Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Y_Nagato

HMS London, tier 6?

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

332
[PISD]
Members
571 posts
3,748 battles

I saw that the London would be a premium tier 6... And it made me wonder. Why? Because the County class was, basically, just as strong than the Hipper while being more efficient.

HMS London vs KMS Admiral Hipper

Displacement: 9750 vs 14050

Main gun: 8x 203 vs 8 x 203

Secondaries: 8x 103mm vs 12 x 105mm

Main belt: 114mm vs 80mm

Deck armor: 32mm vs up to 50 mm

Speed: 32 knt vs 32 knt

 

Sure, the County class should not end in tier 8: Hipper already struggle there. But to be 2 tier lower than a ship with historically a poorer design? I doubt about it.

Edited by Y_Nagato
  • Cool 2
  • Confused 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,408
[WAIFU]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
13,760 posts
5,814 battles
16 minutes ago, Y_Nagato said:

I saw that the London would be a premium tier 6... And it made me wonder. Why? Because the County class was, basically, just as strong than the Hipper while being more efficient.

HMS London vs KMS Admiral Hipper

Displacement: 9750 vs 14050

Main gun: 8x 203 vs 8 x 203

Secondaries: 8x 103mm vs 12 x 105mm

Main belt: 114mm vs 80mm

Deck armor: 32mm vs up to 50 mm

Speed: 32 knt vs 32 knt

 

Sure, the County class should not end in tier 8: Hipper already struggle there. But to be 2 tier lower than a ship with historically a poorer design? I doubt about it.

Amazing. You state that London is as strong has Hipper, and proceed to list 6 stats where London only beats Hipper in 1 category and loses in 3. Funny way to sell a ship. :fish_palm:

Personally though I think a modernised London should be tier 7. Tier 6 imho does feel too low. It tells me that WG will cripple the performance to fit her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[TROLO]
Members
200 posts
13,157 battles

Honestly this was my thought as well. I think T7 would be a much better fit for HMS London. At T6 she's basically just Exeter with an extra turret, a little bit more armor, and matchmaking that is still frustrating even though it's been improved. T8 is a bit much, as you say. I think T7 would be better.
And maybe we can have a Dido or Bellona class cl as a T8 premium? Because every nation with an established fleet has a T8 premium cruiser now, and the British need a premium cruiser to keep Indomitable (whenever she finally leaves development hell), Vanguard and Cossack company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,112
[SPTR]
Members
26,874 posts
14,332 battles

Wouldn't buy cruiser at tier 8 that has 40% less health than a hipper thin deck armor that can be lolpen by the yammy sisters this can be very infuriating when on the recieving end of BB plunging fire but maybe british gimmicks can save london from sucking on Hipper's aft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[PISD]
Members
571 posts
3,748 battles
7 minutes ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

Amazing. You state that London is as strong has Hipper, and proceed to list 6 stats where London only beats Hipper in 1 category and loses in 3. Funny way to sell a ship. :fish_palm:

Personally though I think a modernised London should be tier 7. Tier 6 imho does feel too low. It tells me that WG will cripple the performance to fit her.

The point is: London is almost if not just as good as the Hipper, yet for 75% of the displacement which made it a superior design in history. It also is 20m sorter, making it a smaller target to hit for all of it matter.

 

But even from the gameplay: they have nearly the same stats, the same fire power, equivalent AA.... As I said, not at tier 8, but London should be a solid tier 7.

 

4 minutes ago, Rolkatsuki said:

Wouldn't buy cruiser at tier 8 that has 40% less health than a hipper thin deck armor that can be lolpen by the yammy sisters this can be very infuriating when on the recieving end of BB plunging fire but maybe british gimmicks can save london from sucking on Hipper's aft.

Health is vaguely ling with displacement, but only loosely. And U-K do get the super heal (I guess their CA will get it). And for the armor: the proper deck armor is thicker with the County class (32mm vs 30mm), it is the ''turttle back'' that bring it to 50mm (so less citadel, but more weak to HE and less prone to bounce shell)

 

But even so, my last sentence do point that I do not want her at tier 8, but at tier 7.

Edited by Y_Nagato
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Privateers, Members
8,913 posts
7,837 battles

While the County class was strategically a superior design in reality, in terms of combat capabilities the Hippers were superior.

Since you would want London post refit, she‘s actually ~1000 tons heavier. Around 11,000 tons standard. 

Armor:

Hipper has an 80mm belt (which was 3.75m high, important to note), yes, but also something behind that. If you add this up (assuming a 40mm turtleback, sources vary on how thick it actually was) you get 118mm of effective armor.

HMS London either had a 102mm+9mm protection around the magazines, would add up to ~105mm effectively, or an 89mm belt (which was 2.4m high) around the machinery which however was not high enough to sufficiently protect the machinery. And if the belt was not in the way the only thing between shell and boilers would be a 25mm bulkhead, which was their as-designed armor. So side armor wise there is no discussion about Hipper providing a better protection.

