Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
tm63au

Any Battleship / BattleCruiser Classes Armed With ASW's

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,392
[POP]
Members
2,839 posts
22,702 battles

Is there any record of Battleship / BattleCruiser class ships being designed and armed the ASW even if they are not currently in game at the moment. 

I have tried to find information on whether any of these classes of ships dating back before WWI and past WWII were equip in some way shape or form with such weapons.

Particularly if any of the current in game ships ever did also if any that are not currently in game but may in the future.

So far no luck on this matter, however my library of books  is not big and so far searching the internet has failed to come up with anything.

regards  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,575
[WOLF3]
Members
26,963 posts
23,767 battles

None that I can think of.

In the real world, only morons like the Kriegsmarine liked to send capital ships virtually unescorted.  Most everyone else dedicated some sort of screen for such expensive ships.

 

Even in the Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, where the only thing people talk about is the fight between Kirishima, South Dakota, Washington, people ignore there was a significant screening force.  This was right on the heels of the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal that saw heavy Allied losses (which also had a significant Cruiser and Destroyer presence).

Kirishima had with her 2 CLs, 2 CAs, DD x8.

Washington and South Dakota had a smaller screen but at least had 4 DDs with them.

 

In 1944 for the Battle of Surigao Strait or to be more exact, The Slaughter at Surigao Strait, it's often thought of as the last clash between Battleships and crossing of the t.  Still, there was a screening force, even for the late war IJN who were in bad shape.  The USN had a powerful screening force for their 6 old BBs.  CA x3, CL x5, DD x29, PT Boats x39.

 

Late in the war when Yamato was sent off to die, she at least had a screen of 1 CL and 8 DDs with her, and by the time of April 1945, the IJN was scraping the bottom of the barrel.  Yet they still sent Yamato with a screen.

 

In WoWS it's very hard to replicate that because more people play Battleships than they do Destroyers :Smile_trollface:

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,546
[O7]
Members
1,493 posts
10,811 battles

no counter play is allowed comrade you must rely on your trusty random battles team mates.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,392
[POP]
Members
2,839 posts
22,702 battles
18 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

None that I can think of.

In the real world, only morons like the Kriegsmarine liked to send capital ships virtually unescorted.  Most everyone else dedicated some sort of screen for such expensive ships.

 

Even in the Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, where the only thing people talk about is the fight between Kirishima, South Dakota, Washington, people ignore there was a significant screening force.  This was right on the heels of the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal that saw heavy Allied losses (which also had a significant Cruiser and Destroyer presence).

Kirishima had with her 2 CLs, 2 CAs, DD x8.

Washington and South Dakota had a smaller screen but at least had 4 DDs with them.

 

In 1944 for the Battle of Surigao Strait or to be more exact, The Slaughter at Surigao Strait, it's often thought of as the last clash between Battleships and crossing of the t.  Still, there was a screening force, even for the late war IJN who were in bad shape.  The USN had a powerful screening force for their 6 old BBs.  CA x3, CL x5, DD x29, PT Boats x39.

 

Late in the war when Yamato was sent off to die, she at least had a screen of 1 CL and 8 DDs with her, and by the time of April 1945, the IJN was scraping the bottom of the barrel.  Yet they still sent Yamato with a screen.

 

In WoWS it's very hard to replicate that because more people play Battleships than they do Destroyers :Smile_trollface:

Yeah those early Raiding cruise's specially like Operation Berlin went to the Germans head, there over confidence cost them dearly.

cheers 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,392
[POP]
Members
2,839 posts
22,702 battles
12 minutes ago, ITZ_ACE_BABY said:

no counter play is allowed comrade you must rely on your trusty random battles team mates.

Well then they need to ad scuttles buttons if we need to rely on team play to defeat Subs 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,546
[O7]
Members
1,493 posts
10,811 battles
Just now, tm63au said:

Well then they need to ad scuttles buttons if we need to rely on team play to defeat Subs 

you have no faith in this player base? i would never doubt my excellent dd players, they can cap,spot and chase pings on map!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,392
[POP]
Members
2,839 posts
22,702 battles
8 minutes ago, ITZ_ACE_BABY said:

you have no faith in this player base? i would never doubt my excellent dd players, they can cap,spot and chase pings on map!

Just jesting, I've been on the short end of the stick by some of the best there is in both BB's and DDs as well as the types.

cheers 

Edited by tm63au
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,627
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,652 posts
14,715 battles

Historically I'm pretty sure Tirpitz had depth charges for a brief trial period, and I think maybe the Italian Litorrio class too. 

