Some minor notes: There are no photos of A-150 because it wasn't built, so Yamato and Musashi make up much of the imagery. Information surrounding the designs are hearsay, but are overall considered reliable.
Thanks. We all know this, but I have no problem with the Yamato/ Musashi imagery being used as while the final design for the A-150's is unknown, it might have most likely resembled a slightly larger Yamato-class battleship.
Thanks for the A-150 upload and some YAMATO/MUSASHI photos that I have never seen before. I imagine that had the battleship era continued, we may have seen some designs come out that would be the size of super-carriers.
Well, the United States had the funding and resources to do it. Every other major power put in their fair share however, because no navy saw the battleship as obsolete in 1939.
Japan wasn’t even remotely unique in building pointless new battleships in WWII. This is a sin every major power was guilty of. In fact, Japan actually built fewer battleships in WWII than most others (just the two Yamatos; all other Japanese battleships were WWI or 1920s vintage, not ships built for WWII as too often assumed).
For once, the IJN chose the practical route with their battleships, and instead of building an even more ludicrously large battleship to supersede Yamatoof her characteristics became known, they simply choose to not let Yamato take the field until after it was too late for her to give anything away by actually going into battle.
@@BHuang92 Montana > A-150 >>> H-class. (Yamato would probably be between Montana and the A-150 in spite of being the latter’s predecessor, due to more guns). Montana has the most main guns to bring to bear, and while the A-150 wouldn’t actually be significantly less accurate as long as visibility holds, the smaller number of main guns still makes it much harder for an A-150 to hit Montana than vice versa (given that naval gunnery isn’t like a sniper duel but more like an artillery engagement where the artillery emplacements can move). The H-class is just horribly designed, but what do you expect from the Kriegsmarine?
Montana would win due to: - more barrels, - much higher rate of fire, - better fire control. Not sure at what distance the 16“/40.6 cm shell could penetrate the A-150s armor belt, but it had sufficed to devastate the superstructure.
This ship was being built in secrecy because 1 yamato went missing being converted to a "air craft carrier" But I belive 510mm was going on a yamato shell
Hey Crosser: I'm just catching up on your videos and noticed the latest were Yamato linked, and was wondering in they were inspired by FRANKIEonPC piece two months ago titled "How the US sank the worlds largest battleship." It's quite a spectacular video that I guess he animated himself, and thought you would appreciate it because it dives into Japanese Naval design. He's actually a DayZ RUclipsr who was wildly popular, but took a long break and just randomly returned with a video inconceivably in your wheelhouse, and instantly knew I had to recommend it to you.
They are inspired by no one but my own interests. I don't watch ship related content on YT and don't keep up with other creators on the platform that cover the same field. Thanks for commenting.
After the Eastern Solomon Islands Campaign, it would have been on borrowed time. Its fate would have been similar to the Yamato or sitting in a harbor as a floating anti aircraft battery.
The difference between the 2 Axis paper ships and the Montana, is that the US would have been easily been able to build 6 of them had they wanted to. The plans were complete and the shipbuilding capacity was available. Germany didn't have a slip way big enough to construct the H-44. Japan probably could have built the A-150s but it would have taken years.
@@troygroomes104The British would have only needed to send commandos to sabotage the large shipyards capable of caring for these beast, then it would have no where to go and probably have a similar fate like tirpitz or bismarck.
@@sithlord66.12 send commandos into German cities like Kiel and Hamburg? 😆 dressed as Ss units maybe and speaking flawless German with no accent? And ID papers which are flawless? Dream on
The cost to build them would have also been staggeringly high. Yamato and Musashi were extremely expensive as they were and the only thing they achieved was becoming artificial reefs.
True, but like the tank shock phenomena that led to behemoths like the Maus Japan had no way of knowing what its potential enemies were working on. In the end they made the right decision and built carriers instead.
@@B52Stratofortress1 victims of their own fame? Japan ended up too scared to commit them when they could have made a difference at Guadalcanal for example, in case they lost them. And, having spent so many ships and so many lives to get Yamato into position off the landing beaches at Leyte Gulf Kurita suddenly started worrying about loosing men and ships and ran away.