Hipper‘s deck was 30-50mm, again sources disagreeing. London carried a 32mm machinery deck and 25-76mm magazine deck, meaning that London claims a slight edge here.

But the real killer is the protection of the main armament. London only had 25mm splinter protection for barbettes and main gun turrets. As HMS Ajax with similar turret protection experienced, that was not enough to actually withstand splinters. Hipper has an 80mm thick barbette, not amazing by any means but certainly splinter-proof, and a 160mm turret face, which you‘ll find unmatched when comparing turret faces of cruisers that don‘t happen to wear Stars n Stripes.

Armament:

Hipper‘s guns had drastically superior penetration against belt armor at all ranges, but were behind in terms of filler (as one would expect from AP vs SAP), so main gun wise you‘d struggle to declare a winner. But Hipper carries an additional pair of dp guns and a heavier torpedo armament.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,355
[KSE]
Beta Testers
1,568 posts
14,716 battles

Bad thread - flawed thesis, poor execution of the argument 0/8 mate.

  • Cool 1
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,408
[WAIFU]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
13,760 posts
5,814 battles
2 minutes ago, Nine_Lives_ said:


And maybe we can have a Dido or Bellona class cl as a T8 premium? Because every nation with an established fleet has a T8 premium cruiser now, and the British need a premium cruiser to keep Indomitable (whenever she finally leaves development hell), Vanguard and Cossack company.

I actually think Dido (HMS Sirius plz WG) would be better at tier 6. Given her low tonnage, non-existent armour as a result, she'd be very frail at tier 8. 5x2 134mm guns doesn't cut it at tier 8 where 4x3 152mm is the standard for CLs. And Atlanta has 8x2 guns at tier 7.

  • Cool 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
234 posts
12 battles

Hipper isn't a 10,000 ton 'Washington' cruiser. It's the first post treaty heavy cruiser, after Germany denounced the Versailles Treaty.

A fully modernised London certainly competes with the last of the Washington cruisers like NO, Algérie, Zara etc. Only Myoko is heavier. It should be tier 7.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[PISD]
Members
571 posts
3,748 battles
3 minutes ago, BiggieD61 said:

Bad thread - flawed thesis, poor execution of the argument 0/8 mate.

then move one and ignore it if you do not like it.

 

4 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

While the County class was strategically a superior design in reality, in terms of combat capabilities the Hippers were superior.

Since you would want London post refit, she‘s actually ~1000 tons heavier. Around 11,000 tons standard. 

Armor:

Hipper has an 80mm belt (which was 3.75m high, important to note), yes, but also something behind that. If you add this up (assuming a 40mm turtleback, sources vary on how thick it actually was) you get 118mm of effective armor.

HMS London either had a 102mm+9mm protection around the magazines, would add up to ~105mm effectively, or an 89mm belt (which was 2.4m high) around the machinery which however was not high enough to sufficiently protect the machinery. And if the belt was not in the way the only thing between shell and boilers would be a 25mm bulkhead, which was their as-designed armor. So side armor wise there is no discussion about Hipper providing a better protection.

Hipper‘s deck was 30-50mm, again sources disagreeing. London carried a 32mm machinery deck and 25-76mm magazine deck, meaning that London claims a slight edge here.

But the real killer is the protection of the main armament. London only had 25mm splinter protection for barbettes and main gun turrets. As HMS Ajax with similar turret protection experienced, that was not enough to actually withstand splinters. Hipper has an 80mm thick barbette, not amazing by any means but certainly splinter-proof, and a 160mm turret face, which you‘ll find unmatched when comparing turret faces of cruisers that don‘t happen to wear Stars n Stripes.

Armament:

Hipper‘s guns had drastically superior penetration against belt armor at all ranges, but were behind in terms of filler (as one would expect from AP vs SAP), so main gun wise you‘d struggle to declare a winner. But Hipper carries an additional pair of dp guns and a heavier torpedo armament.

Sure, you are right that Hipper may be right to be a tier above. But my point is more to have London at tier 7, not tier 6. The County class was the direct equivalent to Algerie and the New Orlean (okay, Algerie had a small edge probably but not that much). My comparison with the Hipper was more to show that the difference between the 2 is quite small in term of combat capacity, and in my opinion not enough to make a 2 tier gap between the two.

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,355
[KSE]
Beta Testers
1,568 posts
14,716 battles
1 minute ago, Y_Nagato said:

then move one and ignore it if you do not like it.

 

I did.  Apparently, you felt the need to quote me to suck me back into your cavalcade of poorly thought out ideas.....

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
762
[USCC]
Members
2,738 posts
2 minutes ago, BiggieD61 said:

I did.  Apparently, you felt the need to quote me to suck me back into your cavalcade of poorly thought out ideas.....

