From the depths of the interwebs: an interesting read on American battleships.

[Kyrios_Mirage]

Sweet, thanks for sharing!

[mofton]

Limited sample sizes, tenuous conclusions. Battleship history in a nutshell.

 

I agree with LordGomes on the kamikaze v. Fritz X comparison. Not only is the Fritz X an armor penetrating design but I believe it would 'fly' faster than a Kamikaze and potentially hit at a steeper, more penetrating angle.

 

Also, not sure given that we don't know the cause of the sinking that Hood's loss can be attributed to a proportional armor scheme. At the ranges Bismarck was flinging 15in shells her way the penetration vs. armor completely favored penetration (and would have if Bismarck had been engaging an Iowa with it's similar 12in - though inclined - belt). I think at 14,000 yards you might be looking at >16in of penetration from the German gun.

 

 

The author obviously couldn't go into great detail in a precis such as this, but for instance there is a difference between the air dropped Type 91 17.7in torpedo with a 205kg warhead used at Pearl, and the Mk. 15 21in torpedo with (depending on mod) a 350+kg warhead put into Fuso by Melvin. Again, small sample sizes and imperfect comparisons.

[CybrSlydr]

"But comrades, American Battleships are just average!  Stalin says so!"

 

Or at least that's what the Devs told us.  

[AdmiralPiett]

Some parts of the article are tenuous, others are reasonable. Not a bad work overall, but it has issues.