>16 inches (41 cm) of belt armor, inclined 20 degrees >8

>>33353117
Torpedoes against belt and bulge armor designed to only handle TNT and not Torpex

>>33353117
torpedo

>>33353117
Because the japs couldn't into damage control.

Also, submarines.

http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/01/battleship-history/

the real question. is why did it take till last year for Steve Balmer to find her?

Everyone knew where she sunk. It's a lagoon and not deep water. How the fuck does a battleship go missing for 70 years in the middle of the Philippines?

>>33353188
strongest race

File: Yamato ten-go poster.jpg (127KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1280x800px

>>33353146
>Because the japs couldn't into damage control.
That's a fair part of it. Yamato and Musashi took beatings that would have sunk any ship but Japanese damage control used a lot of counter flooding. Which when used too much just adds to the problem.
Plus, after sinking Musashi the USN learned their lesson so when they attacked the Yamato later on they tried to focus one side of the ship.
Trying to induce capsizing and forcing the Japanese to introduce more water into the ship to correct the list.

>>33353206
how else would you do it besides counterflooding? beats listing 70 degrees.

>>33353217
they tried to beach the Musashi. so she could continue firing until everyone was dead or the guns didn't work anymore.

>>33353188
They weren't looking. It's not like Midway, were we've only managed to find the Yorktown and a piece from the Kaga.

>>33353188
You are confusing Musashi with Yamato.

>>33353217
Isolate the flooded compartment to prevent further flooding and then work to pump the water out.

>>33353278
they found the Yamato decades prior and she sank in the middle of the ocean, alone, and deep water./

>>33353290
What if that doesn't work?
I mean, maybe the Japs counterflooded because they had to, not because they couldn't figure out that pumping water out is better than pumping water in.

>>33353289
Yamato was found in 82 and confirmed in 84.

Musashi was found in 2015.

>>33353306
They didn't have pumps as effective as the US did. Plus the interior layout on their ships was different.

Japanese ships had solid bulkheads where the only opening was the main hatch; if you wanted to access the compartment you had to open the watertight hatch, which if the compartment was flooded would mean water entering the now open compartment. If you wanted to stretch a hose and you had to lay it on the floor throughout multiple compartments between the connect point and the where the fire/flooding was. Japan's method was to seal off a compartment and leave it sealed until they could fix it later on.

On American ships there were smaller holes cut into the bulkheads to allow for hoses (For firefighting or water removal). Damage Control teams could stretch the hose through these small hatches and then close the main hatches behind them. While compartments could be left sealed if needed to contain a flood or fire, work could be done on them without fear of it spreading.

File: CV-5 Yorktown.png (339KB, 1254x521px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 1254x521px

>>33353278

>>33353441
I'm already tired of this meme.

>>33353441
Reminder that Yorktown was the most elite USN carrier and almost single-handedly won Coral Sea and Midway.

File: Yorktown CV-5.jpg (22KB, 315x350px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 315x350px

>>33353457
>>33353460

File: Enterprise.jpg (79KB, 800x592px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 800x592px

>>33353460

Wouldn't CV-6 be the most elite carrier?

File: Torpedo_impact_damage_to_the_aircraft_carrier_Shinano,_1944.png (72KB, 1920x393px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1920x393px

>>33353217

Close the leaks. Compartmentalization, pumping, if not underway hull patches on outside of hull. Very aggressive flood control. WWII IJN did not have the concept everyone on board the ship is trained to fight flooding and fires. Immediately take action closest crew starts on it, not closest crew runs away while dedicated DC parties go in.

Japanese aircraft carrier Shinano was so poorly fitted out when flooding occurred adjacent compartments supposedly on the other side of water proof bulkheads flooded around fittings, wires and pipes that went thru the bulkheads for operational reasons. There was a sad story about a IJN 2nd Lt who drowned with his Damage control party because they could not open a door due to to flooding in a supposed water tight compartment, they drowned as the water came up. The bridge crew were talking to them over the communication system as they died by the water slowly completely filling the compartment. The flooding killed ships systems (pipes,wiring etc) that would of survived flooding in a US or British vessel.