@@katrinapaton5283 A lot of misconceptions there. The Yamatos were never famous prior to their sinkings, so the entire idea Japan didn’t want to lose them for propaganda value is utter nonsense (they only gained any propaganda value AFTER they had both been sunk and the war had ended). Keep in mind they were so secret that even their own crews were not told of their actual specs and that they were the only capital ships ever that didn’t have fancy commissioning ceremonies. The actual reason the Yamatos were held back was because Japan would only really have wasted even more fuel by trying to use them actively. They COULDN’T have made enough of a difference to make up for the expenditure during the Guadalcanal campaign (not to mention bringing capital ships into confined waters is risky; the Americans only did it because they ran out of cruisers, and the Japanese only really started bringing in the Kongos late in the campaign, which didn’t really work out for them in the end). Your understanding of Leyte Gulf is also based entirely on Morison’s traditional narrative which ignores many major details, such as the fact the Japanese were already behind schedule before the battle even started (the Americans had already pulled off the landings before the Japanese even sortied), the fact only half the American naval forces were lured away (because only Third Fleet was lured away; Seventh Fleet under Kinkaid was still holding the fort) meaning that the landing beaches were NOT left unprotected even if you leave out Taffy 3, and the fact Samar was far less one-sided than often assumed because the American air presence was both much more prevalent and better equipped than most secondary sources assume. It’s unlikely that Kurita would have been able to inflict any meaningful damage against the American forces during Leyte Gulf, not to mention that Yamato wasn’t really the critical part of that plan (it was Centre Force in general, not Yamato specifically; she was only really a part of the force because she happened to be available, not because the Japanese wanted her specifically to attack the landing beaches, which would have been pointless overkill and wasteful at any rate).
@@B52Stratofortress1 Actually Yamato and Musashi were less costly than building smaller battleships for the same amount of tonnage; the bottleneck Japan faced in naval construction was in the number of building slips and engine parts, and those are things determined by how many ships you build, not how big your ships are.
Even if they had built it, given how slow the rate of fire for such huge guns would have been, a Montana would probably been able to put more weight of shot down range. There reaches a point where bigger isn't better.
This Super-Yamato seems just as vulnerable to mass air attack as Yamato and Musashi were. Even with the added armour, you can still bomb the superstructure until the ship is just a floating hull with guns that are firing blind (because everyone top side is dead or dying).
That isn’t the biggest issue for battleships facing aircraft. The biggest issue is that a battleship (and ANY battleship) is only ever going to be a target in that situation because it has no way to hit back at the carrier launching those planes. No amount of defensive capability is ever going to fix that.
Untrue so much here, but like we never want only our ex’s lawyer to give evidence, but even concensus amongst our own historians, I suggest post war books by our SOI racing around hoping to find evidence before the Japs and Koreans incinerated all. Post war testing we alarmed that that Japanese Tyoe 88, we would call computer, optical targeting system guaranteed first salvo strike within visibility, 3 over horizon air or submarine spotting, something our admiral Lee was all about. Reel weapons ballistics armour testing engineers agree even a non-penetrating 18” Yamato shell kinetic energy alone would end my beloved Missouri or Iowa longer thinner all more so. While we were literally seaering and blaming each other the impossible number of successful torpedo strikes to ONE side and most modern bombs, Like Bismarck bs Hood, turns out we flukes 1/1000000 éxsct oerfect right angle st only moments the turrets opposing vulnerable inky because the magazine lift was also delivering more shells. Otherwise we would d taken a lot longer. Musashi we only recently found out, was less than 10 minutes from the shoal she wanted to ground herself on, unsinkable flak target, to be towed off or beached rather than lost in the night. She also took ‘impossible’ damage the retired admiral at pearling related to joking of classified jao photos showing she still found 16 knots with water between the mowsorit and A turret, ‘and the battleship submarine is born’ in the captions. They could be at least as good as us in fire and damage control. I’m a member of the Missouri Mission, support