Alternate History -- Carriers & Battleships Swap Fates

>>31363790
Why are you Chinese people so obsessed with carriers? Literally Americans don't think twice about them

>>31363790

>On December 5th, 1941, the Imperial Japanese Navy executed a surprise attack on the American Naval Base Pearl Harbor, annihilating the USA's Pacific Battleships but missing the juiciest targets: America's Pacific Aircraft Carriers

The War in the Pacific theatre lasts longer, possibly a year or more, but the overall result is the same.

>>31363790
on the pacific rim part,

because giant robots punching monsters looks cooler than battleships shelling them

The war lasts longer, we nuke Japan 20 times instead of 2 times. We also nuke Iwo and Okinawa for good measure. Japan sinks back into the ocean. And we never have to suffer from shit like GuP again. That being said, I will miss some hentai, though.

File: If the US had gotten curbstomped at Midway.png (703KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

703KB, 1600x900px

>>31363790
This is the third time we've had one of these threads in the last two weeks. Please stop.

War extends another 6-18 months, US production still buries Japan without much doubt in the final outcome while still supplying European allies and fighting in Europe. Pic related is what carrier forces would have looked like over time if the US had lost all three carriers at Midway and the Japanese hadn't lost any. The results for a similar event with carriers at Pearl would have been similar over time, or even better considering how many of the Pearl BBs were brought back into service. See: http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm

They only way the War in the Pacific changes is if Japan somehow figures out how to gain air superiority over the continental US and carry out extended and continuous disruption of US war production. Impossible, in other words.

>>31364886
I, op, was unaware of these other, similar, recent, previous threads, and apologize for redundant shitposting, and I thank you for your thoughts on these matters, but I'd like to ask:
>what if japan had gone with their army's plan instead of their navy's plan and never attacked america?

>>31365763
>Apologize for shitposting but continue anyway.
Lurk more you colossal nigger.

>>31365763
>>what if japan had gone with their army's plan instead of their navy's plan and never attacked america?
They would have been strangled of strategic resources by the US and allied trade embargo, including oil, petroleum products, rubber, high quality steel, aluminum, etc. Even if the US never entered the war (highly, highly unlikely), the Japanese would have been bled dry by Chinese insurgency ops, British-operated US production naval assets, possibly British operated, partially US-produced strategic bomber fleets, possibly British-dropped US developed nukes and finally Soviet ground forces. Result would have been the same, just taken another 2-4 years depending, with the Soviets ending up owning Japan and all of Korea, maybe a good chunk of China as well, so a much worse 20th century for Japan and Korea at the very least.

I should stress again, though, that the probability of the US never entering the war was and is EXTREMELY low. US embargo on Japanese trade would have eventually forced a confrontation in the Pacific, and US naval build up started well before Pearl Harbor.

>>31364886
Actually not bad. I thought that was worth. Japan just need to kill burgers at 2:1 efficiency.

File: 1473819638787.jpg (69KB, 640x795px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 640x795px

>>31365912
>Japan just need to kill burgers at 2:1 efficiency.
That's very, very difficult to do when you're at a vast training and technological disadvantage.

USN tech advantages by 1944, not even considering the crippling production advantages:
>completely broken IJN and IJA comms cryptography by the US
>all production tactical aircraft in general performance and survivability
>strategic bombers. 'nuff said
>US pilot training system was far, far better - rotating experienced combat pilots back to the states to train new pilots rather than leaving them on the line until they die and take their experience and knowledge with them. Means the US air forces were operating at a much higher level of basic effectiveness by 1943
>radar directed fire control at 3cm wavelengths with remote power controlled turrets for anti-surface and anti-air primary, secondary and AAA battery targeting (IJN had only very limited radar FC direction capability in 10cm wavelengths, no RPC turrets)
>USN DDs had nearly equal AAA throw weight to IJN heavy cruisers, with far more effective targeting and fire effectiveness
>USN submarine forces were completely choking merchant shipping and causing rear area havoc on IJN combat vessels, again radar is a big factor here
>AAA and DP medium naval artillery was generally far superior, for instance the lack of a 40mm BOFORS equivalent for the Japanese was disastrous, and the US BOFORS were RPC to boot
etc, etc.

