|
For comparison's sake, the 28cm/11" SK C/34 guns that the Kriegsmarine used fired a ~700-pound (315kg) HE shell containing up to 48 pounds (22kg) of high explosive. The 16"/50 guns used on the Iowa, in WW2, fired a 1900-pound (862kg) shell containing ~154 pounds (70kg) of high explosive. I don't know of any actual 20" guns to look up stats on, but I would guess they'd contain more than twice as much explosives as the 16", which is already triple what the 11" could use. Increasing shell size dramatically improves the amount of damage the shell can do. (And that's ignoring the improved armor penetration of a larger shell, which is arguably the bigger deal here) EDIT: there was a battle on the previous page
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:30 |
|
|
I just want a montana with four twin turrets each fitting two 18"/47 Mark A guns, which had US style superheavy shells.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 17:47
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:For comparison's sake, the 28cm/11" SK C/34 guns that the Kriegsmarine used fired a ~700-pound (315kg) HE shell containing up to 48 pounds (22kg) of high explosive. The 16"/50 guns used on the Iowa, in WW2, fired a 1900-pound (862kg) shell containing ~154 pounds (70kg) of high explosive. I don't know of any actual 20" guns to look up stats on, but I would guess they'd contain more than twice as much explosives as the 16", which is already triple what the 11" could use. Increasing shell size dramatically improves the amount of damage the shell can do. 80cm (31.5”) AP was 7100kg (15,700lbs) with 250kg (550lbs) of explosive filler. So what you can’t put it in a turret. Just point the whole ship at them!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 17:56
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I just want a montana with four twin turrets each fitting two 18"/47 Mark A guns, which had US style superheavy shells. Like this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 18:11
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:80cm (31.5”) AP was 7100kg (15,700lbs) with 250kg (550lbs) of explosive filler. Ah yes, that's what we need, a modern recreation of the USS Vesuvius.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 18:25
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I couldn't believe how one-sided this was. Nisshin still had half her magazine leftover. Clearly lots of guns was the way to go in the era when gunnery was poor, but with radars and whatnot...did a "main battleship tank" approach have any validity? Lots of frontal protection and one gigantic main gun? I imagine a lot of it comes down to what you want the battleship to do. If you're designing a heavy battleship killing battleship then it might make sense, but it would probably be less effective when fighting heavy cruisers or even lighter, older battleships, never mind providing shore bombardment (which is arguably what battleships did more than fighting other battleships).
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 18:42
|
|
|
In the sort of world where battleship development continues past the forties and aircraft carriers (and ASMs) do not exist, these big gun designs might actually have reason to evolve. If you have Montanas and Yamatos becoming common, then it makes sense to have something tailored to kill them. Precision fire from twenty inch or larger guns just might be that. Call them battleship destroyers, just to make naval terminology even more tangled. Though, if navies are doing that, then they’re also probably slapping even bigger torpedos on actual destroyers, or revisiting and updating the fleet submarine concept.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 20:58
|
|
|
Even if aircraft carriers and missiles don't exist, submarines going from ambush predators that can be readily outrun after one attack to hunter-killers is going to be a real wrench for battleship fleets. It cannot be overstated how critical the change is between a World Wars era diesal submarine restricted to <9 knots submerged and the 50s era Cold War submarines which readily hit 20+ knots even before they had reactors.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:16
|
|
|
Complications posted:Even if aircraft carriers and missiles don't exist, submarines going from ambush predators that can be readily outrun after one attack to hunter-killers is going to be a real wrench for battleship fleets. It cannot be overstated how critical the change is between a World Wars era diesal submarine restricted to <9 knots submerged and the 50s era Cold War submarines which readily hit 20+ knots even before they had reactors. The Type XXI scared the absolute gently caress out of everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:18
|
|
|
Plus homing or guided torpedoes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:30
|
|
|
Natty Ninefingers posted:In the sort of world where battleship development continues past the forties and aircraft carriers (and ASMs) do not exist, these big gun designs might actually have reason to evolve. Maybe in that universe we'd eventually actually get railguns
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:44