museum, relatives served on her under Adn Lee. No she was not a mistake. Just morais alone, not just like our Constitution, but how we feared every German tank be a tiger, has effect on its own, both ways, As for being obsolete, disagree. One thing Rundstedr and Rommel agreed on was they fears the RN battleship guns firing inland more than our total air superiority, Med and Normandy. The Japs same thing, our bbs we raised from Pearl invaluable island hopping. Fast or slow especially carrier strike groups the flak support a Nb could provide given a square mile was far far better than as many cruisers etc we could close up. We benefit a lot in accuracy from German and Italian accounts and records we have none from Japan and often racist about them. Had Kurita not disobeyed both his adc, and Yamato led the surface fkeet against our landing fleet, would’ve been catastrophic. As Admirak Lee, furious at Halsey write, they could stand off and couldn’t miss if they closed they eyes,. Our Pearl BBS raised would blow horribly along with our munition ships and oil tankers. At BEST, it would take us at least a year to rebuild the shipping, only a pittance was left to Brit’s land Indian Ocean. WORST case, Nimitz ‘our Dunkirk’ we’d sue for peace to save 3-400,000 men if ours, tanks, planes, vehicles,supplies. Hostage. Otherwise as even MacArthur whined, no govt would survive such a military disaster. Btw. We did have 18”tested, not viable. One barrel exploded killing observers. The Brit’s had 2 versions actually worked from ground. One slot longer but lesser range than Yamato, the other slot more punch. They also couldn’t mage a Nb wide enough even tests for Nelson clad only firing forward failed. They were emplaning 4 they had on concrete coastal invasion defense monitors but no confirmation there either. If weather allowed surface engagements, our engineers conceded even the kinetic energy alone even non-penetrating hit would knock out all our radar, communications and electronics as Adm Lee complained my own Missouri Solomon’s. But break even wider Missouri beside Iowa. Penetrating worse. While we now know we got Bismarck vs Hoid lucky 1 in million shot blowing the magazine ending her. Otherwise it would’ve taken us agonizing longer. At Pearl I got too see from ret adm relative photo of Musashi, literally from bowsprit to A turret under water, and yet. Sick uo ti 16 knots claimed. The caption joke below I’ll never forget, ‘and the battleship submarine is invented’. He explained how ‘impossible’ damage they took, against far more ands than sank 10x at Pearl. That finding Musadhi they realize she was inly 10 minutes from her goal of beaching, surimvuv undjinsbor tierd rauddd during night post battle. He was ever so angry at our ‘authors’ who diminished how good the enemy designs and all were. Disrespects what risks they took, what they went through all for ‘ignorant patriotic vanity’. Sadly Adm Lee, who turned out right, our 16” guns alone knocking out our own radar, electronics and communications. An issue the japs solved but we wouldn’t until the Korean War when battleships again invaluable lending shore bombardment. No like our Constitution, Yamato was worth the national and engineering ooryde. Yamamoto huge mistake according to our admirals not following through Mudawt and used against Washington and Missouri Guadalcanal. The sirigao invasion site even MacArtuhrr admitted sane Nsvt could very well have ebddd the war. Our Dunkirk but at best we make peace save 399,000 othewuss obliteration and captured equipment no govt could survive. Only Yamato guns and shells had chance of defeating her armour surface fight. My relative write it would’ve been horrifying slaughter. Our bbs only had he shells e en so no chance in hell and they couldn’t miss ‘blind’ we do packed in, they couldn’t even maneuver the ammunition and oil tankers try spread out, each one would be what Brits recall the Halifax explosion? WW1? The japs would be most honourable if they spared our men, we grateful. Halsey wasn’t sacked unfortunately Lee would die by wars end. No all humanity should take pride we can engineer such things, when we expand to other solar systems, such altitudes in engineering, metallurgy, architecture, targeting and fire control skills we can use in peace in future too! Think of them as reminders what potential we as a species are capable of, and be proud even in peace.
My research interests lie elsewhere (philosophy), history is just a minor interest of mine. Feel free to present your argument for the opposite.@@jamiejones7325
As Yamato and Musashi were completely useless and a gigantic waste of money and ressources, an ever bigger battleship would have been a real disaster for Japan.
Silly idea in reality, just like Yamato was. Better to put those resources and manpower into 3-4 separate vessels than one that is such a mission specific kind of vessel.