Ground forces advantages were similarly telling.

There was simply no way the Japanese could have sustained a 2:1 kill ratio against US forces after 1943, much less '44.

>>31365912

that's the ratio they need, the ratio they had in reality was about 1:10, both on the ground and in the air.

>>31363790
I really can't understate how important land based aviation was in the Pacific. Without a good way of countering it, the war is likely extended by another year or two. Remember that the US did have more carriers than were based in the Pacific, so it would have several to be somewhat defensive with, and that combined with all the land based aviation might be enough to have a decent defense in the Dutch East Indies.

File: DF-21D launch test 2014.jpg (26KB, 638x655px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 638x655px

>>31363824
Because carriers are the symbol of US hegemony and oppression.

Wherever Carriers are, there is also rape. Literally.

Ask the Okinawans and the Philippines - whenever a carrier docks, hundreds of rape cases pop up, some ending in murder.

China would do the world a favor, if they de-imperialize the US by sinking every single carrier and making fishfood of every single Marine.

>>31366305
This as well. From http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm:
>Aircraft Production
Year-US-Japan
1939 5,856 4,467
1940 12,804 4,768
1941 26,277 5,088
1942 47,836 8,861
1943 85,898 16,693
1944 96,318 28,180
1945 49,761 8,263
Total 324,750 76,320

If we extrapolate the 1944 numbers further, even assuming more than half the aircraft are going to Europe but addressing the US capability to strike Japanese production without similar risks, there's just no way Japan could have ever kept up, regardless of how many aircraft are on carriers.

Other 1944 production numbers:
Type-US-Japan
CV/CVL/CVE 45 5
BB 2 0
CA/CL 14 2
DD 74 24
DE/FF 194 ?
Subs 81 39 (many IJN production were midget subs, not fully operational subs)

>>31366403
>Ask the Okinawans and the Philippines - whenever a carrier docks, hundreds of rape cases pop up, some ending in murder.
>China would do the world a favor, if they de-imperialize the US by sinking every single carrier and making fishfood of every single Marine.
If you're feeling froggy, go ahead and jump dog eater.

wishaniggahwould.jpg

you need to
>learn how to
>greentext
dude

>>31366520
I'm >>31366079
as well as >>31366488

There is just no easy way to present multiple data tables in a single post on 4chan.

They need to upgrade to allow table coding within the message body, or at least add some formatting options.

I hate america and take every excuse to shit on america and americans (especially Marines) but even I must admit that japan has always been shit at warfare and was probably at its shittiest in WWII and that yankees curbstomped them is no surprise (and that they still could have with then-dying battleship doctrine is also pretty easy to prove)
that said

>especially the four Iowa-class ones with their high speed and sixteen-inch guns dropping two million pounds of ordinance on a target in an hour?
battleships and naval guns were and continue to be horribly imprecise compared to missiles. volume of ordinance doesn't mean much when most of it lands harmlessly in the ocean, and even fancy airbursting munitions don't mean much when most of the critical systems of a ship are below the water line and this protected by the waters around the boat in addition to its own actual armor.

I don't know why modern "battleships" aren't commissioned that are intended to use guided munitions though. I'd figure a guided shell would be cheaper than an equivalent missile, but maybe there's range issues or something idk. maybe to make a guided shell with the range of a missile requires so much powder that you may as well just use rocket boosters anyway.

tl;dr japan could have been defeated by guys in boats wielding enfields and ross rifles but the battleship rightly died because it is outranged by planes and missiles

>>31366488
Definitely true that the US could out produce Japan by far, but the real question is how long it would.

There's also the intetesring situation where the Yamato would likely utterly obliterate most prewar BBs, and is operational sooner than the Iowas

>>31366079
Don't forget proximity fuses for them DP AA guns

>>31366571
>I don't know why modern "battleships" aren't commissioned that are intended to use guided munitions though.
They're called the Zumwalt class. And soon enough every 5" gun in the fleet

>>31366571
>I don't know why modern "battleships" aren't commissioned that are intended to use guided munitions though.
Because there is no capability added on the munitions for USN standard VLS systems. Back in WWII, you built bigger ships because you wanted better armor and bigger guns. Now all you get is more VLS cells with exactly the same munitions capability and exactly the same defensive capability.

