WWII Battleship Comparisons

Discussions on History. Please keep on topic & friendly. Provocative & one sided political posts will be deleted.

WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby dcunning30 » Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:23 pm

I revisited the site www.combinedfleet.com.  It's an excellent site.  After revisiting the battleship comparison page, I thought it would be of interest here:

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


.....let the debates begin!   ;)
TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
User avatar
dcunning30
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Nod

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby Felix/FFDS » Fri Feb 10, 2006 11:31 pm

Actually, reviewing his methodology and data, I tend to agree.

A potential ship to ship between the Yamato and the Iowa could have gone either way.

Like the fellow implies, just because the raw numbers come out one way, doesn't mean the fight follows.

NIce site find.!
Felix/FFDS
User avatar
Felix/FFDS
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 16776435
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 9:42 am
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby 4_Series_Scania » Sat Feb 11, 2006 6:18 am

Actually, reviewing his methodology and data, I tend to agree.

A potential ship to ship between the Yamato and the Iowa could have gone either way.

Like the fellow implies, just because the raw numbers come out one way, doesn't mean the fight follows.

NIce site find.!


The Battle of the River Plate being a classic case in point.
Posting drivel here since Jan 31st, 2002. - That long!
"He who laughs last, thinks slowest."
User avatar
4_Series_Scania
Major
Major
 
Posts: 3194
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Newport Shropshire U.K.

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby dcunning30 » Mon Feb 13, 2006 10:34 am

Felix/FFDS

I've been visiting his site for well over 5-6 years.  John Parshall has become an authority on the IJN.  As you might have seen, he served as consultant to identify the wreckage of the IJN Kaga, plus I've read a couple of books that list his website in their bibliography.

What is truly amazing, yet is easily overlooked by the casual viewer is his Tabulature Records of Movement (TROMs).  His site has compiled the actual histories of hundereds of ships.  His site originally compiled TROMs of combattants several years ago, starting with the carriers.  But now, he's compiling TROMs of merchant vessels.  It's absolutely amazing that he's getting this info.  This means analyzing Japanese documentation which obviously resides in Japan.  Also, consider how they Japanese did a much more thorough job of destroying documentation than the Germans.
TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
User avatar
dcunning30
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Nod

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby dcunning30 » Mon Feb 13, 2006 10:47 am

Plus the out-of-scope consideration that has much to do with which will win is the human factor.  Do each ship have experienced and competent skipper?  How's the training and experience of the crew, and the fatigue factor also plays in.

Case in point:  Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal.  The US sent in two BB's, the Washington and the South Dakoda along with 4 DD's to go against the Japanese bombardment force to bombard Henderson field which included Kirishima with various CA's, CL's and a bunch of DD's.  The South Dakoda's electrical power went out shortly afetr the battle began, but the Washington prevailed.  The point I want to make is even though it was an American victory, it was barely.  Washington had radar, but they didn't trust the new technology.  That resulted in the Americans taking more damage than they would have if they trusted the radar.
TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
User avatar
dcunning30
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Nod

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby Felix/FFDS » Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:14 am

From a historical standpoint, it's amazing (to the aerocentric history dilettante) how much of the world's history has churned around control of the seas, and the predominance of the "ships of the line" and battleships, even if actual significant moments did not involve battleships!

My "seapower" mindset has been influenced by the two books, "Dreadnought" and "Castles of Steel", which I consider must reads for anyone interested in the pre-WW1 arms race leading up to the actual fighting (Dreadnought) and an overview of WW1 as it played out at sea.
Felix/FFDS
User avatar
Felix/FFDS
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 16776435
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 9:42 am
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby dcunning30 » Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:39 am

Let me clarify the radar that I mentioned.  There's several types of radar.  There's surface search radar, fire control radar, and air search radar.  The radar that I was speaking of is fire control radar.  Previously, obtaining a firing solution was accomplished by optical rangefinders.  In a night battle, a fire control radar trump optical rangefinders anyday.  And besides, in 1942, the Japanese were arguably the best naval night fighters in the business.
TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
User avatar
dcunning30
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Nod

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby dcunning30 » Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:45 am

Felix/FFDS


This i show I kinda see it:

The battle between the Monitor and the Merrimack rendered all the world's navies obsolescent.

The Dreadnaught also rendered the world's navies obsolescent.

The emergence of the carrier in WWII rendered the battleship obsolescent.

Since WWII, I don't think you'll ever see another large scale naval battle.  Navies are very expensive, and only rich nations can afford them.

BTW, I'm not advocating that navies are obsolescent.
TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
User avatar
dcunning30
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Nod

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby Felix/FFDS » Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:11 pm

Adding to your comments:

Felix/FFDS

This i show I kinda see it:

The battle between the Monitor and the Merrimack rendered all the world's navies obsolescent.

While the first "ironclad ship of the line" was the French  "La Gloire", and there were already several ironclads (used in the Crimean War as bombardment ships), the battle between the USS Monitor and the CSS Virginia definitely pointed out that all-wood ships were pass
Felix/FFDS
User avatar
Felix/FFDS
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 16776435
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 9:42 am
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby dcunning30 » Mon Feb 13, 2006 2:59 pm

Also, the Japanese made effective use of torpedo carrying destroyers.  They played a fairly vital role, as well as the fatigue factor.  The Russian Baltic Fleet sailed all the way around the cape of Africa up to the Tsushima straits, which were effectively Japanese backwaters in comparison.
TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
User avatar
dcunning30
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Nod

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby Woodlouse2002 » Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:03 pm

I thought HMS Warrior was the first all metal ship of the line. Wooden war ships really became obsolete with the invention of the explosive shell in the 19th century. After that really it was only a matter of time before ships were made entirely out of iron.

Also the Battle of Tsushima straits isn't a good case study for warship design but for training and tactics. The Japanise had been trained by the Royal Navy and as the Royal Navy had ruled the sea for the previous 100 years it is fair to say that they were the best.

The Russians on the other hand barely knew how to control their own ships and on their way to Tsushima they actually managed to attack the Hull fishing fleet in the North Sea thinking that they were Japanise torpedo boats.

http://www.hullwebs.co.uk/content/l-20c ... dammed.htm
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!

Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains c
User avatar
Woodlouse2002
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 10369
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: Cornwall, England

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby Felix/FFDS » Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:48 pm

I thought HMS Warrior was the first all metal ship of the line.


I would agree with you on Warrior - as being the first iron-hulled (metal frames/metal armour) ship of the line.  La Gloire caused a shock as being the first ship of the line to be ironclad (iron armour over wooden hull).

HMS Warrior, going in service about a year after La Gloire, basically made La Gloire obsolete.
Felix/FFDS
User avatar
Felix/FFDS
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 16776435
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 9:42 am
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby dcunning30 » Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:32 pm

Yamashiro in her glory!

Image

More Glory!

Image

Yamashiro in trouble.

Image
TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
User avatar
dcunning30
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Nod

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby Woodlouse2002 » Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:56 pm

Having looked at this chaps site I must say that I think he is a little biased as regards the Iowa class and ignores HMS Rodney/Nelson in his battleship contest.

All the same tis an interesting site.
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!

Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains c
User avatar
Woodlouse2002
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 10369
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: Cornwall, England

Re: WWII Battleship Comparisons

Postby dcunning30 » Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:22 pm

Having looked at this chaps site I must say that I think he is a little biased as regards the Iowa class and ignores HMS Rodney/Nelson in his battleship contest.

All the same tis an interesting site.



Reasonable question.
Last edited by dcunning30 on Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
User avatar
dcunning30
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Nod

Next

Return to History

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 134 guests