Jump to content


Challenge Accepted : Yamato vs. Iowa


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

Jracule #41 Posted 14 May 2017 - 07:27 PM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,595
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostSventex, on 12 May 2017 - 03:16 PM, said:

 

Huh, I always thought combat fighters had quicker take off speeds.  I figured all that extra speed would been for those planes hauling heavy torpedoes.

 

Japan couldn't keep Yamato's tank topped up, and was too scared to send it to face a lot of Battleships, but with hindsight, and me being admiral, it becomes different.  I'm not hearing why you think Iowa would be necessary as a fleet escort.  The scenarios where a CV fleet with an Iowa would actually use the Iowa apart from bringing extra 5"/38s guns to an air battle are extremely narrow.

 

If we're going with real life, I'd say the Iowa was more useful, but if we're doing fleet specific scenarios where I'm in charge, it becomes different.  With no mention of fuel shortage, or plane shortages, or pilot training problems, the Yamato in a fleet becomes genuinely formidable.  But when you add the historical situation that Yamato found herself in, she became pointless.  And the Iowa was commissioned long after the Battle of Midway, so she wasn't terribly useful either, but in a post WWII world, she could still keep up with a nuclear aircraft carrier, so she remained mildly relevant.  But in any instance that an Iowa-Class did shore bombardment, the Yamato could have done anyway, speed isn't relevant in such cases.  Maybe I haven't done enough research, but has an Iowa class ever done anything that legitimately protected a fleet post-WWII?

 

Because once again,

 

Once battles were no longer being settled by gunnery duels, battleships had to evolve into more multi-role vessels. 

 

If you are going to be an intelligent admiral, you have to look beyond big guns and look at the larger scope.

 

You certainly can't think " I know the Yamato's strengths so I'll only use the ship in situations where the strengths matter." Japan knew the strengths as well, however the reason they couldn't do precisely what you are suggesting is combat is fluid and doesn't go according to plan.

 

What you need is a ship that offers the better chance at adapting to changing circumstances. That is what the Iowa offered over the Yamato. Need to bombard a shore? Done. Need to escort a carrier? Done. Need to refuel some destroyers? Done.

 

As to why the Iowa was relevant to carrier escort, it should be obvious. Because it can be used for it. No one is ever going to turn away additional protection over something like "intended roles"

 

You had a large ship, able to bring large amounts of firepower equal to a couple of cruisers or several destroyers to bear on targets more accurately. Unlike destroyers, it has the range to match a carriers endurance (destroyers had be dispatched for refueling several times). During bad weather, it can still keep pace with a carrier while destroyers and cruisers could fall behind.

If you have a ship that can do all of that, it would be silly to turn it away.



Sventex #42 Posted 14 May 2017 - 08:18 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Members

  • 2,682
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostJracule, on 14 May 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

Once battles were no longer being settled by gunnery duels, battleships had to evolve into more multi-role vessels. 

 

A Battleship's only role combat role is gunnery.

 

View PostJracule, on 14 May 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

If you have a ship that can do all of that, it would be silly to turn it away.

 

It's not silly if I have to turn away the greatest Battleship ever built.

 


Edited by Sventex, 14 May 2017 - 08:22 PM.

"The world is not beautiful; and that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty."
 


Jracule #43 Posted 16 May 2017 - 11:59 AM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,595
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

A battleship's only combat role is gunnery. - Japan thought so too. Worked out pretty good for them right? Meanwhile, the US, Britain, and France all thought differently at the end. Results speak for themselves.

 

It's not silly if I have to turn away the greatest battleship ever built. - Well, that might work. After you handicap the fleet, you can use that pride and honor to float home after everything is sunk. :D

 

 



Sventex #44 Posted 16 May 2017 - 02:35 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Members

  • 2,682
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostJracule, on 16 May 2017 - 03:59 AM, said:

A battleship's only combat role is gunnery. - Japan thought so too. Worked out pretty good for them right? Meanwhile, the US, Britain, and France all thought differently at the end. Results speak for themselves.