Thus, it makes much more tactical, strategic and budgetary sense to have many ships with fewer cells (like Burkes or Ticos) which can be in many more places at once and whose loss costs far less in a war, than far fewer ships with a shit ton of cells.

>>31366586
>but the real question is how long it would.
what do you even mean by this?

>>31366586
>There's also the intetesring situation where the Yamato would likely utterly obliterate most prewar BBs, and is operational sooner than the Iowas
By 1942-43, SouDaks and NorCals were arguable a match for Yamato 2 on 1 due to far superior radar FC and RPC, and 2 vs 1 matches up when looking at sunk resources and cost.

>>31366607
>Don't forget proximity fuses for them DP AA guns
Nice get. Slipped my mind.

>>31366613
>They're called the Zumwalt class.
you mean the class that was a massive failure and is now only good for training vessels according to the USN?

>>31366628
>Because there is no capability added on the munitions for USN standard VLS systems.
so is it basically indeed a sort of
> to make a guided shell with the range of a missile requires so much powder that you may as well just use rocket boosters anyway
scenario then? because I do know that guns do have a fairly limited range compared to missiles, and the range of a naval gun is already well beyond the horizon

modern naval warfare is ridiculous

>>31366403
Then watch you Navy get sunk by the subs you never factored in.

>>31366678
>that was a massive failure
In what way? In that we didn't make 40 of them due to having to pay for the GWOT?

We might not have bought many, but they will serve as testbeds and development resources for the next generation of US surface warfare ships.

>>31366766
this, besides the US Navy is already the controller of the seas, the government looked at what it could cut and decided to go with the Zumwalt class

>>31366660
How long it would take.

And FCS differences in 42-43 are not as significant as you think they are. It was the nee radar in the... 44 refits, I think. At that point, the Japanese optical FCS on the Yamato was still comparatively still very good. Two SoDaks might be the match of a lone Yamato, purely because only one gets damaged at a time vs the Yamato taking the shots from both. Battle damage quickly reduces combat effectiveness . However, Yamatos would also have additional ships in their fleet as well.

You've got to look at usage more.

>>31366678
>you mean the class that was a massive failure and is now only good for training vessels according to the USN
You're thinking of the wrong ship entirely. And that's not what happened to the LCSs either.

And no, the effective range of current unguided shells is nowhere near the horizon

>>31366403
Implying the us is the only country where most rape cases aren't made up for attention/attempt to control somebody. A buddy of mine had some whore in Singapore tell him she'd scream rape if he didn't pay her after he turned down her first "business proposition." Trusting the word of any southeast asian is like trusting a nigger, just plain stupid.

>>31366571
I think it was the USS Michigan (too lazy to check) that they put some missile capability on.

>>31366806
>How long it would take.
No more than 2 years more by the most pessimistic projections. Most likely 6 months more. The deciding factor was increased US production and the US spooling up to full wartime production, much more than anything else.

>>31366806
>And FCS differences in 42-43 are not as significant as you think they are. It was the nee radar in the... 44 refits, I think
Nope. SouDak had it from the beginning. See:
http://www.historynet.com/second-naval-battle-of-guadalcanal-turning-point-in-the-pacific-war.htm
in which USN radar FC and RPC turrets on the Washington snatched strategic victory from the face of crushing defeat, even with the SouDak having a catastrophic electrical failure in 1942.