Every time I see your profile photo BiggieD61 I start.....

The mate was a mighty sailing man, the Skipper brave and sure, five passengers set sail that day, for a three hour tour,
a three hour tour. :Smile-_tongue: bloody song stuck in my head!!

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,185
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,887 posts
9,171 battles

The differences between t6 and t8 are not as great as we like to imagine, which is why t6 and t8 can be thrown together by MM. Normalization of armour values in WOWS, tier for tier, is also a major factor to be taken into account, which allows WG to shoehorn a ship into whatever tier they wish. I'm sure there are good gameplay reasons why HMS London is destined fot tier 6, and I'm sure she will do fine there. Could she be refitted, tweaked, normalized and shoved into tier 8? Probably, but why bother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[PISD]
Members
571 posts
3,748 battles
42 minutes ago, LoveBote said:

The differences between t6 and t8 are not as great as we like to imagine, which is why t6 and t8 can be thrown together by MM. Normalization of armour values in WOWS, tier for tier, is also a major factor to be taken into account, which allows WG to shoehorn a ship into whatever tier they wish. I'm sure there are good gameplay reasons why HMS London is destined fot tier 6, and I'm sure she will do fine there. Could she be refitted, tweaked, normalized and shoved into tier 8? Probably, but why bother?

Because it kinda feel weird to have 3 county class cruiser (London,  Devonshire and cancelled Surrey) at tier 6 and 7, while they could have put a County class cruiser at 7 (and London become a premium tier 7) while putting a York class at tier 6. removing a ship that never existed from the line with more actual ships, while following some historical logic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,185
[SYN]
Members
8,133 posts
12,777 battles

Historically London wasn't as good a surface combatant as Hipper, in-game the differences are only exacerbated by gameplay mechanics. Flat-shooting guns are favored, distributed armor is a plus etc. 'Efficiency' is if anything a disadvantage in game, more displacement, more HP by the formula they use.

That's rather silly in a way as it suggests that adding weight and topweight in particular increases your survivability, though what it really does is reduce your reserve buoyancy and possibly margin of stability... Go flood your engine room, increase displacement and in WOWS congrats, more HP! Efficiency is also something kind of irrelevant to warship design when the rubber meets the road, it's not like treaty breaching was penalized. 

Could London make T7? I'd have to say possibly, with the generous addition of the backing plate she has a 114mm belt, she may retain the 32.3kt design speed. Right now WG are putting Surrey at T7 with the advantage of a thicker, though not tremendously so 152mm belt, but at the cost of being a 30kt design. That's not much of an advantage to go a tier higher, suggesting that London could work at T7. 

These days I don't get too worked up over +/- 1 tier. It's pretty easy.to slide a tier up or down, consumables and modules and ROF and soft stats can usually see a 1 tier shift, the main advantage of Aoba over Furutaka is 5.5 instead of 4 RPM, the difference between Fiji and Edinburgh outside Edinburgh's arbitrary better repair and access to concealment module is pretty slight. 

As for Dido, T5 for the base model, T6 with the bells and whistles is my view. Then again WG took something a bit like a Capitani Romani only with an armor belt and somehow shoved it in T10 so maybe make a bizarre 40kt Dido a T10 too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
145 posts
871 battles
3 hours ago, Y_Nagato said:

then move one and ignore it if you do not like it.

 

Sure, you are right that Hipper may be right to be a tier above. But my point is more to have London at tier 7, not tier 6. The County class was the direct equivalent to Algerie and the New Orlean (okay, Algerie had a small edge probably but not that much). My comparison with the Hipper was more to show that the difference between the 2 is quite small in term of combat capacity, and in my opinion not enough to make a 2 tier gap between the two.

 

 

There's a bigger gap here than you think. Hipper and London had the same size and number of guns, yes, but Hipper's guns were far superior in terms of ballistics and penetration which is a significant edge when both combatants otherwise share a practical rate of fire.

As has been mentioned, Hipper was not only a better-armored ship overall, but because of her size also had more staying power. The Hipper's were huge, longer than even the South Dakota class of battleships. Simply put it takes more water to fill and sink a Hipper than the London, which theoretically means you need to score more hits to sink a Hipper than a London.

London is also behind Hipper in terms of DP and torpedo batteries.

Hipper was also faster, topping out on the German mile at just a hair under 33 knots, could achieve a top speed of 22 knots on a single blade alone, and with its centerline variable pitch propeller was capable of almost instantaneous deceleration and acceleration.

 

Only looking on the surface of things, London and Hipper look close, but when you start digging the gap between the two gets larger and larger.

