Design your BB for Pacific War...

[bradfordkay]

What would I want for a Pacific theatre WW2 battleship? An Iowa, no questions asked. Fast enough to escort the fleet carriers, capable of standing up to any battleship afloat, possesses enough range to remain on station and crammed chock full of AAA. Noone else got it right, IMO.

The Montanas sacrificed speed for the extra guns, and so would not have been as worthy escorts for the fleet carriers.

[bigjoe96912]

you goofs how could you not want the Montana Class!!!!!!!!!!!! Not only is she a total brute but a beauty as well

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: bigjoe96912

you goofs how could you not want the Montana Class!!!!!!!!!!!! Not only is she a total brute but a beauty as well

How about the minor drawback that none of them would have been completed in time to actually participate in the Pacific War?

[seydlitz_slith]

Given the treaty restrictions, a South Dakota class is about as good as you will get. While they were an evolution of the North Carolina type design, they did not suffer the severe vibration problem that plaqued both North Carolina and Washington. I have always considered the SoDaks as cramped ships, which they were. If you didn't have treaty restrictions, and did not have to worry about the ship being ready in 1942, then the Iowas were the better ships.

Regarding the North Carolinas (Which I personally think were excellent ships):
This vibration problem was serious, and as late as April 1944, the navy was still conducting vibration trials and swapping propellor configurations.
The vibration was pronounced above 20 knots, and for a time, they were speed restricted to no more than 23 knots. Even after prop swaps, the vibration was still bad enough that the after fire control tower had to be externally braced and the after range finder still vibrated excessively.

Think about that....if the range finder is vibrating, how accurate is it going to be in determining precise ranges.

Other than that, the NCs were built to withstand 14" shellfire, where the SoDak and Iowas were built to resist 16". Torpedo protection was also not as good as in the later classes, although it compared quite well to the protection schemes used in other contemporary battleships. In fact, part of the problem is that torpedo warhead size/explosive force increased quite a bit from the time the treaty ships were designed until war.

The NoCars and SoDaks had 16"/45 cal guns...the Iowas had an improved 16"/50 cal gun, providing greater range and muzzle velocity (hence more accurate over a given range).

All three classes had excellent steaming range needed for a Pacific war.

Funny thing is, if you had asked "what battleship would you have wanted to be on during the war" I would have said "Washington". She had the most interesting war record. While checking my facts for this post, I found a few interesting but not widely known facts:
1. On 1 May 1942 she was steaming in formation behind King George V in dense fog at 18 knots when the KGV collided with the destroyer Punjabi and cut her in two. The Washington steamed through the wreckage of the destroyer as the depth charges were detonating, causing shock and concussion damage. However, hullwise, only one diesel tank sprang a leak. The shock caused three large circuit breakers to trip, cutting 25% of the power in the forward switchboard and cutting emergency power in the forward part of the ship. Also the search radar and three fire control radars were disabled from the shock.
Washingtion was able to continue on station. KGV was damaged enough that she had to return to port under DD escort for repairs.

2.On 1 February 1944 she was zigzagging at night in formation andcollided with the BB Indiana. She hit the Indy broadside, with her bow contacting the ship on the starboard side at number 3 16" turret. Washington's bow was seriously damaged and she had to steam to Majuro at 6 knots for repairs. After reaching Majuro,she was worked on for a little over a week, then sent to Pearl for a temporary bow, and then from there on to Puget Sound in the states for complete repairs. The damage to Indiana was also extensive, and according to one of my source books, was the most extensive damage to a US battleship aside from those damaged in the Pearl Harbor attack. I have not seen any pictures of either ship showing the damage, but I would certianly be interested in seeing some if anybody could ferret them out.


Finally, I went to Mobile to see the Alabama last month while I was on my way to Daytona for Speed weeks. I took lots of pics, and I will try to post some of the interesting ones in a separate thread for your viewing pleasure.

[Murphie]

OK - give me a Kongo class.

Gimme 4 14" turrets with 2-gun salvos - two in front and two in back

Gimme some 6" secondary guns 7 to the left, 7 to the right.

And I want Long Lance Torpedoes! I wanna broadside of 25 fish!

And AAA - I want lotsa that.

And 2 two-seater spotter planes as FOs.

And I wanna be able to make smoke if I hafto run - lotsa smoke.

Lemme do 30 knots so she can cut thru the seas with authority - I wann feel the wind blowing thru my hair...

Can I ask for special weapons for my DD escorts? I want them 2 make smoke too but also be able to toss special canisters from their depth charge launchers that float on the water and make even more smoke... I wanna make smoke on the water and toss fire in the sky... I like smoke when there's no radar. And spotter planes 4 a bird's eye view.

[KDonovan]

here's my design, basically an elongated Iowa, with upgunned secondary. I always thought the Iowa's lacked sufficient firepower in the secondary batteries when compared to other ships of her time. Therefore i would give her 6 x 6in guns of the type used on the Brooklyn class CL's.

9 x 16in guns
6 x 6in guns
24 x 5in guns
72 x 40mm
(no 20mm's)

[RUPD3658]

Add fighters and a wave motion cannon to the Yamato (ala Star Blazers) and I would be a happy JFB. [:D]

[Tiornu]

And I want Long Lance Torpedoes! I wanna broadside of 25 fish!

Battleships and torpedoes don't mix.