>At that point, the Japanese optical FCS on the Yamato was still comparatively still very good.
Completely worthless in heavy weather, mist, night time, etc. Radar directed FC was an enormous advantage. For more proof, look at the Battle of Surigao Strait between older BBs, 1944:
>At 03:16, West Virginia's radar picked up the surviving ships of Nishimura's force at a range of 42,000 yd (38,000 m) and had achieved a firing solution at 30,000 yd (27,000 m). West Virginia tracked them as they approached in the pitch black night. At 03:53, she fired the eight 16 in (410 mm) guns of her main battery at a range of 22,800 yd (20,800 m), striking Yamashiro with her first salvo. She went on to fire a total of 93 shells. At 03:55, California and Tennessee joined in, firing a total of 63 and 69 14 in (360 mm) shells, respectively. Radar fire control allowed these American battleships to hit targets from a distance at which the Japanese battleships—with their inferior fire control systems—could not return fire.

>However, Yamatos would also have additional ships in their fleet as well.
The USN would have more at the beginning, and far, far more by 1944.

>You've got to look at usage more.
I have. Your timelines are all cocked up.

So if the war dragged on for a few more months or even a full year, then the Soviets, after being done with Manchuria/Korean peninsula, Sakhalin and the Kurills would probably started to invade Hokkaido and launched an offensive to liberate Beijing and move further south to south west.

Stalin might've felt greedy enough to include Manchuria into the USSR and turn Hokkaido and Korea into puppet states.

>>31366766
It was canceled a quarter of the way through because the ships are objective shit. they're bad at everything, badly built, and are literally only good as training platforms for utterly fresh sailors. not according to me. ACCORDING TO THE USN

something the Orca """class""" does for a fraction of the cost of one Zumwalt and at way better efficiency

>>31366403
Shouldn't you be honoring your family instead of shitposting?

>>31366844
>And no, the effective range of current unguided shells is nowhere near the horizon
I meant "it can feasibly go that far" range not "it can reliably hit even a stationary target" range

like how .223's "effective" range is 300m or whatever but you can reasonably volley fire it to like 500 or 600 if you're feeling cheeky

>>31367197
how are they shit?

File: Fred Thompson knows youre a moron.gif (47KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 300x225px

>>31367197
wew

>>31367214
aluminum hull rusting out to uselessness as they move
bad guns and munitions
capsize-prone hull design
being named fucking "zumwalt"

>>31367227
i think you're thinking of the LCS

>>31367227

Zumwalt is a kickass name.

The other stuff is also wrong and requires sources.

>>31367227
>aluminum
>rust

nigga, you how retarded are you?

>>31367318
>aluminum doesnt oxidize
"rust" technically refers only to iron but the exact same process happens to aluminum just fine. it's why aluminum cans are often trated with plastic on the inside -- even just a fizzy drink can eat through aluminum. Aluminum is chemically fragile as fuck and the only thing protecting it from corrosion naturally is that the layer of corrosion that eventually forms is air-tight (but still enough to fuck up structural integrity and pit the fuck out of it)

>>31367318
Uh...
Aluminum does corrode, anon. It just forms a white byproduct instead of red.

>>31366678
>you mean the class that was a massive failure and is now only good for training vessels according to the USN?
1) mixing up Zumwalt and LCS
2) managing to somehow interpret "the first 4 ships will be used for training" into "entire class of 30-40 ships"
0/10

>>31367404
the class is no longer being built beyond those 4 ships

the entire class is those first 4 ships

>>31363790
We'd have built a bunch of liberty ship carriers on merchant hulls, raised the sunk carriers and refloated them in the still not destroyed dry docks, and transferred most of the Atlantic fleet to the Pacific.

So a potentially faster btfoing of Japan with battleships suffering the same fate as naval aviation assraped the nips

>>31367401
This. The oxidation forms a protective layer. Anything Al oxidizes immediately upon contact with air.

>>31367453
This. So much so that powdered aluminum an explosion hazard in air and it's typically shipped either in mineral oil, or treated. it's pretty low-energy but it will still corrode fast enough to create small flames like throwing a chunk of pure sodium in water.

>>31367096
6 months? Are you insane? Midway alone is 6 months. Not getting caught in the Coral Sea is another couple of months. The USN cannot start pushing until Japan's advantage in carriers is negated and they can take on land based aviation with massive carrier based raids. That doesn't happen with fleet carriers until late 1943 at the earliest. And the Washington was at point blank range when she mauled the... Kirishima? And for your information, those are two completely different radars, and the Yamato's FCS is quite likely equal to the early war radar FCSs. It's not just a radar>visual sort of thing. It's an incredibly complex issues.

