What do you think, what outcome of next fights would be:

 

1)Yamato vs Iowa: Iowa- (Fire control and armour)

 

2)Bismarck vs Iowa: Iowa- (Fire Control and Armour)

3)Yamato vs Bismarck: Yamato-(don't know why except that Yamato had larger weapons, more SMASH and thicker armour)

Bottom-line: I think Bismarck AND Yamato are over-rated

Well, I think that Iowa is over-rated too. Here are some data about armor and weaponry:

IOWA:

Armament:

World War II, Korea, Vietnam: 9 × 16-inch (406 mm) / 50 cal. Mark 7 guns[A 5] 20 × 5-inch (127 mm) / 38 cal. Mark 12 guns[A 6] 80 × 40 mm / 56 cal. Bofors anti-aircraft guns 49 × 20 mm / 70 cal. Oerlikon anti-aircraft guns

Armor:

Belt: 12.1 in (310 mm),[3] Bulkheads: 11.3 in (290 mm),[3] Barbettes: 11.6 to 17.3 in (295 to 439 mm),[3] Turrets: 19.7 in (500 mm),[3] Decks: 7.5 in (190 mm)[3]

 

BISMARCK

Armament:	8 × 380 mm/L52 SK C/34 (4×2) 12 × 150 mm/L55 SK-C/28 (6×2) 16 × 105 mm/L65 SK-C/37 / SK-C/33 (8×2) 16 × 37 mm/L83 SK-C/30 12 × 20 mm/L65 MG C/30 8 × 20 mm/L65 MG C/32 (8×4)
Armour:	Belt: 145 to 320 mm Deck: 110 to 120 mm Bulkheads: 220 mm Turrets: 130 to 360 mm Barbettes: 342 mm Conning tower: 360 mm

 

 

YAMATO

Armament:	9 × 46 cm (18.1 in) (3×3).[2] 6 × 15.5 cm (6.1 in) (2×3).[2] 12 × 12.7 cm (5 in) (6×2).[2] 24 × 25 mm (0.98 in) AA (8×3) 13 × 13 mm (0.51 in) AA (2×2)[5]
Armor:	650 mm (26 in) on face of main turrets[5] 410 mm (16 in) side armor (400 mm(16 in) on Musashi),[5] inclined 20 degrees 200 mm (8 in) armored deck (75%) 230 mm (9 in) armored deck (25%)[5]

 

These data are from Wikipedia. Also, I watched documentary about Bismarck on YouTube. It is confirmed that Bismarck did not sunk beacouse of battle damage (shells, torpedoes etc.) but beacouse of scuttling, both by survivors of Bismarck and observations of the wreck.

Iowa had 16 inch guns, right, but they had same penetration power as Yamato's 18 inch guns; however, Iowa's armor could not withstand her own guns, which means that she also couldn't withstand Yamato's artillery. Also, Yamato's main guns had slightly longer range, and while Iowa could outrun Yamato, she has to be in his range in order to shoot at Yamato. And, concerning radar, Japanese equipped their most important surface units with it until 1944.

All radar is not the same, US radar and its attendant fire control was an order of magnitude greater than Japanese fire control....for accurate shooting rather Wiki range shooting, the US could begin to fire and get hits, quite likely, at 30K yards.  The Yamato was unlikely to get any hits beyond 25K yards.

Iowas armour ahd the capacity to decap AP rounds of GREAER than 18", menaing that the ability to penetrate deeply into the Iowa was limited.  Yamato was vulnerable to US 16" fire.

have been rated as the best OVERALL Battleships of WWII.  Check out Combinedfleet.com  The Germans scuttled the Bismarck because she was scrap metal going nowhere.....that's like saying because someone gave up, that his opponent in the boxing match didn't really win the match.  The reason for both was that the other side had triumphed already.

 

Bismarck was almost immobile, defenseless, and not firing back, because the ship had been pounded into scrap over the last few days....if the "fight" had continued the British WOULD have sunk her, the Germans simply saved the British time and barrel wear, plus the ordnance expense.  Had the Germans really wanted to make Brit's pay they'd have made them expend the shells, torpedoes and barrel wear to put Bismarck down...that's all that Bismarck could do for Volk, Reich, und Fuhrer by that point.

