Prev: Re: [DS] Infantry Base Question Next: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

From: "Robert W. Eldridge" <bob_eldridge@m...>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 12:06:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

Good points John. I'd like to add a couple of more points about 2nd
Guadalcanal. The Japanese capital ship that was sunk was Hiei, one of a
class of four battlecruisers reconstructed as fast battleships in the
late
1930's. She defnitely didn't have a "modern" (for 1942) battleship scale
of
protection, even allowing for the extensive refit. Secondly, 2nd
Guadalcanal
was indeed a "barroom brawl". Initial contact (and open fire), despite
U.S
radar and the vaunted Japanese optics, occurred at about 3000 yards or
so,
at which range the U.S. 8inch guns were at least theoretically capable
of
penetrating the Hiei's relative thin main belt and turret armor.
Finally,
the air attack threat was sustained air attack from the SBD's based on
Henderson Field, not just a single carrier strike. Despite all of that,
it
can well be argued that Hiei was lost as much due to the indecision of
her
captain as to her battle damage. Inter alia it should be noted that most
of
the "easy" capital ship kills in WWII (Royal Oak, Hood, Barham, Arizona
for
instance) were obsolete or obsolescent vessels. Modern capital ships
(Scharnhorst, Bismarck, etc.) proved extremely tough and difficult to
sink,
whether by air attack, torpedo, or surface gunfire. USS North Carolina,
for
instance, was able to maintain 25 knots AFTER being hit by a Japanese
submarine torpedo under the Number 1 turret. The only modern battleship
that
was an "easy" kill that I can think of was the Italian Roma, sunk by a
single (or possibly 2) hits from a 1400lb guided bomb which exploded her
magazine.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Fox" <jfox@verity.com>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

> Hello Everyone:
>   An interesting conversation about airstrikes and other stuff.
>   Lets set the record straight on a couple of things.
>
>   The attack on the Musashi (Yamato sister ship) did take roughly 12
(some
say
> up to 20) torpedo hits and roughly 20 bomb hits.  That the ship
survived
only to
> be sunk due to a sharp turn by the captain came as a shock to the
American
> analyst.  Henceforth attacks on large Japanese ships with torpedoes
were
> directed to be against one side only so as to capsize the ship (ie 
what
> happened in the Yamato's case)
>   The Japanese did not have the proximity fuses that the US had at hat
time.
> Thier AA was relatively ineffective compared to ours. Note there is an
> interesting article in Science and Technology magazine about the
development of
> these fuzes if you care to read about it. Had the Japanese ahd
proximiity
fuzes
> the battle would have been much bloodier.
>   As for the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal that occurred on the
night
of
> 13th of Nov 1942 Several things happened.  First the fight was a bar
room
brawl
> with ships cutting infront of, behind and besides each other. There is
still
> some discussion on this subject of what causes the Japanes battleship
the
mortal
> wound that slowed it down. There is a good write up about it and
analysis
see
> the following
>   http://www.combinedfleet.com/atully03.htm
>   The ability of one modern CV (or CVN) to take out multiple Kirov or
Missouris
> is a matter of conjecture.  They may be able to mission kill (ie
render
> inpotent) the ship due to topside distruction of radar, optics and
comm.
> However the ability to completely punch through 12 to 16 inchs of
specially
> designed armor is a matter of great concern.	If the warheads were
shaped
> charges then maybe but general explosives, I doubt it.  Unless the
torpedoes are
> designed to explode under the hull the BB are a real tough customer.
>   One of the problems the US Navy found out about in the Gulf while
escorting
> tankers (before Desert Storm) was the inability of 5inch guns to
really
due much
> structural damage to oil platforms and other tough structures.  Now a
couple
> salvos from 16 inch guns is another story.
>   What does this mean for traveller, good question. For heavy armored
ships
> fighters have to blast through the armor (while taking PDF fire).
Torpedo
> fighters will punch thorugh but get only one shot.
>
> John W. Fox
>
>
>


Prev: Re: [DS] Infantry Base Question Next: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts