HMS Inflexible, the warship with the thickest armor ever

[Lert]

In 1876, the warship with the thickest armor ever was launched. Laid down in 1874 and commissioned in 1881, HMS Inflexible carried up to 1042mm (42") of armor, 610mm (24") of iron backed by 432mm (17") of teak.

 

Inflexible also arguably has the questionable distinction of being the ugliest warship ever built, with her strange a-symmetrical superstructure, so designed to try and give her awkward turrets a better firing angle.

 

This armor covered the citadel in a very early 'all-or-nothing' armor scheme. The heavily armored tub also contained the ship's engines and turrets, each carrying two 16" Armstrong rifles. The fore- and aft sections of the ship were unarmored, except for a 76mm thick armored deck, a little ways below the waterline. The theory behind this was that plunging fire wouldn't cause leaks. Though the ship was designed in such a way that even if the unarmored fore- and aft sections became waterlogged, the buoyancy in the armored tub would still be enough to keep her afloat.

 

 

 

The guns themselves weighed 80 tons each and were muzzle-loading. After each shot the turret would have to be traversed to a certain position and the guns depressed in order for them to be loaded:

 

 

 

These rifles could fire a 764kg (1684 lbs) shell at a muzzle velocity of 480 m/s (590 fps). This allowed them to penetrate up to 580mm (23") of wrought-iron armor at 910 m (1000 yards). I don't have any numbers regarding her ROF, but it couldn't have been much better than one salvo every 15 minutes, if that.

 

Inflexible late in her career, after her sailing rig was removed.

 

Her secondaries consisted of 6x 20-pounder breechloaders, but these were eventually replaced by 4" guns, eventually to be replaced yet again by 4.7" ones.

 

She was eventually scrapped in 1903.

[CombatBoss]

Those HE spamming cruisers would have a field day with this beast.

[Legendary_Typo]

Those HE spamming cruisers would have a field day with this beast.

 

If an angled Kutuzov absorbs my 155mm HE shells, surely 1,000mm of hull would also absorb my HE.

[GhostSwordsman]

The fore- and aft sections of the ship were unarmored, except for a 76mm thick armored deck, a little ways below the waterline.

 

So a Yamato could still lolpen this ship.

[715]

I did a quick read about this ship and it has a ram fitted to the front of it. Could you imagine this thing coming at you for a ram.

[Lert]

 

So a Yamato could still lolpen this ship.

 

The 42" armor sounds impressive, until you realize that it's wrought iron and teak. A Mikasa could probably lolpen Inflexible. But then, Inflexible could do serious damage to Mikasa too.

 

Could you imagine this thing coming at you for a ram.

 

At a whole 15 knots? I would just get out of the way.

[715]

At a whole 15 knots? I would just get out of the way.

 

That's what is funny about it. Poor thing would be giving it all she's got and you can just turn out of the way. 

[AquaSquirrel]

I almost wish there was a way to have ships like these in the game. They are so crazy looking!

[Lert]

She would technically fit within the game if WG did some math and converted the iron+teak armor thickness to equivalent armor steel thickness vs AP. However, with her slow speed, slow reload and awkward turret layout she wouldn't be fun to play.

[1nv4d3rZ1m]

I almost wish there was a way to have ships like these in the game. They are so crazy looking!

 

Maybe a special event or something like the 8-bit mode in tanks or the space mode we had in ships. A special game mode for a short amount of time with some unique ships that dont fit into the normal game and have some interesting play styles. 

[Rion12]

Egads.

 

Who was in charge of that thing's design?

 

They ought to be sacked. And then we'll sack the people responsible for sacking the designer. And we'll then sack the people responsible for sacking the people who sacked the designer. And so on.

[Cruiser_Maya]

The sad thing about Inflexible is that she actually represented a misstep for British warship designers. A few years prior, the Dutch had commissioned a tiny coastal defense turret ship named HMNLS Buffel (which you can still visit today). British naval architects, admiring Buffel's qualities, decided to up the ante with HMS Devastation, which essentially amounted to an enlarged Buffel with an extra turret. You can see in Devastation, despite the fact she was built in 1870, the clear lines of a very early predreadnought.