 

Bismarck was designed for a North Sea fight and built to resist flat fire at close ranges, relatively close ranges....She wasn't "all that." And had she met a North Carolina, much less an Iowa Class she'd have been pounded, even more rapidly, into scrap.   Bismarck gets her "fearsome reputation" from having fought a somewhat antiquated Battle Cruiser, HMS Hood, and Prince of Wales, a vessel that had not been properly shaken down, had builders technicians on-board during her baptism of fire and which had major gun malfunctions that limited her combat ability!  In short, Bismarck beat up an Old Granny and her Asthmatic Nephew, *WOW* that makes her a dangerous opponent.

Hood may have been the SYMBOL of British Naval Power, to the General Public, but the RN knew she was:

1) Vulnerable and in need of rebuild; and

2) Clapped out and in need of extensive refit in 1939.

 

However, the press of naval needs prevented Hood from being either rebuilt or refitted....The British on that fateful May morning knew that Hood had serious weaknesses, and Adm Holland had planned to obviate them, but that plan failed, and even in the battle that took place Holland tried to minimize the risks that he and the RN knew existed in fighting the Hood with a battleship.

 

Bottom-line: as a SYMBOL HMS Hood was peerless, as a COMBAT UNIT, Hood was seriously compromised and the Royal Navy knew it.

Were deemed unnecessary...a North Carolina, outfitted with a 1943 eracontrol suite would have sunk Bismarck.  American radar and fire control outstripped EVERYONE in WWII.  As long as there was sea room to extend the fight ANY US Fast Battleship was going to give ANY Axis Battleship a terrible fight.

 

Please note what happened to Scharnhorst v. Duke of York...the Duke of York could fire blind and produce hits, Scharnhorst could not.  The result Scharnhorst was sunk and the Duke of York was not.

 

Had any of the fast US Battleships engaged Bismarck OR Tirpitz, in the open, they would have out ranged them and pounded them into scrap metal....due to great guns, great shells, and simply world-class fire control systems!  In the open, they could have been UNARMOURED and won, they simply could have held the range on their opponent and punched and punched, until the opponent sank...and that ignores the US' great armour.

 

Bottom-line: it wouldn't have taken a quad turret vessel like Montana to sink Bismarck....any of the US battle line built 1939-on, the triple turret 16" vessels (L/45 or L/50) would have defeated any of the German or Italian battleships, and probably the Yamato, too...

\

 

 

 

 

Victim is Jean Bart, mugger is USS Massachusetts: a South Dalota Class.

EXTRAPOLATE.

 

Herald

 

 

the French Navy couldn't catch a break...first the British and then the US navy!

Plus Prince of Wales with only two out of ten guns operative...  Bismarck was more powerful than any battleship afloat in 1940-1941, and Hood was originaly built as battlecruiser. Germans, however, planned to produce six H-39 class battleships, which were basically Bismarck class, but enlarged and with several weak points removed (largest Bismarck's weakness was the fact that her manouverability was greatly reduced without rudder, which, in combination with inadequate anti-air defense proved fatal-the same weakneses will cause sinking of the Prince of Wales near Kuantan 3 days after attack on Pearl Harbour. However, while I said that both Bismarck's and Prince of Wales' anti-air artillery was inadequate, they had unordinarily strong AA defences for that time. Bismarck and PoW are used as examples of air force outclassing dreadnoughts, but that is not completely true-Bismarck's AA fire control computer was not calibrated for ancient Swordfish bombers which attacked her, while Prince of Wales' AAFC computer was not even operative beacouse of climate in Singapore (and Malaya itself). Bismarck was doomed by torpedo jamming his rudder, PoW also, while Hood was doomed by its weak deck and goodwill ambassador missions which did not left time for necessary refit. And Bismarck was designed with facing Hood in mind-so it can be stated that he fulfilled his purpose.

Huh?

 

Battle of the Denmark Strait, PBA. 

 

Read the two paragraphs under The Battle

 

Herald