|
|
|
Okay hold on: what if the entire boat was a torpedo
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:54
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I couldn't believe how one-sided this was. Nisshin still had half her magazine leftover. Clearly lots of guns was the way to go in the era when gunnery was poor, but with radars and whatnot...did a "main battleship tank" approach have any validity? Lots of frontal protection and one gigantic main gun? If you strip out the frontal protection and actually figure out a practical/cost effective gun system... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 23:29
|
|
|
Benagain posted:Okay hold on: what if the entire boat was a torpedo didn't the japanese actually do that
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 23:34
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:didn't the japanese actually do that Italians at least had them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MT_explosive_motorboat
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 23:50
|
|
|
bewbies posted:For Intermission Battle 1 we feature the USS Nebraska and her 27 11" guns versus the Japanese battleship Nisshin, and her...two 20" guns. drat interesting fight! Pity that there wasn't a video, I'd have really liked to hear the sounds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 23:52
|
|
|
Benagain posted:Okay hold on: what if the entire boat was a torpedo The Russians are way ahead of you: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:didn't the japanese actually do that Yeah, the Kaiten suicide torpedoes. They weren't all that effective.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 02:10
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Yeah, the Kaiten suicide torpedoes. They weren't all that effective. None of the dedicated suicide craft seem to have been terribly effective - they weren't very good vehicles and their carrier vessels ended up being sitting ducks, both air and sea. Actual fighter planes packed with explosives had a far higher success rate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 03:59
|
|
|
Loxbourne posted:None of the dedicated suicide craft seem to have been terribly effective - they weren't very good vehicles and their carrier vessels ended up being sitting ducks, both air and sea. Actual fighter planes packed with explosives had a far higher success rate. 40 mph vs. 300 plus is huge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 04:21
|
|
|
Infidelicious posted:40 mph vs. 300 plus is huge. Also a matter of sending several hundred against the target area, as opposed to like 5 (of which several might not even reach the area). And ironically, as much damage as kamikazes caused, one of (the?) worst hits on a major combat ship at the end of the war was still done by a normal plane dropping a bomb and then leaving. I'm referring to USS Franklin here, where a random Judy just appeared out of nowhere, dropped a two bombs on it, and zipped off back into the sky.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 05:09
|
|
|
Biffmotron posted:I might get banned for insufficient love of Big Guns, but I recall an interwar debate about the best type of cruiser, and I’d like to see a match up between equal tonnage of 10k heavy cruisers like the County class, and 6k light cruisers like the Omaha class. Get the last word on lots of botes vs big botes. It's very hard to build light enough treaty cruisers because if you pick 8" guns it forces you to have 3" of belt armor
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 15:54
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:I'm actually not that surprised that the bote that could damage the other bote won. concur, you have to set Nebraska to shoot HE
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 15:57
|
|
|
For our second intermission battle, we bring you a recreation of the brutal Japanese victory at First Savo Island. The first naval confrontation of what would become the Guadalcanal Campaign, and one of the largest and most decisive surface engagements of the entire Pacific war, Savo Island was more or less a complete depantsing of the US Navy in a way not equalled before or since. Overconfident/incompetent/ill-prepared/unlucky allied commanders were introduced to the lethal Type 93 torpedo and Japanese skill at nightfighting by losing a big chunk of the Pacific Fleet's heavy cruiser strength. The Japanese sank 4 CAs and seriously damaged a fifth, while shutting out the allied fleet. We'll give the USN a chance to redeem itself. Four New Orleans Class CAs will take on four Aoba Class CAs at a distance of 30km, in good weather conditions, in daytime. No surprise attacks, no equipment failures, no intelligence gaps...just a straight up cruiser shootout.  