Japan didn’t have enough infrastructure to build 3-4 separate smaller battleships, because 3-4 battleships, or even 3-4 aircraft carriers, are going to take up 3-4 slipways to build no matter how small they are-and Japan couldn’t spare that many slipways unless they wanted to stop building other large ship construction projects. That’s the entire reason the superbattleship concept even became a thing in Japan: they couldn’t have built more smaller battleships to start with, so they were forced to go bigger so they could get more out of the smaller number of ships they could actually build. And smaller battleships wouldn’t be any better than larger battleships in WWII when they’re both going to be equally useless in the face of naval aviation.
Indeed. I wasn't talking about battleships though. Nor was I specifically talking about Japan or WW2 really. Just saying it's better to have 3-4 platforms instead of 1, if can be built for roughly the same cost. Obviously there's other considerations to be taken into account.@@bkjeong4302
Some minor notes:
There are no photos of A-150 because it wasn't built, so Yamato and Musashi make up much of the imagery.
Information surrounding the designs are hearsay, but are overall considered reliable.
Thanks. We all know this, but I have no problem with the Yamato/ Musashi imagery being used as while the final design for the A-150's is unknown, it might have most likely resembled a slightly larger Yamato-class battleship.
Thanks for the A-150 upload and some YAMATO/MUSASHI photos that I have never seen before. I imagine that had the battleship era continued, we may have seen some designs come out that would be the size of super-carriers.
Interesting that a country that helped make the battleship obsolete would invest so much in building them.
Well, the United States had the funding and resources to do it. Every other major power put in their fair share however, because no navy saw the battleship as obsolete in 1939.
Japan wasn’t even remotely unique in building pointless new battleships in WWII. This is a sin every major power was guilty of. In fact, Japan actually built fewer battleships in WWII than most others (just the two Yamatos; all other Japanese battleships were WWI or 1920s vintage, not ships built for WWII as too often assumed).
Yamato was the most successful battleship compared to anything by allies.
If midway never happened japan would of won the pacific
For once, the IJN chose the practical route with their battleships, and instead of building an even more ludicrously large battleship to supersede Yamatoof her characteristics became known, they simply choose to not let Yamato take the field until after it was too late for her to give anything away by actually going into battle.
Very interesting. I hadn't known about this project, despite being an avid nautical history buff. Thanks ! I learned something.
Great as usual, never dull.
If you ever discuss the type 13 radar, there is a good close up of Nagato's.
Take care, and all the best.
Thank you for sharing the photos and images, I have not seen many of them before.
Thank you also for sharing your research and narration.
The A-150 would have gone into service at the same time as the Skyraider
I am hyped, but for some reason I need to watch the Yamato videos as a prerequisite.
Interesting! Heard about it but not in much detail. Your channel always delivers :)
Can you also cover the US 18 inch guns
Fascinating. 👍🏻🏴🇺🇸
I wonder who would have won in a naval engagement, A-150 or Montana.
Better yet, how would the A-150 compare to Germany's H-44 super-battleship?
Or an A-150 vs 120 Skyraiders
@@BHuang92
Montana > A-150 >>> H-class. (Yamato would probably be between Montana and the A-150 in spite of being the latter’s predecessor, due to more guns).
Montana has the most main guns to bring to bear, and while the A-150 wouldn’t actually be significantly less accurate as long as visibility holds, the smaller number of main guns still makes it much harder for an A-150 to hit Montana than vice versa (given that naval gunnery isn’t like a sniper duel but more like an artillery engagement where the artillery emplacements can move).
The H-class is just horribly designed, but what do you expect from the Kriegsmarine?
Montana would win due to:
- more barrels,
- much higher rate of fire,
- better fire control.
Not sure at what distance the 16“/40.6 cm shell could penetrate the A-150s armor belt, but it had sufficed to devastate the superstructure.
I'd put my money on a swordfish
Very interesting! I can't imagine what the fire rate would've been.
This ship was being built in secrecy because 1 yamato went missing being converted to a "air craft carrier"
But I belive 510mm was going on a yamato shell
Very Nice
These pie-in-the-sky ships were a waste of time, effort, and money. Many of my DIY projects suffer the same fate.