 

     Besides which, there was an instance in history in which the Admiral Hipper herself did engage a County-class heavy cruiser, the HMS Berwick, on Christmas night, 1940 in The Battle of the Christmas Convoy. The battle was about as lopsided as a battle can get... in 14 minutes of combat Hipper scored 4 hits on the Berwick while Berwick scored no hits of her own against the Hipper. The first hit on Berwick completely penetrated the lightly armored aft turret and put it out of action, the second hit penetrated the belt below the waterline of the forward superfiring turret and caused a good deal of flooding, the third hit completely penetrated one of the 102mm turrets on the starboard side and continued on to explode in the chimney, the final hit blew a 13 meter hole in the side of the hull and caused severe flooding but ultimately failed to penetrate the 102mm boiler room armor which probably saved the ship. Nonetheless, the hapless Berwick had learned her lesson by this point and was trying, with some difficulty, to withdraw from the engagement. Hipper, who at this point was also being harassed by the light cruisers Bonaventure and Dunedin (who also failed to score any hits), decided to finish off Berwick with torpedoes and break off. Berwick was spared only by the fact that the aiming mechanisms for the torpedo battery had been disabled by the blast from Hipper's own gunfire and Hipper's captain called off the attack, not wanting to waste torpedoes. On her way out, Hipper made short work of the Jumna, a 6,000t British merchant, before heading home. As for Berwick, she also limped home and was in drydock undergoing repairs for the next 6 months.

Edited by WirFahrenGegenEngeland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[PISD]
Members
571 posts
3,748 battles
13 minutes ago, WirFahrenGegenEngeland said:

 

There's a bigger gap here than you think. Hipper and London had the same size and number of guns, yes, but Hipper's guns were far superior in terms of ballistics and penetration which is a significant edge when both combatants otherwise share a practical rate of fire.

As has been mentioned, Hipper was not only a better-armored ship overall, but because of her size also had more staying power. The Hipper's were huge, longer than even the South Dakota class of battleships. Simply put it takes more water to fill and sink a Hipper than the London, which theoretically means you need to score more hits to sink a Hipper than a London.

London is also behind Hipper in terms of DP and torpedo batteries.

Hipper was also faster, topping out on the German mile at just a hair under 33 knots, could achieve a top speed of 22 knots on a single blade alone, and with its centerline variable pitch propeller was capable of almost instantaneous deceleration and acceleration.

 

Only looking on the surface of things, London and Hipper look close, but when you start digging the gap between the two gets larger and larger.

 

     Besides which, there was an instance in history in which the Admiral Hipper herself did engage a County-class heavy cruiser, the HMS Berwick, on Christmas night, 1940 in The Battle of the Christmas Convoy. The battle was about as lopsided as a battle can get... in 14 minutes of combat Hipper scored 4 hits on the Berwick while Berwick scored no hits of her own against the Hipper. The first hit on Berwick completely penetrated the lightly armored aft turret and put it out of action, the second hit penetrated the belt below the waterline of the forward superfiring turret and caused a good deal of flooding, the third hit completely penetrated one of the 102mm turrets on the starboard side and continued on to explode in the chimney, the final hit blew a 13 meter hole in the side of the hull and caused severe flooding but ultimately failed to penetrate the 102mm boiler room armor which probably saved the ship. Nonetheless, the hapless Berwick had learned her lesson by this point and was trying, with some difficulty, to withdraw from the engagement. Hipper, who at this point was also being harassed by the light cruisers Bonaventure and Dunedin (who also failed to score any hits), decided to finish off Berwick with torpedoes and break off. Berwick was spared only by the fact that the aiming mechanisms for the torpedo battery had been disabled by the blast from Hipper's own gunfire and Hipper's captain called off the attack, not wanting to waste torpedoes. On her way out, Hipper made short work of the Jumna, a 6,000t British merchant, before heading home. As for Berwick, she also limped home and was in drydock undergoing repairs for the next 6 months.

About the gun capacity: both shell were fairly similar (little heavier on the German side), and for the ballistic the only thing that I can point out is that the British gun kept the shell velocity for longer, while the German gun had an higher shell velocity in close range.  All in all, the advantage of Hipper here is quite small and German shells tends to lack in explosive charge against comparable of other navy (the Algerie had almost 4 the explosive charge of the Hipper (2.3kg for Hipper vs 8kg for Algerie vs 5.2 kg for the County class). So if Hipper may have a small edge in piercing capacity, it lose in term of damage done per shell.

 

About staying capacity, sure the bigger you are the harder you get to sunk. But on the other hand, they tend to be quite hard to keep in order, something that was shown at the battle of Drobak Sound. Also, the bigger the target get, the easier it get to be hit. And in term of speed the 2 are fairly close: in wartime configuration their top speed was almost the same at around 32 knt. Nothing there to give an advantage to Hipper. That let the protection of the main battery and 2 torpedoes per side as the main advantage of the ships.