From survivors accounts.
Red is the flooding from the initial torpedo hits. Yellow is counter flooding. Orange is known slow flooding probably due to bad seals and bad damage control practices. Notice the irregular shaped flooding. Water tight bulkheads often were NOT in actual practice. Where torpedo one hit was the best quality of compartmentalization.

>>33353437
I would be wary of the claim the US had better pumps. It is more of crew proficiency and overall ship condition than equipment superiority. Musashi's crew was perhaps the best trained crew manning an IJN battleship in 1944 and the time it took to sink the ship is evident that the crew was extremely good at dc.

If anything it would be a combination of overuse of counterflooding and severe pounding from torpedoes and bombs.

>>33353486
Enterprise and Yorktown are ships well deserving of their reputations. I don't think we will ever again see warships go through so much and determine the course of battles.

>>33353486
CV-6 was luckier in not being the carrier that Japs found.

>>33353492

>Japanese aircraft carrier Shinano

That thing wasn't even really an aircraft carrier. It was always intended to be a battleship and it was hastily converted when the battleship was already partially complete, meaning that it had many vestigial features which made sense for a battleship but didn't make sense for a carrier.

>>33353237
Believe it was the Yamato that they tried to beach, the Musashi was sunk in the Philippines.

>>33353557
Yamato was sunk in the middle of the east china sea.

>>33353505
American definitely had better firefighting capability. Especially on carriers since they could pump inert gas into the fuel tanks for the planes.
That and (on earlier) Japanese carriers the hangar decks were mostly open so once flammable fumes were in the air, one spark would set off an inferno and explosions.

I wish I could find more to read about damage control on these ships. Especially battleships or cruisers.

>>33353146
>>33353206
What BB did survive 11 torpedoes?

>>33353168
This was done at point blank range with no incline on the armor. Tests concluded however that at great ranges no 16 inch shell could have ever pierced the armor. The main problem with the Japanese navy was horrible damage control and the welding was no where near up to par with us welding. When yamato suffered that first torp hit by that sub near truk it dislocated a major piece of armor due to faulty joints

>>33353553
Wasn't it missing a shit ton of shit as well when it sailed since it was gonna get finished somewhere else?

>>33353613
What other BB let itself go practically un-escorted into an area with 12 CVs operating?

It'd be interesting to Operation Ten-Go with the roles reversed. An Iowa class BB with a CL and a few DDs escorting against a massive Japanese air attack. I think the radar warning and better AA weapons would mean a better result. Maybe the Iowa would still sink but a lot more than just a dozen planes would have been shot down.

>>33353661
it was a suicide mission, literally.

>>33353661
Japanese AA was woefully inadequate. Fun fact, the Yamato actually had anti-air shells for the main guns. Only problem was the muzzle blast was so insane, nobody could be above-deck when they were being fired, meaning the other, more effective AA guns could not be manned.

>>33353690
I know. That still doesn't excuse the massive dispraity throughout the war between the IJN and USN when it came to AA capabilities.

>>33353636
It was the turret face which is more ha ill armored than any other part of the ship, and I've still never seen any source on it being "point blank"

>>33353723
http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-040.htm

>>33353709
Proxy fuse are no joke. And from what I heard the Jap 100mm was fine for AA they just didn't have the Radar and proxy fuses that the Yanks did. That and the Triple barrel AA MG that Im forgetting the name of was hot garbage

>>33353690
This. The Yamato class never even had a single dedicated HE round produced for its main battery so even if it did beach itself at ten go, it's dubious it would've done much to say nothing of the depression it wouldn't have

>>33353734
Your own source would indicate that the 16" could penetrate at under 40km according to the second firing.

Not bad for hitting turret armor.

>>33353745
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_96_25_mm_AT/AA_Gun

In addition to being a poor AA gun, it was a poor AT gun as well. Do you guys think the 40mm Bofors L/60 could be used as an AT gun?

File: cnn.png (57KB, 1332x254px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1332x254px

>>33353828

Where does the source say that?

>>33353318
It was Paul Allen, not Steve Ballmer.

Got your Microsoft execs messed up.

>>33353753
use its secondary battery, duh

>>33353505
>I would be wary of the claim the US had better pumps.

Before Midway the Japanese barely even had any motorised pumps for their DC teams - the crews had goddamn hand pumps more often than not.