My prediction here is that the USN does pretty well. NOs are fast, well-protected for their class, and have a lot of guns. Aobas have much thinner armor and fewer guns, but those Long Lances are unbelievably nasty...anything hit by them is going to be pretty hosed up. NOs are fast and maneuverable though, and will be very tough to hit in daylight. That said, CAs from this era are really rather undergunned for their size and armor (as usual, a treaty-related thing). Even with very good gunnery, I think they're going to struggle a bit to actually sink anything with gunfire...unless they hit a loaded torpedo launcher, in which case, lol. My official pre-fight prediction is the Japanese ships are all badly damaged topside but survive, and the NOs are mostly intact having taken much less shellfire. The AI is quite good at dodging torpedoes, and I think the IJN will struggle to score hits without exposing themselves to a whole lot of gunfire.  NOs were regarded as some of the prettiest ships of the era, and for good reason. They look like little battleships.  IJN cruiser design was a lot more...creative? And very much hit or miss, historically.  The IJN configures with three ships in the battle line (Kinpu, Takao, and Kaikoma) with their sister Aoba acting as a screen or something.  USN sails in a smart looking battle line. Here we see the Brooklyn, the Washington, the Bridgeport, and the New Orleans.  The 8" guns on each have similar range, though the NOs have much better radar and far more guns. Each side opens up at near max range, and mostly misses.  Aoba as a screen or something gets way far away from her siblings and very close to the USN line. She starts taking a lot of gunfire from all four American ships.  Aoba takes a beating and catches fire, but doesn't suffer any crippling damage.  Hey, that's a cool looking maneuver, I wonder why they're doing that....  Holy poo poo, already?? We're still a solid 15km apart! I think this shot was from Aoba, who was a bit closer.  This salvo misses by a mile. Almost literally.  What looked like a sharp maneuver at first very quickly descends into chaos. This is bad for a number of reasons: they're less able to maneuver, their own gunnery is thrown off, and they're now a pretty concentrated target.  They're still targeting Aoba, and she's taking a lot of hits. I'm a bit surprised that she hasn't lost more systems...the Aoba class armor is not very thick...and not even there in some cases.  It takes the Americans a bit to get their formation back, but they do eventually. Despite the crazy maneuvering, they're absolutely dominating the gun battle: Aoba is getting hammered, while no American ship has taken anything but superficial damage.  Aoba finally takes serious damage: her unarmored con and all fire control is wiped out. Her guns are now essentially useless, but she's still doing fine down below.  This happened so quickly I didn't even notice it. I saw a fire on Brooklyn, and thought it strange as she wasn't taking gunfire. Turns out, she ate a Long Lance and is very seriously damaged. She has massive flooding, engine damage, rudder damage, and a fire that is quickly raging out of control.  I really didn't think the damage was fatal, but..... ...and just like that, the US is down a cruiser.  This one, I saw. Bridgeport was coming out of an evasive turn, and this torpedo was just right on the dot.  Bridgeport eats it amidships. She takes it like a champ...the damage is severe, but she does not sink, and she's still able to fight and fire even though her speed is now reduced to only 8 kts.  New Orleans and Washington are now trying so hard to evade torpedoes that...this happens.  THUD. I feel like this collision in real life might've claimed both ships, but friendly ramming damage is not modeled. We fight on!  Bridgeport is now nearly dead in the water and listing badly, but she's still very bravely doing what she can.  Another torpedo salvo brackets the sinking Brooklyn. Washington and New Orleans slide away from it safely. The Aobas fire 4-torpedo broadsides, so this is a shot from two ships simultaneously.  Washington turns so hard she nearly does a complete 360 and puts herself right back in front of the torpedo spread. This one probably took some paint off her bow, but it doesn't detonate.  Bridgeport meanwhile is pretty much stationary and non-maneuvering, and is an easy torpedo target. She took the first one and survived, but two Long Lances is too much for any cruiser (probably).  Bridgeport sinks. 2-0 IJN.  As I was watching Bridgeport sinking, this happened again. This might be even more embarrassing for the USN than the actual battle was.  ALRIGHT. SO. We've lost two cruisers, but the NOs are still good shooters, both NO and Washington are in like-new condition, the IJN battle line is fairly close, and they're done shooting torpedoes for a while. If we can get some good gun hits in, we can make this thing a lot closer. Aoba, remember, can't really shoot anything, so the odds in a guns battle are really pretty even, maybe even in the USN's favor. As of now, we've seen two torpedo salvoes from the IJN fleet. The first was at extreme long range and missed by a mile, though it caused a lot of disruption/confusion among the American ships. They reloaded, and fired the second at 12-15km. This was what produced the three hits that sank two American CAs. They're now reloading again, which takes a LONG time.  The USN targets Kinpu...and hits one of her torpedo launchers (the one on her port side...somehow?). It does not blow up though, and Kinpu is the Luckiest Ship on Earth for today.  