 

It's not silly if I have to turn away the greatest battleship ever built. - Well, that might work. After you handicap the fleet, you can use that pride and honor to float home after everything is sunk. :D

 

 

 

So when has a Battleship...not used it's guns in combat?  The Gulf War with the tomahawk missiles?  What other combat role can a Battleship even do without it's guns?  Launch a catapult fight to depth charge a submarine?  Even anti-aircraft escorting requires the use of the AA guns.

So a Yamato would automatically cause her own fleet to be sunk?  Because 26kts is too slow?  Because getting close too another fleet means sinking?  I guess an Iowa Fleet would be really good at retreating to survive another day I suppose...?  I figure an Iowa Fleet and a Yamato Fleet of equal strength would just tear each other to pieces in battle.

Edited by Sventex, 16 May 2017 - 02:40 PM.

"The world is not beautiful; and that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty."
 


Jracule #45 Posted 17 May 2017 - 04:59 PM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,595
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostSventex, on 16 May 2017 - 09:35 AM, said:

 

So when has a Battleship...not used it's guns in combat?  The Gulf War with the tomahawk missiles?  What other combat role can a Battleship even do without it's guns?  Launch a catapult fight to depth charge a submarine?  Even anti-aircraft escorting requires the use of the AA guns.

So a Yamato would automatically cause her own fleet to be sunk?  Because 26kts is too slow?  Because getting close too another fleet means sinking?  I guess an Iowa Fleet would be really good at retreating to survive another day I suppose...?  I figure an Iowa Fleet and a Yamato Fleet of equal strength would just tear each other to pieces in battle.

 

You were fixated on ship to ship gunnery. Hence why I said multi-role, as in AA and the like. 

 

Yamato's disadvantages are always going to reduce the effectiveness of the fleet. Especially in our scenario of two equal fleets.

 

It's already been established that carrier operations are going to cause the carriers to leave Yamato behind. So what are you going to do? Leave it behind while your escorts are going to stick with the carriers?

Or worst case, you can divide your units. Now you have two fleets that are nowhere near as effective as a whole cohesive unit. 

 

The carriers will decide the battle long before the Iowa and Yamato ever see each other. The question becomes which is going to support the carriers better.The answer is obvious.

 

Like I said, you can defend your favorite ship all you want, but have to acknowledge the failures.

 



Sventex #46 Posted 18 May 2017 - 05:42 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Members

  • 2,682
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostJracule, on 17 May 2017 - 08:59 AM, said:

You were fixated on ship to ship gunnery. Hence why I said multi-role, as in AA and the like. 

 

Yamato's disadvantages are always going to reduce the effectiveness of the fleet. Especially in our scenario of two equal fleets.

 

It's already been established that carrier operations are going to cause the carriers to leave Yamato behind. So what are you going to do? Leave it behind while your escorts are going to stick with the carriers?

Or worst case, you can divide your units. Now you have two fleets that are nowhere near as effective as a whole cohesive unit. 

 

The carriers will decide the battle long before the Iowa and Yamato ever see each other. The question becomes which is going to support the carriers better.The answer is obvious.

 

Like I said, you can defend your favorite ship all you want, but have to acknowledge the failures.

 

 

 

A Battleship is an armored ship covered in guns, of course it's going to be involved in gunnery.  The 5" Mark 12's are guns.  The Bofors are guns.  The Oerlikons are guns.  All of which can be used in a naval battle or air battle, it's all gunnery.

 

Why would a fleet have to abandon it's Battleship?  You said I'm the admiral, and I would never do such a thing.  Why does a fleet half to move at top speed?  The US wouldn't have built all those 21kt battleships if it thought it was a good idea to ditch the slowest ships in a fleet operation.  The fleet was meant to hold together at a slow speed, and I don't see victory in a naval battle being dictated by ship speed.  Sure speed is better when it comes to grand strategy, but when fleet A needs to sink fleet B, it's going to come down to tactics, firepower, armor and luck.

"The world is not beautiful; and that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty."
 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users