The IJN were playing technological catchup from the beginning. Once they got the hint and desperately started handing out little gasoline pumps to their "dedicated DC crews",, the USN was issuing them in far greater numbers all over their ships, and training everyone aboard in their use.

>>33353575
Yamato's entire mission plan was "Sail to Okinawa, beach yourself to fight the invasion".It just so happens that it got located and wiped out before it managed to get there, that's all.

>>33353850
It was. The Swedish Landsverk II-Anti was a AFV with a Bofors 40mm and an open-topped turret - and originally designed, marketed and employed as a Tank Destroyer. It's notoriety in the Finnish and Hungarian armies as a useful SPAAG came later.

>>33353946
depression, duh

>>33353918
>TEST #2 on 23 October 1946 (IMPACT #33459):

>STRIKING VELOCITY: 1707 feet/second (502.3 m/sec)

>RESULT: Projectile nose tip only penetrated 21" (53.34cm) into the plate, though punching a hole entirely through. Projectile was completely undamaged (merely lost its windscreen and AP cap, as usual). Plate had exactly the same thing happen to it as with the first test, with numerous small cracks, many laminations, and a complete break through hole between left edge and curved gun port cutout.

In the conclusions:

>At about 40,000 yards, the U.S. Navy 16"/50 firing a 16" Mark 8 Mod 6 AP projectile (the later Mod 7 and Mod 8 designs were post-WWII, so I usually do not count them and they were no better ballistically, to my knowledge) will hit at about 45° downward angle and 1607 feet/second (489.8 m/sec).

Establishes that 40,000 yards the velocity would be 1607 ft/s

Whereas the second shot says it penetrated with a higher velocity. As there were no other subsequent test firings at differing velocities, it's safe to say that within the range that the projectile would hit at roughly the 1700 ft/s velocity, it would penetrate the turret of the Yamato class. Considering that the deck armor is only 8-9", it's safe to say that penetration would occur there at substantially longer ranges where plunging fire occurs. Belt armor would be penetrated closer than the deck armor naturally but further than the turret armor.

File: throw weight.png (864KB, 907x1300px) Image search: [Google]

864KB, 907x1300px

>>33353703
Casual reminder that the Yamato class (post refit) had slightly more throw weight than a USN DD of comparable timeframe, but the DD had DP guns and radar direction making it more effective.

File: 1474581958773.jpg (42KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 640x640px

>>33355205
Thow weight increases 10-20x in just 2 years

>>33353217
They had a real problem with overdoing it; so, the ship would list too far the other way, they would try to fix it by flooding the damaged side some more, and so forth, until half the water inside the hull was self-inflicted.

>>33353217
Isolate the damaged compartments. Aggressive dewatering. Working parties over the side to rig patches over the worst holes at the first opportunity. At the very least you fother a sail under the hull to slow the flooding to the point that your pumps can keep up.

You effect temporary repairs one compartment at a time, sequence to be determined by DC Central. If you can't mount patches from the outside of the hole, you use sectional folding patches with threaded J hooks passed through the hole from the inside. Unfold, set the hooks, run nuts and washers down the threaded shank until the patch is snug against the hull. Pack gaps with rags, wedges, and wooden plugs.

Rinse, repeat, move onto the next compartment.

Counterflooding should be limited to the bare minimum necessary to keep the list below about 15 degrees or so. Damage has already reduced your reserve buoyancy, you don't want to reduce it further by voluntarily flooding more spaces. You can achieve the same effect by shifting fuel and fresh water supplies around. This is standard US DC doctrine.

>>33353306
>What if that doesn't work?

Then you have a really badly designed ship. Counterflooding is just speeding up the inevitable.

>>33355656

Sounds like work for divers...who exactly does this kind of stuff on a ship?

>>33353278
I heard they found the Akagi as well. Robert Ballard (guy who found the Titanic) has a book all about the wrecks of Midway.

>>33353117
16 inches. Your mom is exaggerating.

>>33355741
Iirc, shipboard divers of the time were typically skin divers. I don't know if they were volunteers from the crew, or specially trained for diving as a collateral duty. I'm not positive, but I suspect that capital ships of the era would have at least a rudimentary dive locker and complement of divers.