 

For the example, wartime experience are hard to be used as valid evidence. On paper, Bismark and Hood were solid match, yet we know how it ended.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,185
[SYN]
Members
8,133 posts
12,777 battles
1 hour ago, WirFahrenGegenEngeland said:

Besides which, there was an instance in history in which the Admiral Hipper herself did engage a County-class heavy cruiser, the HMS Berwick, on Christmas night, 1940 in The Battle of the Christmas Convoy. The battle was about as lopsided as a battle can get... in 14 minutes of combat Hipper scored 4 hits on the Berwick while Berwick scored no hits of her own against the Hipper. The first hit on Berwick completely penetrated the lightly armored aft turret and put it out of action, the second hit penetrated the belt below the waterline of the forward superfiring turret and caused a good deal of flooding, the third hit completely penetrated one of the 102mm turrets on the starboard side and continued on to explode in the chimney, the final hit blew a 13 meter hole in the side of the hull and caused severe flooding but ultimately failed to penetrate the 102mm boiler room armor which probably saved the ship. Nonetheless, the hapless Berwick had learned her lesson by this point and was trying, with some difficulty, to withdraw from the engagement. Hipper, who at this point was also being harassed by the light cruisers Bonaventure and Dunedin (who also failed to score any hits), decided to finish off Berwick with torpedoes and break off. Berwick was spared only by the fact that the aiming mechanisms for the torpedo battery had been disabled by the blast from Hipper's own gunfire and Hipper's captain called off the attack, not wanting to waste torpedoes. On her way out, Hipper made short work of the Jumna, a 6,000t British merchant, before heading home. As for Berwick, she also limped home and was in drydock undergoing repairs for the next 6 months.

The main shortcoming for Berwick in the Christmas Convoy encounter was not so much being a County class as a lack of radar. 

Weather and visibility conditions were pretty horrendous at the time and Berwick had not yet had any radar installed, while Hipper had a FuMo 22 set and the better of the visibility to. 

London after her rebuild (as she's being implemented as a premium) had Type 279, 284 and 285 radar, the Type 284 was a pretty successful surface search set and tracked Bismarck, and (in a modified form) contributed to DoY's ability to land hits on Scharnhorst at night. In the same circumstances you would expect London to put up a significantly better performance. 

Overall despite coming off second best by far Berwick wasn't in danger of sinking or losing speed so her armor scheme held up fairly well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
145 posts
871 battles
1 hour ago, Y_Nagato said:

About the gun capacity: both shell were fairly similar (little heavier on the German side), and for the ballistic the only thing that I can point out is that the British gun kept the shell velocity for longer, while the German gun had an higher shell velocity in close range.  All in all, the advantage of Hipper here is quite small and German shells tends to lack in explosive charge against comparable of other navy (the Algerie had almost 4 the explosive charge of the Hipper (2.3kg for Hipper vs 8kg for Algerie vs 5.2 kg for the County class). So if Hipper may have a small edge in piercing capacity, it lose in term of damage done per shell.

 

About staying capacity, sure the bigger you are the harder you get to sunk. But on the other hand, they tend to be quite hard to keep in order, something that was shown at the battle of Drobak Sound. Also, the bigger the target get, the easier it get to be hit. And in term of speed the 2 are fairly close: in wartime configuration their top speed was almost the same at around 32 knt. Nothing there to give an advantage to Hipper. That let the protection of the main battery and 2 torpedoes per side as the main advantage of the ships.

 

For the example, wartime experience are hard to be used as valid evidence. On paper, Bismark and Hood were solid match, yet we know how it ended.

 

 

London topped out around 32 knots on sea trials, she only would have gone downhill after that. German ships, on the other hand, are harder to measure since they run their trials on the mile. So when a German ship is designed to have a top speed of 32 knots at 110,000 horsepower... that simply means that that is the speed and horsepower output th ships are expected to make at the mile marker and is NOT the ship's actual combat speed or power output. After all, why would you overpromise and underdeliver? This is why, throughout history, German warships tended to blow their trial speeds out of the water in service. For example, Gneisenau, who made 31.3 knots on the mile, accelerated to 33 knots during her engagement with Glorious. Or look at the battle of Jutland, where many of Germany's dreadnoughts, which had made top speeds of around 21 knots on the mile, exceeded 24, 25, and even 26 knots. Bismarck's chief engineer swore up and down that she was easily capable of at least 32 knots. So, if Hipper made a top speed of 32.8 knots on the mile, we can safely assume that her actual combat top speed was closer to 34 knots at the time. Doesn't matter which time frame you compare the two ships, Hipper has a decisive advantage in speed.

 

I'll give you the point on shell weights. But I will point out that, in general, English naval gunnery during WWII tended to be subpar while German gunnery was generally excellent. So any engagement between a Hipper and the London would almost certainly have ended up as a repeat of the beating Berwick took.