 

Unfortunately, shortly after Devastation's debut, the Italians - always innovative - launched the Caio Duilio class ships, which sported massive 17.7 inch guns which could only fire one round every FOUR MINUTES (can you imagine?), and featured turrets en echelon. Concerned because they perceived that their current designs amounted to inferior platforms (they weren't), the British copied the basic layout of the Duilios with Inflexible. The ships featured slightly smaller 16" weapons, but were otherwise clones of the Italian vessels. It wasn't until the Admiral class of 1887 that British naval design got back on track.

 

 

[Lert]

A few years prior, the Dutch had commissioned a tiny coastal defense turret ship named HMNLS Buffel.

 

 

A few months back I actually wrote a thread about Buffel. She still exists as a museum ship. Such a beauty~ Unlike the monstrosity that is Inflexible.

[Cruiser_Maya]

 

A few months back I actually wrote a thread about Buffel. She still exists as a museum ship. Such a beauty~ Unlike the monstrosity that is Inflexible.

 

Buffel was the first ocean-going capital ship to never record hoisting a sail, which makes her noteworthy enough.

[Lert]

She wasn't very good at that whole ocean-going thing though. Rolling a lot, taking on water, and after just one trip across the channel being confined to dutch coastal waters.

[ValkyrWarframe]

So that's why they called it Inflexible, because you could not flex it.

[Aivris]

She would technically fit within the game if WG did some math and converted the iron+teak armor thickness to equivalent armor steel thickness vs AP. However, with her slow speed, slow reload and awkward turret layout she wouldn't be fun to play.

With a reload time of one salvo every 15 minutes, it would make for one whole salvo every match. Stunning!

[Guest]

 

The 42" armor sounds impressive, until you realize that it's wrought iron and teak. A Mikasa could probably lolpen Inflexible. But then, Inflexible could do serious damage to Mikasa too.

 

 

At a whole 15 knots? I would just get out of the way.

 

Now you make me want to see a animated or ingame duel between the two, I'm sure the Mikasa would be the Superior Warship, and would likely be the one coming out on top, but how much damage would it take, and now that we know...how many Inflexibles would it take to sink a Yamato? :p. 

[Rion12]

 

Now you make me want to see a animated or ingame duel between the two, I'm sure the Mikasa would be the Superior Warship, and would likely be the one coming out on top, but how much damage would it take, and now that we know...how many Inflexibles would it take to sink a Yamato? :p. 

 

Seeing the penetration values on those guns...

 

I think we'd need about 100 Inflexibles. You'd need to dent the Yamato to death. 

[Cruiser_Maya]

 

Now you make me want to see a animated or ingame duel between the two, I'm sure the Mikasa would be the Superior Warship, and would likely be the one coming out on top, but how much damage would it take, and now that we know...how many Inflexibles would it take to sink a Yamato? :p. 

 

Near infinite. They'd have to fill the oceans and ram Yamato to do any damage. Or I suppose you could air-drop an Inflexible onto Yamato - that might sink it.

 

Also, there's no way that Inflexible could ever damage Mikasa - the latter, like Yamato, could use superior speed to stay out of range, and pound Inflexible at 6,000 yards. No nation had anything even resembling fire control when Inflexible was launched (and it was only in its infancy in 1905), so I doubt Inflexible's guns could even hit Mikasa, seeing as they'd be aiming on dead reckoning alone. 

[BlazerSparta]

I did a quick read about this ship and it has a ram fitted to the front of it. Could you imagine this thing coming at you for a ram.

 

[Lone_Starr]

So you're saying they would be using the exact aiming (dead reckoning) that WOWS is using for this entire game.....well for the guns anyway

[J30_Reinhardt]

Peeps needs to learn basic metallurgy.

/thread

[Vaidency]

 

how many Inflexibles would it take to sink a Yamato? :p. 

 

Let's see...Inflexible's displacement is about 11,000 tons, which is a bit less than 1/6 of Yamato's, and hitpoints are based on displacement so about 6 successful ram hits plus some incurred flood damage would do it.  The problem is Yamato is almost twice as fast as Inflexible, so successful ram hits would require surrounding it from multiple angles.  Inflexible is probably actually armored enough that Yamato's secondaries couldn't sink it, so only the main battery would pack enough punch.

 

So I'd say about 20 Inflexibles could sink the Yamato if they had it surrounded and it couldn't avoid being rammed 6 times.

 

The other option, of course, is HE rounds and fire damage.  At a rate of fire of about 4 per hour.

 

How's that for putting way too much thought into a stupid question?