Yes, passing a sail under the hull is most easily done by divers but it can be done from the surface with careful planning.

>>33353636
>This was done at point blank range with no incline on the armor. Tests concluded however that at great ranges no 16 inch shell could have ever pierced the armor.

16 inch superheavy shell could def. bash through her deck, in an actual fight an Iowa would have stood off at extreme range and relied on her superior fire control, hoping for a plunging hit to the deck.

>>33353168
Jesus Christ that spalling would have cut dudes in half.

Shitty DC and FC aside, the japs sure made some pretty BB's and cruisers

>>33356192

>16 inch superheavy shell could def. bash through her deck

The deck armor of the Yamato-class was designed to with stand a 2200-pound armor-piercing bomb dropped from an altitude of 10,000 feet. 75% of the deck was covered with 8-inch thick armor. The remaining 25% was covered with 9-inch armor. The American BB crews should have been very grateful that torpedo bombers were able to find and destroy the Yamato before the battleships got a chance to engage her, because they wouldn't have survived a direct fight. Their guns would have been useless against her armor.

>>33357493
>9-inch armor plate

>>33353168
>26 inch armor plate

Hmmmm.

>>33355205

Is this counting all guns or just AA guns?

>>33357515

That was fired at point blank range with zero incline. At realistic combat ranges, the shell wouldn't have been able to do that, and the Yamato-class's more-powerful guns would have been able to easily defeat the armor of any American battleship in service at the time.

>>33357549
>the Yamato-class's more-powerful guns would have been able to easily defeat the armor of any American battleship in service at the time.

Only if they could land a hit. The Nips NAVY had shit tier fire control.

>>33353946
Just imagine jap 100mm's hitting pershings on Okinawa

>>33353237
>tried to beach the musashi so she could continue firing until everyone was dead or the guns didn't work anymore

I never even thought of that. that's fucking metal

>>33357516
Throw weight is all guns. Broadside on an Iowa was ~24k lb, whilst total throw weight was 150k lb.

>>33360353
That was the plan for the Yamato, too. Beach her on Okinawa and fire until the barrels melted. She never made it.

>>33359741

They had the best optics of the war and more accurate guns. And diving shells.

USN had better radar FCS.

>>33361064
>Diving shells
Wat? Like under water?

>>33361209
Yes.

Diving shells were a recent innovation and Japan engineered modern battleship shells to hit the water intact and capable of holing ships.

US went the other way, optimizing hull protection to absorb armor piercing shells that hit below the water line.

>>33353515
Other than HMS Conqueror sinking the Belgrano and effectively neutering the Argentine Navy, has there even been ANY decisive naval engagements since the end of WWII?

i was wondering could era work on a battleship? obviously you upsize it to the projectiles.

>>33361311
First Battle of Yeonpyeong

>>33361311
Latakia/Baltim
Some Indo-Paki engagement
Korean fishing net incident

>>33361209
>>33361259
>>33361064
They also put dye charges in their shells and color coded the various guns to make adjusting fire easier. Getting shot at by them made the water around the target erupt into a technicolor rainbow.

>>33353117
16 inches of shitty nip steel that's about as good as 12 inches of not-shit American steel.

>>33361465
that's kinda gay

>>33361484
>shitty nip steel

At 16 inches that would mean it's been folded over 100,000 times making it the strongest material in existence. Read a book dumbass.

File: thanks washington naval treaty.png (68KB, 1193x473px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1193x473px

>tfw the washington cuck treaty screwed everything up

File: NCIS.jpg (13KB, 300x157px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 300x157px

Got any more , i like to see Navy ships

>>33355741
>who exactly does this kind of stuff on a ship
The entire crew of the ship that isn't directly involved in combat operations.

>>33361675
Well. It's the navy.

>>33355656
Wasn't IJN doctrine though. If you're a Japanese battleship, you *always* couterflood because it gives you a better firing platform. The Japanese looked at Damage Control as a way to stay in the fight for as long as possible, not as a way to limp the ship home so she could be repaired.

>>33355741
>Sounds like work for divers...who exactly does this kind of stuff on a ship?
The entire rest of the crew. You only need a handful of people to actually command a warship, the other two thousand or so crewmen only exist to serve the ship's needs and keep her fighting.

