, and since I doubt that we will see Thomahawk Missiles in this game before 2035, her KaiNi will probably still fire all turrets ;)

Maybe...

But has it occurred to you that the girls are in their World War II state because it was the last major conflict their actual ships were in? Not to mentioned when they were at their "best"?

Then there's also the factor that their actual ships were either sunk during the war, or turned into scrap after the war.

Aren't those why they were in their WWII state?

For the Iowas, they would have the Modernized upgrades (and Iowa would still have only 2 operating turrets) if allowed. Remember that I'm considering their history and the events they were in. And same goes with the Japanese Navy ships involved in World War II. The Iowas survived the War and other major conflicts until they all became Museum ships to this day. As opposed to the Japanese ships that were either sunk during the war, or scrapped after the war.

But anyway, it seems that we're getting off topic now.

Thanks again for the images of what the Iowa-Class battleships would look like if they were in KanColle, but where's Missouri?

There's Iowa, Wisconsin and New Jersey, so where's Missouri?

Can you imagine the the space you would need to have for the Essex class carrier sisters, all 24 of them, and that's not even counting the 50 Casablanca class escort carriers :heh:

Uh, how about cutting it down to 4?

- Yorktown
- Intrepid
- Hornet
- Lexington

Because those are the surviving WWII carriers of the Essex-class to this day.

Ithekro
2015-06-02, 02:08
Missouri? Still being worked up. (the artist is still active. The last one was USS Maryland (http://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/2026634?tags=jeanex))

Note that Yukikaze didn't sink. She lasted until 1970 when she was scrapped after running aground after a major storm. Yukikaze is not in her final form. She's in her Imperial Japanse Navy form with her original armaments. She's not been converted yet to her Taiwan Navy specification with Allied weapons. She fought in the 1950s a little as flagship.

As for images and upgrades...there is always the space battleship route:

Space Battleship Kirishima (BBS-555) circa 2198. A Kongo Type Battleship from 2171.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v514/ithekro/lolikirishima555_zpsf89d976e.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/ithekro/media/lolikirishima555_zpsf89d976e.jpg.html)

The Space Shipgirls at the Battle of Pluto (January 17, 2199). Assault Destroyer Yukikaze (DDS-117) is defending Kirishima. She will be the last ship lost in this war. Only Kirishima made it back to Earth. Yukikaze is an Isokaze Type assault destroyer from 2188.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v514/ithekro/lolishipsinbattle_zps826dc2c8.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/ithekro/media/lolishipsinbattle_zps826dc2c8.jpg.html)

Space Battleship Yamato (BBY-01), finished after the Battle of Pluto in 2199, will go on her own to save Earth and end the war. First Earth Shipgirl with a wave motion engine capable of long range faster than light travel.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v514/ithekro/lolishipYamato2199_zps7a7bd0c8.png (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/ithekro/media/lolishipYamato2199_zps7a7bd0c8.png.html)

DarkJak2050
2015-06-02, 02:16
Missouri? Still being worked up. (the artist is still active. The last one was USS Maryland (http://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/2026634?tags=jeanex))

Note that Yukikaze didn't sink. She lasted until 1970 when she was scrapped after running aground after a major storm. Yukikaze is not in her final form. She's in her Imperial Japanse Navy form with her original armaments. She's not been converted yet to her Taiwan Navy specification with Allied weapons. She fought in the 1950s a little as flagship.

I guess you missed the part where I said "scrapped after the war". And I didn't say how long after the war. And also WWII being the last major conflict that she was in.

Those or I forgot the factor of being "transferred" to another country's Navy. Then again, it seems that's all the more reason she's in her WWII state. Because that's the last major conflict she was in while sailing the Japanese flag before being "transferred".

AC-Phoenix
2015-06-02, 02:27
Maybe...

But has it occurred to you that the girls are in their World War II state because it was the last major conflict their actual ships were in? Not to mentioned when they were at their "best"?

Then there's also the factor that their actual ships were either sunk during the war, or turned into scrap after the war.

Aren't those why they were in their WWII state?

For the Iowas, they would have the Modernized upgrades. Remember that I'm considering their history and the events they were in. And same goes with the Japanese Navy ships involved in World War II. The Iowas survived the War and other major conflicts until they all became Museum ships. As opposed to the Japanese ships that were either sunk during the war, or scraped after the war.

No they are in their WWII state due to the story, that says WWII ships. Also Iowa and her sisters were Mothballed and re-activated so often they'd at least need 3 upgrades like Bismarck has :heh:


But anyway, it seems that we're getting off topic now.