And quit your nationalistic dick waving. The US will likely win the war in the end, but don't think that it would be all sunshine and daisies the entire time. In this timeline Japan is dominant until late 1943 or 1944. That the US can likely win despite that is testament to its strength.

>>31366613
Yeah, useful to remember that an Arleigh Burke displaces as much as a WW2 heavy cruiser. Ship designations are not as descriptive as they used to be. A destroyer now is quite a different thing from a destroyer from the old days. They're not battleships, but they ain't WW2 tin cans, neither.

>>31367412
That's very wrong.

What if the Japs sink all the carriers but....
2 x Freedom Class LCS are sent over through time travel?

>>31367412
Zumwalt- 3 ships, all going to be used operationally
LCS- 54 ships currently on order, with the first 4-ish being used as test-beds

File: standing here is alright.jpg (143KB, 705x707px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 705x707px

>>31367562
>"y-youre wrong ;_;"
>no citation

>>31367629
they appear in harbour and are completely useless without a worked up crew. They are dismantled for parts and reverse engineering a la XCOM, and the advances in technology are generally taken as advancements in an already established craft but with better materials. The means to replicate it with the necessarily modern manufacturing processes come at around the same time as The Bomb, and nothing changes.

Then ayyliums come from the deep

>>31367538
>6 months? Are you insane?
6 months more added to the war, genius. Jesus. Use your brain.

>the Yamato's FCS is quite likely equal to the early war radar FCSs
Not even close. No FC computer, no direct RPC turret integration, no 3cm radar.

>It's an incredibly complex issues.
I know. You're not paying attention to detail.

>In this timeline Japan is dominant until late 1943 or 1944
Feel free to support that with fact and rational argument. I've provided plenty of factual, sourced information for my assertions. It's time you do the same.

For reference:
USN in late 1941:
>17 battleships (+15 under construction), 9 in the PO
>7 aircraft carriers (+11 under construction), 3 in the PO
>18 heavy cruisers (+8 Baltimore class under construction), 13 in the PO
>19 light cruisers (+32 Cleveland class under construction), 11 in the PO
>6 anti-aircraft cruisers (4 in service, 2 nearly ready)
>171 destroyers (+188 Benson, Livermore and Fletcher class under construction), 80 in the PO
>114 submarines (+79 Gato class under construction), 56 in the PO

IJN in late 1941 (can't find active building numbers):
>10 BBs
>10 CV/CVL
>18 CA
>18 CL
>113 DD
>63 subs

I would love to know how you think the IJN would still have a dominant advantage in 1944.

>And quit your nationalistic dick waving. The US will likely win the war in the end, but don't think that it would be all sunshine and daisies the entire time
That's a cute strawman, but nothing close to what I was saying. The simple fact of the matter is that by any strictly analytical military history perspective, the war was over before it began. Without a developed Japanese capability to strike the CONUS by 1939 or so, there is literally nothing they could have done, and even then they would have needed a miracle. They just didn't have the resources.

>>31367755
>the USN literally had 1.5 times the entire IJN under construction when Pearl Harbor happened

Jesus Christ.

>>31367755

>Without a developed Japanese capability to strike the CONUS by 1939 or so, there is literally nothing they could have done, and even then they would have needed a miracle. They just didn't have the resources.

This.

In order for Japan to win, they would have had to actually invade the Western US and established a foothold.

Something logistically impossible for them to do.

They didn't even get Hawaii, and that's the place they really needed because they could have used it as a staging area for an invasion of California.

>>31367775
japan has literally never been good at warfare

name ONE (1) war japan has won

shit it has never even successfully staved off a revolution, one cowboy and some guys with guns took over Edo once

>>31367887
Russo-Japanese War and 1st Sino-Japanese War.

File: A CHALLENGER APPROACHETH.jpg (66KB, 668x372px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 668x372px

>>31367949
"no"

>>31367964
He's completely correct, though.