>>33353117
>torpedoes don't care about belt armor
>8 inches is nothing to aerial bombs

>>33353492
Is that as far as the flooding got by the time the ship sank? Pretty interesting if so, that it could sink with such a relatively small fraction of its volume flooded, especially as it was concentrated more or less around the center.

>>33355205
What's your source on that claim? The only BB in that image is the Iowa.

>>33355656
>Working parties over the side to rig patches over the worst holes at the first opportunity. At the very least you fother a sail under the hull to slow the flooding to the point that your pumps can keep up.

Somehow I don't think any warship in combat in WWII is going to manage this without coming to a complete stop, and thereby making itself a sitting duck.

>Counterflooding should be limited to the bare minimum necessary to keep the list below about 15 degrees or so. Damage has already reduced your reserve buoyancy, you don't want to reduce it further by voluntarily flooding more spaces. You can achieve the same effect by shifting fuel and fresh water supplies around. This is standard US DC doctrine.

This goes without saying, and is how the Japanese operated in WWII. Issue is, once you've opened enough compartments to the sea all you can really do is delay the inevitable unless the aggressor kindly fucks off and leaves you alone to make repairs.

>>33355205
Friendly reminder that the Yamato class shot DDs out of its 18 inch guns.

>>33357493

>The American BB crews should have been very grateful that torpedo bombers were able to find and destroy the Yamato before the battleships got a chance to engage her, because they wouldn't have survived a direct fight. Their guns would have been useless against her armor.

I doubt that.

Yamato and Musashi were really the only modern battleships that the Japanese had. The Kongos and Fusos were totally outmatched even by the standards (see: Surigao straight).

Even in the most favorable matchup- assuming that Kurita's center force had managed to push through Taffy 3 to Oldendorf's standards, Yamato was literally the only modern battleship among them. Kongo, and Haruna would have been completely eviscerated just like Fuso and Yamashiro were against the superior, modern fire control of West Virginia, California, and Tennessee. Nagato would have probably followed shortly after.

Yamato would have quite quickly been left alone against 6 interwar-period designs. Yeah, great armor, but the combined firepower of 16 x 16" guns, and 48 x 14" guns (to say nothing of the 8 cruisers and 20-something destroyers escorting) would have scoured her upper decks and superstructure of all life and workable equipment. It isn't a question of whether Yamato would win, but rather how many standards would be still floating when Yamatos guns finally fall silent or she succumbs to torpedoes from escorting destroyers.

>>33353636
>point blank range

No, Nazi mega weapons was fucking full of shit and you stop quoting that shitty doc right the fuck now.

>>33357493
@ 40,000 yards the AP round fired from the 16"s could penetrate more than 20", they would definitely go through deck armor.

>>33357549
>That was fired at point blank range with zero incline. At realistic combat ranges, the shell wouldn't have been able to do that,

see
>>33355186

>>33355656
you think this is the Age of Sail and the Yamato is a British Royal Navy Man of War?

>>33362627
Yamato Total AA throw weight (post refit): 19,784 lbs/min

Iowa AA throw weight 5" DP guns only: 17,600 lbs/min

Allen M. Sumner Class class
-Total AA weight = 9032.7lbs of AA fire per minute, has radar direction and VT fuses.

>>33364678
is that including beehives?

>>33361484
It would have been fully equivalent to US steel, the Navy made sure to source the best materials and quality assurance would not have been an issue at the time, only really became noticeable in 43 and after.

sage and hide bbfag

File: Taffy 3.png (21KB, 318x455px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 318x455px

>>33353117
>How did they ever kill this thing? It seems completely invincible.
Lel.

>>33361465
I cant imagine this working without spotter aircraft, ie with air superiority

>>33353117
A lot of bombs, a lot of torpedoes, and even more strategical and tactical fuck ups on Japan side. I mean, you can`t do much without proper air defence against aircraft carrier. Sooner or later it will sink you.

why not bombard it with high volumes of high explosives until it's just a floating brick of metal that can't function anymore? who cares about armor if all of the guns are blown off the deck?

