2015-02-27, 20:14 | Link #41 | |
Detective
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 36
|
Quote:
(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.
__________________
|
|
2015-02-27, 21:25 | Link #42 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
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.
__________________
Last edited by Ithekro; 2015-02-27 at 21:36. |
2015-02-28, 00:54 | Link #43 | |
Otaku Apprentice
|
Quote:
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)
__________________
|
|
2015-02-28, 03:36 | Link #44 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
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, 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.
__________________
Last edited by Ithekro; 2015-02-28 at 03:48. |
2015-02-28, 03:42 | Link #45 | |||
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Quote:
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. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2015-02-28, 03:48 | Link #46 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
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.
__________________
Last edited by Ithekro; 2015-02-28 at 06:20. |
2015-03-01, 11:07 | Link #47 | |||||
Detective
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 36
|
Quote:
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. Quote:
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. Quote:
I'm personally more concerned how he would have survived the shockwave than the actual explosion tbh. Quote:
Quote:
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.
__________________
Last edited by AC-Phoenix; 2015-03-01 at 11:42. |
|||||
2015-03-01, 13:10 | Link #48 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
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.....
__________________
Last edited by Ithekro; 2015-03-01 at 13:21. |
2015-03-01, 13:59 | Link #49 | ||||||
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Quote:
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. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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. Quote:
__________________
|
||||||
2015-03-01, 15:47 | Link #50 | |||||||
Detective
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 36
|
Quote:
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. Quote:
Quote:
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. Quote:
Quote:
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) Quote:
And that is a reason a pointed to Cameron's documentation - Bismarcks planes were unable to launch. EditDuring 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. Quote:
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
__________________
Last edited by AC-Phoenix; 2015-03-01 at 16:17. |
|||||||
2015-03-01, 17:33 | Link #51 | ||||
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Quote:
Spoiler for Yamato's deck armour:
Quote:
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. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||||
2015-03-01, 18:01 | Link #52 | ||||
Detective
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 36
|
Quote:
Less than 1 % actually hitting sounds unlikely considering how her course was pretty much predictable. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
||||
2015-03-01, 18:52 | Link #53 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
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.
__________________
|
2015-03-02, 02:09 | Link #54 | |||
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Quote:
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. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2015-03-02, 03:20 | Link #55 | |||||
Detective
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 36
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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 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.
__________________
|
|||||
2015-03-02, 06:51 | Link #56 | ||||
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||||
2015-03-02, 21:54 | Link #57 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
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/statu...31062522982400 She sank there over 70 years ago.
__________________
|
2015-03-03, 06:44 | Link #58 | |
RUN, YOU FOOLS!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Formerly Iwakawa base and Chaldea. Now Teyvat, the Astral Express & the Outpost
Age: 44
|
Quote:
|
|
2015-03-03, 07:01 | Link #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Age: 33
|
Quote:
|
|
2015-03-03, 09:25 | Link #60 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Well better than the Yamato anyway, which is lying in 2 pieces on the sea floor... |
|
|
|