After an extended and largely ineffective gun battle, Japanese torpedoes start flying in again. I guess this is like a twinpedo.  Washington and New Orleans have to start jinking and jiving again to avoid the spreads.  Goddamn that was close.  Washington won't be so lucky this time. She turns violently but...  THUD.  Washington is very badly damaged, but she does not sink. She even continues fighting fairly effectively despite the fires and flooding.  Gunfire on the Japanese ships is finally starting to take a toll. Nearly all have lost a turret, and they're starting to suffer some severe topside damage.  I don't know how we got like this, but it seems suboptimal.  And then out of NOWHERE, Takao's torpedo launcher is hit, and it detonates. She's "hit" with four full torpedo blasts and sinks almost instantly.  Goddamn, seriously? This is still a part of the third salvo...  Nice dodge, New Orleans.  I'd completely forgotten about Washington. She's more or less dead in the water, and the IJN caught up to her. To her credit, she's absolutely ripping into Aoba at close range despite her heavy damage.  Aoba responds as a Japanese cruiser should. 3-1, IJN.  New Orleans has clearly had enough and is trying to escape. She extends the range and waggles back and forth to throw off torpedo aim. I 100% thought she was away and was about to end the battle, when...  YOU ARE loving KIDDING ME  The torpedo hit didn't sink her, but it crippled her. We had to wait for the IJN to catch up and sink her with gunfire, which they did...eventually. They're finally out of torpedoes.  Well...at least they sank a Japanese cruiser this time. Holy poo poo. The bottom line is 8" guns struggled to land really killer blows on both sides...they just don't have the hitting power to get through even relatively light belt armor. The IJN's torpedo attacks were obviously incredibly effective, made moreso by the fact they were able to get in relatively close without dying. My only question is the torpedo reload sequence -- I know some IJN ships had ready torpedo reloads for their 93s, but others could not do it during combat. They fired a total of four salvoes of torpedoes, and while it takes FOREVER in-game to reload the launchers, I'm not sure if that was a capability they had historically. Either way, this was not at all how I thought this one would go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 19:17
|
|
|
Jesus those torpedo salvos 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 19:30
|
|
|
Holy poo poo. What a slaughter. Hell, give the IJN their lost boat back too, because the Americans got away with those two friendly collisions. Long Lances are incredibly badass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
Dang, just like in the real life long lance torpedoes are no joke. I do wonder what would happen if you put them in a closer range or 15km. Would the US gunnery win out or would it just Torpedo Hell part II.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
TWO friendly rammings, drat. And those Long Lances are absolute beasts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 20:01
|
|
|
loving hell, those Long Lances.  I’m seriously wondering about treaty cruiser armor belts managing to keep out 8-in shells, though. Even at 20km+, an 8-inch shell should easily be able to overmatch the 3-inch belt the Aobas had (especially if it’s a later 335-lb superheavy shell, as opposed to the standard 260-lb shell—I forget which ones the Americans had). The New Orleans are tougher customers, but even then their belt, which varied from 3in to 5in, would have had a very tough time against Japanese 8-inch shellfire at anything closer than 20km. Indeed, one thing most treaty cruisers shared in common was vulnerability to heavy cruiser guns. Rare was the treaty cruiser that could reliably keep out 8in at any kind of range. I think the American Wichita, the Italian Zara, and the Treaty-busting Japanese Mogamis and Tones had that kind of protection, and…that was pretty much it. Good resource on shell penetrations against different types of armor, by the way. I believe Nathan Okun’s work is still considered the reference by the naval researcher community: http://www.navweaps.com/index_nathan/Penetration_index.php
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 20:08
|
|
|
I ran a WNT Cruiser thunderdome in parallel to this which I haven't posted for a variety of reasons, but two lessons, reinforced by this fight: 1) It's hard to kill a CA with 8" guns, even with weak 1" armor plate on turrets. I think flash fire chances are a lot lower compared to earlier eras and that helps survivability. I also think there are issues with the penetration model in the game since treaty CAs were not proof against their own guns. 2) Torpedoes are extremely effective. Designs without torpedoes tended to get trashed by designs that did, and most fights were decided by success/failure at landing torp salvos. 2b) oxygen fueled torps are a cheat code
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 20:18
|
|
|