>>33364624
Ships still carry canvas to this day. Shit's useful. It's not really a sail that gets passed under the hull, just a big-ass piece of canvas

>>33361064
They may have the best optics but in overall fire-control, the US has the edge. The Yamato can only fire or maneuver, US ships can do both at the same time. The Yamato would've been spotted long before it got into visual range, and the US will have the opportunity of striking first.

>>33366654
Fun fact: During the battle of Guadalcanl, when the Yuudachi was stopped due to battle damage, the commander ordered the a sail to be raised, not because to harness the power of the wind (he was well aware it wouldn't work anyway), but to raise the crew's morale. When a US ship found them, they thought the were trying to surrender and approached. Of course the Japanese, where surrendering was not on their minds, fired at their approaching target. The US ship, enraged of what it considered perfidy, shot the Yuudachi to pieces, not even considering salvaging her for intel.

File: San-shiki_dan_explosion.jpg (493KB, 1280x1590px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 1280x1590px

>>33353117
Outdated fire control, inconvenient gun placements, inept crew, and antiquated notions of naval warfare that should've been trashed after the first after-action reports from the Coral Sea.

Yamato had over 200 guns pointed skywards and she killed only ten of the 386 aircraft involved in Operation Ten-Go.

>>33353117
Because Japan can't into steel

>>33366992

THEY FOLD IT 1000 TIMES LIKE BEAUTIFUR ORIGAMI CRANE STUPID GAIJIN

>>33353154

Surprisingly factual and funny article for Duffelblog.

>>33366992
>>33367016
They had access to Manchurian steel, modern armour hardening processes, etc, stop being stupid and assuming they used medieval iron sands methods for fucking warships.

>>33364975
Of course. Not for the 18", those were abandoned after the first test batch was made due to their uselessness, but other guns had san shiki rounds made for them.

It's like bringing up the AA gunnery tables and fuses for the Iowa, NC and SD 16" guns - it makes no difference as they were never used.

File: https-::en.wikipedia.org:wiki:Luftvärnskanonvagn_L-62_Anti_II.jpg (3MB, 3456x2592px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3456x2592px

>>33354094
>originally designed, marketed and employed as a Tank Destroyer.

No it wasn't, it was developed as a self-propelled AA gun, that it was pressed into action on occasion as an AT gun doesn't change what it was originally designed for.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luftvärnskanonvagn_L-62_Anti_II

>>33353658
It was undergoing sea trials so it wasn't loaded up with anything but a skeleton crew

>>33355771
I thought that they found parts of one carrier but haven't identified yet wether it's Akagi or Kaga

>>33367678
http://www.navweaps.com/index_nathan/metalprpsept2009.htm

mediocre

>>33367678
>modern armour
Japan used a inferior version of a British WWI armor plate.

By WWII both the US and UK had superior armor compositions.

>>33370256
not really the us.l murricucks couldn't make good cemented plate so they just gave up and cried sofly as they proclaimed class b plate is good enough and they just lied about the BC iowa's armor thickness anyway. Italians and the British empire are the best

>>33366100
Wait... the Japs started the fight with 30 aircraft.. how in the flying fuck did they lose 52 aircraft?

>>33370426
t. Nelsonfag

File: 03_hms_nelson.jpg (218KB, 744x1436px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 744x1436px

>>33371030
>feminine bow
>refined stoic tower
>chaste thick belt and deck
>sleek-will-never cellulite like shitty murricuck stern
literally the most elegant

File: 136_4.png (529KB, 600x650px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 600x650px

bote?

>>33353703
Also the anti-air shells for the main guns were supposedly more dangerous to the friendly escorts than enemy aircraft. I cannot remember the source but apparently a 18.1" AA round had damaged a friendly escort and killed some of it's crew.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.php

Noted one time the AA round blew up in the barrel of the gun.

File: Emergency_hull_patches.jpg (139KB, 1200x600px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1200x600px

Interesting resource about naval damage control.

https://maritime.org/doc/dc/part8.htm

>>33370865
One of the most lopsided battles anon

>>33370865
Work on your reading comprehension Trayvon

>>33365025

The quality of the steel was roughly the same, but the actual treating process to turn it into armored plate was different. The US had superior treating processes and the actual plates were cast in larger sections, something Japan couldn't match due to factory limitations, which lead to better structural integrity due to having less plates to weld together.