Those are the only ones I'm aware of.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,657
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,859 posts
15,754 battles

American BB and Cruisers during mid/late WW2 carried Kingfishers who could carry 2-4 depth charges under their wings. Though there's no record of them every being used in this role or sinking an enemy submarine. Kingfishers were mostly used for scouting and following the fall of shot from long range bombardment during invasions in the Pacific.:fish_book:

 

I'm pretty sure I read/saw somewhere the Hedgehog ASW system was also fitted on the British dido class?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,392
[POP]
Members
2,839 posts
22,702 battles
23 minutes ago, mofton said:

Historically I'm pretty sure Tirpitz had depth charges for a brief trial period, and I think maybe the Italian Litorrio class too. 

Those are the only ones I'm aware of.

Interesting info though if that's the case you can bet your last doubloon WG wont mount them on those ships. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,818
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
12,593 posts

Many battleships and cruisers of WWII had at least one spotter plane and some ships had up to eight of them. These planes could, and did, carry depth bombs.

Quote

Scouts could carry a pair of 325 pound depth bombs that could crack open submarines. This made them very dangerous on submarine patrols.

Planes from carriers also wreaked havoc on submarines. 

U-118 being attacked by planes from USS Bogue.

battle-of-the-Atlantic-2.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,666
[PVE]
Members
6,117 posts
22,432 battles
1 hour ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

In the real world, only morons like the Kriegsmarine liked to send capital ships virtually unescorted.

 

57 minutes ago, tm63au said:

Yeah those early Raiding cruise's specially like Operation Berlin went to the Germans head, there over confidence cost them dearly.

cheers 

(Sorry...none of this is related to your OP about ASWs).

Hitler was a landlubber & especially after the loss of the Bismarck would rather have stripped all the turrets off all the BBs (BCs?) & put them in land installations to protect possible raid points.

The whole reason the Channel Dash happened is because he threatened to do that to Gnies & Sharn if they didn't get them out of France (where they...along w/Eugen...kept getting air raided & damaged) & into the Northern waters where they might do some good...although w/in 2 weeks only Sharn ever saw action after the dash.

He did at least allow DD escorts for the Channel Dash (although I forget how many...but it was sufficient...only significant damage taken was from 2 mines).

He also predicted England wouldn't be able to scramble fast enough to stop the dash.

But it was more Hitler than the Kriegsmarine (they didn't like to go it alone) was the reason for lack of support ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,392
[POP]
Members
2,839 posts
22,702 battles
14 minutes ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

 

(Sorry...none of this is related to your OP about ASWs).

Hitler was a landlubber & especially after the loss of the Bismarck would rather have stripped all the turrets off all the BBs (BCs?) & put them in land installations to protect possible raid points.

The whole reason the Channel Dash happened is because he threatened to do that to Gnies & Sharn if they didn't get them out of France (where they...along w/Eugen...kept getting air raided & damaged) & into the Northern waters where they might do some good...although w/in 2 weeks only Sharn ever saw action after the dash.

He did at least allow DD escorts for the Channel Dash (although I forget how many...but it was sufficient...only significant damage taken was from 2 mines).

He also predicted England wouldn't be able to scramble fast enough to stop the dash.

But it was more Hitler than the Kriegsmarine (they didn't like to go it alone) was the reason for lack of support ships.

They didn't have ocean going fleet DD's which hamstrung operations into the Atlantic, your right in three aspects if they Ocean going DD's things might have been different and The Channel Dash was the best performed coordinated operation and Hitler was the downfall of many fruitful ideas the went wrong with his interference.

 Back to the main subject I think since there seems little in the way of concrete evidence that major capital ships had any direct ASW it may fall on the spotter planes of said ships which did carry ASW to be the BB / BC last line of defence or attack .

This will put players in a dilemma as to which way to go if they carry fighters to combat CV attacks, time will tell what WG has planned.

cheers          

Edited by tm63au

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,956
[IRNBN]
Members
3,347 posts
9,653 battles
3 hours ago, BladedPheonix said:

American BB and Cruisers during mid/late WW2 carried Kingfishers who could carry 2-4 depth charges under their wings. Though there's no record of them every being used in this role or sinking an enemy submarine. Kingfishers were mostly used for scouting and following the fall of shot from long range bombardment during invasions in the Pacific.

     True enough, but the main limiting factors were the time needed to ready and launch catapult planes (somewhat longer than a LMB click) and the need to stop to recover them (not a particularly brilliant idea in the midst of a gunnery duel).