 

The whole "bigger target is easier to hit" deal simply isn't true in the case of naval warfare. The scale of naval engagements are usually so great that a difference in a few meters between two vessels is almost entirely inconsequential. 

 

Bismarck and Hood were nowhere near equal matches. If for no other reason than the fact that Bismarck's guns were capable of piercing Hoods' armor at normal combat ranges while Hood's were incapable of penetrating Bismarck's. On top of this Bismarck was also faster (Hood by 1941 was barely capable of making 28 knots) and, despite both ships having a main battery of 4x2 15" guns, Bismarcks fire initially at 3.3 rpm with ready ammunition and drop to a designed sustained rof of 2.6 rpm (though in practice this was slightly lower) while Hood's guns top out at 2 rpm. 

Edited by WirFahrenGegenEngeland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
145 posts
871 battles
47 minutes ago, mofton said:

The main shortcoming for Berwick in the Christmas Convoy encounter was not so much being a County class as a lack of radar. 

Weather and visibility conditions were pretty horrendous at the time and Berwick had not yet had any radar installed, while Hipper had a FuMo 22 set and the better of the visibility to. 

London after her rebuild (as she's being implemented as a premium) had Type 279, 284 and 285 radar, the Type 284 was a pretty successful surface search set and tracked Bismarck, and (in a modified form) contributed to DoY's ability to land hits on Scharnhorst at night. In the same circumstances you would expect London to put up a significantly better performance. 

Overall despite coming off second best by far Berwick wasn't in danger of sinking or losing speed so her armor scheme held up fairly well. 

 

"The artillery unit performed well, and the radar turned out to be extremely useful and more perfect than the English: the Admiral Hipper was the first to find British ships, although the Berwick and Bonaventure had completely modern radars." - Kriegsmarine: Heavy Cruisers of the Third Reich by Kofman V Princy

I'd be interested in any source you might have that says that she didn't have radars at this time. I won't write off the possibility of this being a typo and the author having meant Dunedin instead of Berwick. In either event, even if none of the British cruisers had radar thats still no excuse, in my mind, for 3 cruisers not to be able to score a single hit on a lone enemy cruiser. Especially when that lone cruiser was engaging Berwick with half of its main battery, Bonaventure with the other half, and engaging the merchantmen Empire Trooper and Arabistan with its secondary battery and scoring multiple hits on all but Bonaventure. (Worth noting is that Hipper was switching between Bonaventure and Empire Trooper with the other half of its main battery that was not engaged with Berwick which may have contributed to the lack of damage done to Bonaventure)

 

I have to disagree here. DoY's gunnery performance against Scharnhorst was quite lackluster. Scoring only 13 hits out of 446 shells fired for an abysmal (by 1943 standards) 2.9% hit percentage. Some blame can be attributed to the lighting and weather, yes, but even Scharnhorst outshot DoY in this engagement when she hit DoY 3 times out of no more than 80 shots for a hit percentage of at least 3.8%. The shells that did hit Scharnhorst certainly did their damage, no doubt, but that doesn't mean that her shooting itself was good.

 

The final hit that Hipper scored on Berwick (the one that blew a 13m hole in her side) reduced her speed to a crawl of 7.14 knots which was why the Hipper felt confident in a torpedo attack in the first place. I don't know know if she was able to recover speed after the battle, though, which may be what you are referring to.

Edited by WirFahrenGegenEngeland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,185
[SYN]
Members
8,133 posts
12,777 battles
7 hours ago, WirFahrenGegenEngeland said:

"The artillery unit performed well, and the radar turned out to be extremely useful and more perfect than the English: the Admiral Hipper was the first to find British ships, although the Berwick and Bonaventure had completely modern radars." - Kriegsmarine: Heavy Cruisers of the Third Reich by Kofman V Princy

I'd be interested in any source you might have that says that she didn't have radars at this time.

I'm pretty certain Berwick lacked radar in December 1940.

This source - lists no radar as completed but does make a specific note of Berwick getting Type 279, 284 and 286M in June 1941. It does make the effort to ID radar added to Suffolk in 1939 (Type 79Z, an air-search type) and it's generally consistent with increasing radar fit here and there through 1941 for a lot of British cruisers.

That tallies with her general record of movement log here - which has no reference of radar being added until her 1941 refit - Type 284 and 286M again, varying slightly on the dates, I suspect the radar was finalized in Rosyth.

Finally this source has a good series of images of Berwick as she evolved, and is done by a modeler - and they're usually detail oriented. You can see it's not until the June 1941 image (in pink!) that radar antennae are fitted to the masts, and a Type 284 one on top of the forward DCT. It makes a note of the addition being in May-June 1941 in Rosyth too. 