>>31367755
I did use my brain. Only 6 months is small as fuck. The US doesn't start pumping out fleet carriers until the end of 1943 when the Essex and her sisters start being commissioned. The IJN has a massive superiority of carriers in this scenario until that point. There will be no Midway in June 1942 that evens the odds. Until that point you basically have the late war IJN and USN situation reversed. The Allies cannot advance until they have the capability to contest Japanese aviation, both carrier and land based. And no, CVEs are not fleet carriers and cannot be used as such.

Early USN radar controlled gunnery wasn't the greatest. Mark 3 were sort of meh. Mark 8 was what made a difference. Japanese systems were arguably better in this early point. Savo Island might prove this.

>>31368448
>The IJN has a massive superiority of carriers in this scenario until that point
The only carriers that can conceivably be sunk at Pearl Harbor are Enterprise and Lexington.

IJN has
>Kaga, Akagi
>Hiryu, Soryu
>Shoukaku, Zuikaku
>plus a couple of CVL

USN has
>Saratoga
>Yorktown, Hornet, Wasp
>HMS Victorious on loan from Britain

IJN has an edge but no "massive superiority."

>>31366403

Come then. The world needs a war. You want this, get it started.

>>31368448
>I did use my brain. Only 6 months is small as fuck.
Look at >>31364886 again, dipshit. 6 months in 1945 means 3 more fleet carriers, another 300 carrier aircraft and much, much more to add to a lead of 6 CVs and 5 CVLs plys 1,100 carrier aircraft. For the Japanese during that time? 1 fleet carrier, 1 light carrier. Just under 100 carrier aircraft.

Considering what 3 fleet carriers did at Midway, are you really going to tell me that's nothing?

>The US doesn't start pumping out fleet carriers until the end of 1943 when the Essex and her sisters start being commissioned.
The Essex was commissioned Dec. 31, 1942.
USS Bunker Hill, 25 May 1943
USS Yorktown (CV-10), 15 April 1943
USS Lexington (CV-16) 17 February 1943
USS Intrepid, 16 August 1943
USS Wasp (CV-18) 24 November 1943
USS Hornet (CV-12) 29 November 1943
So that's 7 Essex class carriers commissioned before the end of 1943, bringing the US total up to 10 total fleet carriers by Jan. 1944. Again, your timeline is completely cocked up.

>The IJN has a massive superiority of carriers in this scenario until that point.
The IJN only had a one carrier and two light carrier advantage, overall forces, before Midway in 1942. If the USN had lost 3 carriers at Pearl, even if NONE of them were returned to service (when, looking at the BBs damaged in the attack, two of them would have been back inside 2 years), US production would still have taken the carrier advantage by the commissioning of the USS Lexington in August 1943, earlier if you count CVLs and total carrier aircraft, and even earlier than that if you count CVEs.

>There will be no Midway in June 1942 that evens the odds.
Doesn't matter. See above.

>Until that point you basically have the late war IJN and USN situation reversed
The loss of IJN carrier aircraft and experienced combat pilots in the Solomons had already crippled IJN naval aviation. That's why the Japanese were missing two fleet carriers at Midway. Your assertion is debatable.

CONT

>>31368448
>>31368856
>And no, CVEs are not fleet carriers and cannot be used as such.
Depends on the situation. Are we ignoring the Battle off Samar?

>Early USN radar controlled gunnery wasn't the greatest. Mark 3 were sort of meh
Ignoring the Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal.

>Mark 8 was what made a difference
USS Maryland was fitted with a Mk-3 FC at Surigao Strait and managed 54 shells on target (unknown how many hit). Reminder: Surigao was 1944.

>Japanese systems were arguably better in this early point
Not in BB to BB engagements, and not in effective AA fire by any stretch.

>Savo Island might prove this.
Point-blank searchlight night fighting between cruisers all commissioned in between 1936 and 1928 doesn't do a lot to prove your point. This is August 1942. By August 1943, the majority of front line USN destroyers and cruisers had received radar FC and RPC turrets. By August 1944, all of them had these features.