Slightly, which is one of the reasons why I will let Kongou and Kirishima answer everything about Iowa's post WWII equipment and Kancolle:

http://i.imgur.com/AwLI5XP.jpg
Author + Translations:
https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/1961374?tags=Iowa



Thanks again for the images of what the Iowa-Class battleships would look like if they were in KanColle, but where's Missouri?

There's Iowa, Wisconsin and New Jersey, so where's Missouri?

The author apparently never drew Missouri.

Alternetively you can read the arpeggio of Blue steel manga, she might just appear there sooner or later.

DarkJak2050
2015-06-02, 02:46
No they are in their WWII state due to the story, that says WWII ships. Also Iowa and her sisters were Mothballed and re-activated so often they'd at least need 3 upgrades like Bismarck has :heh:

The author apparently never drew Missouri.

Alternetively you can read the arpeggio of Blue steel manga, she might just appear there sooner or later.

Alright then... So no modernization for the Iowas. But they should still have their combat experience. Considering that their actual ships are still around to this day, but as Museum ships.

But they would still be some of the "newest" battleships at the time. And they should be thankful for aircraft carriers; because they practically cancelled the construction of the Montana-class battleships. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana-class_battleship) They were supposed to suped-up versions of the Iowas, with the intent of countering Yamato. The designs were done, the US Navy got the approval to construct them but their keels were not even laid. If those were constructed and hit the water... Uh-oh.

But as for Missouri, I wouldn't be surprised if it has something to do with her involvement in officially ending WWII.

Ithekro
2015-06-02, 03:14
The Montanas were more an upgraded version of the South Dakota-class that the Iowas.

I did find in my older files this version of Tirpitz though:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v514/ithekro/loliship5_zpsmq6xqmwi.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/ithekro/media/loliship5_zpsmq6xqmwi.jpg.html)

I probably got it off 4chan years ago.

DarkJak2050
2015-06-02, 03:34
The Montanas were more an upgraded version of the South Dakota-class that the Iowas.

And yet, it doesn't change the intent of the Montanas to counter the Yamato.

You think Missouri will be done? Out of the 4 Iowas, she's practically the most famous.

Ithekro
2015-06-02, 04:30
By Jeanex? Probably. Seems to mostly be focusing on early warship first. Ship involved in 1942.

Montana was designed to take on larger treaty battleships without needing to worry about the Panama Canal. The US Navy did not know how large Yamato was, nor how larger her guns were until after the war was over. Even when she was sunk the Americans thought she was armed with 16 inch guns like the Nagatos. They had found out she was bigger than expected already, but by then the Montanas had been cancelled.

I don't recall the Americans having even seen Yamato before Montana was cancelled.

SaintessHeart
2015-06-02, 05:22
In the modern age of aircraft carriers, Yamato's concept is pretty much outdated.

Shells are not missiles, against moving and turning targets means that heavy long-ranged cannons need the power of modern FCS to calculate and predict fire-trajectories, rather than the rounds adjusting themselves to suit the changes made by the enemy captain. Besides, the ability to fire shells over long distances is an over-exaggeration, at long distances pressure dynamics and the inertia generated by the mass of the shell would have flung the shot greatly off course by the time the flight path stabilises.

Katori was sunk by Iowa only when the latter closed the distance and is able to aim and fire with little to no lag time. Also, the Iowa could have almost matched Yamato in firepower with little to no accuracy differences over long ranges. The Montana is an overkill.

wavehawk
2015-06-02, 05:27
Likewise, aircraft carriers are starting to be less effective. While they carry a large number of aircraft and firepower, carriers are primarily very large and vulnerable without an accompanying fleet of destroyers, frigates, submarines and obviously it's own air wing. Without all the rest of the fleet a Carrier's an easy target.

SaintessHeart
2015-06-02, 05:57
Likewise, aircraft carriers are starting to be less effective. While they carry a large number of aircraft and firepower, carriers are primarily very large and vulnerable without an accompanying fleet of destroyers, frigates, submarines and obviously it's own air wing. Without all the rest of the fleet a Carrier's an easy target.

Aircraft carriers will always have a role. They used to have a marine detachment under the decks until 1998, where they built LHA/Ds to house a battalion, which is up to 2-4 companies rather than a single one under the deck of a CV.

And then there are Special Forces (mostly SEALs, but expect GB/Delta, AFSOC CAC/Weathermen and PJs, maybe even spooks) numbering up to a (half-)platoon size, forming up a mini TF when necessary given their combined expertises.

And when needed, they can call Washington to bring in up to 2,500 crazies from the 75th Ranger Regiment in 18 hours. Not discounting the madmen already on the LHA/Ds. With air support and the ground troops, they can act as a sledgehammer to take over anything in their fleet area of operations until relieved by the rest of the US Army (Airborne > Army Corps, etc).