Couple this with the weakness of the Yamatos bulkhead design and the outer decapping plate on the Iowas/SoDaks and you have armor protection that is as close to even as really matters when both were slinging the most powerful naval guns ever mounted to a BB.

>>33370426

The US continued to make Class A albeit with a misguided goal of making the face hardened layer thick enough to shatter the new US shells. This was unreasonable and led to compromises in the armor composition. It was still very effective against everything but US SH and obviously IJN 18.1" TYPE1. Overall it was pretty good but not as good as British Cemented which was the best in the world.

>>33373179
or italian. muricam plate was plain mediocre

File: Hotel's Museum.png (3MB, 2500x1250px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2500x1250px

>>33371667
QTest Hotel

>>33361064
>They had the best optics of the war and more accurate guns.

Best Optics? yes

Most accurate Guns? HAHAHAHA HELL no.

The Yamato could either maneuver or fire but not both. They would have to slow down or stop in order to calculate a firing solution. The Iowa could maintain a real time active firing solution while maneuvering at any speed. Iowas could also track where their rounds landed via radar and adjust their firing solution in real tie. Japan had to use spotter to relay firing solution to gunnery control.

>>33353217
Build compartments without amidships WT bulkheads. If it's gonna flood, let it flood in balance.
This only prevent capsizing. Put in enough holes, and enough water will get in to sink anything.

>>33353544
The Enterprise was lucky and good- but if I had a choice, I'd rather be lucky than good.

>>33355562
See:
http://www.navweaps.com/index_lundgren/Kirishima_Damage_Analysis.pdf

I WANT TO FUG A BOTESLUT

You know, that got me thinking. How many of you ship enthusiasts play Kancolle? I've heard that it's an open secret that IJN vets play Kancolle but who knows about Murica's navyfags

>>33357493
The US 16" superheavy AP shell massed 2,700 lb.
Add the kinetic energy from being fired, not just dropped.
Penetration would have happened.

>>33360353
The main engines would stop when the condensers filled with mud. Emergency generators do not typically power the full armament of a ship.

>>33361064
The diving shells had worse penetratio above water, though.
And optics are NOT fire control.
And by 1944, US radar was better than the fucking Japons optics.

>>33361311
IAF vs USS Liberty.
Never forget, /k/ommandos.

>>33361465
Everybody did that.
combinedfleet.com has a page listing the dye colors assigned to the four Iowas.

>>33375286
>entire squadron attacks an unarmed vessel for 8 hours
>doesn't even cripple it
>"decisive"
kek no

>>33361807
Folded?
You ignorant shit.
Search for Harvey, Vickers, and Krupp cemented armors.

>>33363090
Wrong, dumbass. The Yamato's TURRETS massed as much as a DD.

Musashi was sunk by an estimated 19 torpedo and 17 bomb hits from American carrier-based aircraft on 24 October 1944 during the Battle of Leyte Gulf.

>>33375216
I think they ban non-Japon isp's.

>>33375323
It decisively showed us Israel's middle finger.

>>33372403
It says 30 aircraft in the fleet strength list, and 52 in the casualties and losses.

>>33375344
wow autism much?

File: greentext-k2.png (999KB, 1134x620px) Image search: [Google]

999KB, 1134x620px

>>33375216

>>33375998

30 *in kamikaze attack*

Granted they should have worded it better and included the total number of Jap planes, but still..

For the record, just got done reading the source from Wikipedia - it's taken from the Action Report for the entire Leyte Gulf campaign, though I'm not sure how they calculated 52 losses for specifically Taffy 3's little scrum. That said, there were mentions of spotter aircraft and air attacks from local bases, so I'd suspect that's where the extra planes came from.

>>33375444
They don't. For the most part they only ban people using 3rd party software to speed up the game animations, and people using bots to rank.

t. American who's played since Sept. 2013

>>33353703
Didn't the beehive rounds fuck up the rifling of the main battery really bad when fired?

>>33377130
Well, its not like they will live long enought to wear out those barrels...

>>33373675
There was this one engagement on Truk involving two of the Iowa-class and the IJN destroyer Nowaki. The Iowa pair scored a couple or three straddles while their target was at the extreme range of their guns and all participants were maneuvering at high speeds.