Sorry about the spelling, don't always check.

Is okay.

I have been fascinated by the amount of torpedoes that the Hornet took and 400 5" rounds. But must admit have not done much study into it.

The Yorktown class is a case study on how to build ships right. Every one of them (including Enterprise) took battle damage that would tear European capital ships apart. They stubbornly remained afloat. The two ships lost had to be scuttled.   

What about the USS Laffey, great career, Lucky too.

Hit six times by the equivalent of 1000 pounder warheaded cruise missiles is not lucky. That is TOUGH. Warspite and Roma couldn't take that kind of beating.

Musashi was hit by around 19 torpedoes and 17 bombs, there are no confirmed numbers for hits and as the wreck has never been found (the Japanese will not allow a search) there can be no confirmation.

 

No facts, but just discussion...so you freely admit you're fact-free but you keep on keeping on...so why pay any attention to you, then?

 

So here's the deal, you bring some FACTS to the DISCUSSION and we'll talk....trust me you haven't been insulted or bullied...you can ask Darth or Bluewings or French Stratege...they'll tell you all about being insulted.

 

Simply saying "You're biased" doesn't make me biased...I could simply say you are nothing more than an advanced 'bot selecting key phrases and regurgitating htem in a complex, but unthinking, manner...have I any evidence, NO, but I don't need any...I'm just "discussing."

 

I believe Herald has done a nice job of giving you a raft of facts.

Dood your skin's too thin...you ain't been insulted, stop yer whining...when you get called poseur, idiot, or cretin YOU"VE BEEN INSULTED.

 

Herald, to speak for him, points out that the Iowas control the engagement...they are faster.  The Yamato isn't going to be able to close the range on the Iowa UNLESS the Iowa wants it to.  So the Yamato is going to fight at the range the Iowa dictates...

 

My point is HISTORICAL, that no hits occurred over 30K yards, and that the longest HISTORICAL hit was ~26.5 K yards.  Herald's the "tech" guy...he posits Iowa opening fire at 35K yards and getting hits at >30K yards.  History says, "No."  BUT history is built on optical fire control.  The Iowas have a far advanced fire control system.  Herald may be right.  That being the case the Iowa might just want to stay at 30K yards and hit the Yamato several times.  The Yamato is going to have to take it...it can't force the engagement range, being out-"speeded" by the Iowas.

 

Yamato is NOT invulnerable to 16"/50 fire at that range....Some armour belt penetration will occur.  And again, as Herald points out, you don't have to put holes in the armour to "kill" the Yamato.  IF what Herald says is true a stern hit destroys steering, a bow hit destroys the bow, slowing Yamato.  Superstructure hits start fires, disable fire control, impede communications.  Hull hits start fires and let in water.  The damage adds up.  Eventually Yamato loses way, loses fire control, loses steering, and then the Iowas close for the kill, that and the destroyers.

 

Finally it is a fight not between Yamato and the Iowa but Yamato and Musashi versus 4-6 Iowas and South Dakotas....THAT fight rapidly ends with the Yamato(s) being sunk for little loss to the US...Lanchester Equations  would suggest that.  A 3:1 fight equates, all things being equal to 9:1 combat power differential...at that level one side rapidly loses without suffering very heavy losses at all.

 

Check navweapons.com...go to the technology section and look for an article entitled "The N-Squared Laws".  It posits a set of sea fights between various forces...one of which is a fight between  an individually superior force and a more numerically superior force, you know that 20,000 ton advantage you keep talking about.  They SPECIFICALLY point this out as an example of the Japanese theory of the Super-Battleship scenario...the super battleships, though tougher, don't fare too well.

Seems like Yamato might have enjoyed a "sweet spot" between ~25K and ~35K yards, if you discount the possibility of using reduce powder charges to mimick the 16"/45. There the 16"/50 couldn't penetrate the side armor with a low angle shot and couldn't penetrate the deck armor with a plunging shot. Still, it would mess up the superstructure, and the already superior firecontrol of the Iowas would have become decisive as the the 16" shells eliminated the Yamato's firecontrol with hits on the superstructure.

I'd pick the Iowa every day and twice on Sunday. Oh sure, in theory the Yamato could win. There is always a chance. But, I'll stick to probabilities. The probabilities weigh towards Iowa's favor. 

At last, Thank you Herald12345 for information that is clear and discriptive. just stopped at a cafe to check, so not a lot of time. Shan Ano, Pull your head in, (Indian idic), it is NOT JAPANESE. Shan is chinese! If you want to argue with my Japanese Wife and My Chinese mother good luck to you. But I am sending them to your house to sort it out. Ha Ha.

JFKY, it is nice to see you have thick skin, I can give you a little stick and you can take it. Remeber you dont have to insult peoples intelligence to be smarter than them.

Will get back to you guys with some numbers soon. (on Holiday)

But Please think of this!

Iowa ,by far had the best fire control system. No arguement. That does not mean Yamato can not hit the target. They just had a different way of doing it.

I play golf to a single figure handicap. I once played a guy who was 86 and he beat me on stroke play by 6 shots. I had the big range and on paper I should have kicked his arse. But all he did was get it straight and close, nothing fancy. He just did the job.I can see you going "the IOWA would be straight and close".

In a Naval battle there is no absolutes. Do not Discount the japanese because their fire control tech was not the same as the Americans. The Iowas training and results are well documented, How do you know that with all their training and all the japanese readyness for a battleship stand off that they could not hit the target. You dont know their training, you dont know how good they were at using the tech they had. On paper the POW and the Hood should have disposed of the bismark.( I have read the excuses). They did not. They fired several salvos before the bismark responded, but when the bismark responded , it was effective( they knew their equipment)

Historically, and JFKY has said that conflict did not start at 37k-40k. Historically battle would start at under 30k. THE IOWA could not penetrate the Yamatos deck armour under this range.

So I can tell you some numbers from Hyperwar and a site called Combined Fleet which have those numbers for you..

 

Japanese destroyer gunnery was awful about 4%-18% PK.

 

Japanese cruiser gunnery was better, but incidents like Java Sea, Kommandorski Islands, and Samar showed accuracies around 8-20%; depending upon which cruiser and which action.

 

Japanese battleship ship gunnery was awful. Given that Kirishima was only able to score to score one hit out of more than three salvoes fired at South Dakota at 7000 yards, ( SOURCE... ) , well you do the math.

 

Japanese shockpower was not in their gunnery and bombs, it was in their torpedoes both aircraft and ship delivered. That was a poor weapon as ut turned out as their predicted PK using this weapon was ~14% hits using this weapon  In practice thos was more like <9% for weapons launched. I suppose the US comparable rate of 7% should make USN types feel better, but Japanese torpedoes worked and ours didn't.

 

Any rate, your argument about US battleship gunnery and how the Japanese (Yamato) would do in its presence is specious. Given SG radar and the Ford track solution, the South Dakota, a poorly trained ship, with an actually battle proven as worthless captain, and a subsequently court martialed incompetent engineer, who blinded her radars by battleshorting her electrical service buses, was able to straddle her targets second salvo, and score hits almost immediately as long as her radars worked.and her electric powered guns could be served.   

 

A Yamato would have to sail under optics into that hell? No way. Radar is a killer.

 

Source.... 

 

Source 2.... 

 

and West Virginia's take.... 

 

The point is that even when US cruisers met Japanese battleships;

 

Japanese battleship Hei.... 

 

The outcome was not good. 

 

Those are the actual  results. You have speculations. Which is the stronger evodence?

 

Herald