The general impression I get from this game is ships are too tough, guns are not as powerful as they should be and for that matter neither are torpedoes, it's just that with torpedoes they are so powerful anyway they're often enough to get the kill.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 20:25
|
|
|
bibliosabreur posted:loving hell, those Long Lances. This is good info -- for reference, the game lists penetration for the US 8" gun as 10.8" at 10km and the IJN gun as 11.1". In other words, unless it hits at some extreme angle it is going through the armor at any range out to the max (which I think is around 18km). The Aobas definitely lost turrets by the handful and the damage done to Aoba herself would've been pretty gnarly. Like...her bridge was probably pretty gross to clean out. I think the issue is the 8" guns don't have a lot of pop to them. I don't know what their HE loads were, but considering the size of these ships and how well compartmentalized they typically were I can imagine it might've been a challenge to really generate the kind of catastrophic structural damage needed to really cripple a warship. Systems were definitely vulnerable (and the IJN ships were pretty beat up afterwards from this engagement), but none were anywhere close to sinking. They were probably fortunate they didn't have a flash fire or ammo detonation though. That said in thinking about this I think maybe the toughest part from a realism perspective is reloading the torpedo launchers while under fire. I don't remember if they were close enough to engage with their secondary batteries, but even with just 8" shells all over the life expectancy of a torpedo crew on the deck had to be pretty...low. I have no idea what the IJNs doctrine was for this sort of thing, but I do recall them retreating from several engagements after having fired their torpedoes. Also the torpedoes might've been less effective had some destroyers with fancy sonars been in the vicinity. I *think* ships can share torpedo threat information and having more advanced warning might've made it a bit more survivable. bewbies fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Jan 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 20:31
|
|
|
The toughest part from a realism perspective is the cruisers boinging off each other like superballs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 20:51
|
|
|
Well, that was a slaughter. And now I’m looking forward to the Katakami’s debut even more.  (A lucky shot will detonate her torpedoes from extreme range, you watch.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 21:26
|
|
|
I just want to make the point that the loss of all 5 ships can be credited to the long lances.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 22:14
|
|
|
A true superweapon, responsible for 5 out of 4 enemy kills.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 22:15
|
|
|
bewbies posted:My only question is the torpedo reload sequence -- I know some IJN ships had ready torpedo reloads for their 93s, but others could not do it during combat. They fired a total of four salvoes of torpedoes, and while it takes FOREVER in-game to reload the launchers, I'm not sure if that was a capability they had historically. See here for details and pictures. Fig 3 shows the rear side of a launcher and the access doors that would be opened to reload tubes. Fig 11 shows the track for unitized reloads Fig 12 shows unitized reloads stacked up Fig 13 shows a unitized reload box partially opened According to the commission, peacetime perfect conditions were 3 minutes for a complete reload of a Type 92 mount. Practical cycle times were more like 20-30 minutes and they were more labor intensive. I bet it would be pretty unpleasant to do with all the shooting going on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 22:35
|
|
|
I'm not even sure deck torpedoes can explode or mag detonation at the moment. There are some issues imo with small and medium guns in the damage model, they just don't do enough damage even when they penetrate. Also fires probably too easy to put out and don't kill enough crew or degrade fighting capability.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 23:03
|
|
|
bibliosabreur posted:loving hell, those Long Lances. I think the New Orleans-class still used the 260lb shell, with Wichita being the first ship they gave the newer 8" shells to and the Baltimore-class being the first actual class to get them, but I'm not 100% certain on that. But yeah, the armor was absolutely too effective on both sides against even the standard weight AP shells. Still fun to watch the absurdity of all those Long Lances flying around though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2022 02:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:30 |
|
|
bewbies posted:Also the torpedoes might've been less effective had some destroyers with fancy sonars been in the vicinity. I *think* ships can share torpedo threat information and having more advanced warning might've made it a bit more survivable. The problem with that is that maneuvering at high speed and lots of loud gunfire in the background tends to seriously mess with trying to hear anything on your sonar set.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2022 02:18
|
|