6 x 6in guns

Six guns is sub-optimal for FC purposes. What about a DP 6in secondary battery?

[String]

*snip*
1. On 1 May 1942 she was steaming in formation behind King George V in dense fog at 18 knots when the KGV collided with the destroyer Punjabi and cut her in two. The Washington steamed through the wreckage of the destroyer as the depth charges were detonating, causing shock and concussion damage. However, hullwise, only one diesel tank sprang a leak. The shock caused three large circuit breakers to trip, cutting 25% of the power in the forward switchboard and cutting emergency power in the forward part of the ship. Also the search radar and three fire control radars were disabled from the shock.
Washingtion was able to continue on station. KGV was damaged enough that she had to return to port under DD escort for repairs.

*snip*

I doubt the Washington would have been in shape to continue on station if she had hit the DD instead of KGV. Both battleships had unarmored bows. Slice your bow open against another ship and its hard or even dangerous to keep up speed

[Sardaukar]

I think so far that "modified" SoDaks or NoCars might have been what the Pacific needed in BB class. And latter seems to be more easy to modify than former..SoDaks being "cramped".

There is no use to say "I scrap all my BBs in favour of CVs"..yes, by hindsight that might be beneficial a bit...but how could you convince anyone in 1938-41 to do that ?

Basicly I think that good BB design had good cruise speed, loooong range, accurate fire control (Germans had very good rangefinders, for example..even tho they were harder to use under stress), radar (well..in 1941 there should be some sets in production that are decent..), 15" to 16" main armament and ability to severely upgrade AAA.

Why I think that Bismarck would be good for Pacific is that she had larger area of ship under heavy armour than other ships of the period. That is beneficial against dive bombers. And her powerplant had very good power to weight ratio. Just that reliability was not yet the forte of that powerplant. She was very steady gunnery platform too, being wider than most contemporaries. And AFAIK, her torpedo protection was quite good too (despite the lucky hit that disabled her).

[Tiornu]

Both battleships had unarmored bows

KGV had some of the thickest bow armor ever fitted to a dreadnought.

That is beneficial against dive bombers.

Personally, I don't see resistance to dive bombers as a significant criterion. Unless operating apart from carriers, battleships were hardly ever dive-bombed. Operating against American planes, Bismarck is arguably among the more poorly protected modern ships due to the low position of her armor deck.

She was very steady gunnery platform too, being wider than most contemporaries.

Bismarck was a steady gun platform compared to Scharnhorst, but among more skilluflly designed ships, she's merely average. Her exaggerated stability acted against her steadiness.

And AFAIK, her torpedo protection was quite good too (despite the lucky hit that disabled her).

Bismarck's TDS was a primitive design similar to that in German WWI ships. It had a greater depth than KGV's certainly, but the details do not inspire confidence.

I do not subscribe to the idea that battleships were passe in WWII. The carrier task force that has battleships can maneuver wherever it wants against the carrier task force without battleships.

[String]

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

Both battleships had unarmored bows

KGV had some of the thickest bow armor ever fitted to a dreadnought.

my mistake [:o]. But that shows imho that the washington would have suffered even more?

[Tiornu]

I would expect so. I'm trying to think of an illustrative example, and this is the best I can do:
http://navysite.de/bb/bb64.htm

[Murphie]

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

And I want Long Lance Torpedoes! I wanna broadside of 25 fish!

Battleships and torpedoes don't mix.

6 x 6in guns

Six guns is sub-optimal for FC purposes. What about a DP 6in secondary battery?

Hey! This is MY BB design. If I want torps on her then that's what I want. You don't like it - fine - go make your own. [:)]

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Murphie

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

And I want Long Lance Torpedoes! I wanna broadside of 25 fish!

Battleships and torpedoes don't mix.

6 x 6in guns

Six guns is sub-optimal for FC purposes. What about a DP 6in secondary battery?

Hey! This is MY BB design. If I want torps on her then that's what I want. You don't like it - fine - go make your own. [:)]

Well..., you don't state that you insist on your ship floating upright, so by all means do it your way....

[tsimmonds]

SOME people are SO picky; next you'll insist on aircraft that can fly and submarines that can submerge and return to the surface.[8|][;)]

[mlees]

I have not seen any pictures of either ship showing the damage, but I would certianly be interested in seeing some if anybody could ferret them out.

 
As per your request:
 
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/wwii-pac/marshals/wash-ind.htm

[histgamer]

[font="times new roman"]Anyone have springsharp? You can use that program to actually design your own ships. It’s a modified spring style which was an earlier program. [/font]

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: mlees

As per your request:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/wwii-pac/marshals/wash-ind.htm

Washington also had the best honed crew of all BBs in the Pacific. I think it was Admiral Lee who, when he was aboard the Washington, felt that rate of fire on the big guns was the key to winning a surface fight and he drilled his gun crews until they could fire the guns at a rate something like 50% faster than spec. This was the crew that went into combat on November 1, 1942. The Washington won that fight almost singlehandedly. The North Dakota was out of action for most of the battle and all the destroyers were badly damaged.

In the game, the Washington should arrive with a highly trained crew.

Bill

[Monter_Trismegistos]

ORIGINAL: hawker

At ranges of 15-20000m Bismarck can blew of the water ANY ship of her time,and actually did that.

What she did? She blowed old tincan and heavy damaged ship which technically speaking still was under construction....