     The biggest damage control lesson learned from the Savo Island debacle was that keeping fueled-up airplanes on surface ships expecting contact was a really, really bad idea. But hey, it's just an arcade game.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
769
[REVY]
Members
2,273 posts
12,190 battles
6 hours ago, tm63au said:

Is there any record of Battleship / BattleCruiser class ships being designed and armed the ASW even if they are not currently in game at the moment. 

I have tried to find information on whether any of these classes of ships dating back before WWI and past WWII were equip in some way shape or form with such weapons.

Particularly if any of the current in game ships ever did also if any that are not currently in game but may in the future.

So far no luck on this matter, however my library of books  is not big and so far searching the internet has failed to come up with anything.

regards  

 

 

Battleship/Battlecruiser-wise: No, none were designed or equipped to handle ASW.

The closest thing I can think of was more for torpedo defense , When the Iowas were re-activated in the 80s they got the AN/SLQ-25 Nixie.

 

On a side note, later when several Essex's were refitted as CVS, they had a bow mounted Sonar. The supercarriers JFK and America were also built with Sonar in mind (placement of the anchors) but it was only installed on one and then later removed.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,601
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,695 posts
7 hours ago, BladedPheonix said:

American BB and Cruisers during mid/late WW2 carried Kingfishers who could carry 2-4 depth charges under their wings. Though there's no record of them every being used in this role or sinking an enemy submarine. Kingfishers were mostly used for scouting and following the fall of shot from long range bombardment during invasions in the Pacific.:fish_book:

Maybe they were never actually used that way. 

Would put them on par with the use of submarines in the middle of visual-range gunbattles between surface ships. 

 

Seriously though, ships with catapults really need the "scout bomber" option for some ability to defend themselves from subs. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,627
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,652 posts
14,715 battles

Battleship scout aircraft could attack U-boats. For instance there's Warspite's float-Swordfish kill of U-64: https://uboat.net/boats/u64.htm

The American Kingfisher certainly had an ASW role though I'm not sure if any successes were scored by battleship launched ones, land-based Kingfishers did attack U-boats for example: https://uboat.net/boats/u176.htm

 

More generally it's a bit bizarre that some people are so heart-set on cruisers getting depth charges, which they historically did, but then never really managed to use successfully. The only cruiser kill of a submarine in WWII that I'm aware of was by ramming.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
649
[NUWES]
Members
3,120 posts
10,653 battles

 

9 hours ago, tm63au said:

Is there any record of Battleship / BattleCruiser class ships being designed and armed the ASW even if they are not currently in game at the moment. 

I have tried to find information on whether any of these classes of ships dating back before WWI and past WWII were equip in some way shape or form with such weapons.

Particularly if any of the current in game ships ever did also if any that are not currently in game but may in the future.

So far no luck on this matter, however my library of books  is not big and so far searching the internet has failed to come up with anything.

regards  

In addition to what others have said, I believe the surviving Kongos carried depth charges later in the war. The IJN also slapped some on the Unryu class carriers. Both of those were born out of desperation rather than utility. In the real world launching depth charges from a capital ship is largely useless. Capital ships don't have the agility or acceleration to run down a sub maneuvering underwater.  That's part of the reason why DD hunting is usually done by smaller and more maneuverable ships (DDs, DEs, sub chasers etc.) Also capital ships are too valuable to risk if the sub turns on them and sinks them, a la HMS Courageous. Courageous' experience notwithstanding, it is much safer and more reliable to use the ship's spotter aircraft to hunt subs rather than use a capital ship to drop depth charges. 

The game will probably do things differently, but in practice lots of nations tried putting depth charges on large cruisers, and BBs, but it was really a desperation measure. Even cruisers tended to lack the agility and specialized equipment for sub hunting although a lot of them carried depth charges at various times. You'll be hard pressed to find many examples of ships larger than DDs sinking subs in any way other than a convenient ram. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles
13 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

None that I can think of.

In the real world, only morons like the Kriegsmarine liked to send capital ships virtually unescorted.  Most everyone else dedicated some sort of screen for such expensive ships.

 

Even in the Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, where the only thing people talk about is the fight between Kirishima, South Dakota, Washington, people ignore there was a significant screening force.  This was right on the heels of the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal that saw heavy Allied losses (which also had a significant Cruiser and Destroyer presence).

Kirishima had with her 2 CLs, 2 CAs, DD x8.

Washington and South Dakota had a smaller screen but at least had 4 DDs with them.

 

In 1944 for the Battle of Surigao Strait or to be more exact, The Slaughter at Surigao Strait, it's often thought of as the last clash between Battleships and crossing of the t.  Still, there was a screening force, even for the late war IJN who were in bad shape.  The USN had a powerful screening force for their 6 old BBs.  CA x3, CL x5, DD x29, PT Boats x39.