I am 95% sure Berwick did not have radar in December 1940, it is pretty hard to prove a negative but her lacking it would be in keeping for most of the RN's heavy cruisers at that stage. London as she was rebuilt had the previously mentioned range of radar types fitted so would not have been so disadvantaged.

Bonaventure completed with Type 279 (air warning, maybe some surface utility but very limited). She was also apparently struggling with visibility and was a small (5,600t standard) ship armed with only 8x 5.25in guns, which threw a fairly small shell (80lb vs. >250lb 8in shells)) and were fairly difficult to use at-range anti-ship. In particular small shell splashes in heavy seas don't help, a short account:

Spoiler

dQpjdlc.png

- Report of Capt. Egerton, HMS Bonaventure in 'Beware Raiders' by Bernard Edwards

The fairly ancient (laid down 1917 - 23 years earlier) and small (4,970t) Dunedin was of almost no consequence being too old, too unstable a gun platform and generally in completely the wrong weight class to tangle with Hipper

 

7 hours ago, WirFahrenGegenEngeland said:

I have to disagree here. DoY's gunnery performance against Scharnhorst was quite lackluster. Scoring only 13 hits out of 446 shells fired for an abysmal (by 1943 standards) 2.9% hit percentage. Some blame can be attributed to the lighting and weather, yes, but even Scharnhorst outshot DoY in this engagement when she hit DoY 3 times out of no more than 80 shots for a hit percentage of at least 3.8%.

The range of values for hits from DoY is from 13 to 30 - the high end would be 6.6%, those were at a wide variety of ranges, opening at 12,000yd with 2 hits on the first broadside, after that the range steadily opened and spotting fall of shot at longer and longer ranges, while shooting in storm force winds was never going to be particularly productive. The 2.9% seems pretty normal 'by 1943 standards' - I'm not even sure what other battleship on battleship encounters there were in 1943, let alone which were comparable in conditions. Clearly the radar was a big advantage to surface combat in adverse conditions.

 

This is the final British damage tally to Berwick during the action, source:

Spoiler

hjGcYIv.png

 

The ship did suffer some flooding, though not a tremendous amount, only one boiler was interrupted (of 8), a lot of the flooding was in the torpedo bulge which is overall, designed to absorb damage and flooding. Two of the four hits exploded, one on deck, and one after deflecting off the armor belt. I don't think Berwick would have slowed much if any - and the exactness of the reading '7.14kt' is pretty suspect at least to me.

I do always find the 'not seriously impaired' comment on the fighting efficiency amusing, pretty much no matter what the damage it gets put in, though it seems most concerned in that larger source

 

image.png

Edited by mofton
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
145 posts
871 battles
2 hours ago, mofton said:

I'm pretty certain Berwick lacked radar in December 1940.

This source - lists no radar as completed but does make a specific note of Berwick getting Type 279, 284 and 286M in June 1941. It does make the effort to ID radar added to Suffolk in 1939 (Type 79Z, an air-search type) and it's generally consistent with increasing radar fit here and there through 1941 for a lot of British cruisers.

That tallies with her general record of movement log here - which has no reference of radar being added until her 1941 refit - Type 284 and 286M again, varying slightly on the dates, I suspect the radar was finalized in Rosyth.

Finally this source has a good series of images of Berwick as she evolved, and is done by a modeler - and they're usually detail oriented. You can see it's not until the June 1941 image (in pink!) that radar antennae are fitted to the masts, and a Type 284 one on top of the forward DCT. It makes a note of the addition being in May-June 1941 in Rosyth too. 

I am 95% sure Berwick did not have radar in December 1940, it is pretty hard to prove a negative but her lacking it would be in keeping for most of the RN's heavy cruisers at that stage. London as she was rebuilt had the previously mentioned range of radar types fitted so would not have been so disadvantaged.

Bonaventure completed with Type 279 (air warning, maybe some surface utility but very limited). She was also apparently struggling with visibility and was a small (5,600t standard) ship armed with only 8x 5.25in guns, which threw a fairly small shell (80lb vs. >250lb 8in shells)) and were fairly difficult to use at-range anti-ship. In particular small shell splashes in heavy seas don't help, a short account:

  Hide contents

dQpjdlc.png

- Report of Capt. Egerton, HMS Bonaventure in 'Beware Raiders' by Bernard Edwards

The fairly ancient (laid down 1917 - 23 years earlier) and small (4,970t) Dunedin was of almost no consequence being too old, too unstable a gun platform and generally in completely the wrong weight class to tangle with Hipper

 

The range of values for hits from DoY is from 13 to 30 - the high end would be 6.6%, those were at a wide variety of ranges, opening at 12,000yd with 2 hits on the first broadside, after that the range steadily opened and spotting fall of shot at longer and longer ranges, while shooting in storm force winds was never going to be particularly productive. The 2.9% seems pretty normal 'by 1943 standards' - I'm not even sure what other battleship on battleship encounters there were in 1943, let alone which were comparable in conditions. Clearly the radar was a big advantage to surface combat in adverse conditions.