P.S Can I get a mod to shift this conversation set to the historical discussion thread? Thanks. (MOD EDIT: You're welcome. :) )

Ithekro
2016-10-26, 15:58
Something odd I found while looking through an old Jane's Fighting Ships from 1945. Listed as one of the remaining Japanese ship was a carrier called Hayataka. Her sistership, Hitaka had been lost earlier in the war. This is Junyo, and her sister Hiyo.

Of course the old English translation also give us the special type destroyer "Hubuki" also know at the "main character". (Fubuki)

Sixth Destroyer Division is : Akatuki, Ikaduti, Inaduma, and Hibiki.

Estavali
2016-10-26, 20:39
Something odd I found while looking through an old Jane's Fighting Ships from 1945. Listed as one of the remaining Japanese ship was a carrier called Hayataka. Her sistership, Hitaka had been lost earlier in the war. This is Junyo, and her sister Hiyo.

IIRC this is actually a common occurrence when one comes across a Japanese name/term in only kanji and no furigana. If the word has multiple readings, you have to make a guess at which is the correct one. 鷹 can either be read as "taka" or "yō", usually the former afaik. Same goes for 隼: "haya" or "jun", with the former as the more common reading.

This happened with Shoukaku as well ("Kakeduru").

LoweGear
2016-10-26, 20:50
Likewise, aircraft carriers are starting to be less effective. While they carry a large number of aircraft and firepower, carriers are primarily very large and vulnerable without an accompanying fleet of destroyers, frigates, submarines and obviously it's own air wing. Without all the rest of the fleet a Carrier's an easy target.

The same can actually be said of battleships, who are significantly less effective at defending themselves against submarines, aircraft, and anti-ship weaponry. The only thing a battleship can do better than a carrier is tanking hits and providing direct fire support, however for most other combat roles the carrier is a vastly superior platform capable of attacking at longer ranges with more powerful weaponry with better accuracy, and unlike a battleship a carrier is capable of easily upgrading its combat capability by virtue of updating the aircraft it carries.

It's disingenuous to say that a carrier is useless without its accompanying air wing, since that's like saying that a battleship is useless without its ammunition: it's a statement of fact, but not really something encountered in a practical sense in a combat scenario. And a battleship also requires just as many escorts to handle the threats that it can't effectively fight itself such as aircraft and subs, which are handled by its escorts.

Carriers in fact are only going to become more effective as more advanced aircraft and missile systems are developed, hence why you see modern navies trying to catch up to the US in acquiring carriers of their own, rather than going back to building big-gun battleships.

Ithekro
2016-10-26, 21:15
The current problem the US Navy has is power limitations for electricity generation. Modern technology require a lot of power as the ships get more and more computers. Add to this the lasers and railguns in development, and you have some really hungry ships. While the nuclear powers ships can produce a lot of power, the older ones lack something. Either a large enough power generator, or their wiring is insufficient for the loads needed. The recently commissioned USS Zumwalt. and the new Ford-class carriers should have the power requirements for the new weapon systems, and the Fords will have their decks designed the handle the engine blasts of things like the F-35C.

AC-Phoenix
2016-10-27, 03:26
The current problem the US Navy has is power limitations for electricity generation. Modern technology require a lot of power as the ships get more and more computers. Add to this the lasers and railguns in development, and you have some really hungry ships. While the nuclear powers ships can produce a lot of power, the older ones lack something. Either a large enough power generator, or their wiring is insufficient for the loads needed. The recently commissioned USS Zumwalt. and the new Ford-class carriers should have the power requirements for the new weapon systems, and the Fords will have their decks designed the handle the engine blasts of things like the F-35C.

Moreover the Fords work mostly on electromagnetism instead of steam.
I also read about a proposal to add armor around Vital parts of some destroyer classes.

The same can actually be said of battleships, who are significantly less effective at defending themselves against submarines, aircraft, and anti-ship weaponry. The only thing a battleship can do better than a carrier is tanking hits and providing direct fire support, however for most other combat roles the carrier is a vastly superior platform capable of attacking at longer ranges with more powerful weaponry with better accuracy, and unlike a battleship a carrier is capable of easily upgrading its combat capability by virtue of updating the aircraft it carries.


The carrier itself barely has any weaponry though - which is fun because they'd be large enough to carry missiles.
Nevertheless in a scenario such as Kancolle where battleships can literally sneak up on ships the Battleship would be vastly superior.

In actual real life combat scenarios though not so.