 

Late in the war when Yamato was sent off to die, she at least had a screen of 1 CL and 8 DDs with her, and by the time of April 1945, the IJN was scraping the bottom of the barrel.  Yet they still sent Yamato with a screen.

 

In WoWS it's very hard to replicate that because more people play Battleships than they do Destroyers :Smile_trollface:

Well you can’t really blame the Germans that much considering Hitler dragged them into war long before the promised time frame that the Kriegsmarine had to rebuild their naval forces. And even then their capital ships were not being sunk by subs. Meanwhile in the Royal Navy which had plenty of ships...

Royal Navy Capital Ships sunk by U-Boats in WWII

2 Battleships

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Barham_(04)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Royal_Oak_(08)

3 Aircraft Carriers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Ark_Royal_(91)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Avenger_(D14)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Courageous_(50)

And there are assorted other cruisers, destroyers, corvettes, and other assorted ships that were sank by U-Boats. And this was just what U-Boats sank to give an example.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,601
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,695 posts

As a side note, none of those 5 named ships were sunk during a WOWS-context battle.  They were sunk by ambush while underway, or in port.  

And in some instances, the surface ships had detected the submarine on SONAR/ASDIC, but ignored the contacts for various reasons.  :Smile_sceptic:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,130
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,626 posts
4,984 battles

HMS Warspite's scout plane sank U-64 with a bomb.

 

As to the idea of adding a third type of plane for catapult equipped ships to choose from I give a damn solid "NO!".  Your ability to combat an entire ship type should not depend on your consumables choices.  No, add the depth bombs to the spotter and fighter consumables so that whatever you've chosen you can use it against submarines if needed.  The cooldown on these things is already absurdly long to be the sole ASW option.

Edited by Helstrem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,601
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,695 posts
8 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

HMS Warspite's scout plane sank U-64 with a bomb.

 

As to the idea of adding a third type of plane for catapult equipped ships to choose from I give a damn solid "NO!".  Your ability to combat an entire ship type should not depend on your consumables choices.  No, add the depth bombs to the spotter and fighter consumables so that whatever you've chosen you can use it against submarines if needed.  The cooldown on these things is already absurdly long to be the sole ASW option.

So your fighters and spotters would dive away from their assigned task and attack upon the first sighting of a submarine inside their patrol area?  

Suggesting "scout bombers" as an option was supposed to be something based on history and creating what seems like the least amount of strange coding for WG to slog through.  If there's a better idea than that, I'm not opposed to it, but understand that the people who've been suggesting "scout bombers" weren't trying to make it hard or strange. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
4,287 posts
6,522 battles
32 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

HMS Warspite's scout plane sank U-64 with a bomb.

 

As to the idea of adding a third type of plane for catapult equipped ships to choose from I give a damn solid "NO!".  Your ability to combat an entire ship type should not depend on your consumables choices.  No, add the depth bombs to the spotter and fighter consumables so that whatever you've chosen you can use it against submarines if needed.  The cooldown on these things is already absurdly long to be the sole ASW option.

There's really no need for it to be tied at all to the consumable. Just have it be essentially a third weapons type bound to the 3/4 key. Probably you would need to put a very restrictive max vision range and health on the planes to stop them from being effective as a scout, though even if it could scout I'd bet it wouldn't be very effective to take your ship out of the fight at length and leave it uncontrollable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,575
[WOLF3]
Members
26,963 posts
23,767 battles
2 hours ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Well you can’t really blame the Germans that much considering Hitler dragged them into war long before the promised time frame that the Kriegsmarine had to rebuild their naval forces. And even then their capital ships were not being sunk by subs. Meanwhile in the Royal Navy which had plenty of ships...

Royal Navy Capital Ships sunk by U-Boats in WWII

2 Battleships

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Barham_(04)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Royal_Oak_(08)

3 Aircraft Carriers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Ark_Royal_(91)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Avenger_(D14)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Courageous_(50)

And there are assorted other cruisers, destroyers, corvettes, and other assorted ships that were sank by U-Boats. And this was just what U-Boats sank to give an example.

 

You can't sink many German Capital Ships if there Germans didn't have much of any of them to begin with, most especially after Bismarck got sunk :Smile_teethhappy:  They were sitting in port like Tirpitz doing nothing, because if they came out they'd get spanked by the Royal Navy, and then later on, the Royal Navy and US Navy.  Scharnhorst went out to try and play and got smacked by Duke of York & Friends.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,348
[WOLFG]
Members
9,542 posts
8,473 battles

HMS Dreadnought had ASW.

I believe it was called a bow.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×