 

This is the final British damage tally to Berwick during the action, source:

  Hide contents

hjGcYIv.png

 

The ship did suffer some flooding, though not a tremendous amount, only one boiler was interrupted (of 8), a lot of the flooding was in the torpedo bulge which is overall, designed to absorb damage and flooding. Two of the four hits exploded, one on deck, and one after deflecting off the armor belt. I don't think Berwick would have slowed much if any - and the exactness of the reading '7.14kt' is pretty suspect at least to me.

I do always find the 'not seriously impaired' comment on the fighting efficiency amusing, pretty much no matter what the damage it gets put in, though it seems most concerned in that larger source

 

image.png

 

Very well on the radar.

 

I'm certainly not saying the 3 cruisers should have beaten Hipper, I'm simply surprised that none of them managed to score a hit, regardless of how old they were or how small their guns were. Hipper was scoring hits with both her main and secondary batteries, after all, and had to put up with the same harsh conditions as everyone else.

 

I don't know that I've seen a source claim more than thirteen hits on Scharnhorst. In fact, I can't recall a source that says any number besides thirteen. Not to say they don't exist, of course. 6.6% would be more than adequate, though.

"At 18.42, the “ Duke Of Yorck ” ceased fire, having fired 52 volleys, of which 31 were straddles, which gave a result of 13 direct hits." - Sea, War, and Peace

Perhaps, either way, I should cede this point as well. It would appear, if anything, that Duke of York was simply unlucky with hits rather than truly inaccurate. After all, "Good shooting gives you straddles, only God gives you hits."

 

On a side note, as for what can be expected of a battleship's gunnery in 1943... The brand new Massachusetts scored 5 hits out of 105 shells fired at Jean Bart for 4.8% in late 1942. USS Iowa scored 7 hits on Katori out of 46 shells for 15.2% in early 1944. Washington vs Kirishima put up a 13.7% hit percentage in late 1942, though, that was at near point blanc range.

 

Ope, my bad... 7:14 is the time the Berwick broke off the engagement, not the speed she was making. Sometimes it pays to read CAREFULLY. :cap_book:

 

You seem to have quite an arsenal of naval knowledge and sources. I look forward to future meetings and discussions with you on these forums!

Edited by WirFahrenGegenEngeland
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[PISD]
Members
571 posts
3,748 battles
11 hours ago, mofton said:

Finally this source has a good series of images of Berwick as she evolved, and is done by a modeler - and they're usually detail oriented. You can see it's not until the June 1941 image (in pink!) that radar antennae are fitted to the masts, and a Type 284 one on top of the forward DCT. It makes a note of the addition being in May-June 1941 in Rosyth too. 

Something from those drawing catch my attention: Deep Charge on CA. I knew that the UK put them on their CL, but didn't know that even their CA had it. Hopefully in the future with Subs wows will implement it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,185
[SYN]
Members
8,133 posts
12,777 battles
19 hours ago, WirFahrenGegenEngeland said:

I'm certainly not saying the 3 cruisers should have beaten Hipper, I'm simply surprised that none of them managed to score a hit,

That is certainly disappointing from the RN's perspective, though if you can't really see what you're shooting at it's more a case of inevitability. Longer range gunfire in general did not produce great results from RN cruisers through most of the war, but in particular from the lighter caliber armed ships.

I am suspicious on the 13 hits, though it is the commonly cited one. An absolute number being recorded for a ship battered and sunk, potentially with repeat hits to damage sections, low damage hits to the upperworks going unrecorded and then most of the crew being killed all mean I wouldn't trust an exact number much. The straddles are ok in ratio, and first-broadside hits are good.

The problem with battleship engagements is comparing like-with-like. For instance Massachusetts did land a better percentage at Casablanca, and she did have a greenish crew, but on the plus sides for her it was daylight, the weather was not that bad and Jean Bart was well... stationary which simplifies things. Washington v. Kirishima was a better hit rate, though as you say at point blank. In comparison the South Dakota at the same battle though fired about 18 salvoes (uncertain number of shells, but I'd guess minimum 50+ shots for at best 1 possible hit with her main battery, despite being down to 7-8,000yd at times - http://www.navweaps.com/index_lundgren/Battleship_Action_Guadalcanal.pdf

Fair to say worse than Washington, but equally fair to say much better than South Dakota despite the greater range (minimum 12,000yd I think) and worse conditions.

 

I look forward to further discussion equally, always more to learn from people and different perspectives to understand. I've learnt a lot from just having to go and dig deeper rather than relying on the sources I knew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[HMCS]
Members
20 posts
6,067 battles

Is there even a point in trying to argue about this when they are not even in game yet. ATM its like wiping before you poop, completely pointless 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×