How about Germany's H-class battleship proposals?
Hey Crosser: I'm just catching up on your videos and noticed the latest were Yamato linked, and was wondering in they were inspired by FRANKIEonPC piece two months ago titled "How the US sank the worlds largest battleship." It's quite a spectacular video that I guess he animated himself, and thought you would appreciate it because it dives into Japanese Naval design.
He's actually a DayZ RUclipsr who was wildly popular, but took a long break and just randomly returned with a video inconceivably in your wheelhouse, and instantly knew I had to recommend it to you.
They are inspired by no one but my own interests. I don't watch ship related content on YT and don't keep up with other creators on the platform that cover the same field. Thanks for commenting.
@@centralcrossing4732 Well, I hope you get a chance to see it.
After the Eastern Solomon Islands Campaign, it would have been on borrowed time. Its fate would have been similar to the Yamato or sitting in a harbor as a floating anti aircraft battery.
660mm, I believe, per Hans Lengerer and Lars Ahlberg's "The Yamato Class and Subsequent Planning"...
Oh... Shikishima or Satsuma on world of warships the blueprint for the 20in gun BB..
A-150 was the Japanese counter to the US Montana class and German H-41 through 44 class
The difference between the 2 Axis paper ships and the Montana, is that the US would have been easily been able to build 6 of them had they wanted to. The plans were complete and the shipbuilding capacity was available. Germany didn't have a slip way big enough to construct the H-44. Japan probably could have built the A-150s but it would have taken years.
@B52Stratofortress1 yep but the H-41 & h44 was they were easier to repair then the Montana class
@@troygroomes104The British would have only needed to send commandos to sabotage the large shipyards capable of caring for these beast, then it would have no where to go and probably have a similar fate like tirpitz or bismarck.
@sithlord66.12 what if the shipyards were in neutral countries , then the allies would have been in violation of a certain law of war
@@sithlord66.12 send commandos into German cities like Kiel and Hamburg? 😆 dressed as Ss units maybe and speaking flawless German with no accent? And ID papers which are flawless? Dream on
I suspect these would have been a downgrade on the Yamatos if built due to having fewer main guns. 18” guns were already more than enough.
The cost to build them would have also been staggeringly high. Yamato and Musashi were extremely expensive as they were and the only thing they achieved was becoming artificial reefs.
True, but like the tank shock phenomena that led to behemoths like the Maus Japan had no way of knowing what its potential enemies were working on. In the end they made the right decision and built carriers instead.
@@B52Stratofortress1 victims of their own fame? Japan ended up too scared to commit them when they could have made a difference at Guadalcanal for example, in case they lost them. And, having spent so many ships and so many lives to get Yamato into position off the landing beaches at Leyte Gulf Kurita suddenly started worrying about loosing men and ships and ran away.
@@katrinapaton5283
A lot of misconceptions there.
The Yamatos were never famous prior to their sinkings, so the entire idea Japan didn’t want to lose them for propaganda value is utter nonsense (they only gained any propaganda value AFTER they had both been sunk and the war had ended). Keep in mind they were so secret that even their own crews were not told of their actual specs and that they were the only capital ships ever that didn’t have fancy commissioning ceremonies.
The actual reason the Yamatos were held back was because Japan would only really have wasted even more fuel by trying to use them actively. They COULDN’T have made enough of a difference to make up for the expenditure during the Guadalcanal campaign (not to mention bringing capital ships into confined waters is risky; the Americans only did it because they ran out of cruisers, and the Japanese only really started bringing in the Kongos late in the campaign, which didn’t really work out for them in the end).
Your understanding of Leyte Gulf is also based entirely on Morison’s traditional narrative which ignores many major details, such as the fact the Japanese were already behind schedule before the battle even started (the Americans had already pulled off the landings before the Japanese even sortied), the fact only half the American naval forces were lured away (because only Third Fleet was lured away; Seventh Fleet under Kinkaid was still holding the fort) meaning that the landing beaches were NOT left unprotected even if you leave out Taffy 3, and the fact Samar was far less one-sided than often assumed because the American air presence was both much more prevalent and better equipped than most secondary sources assume. It’s unlikely that Kurita would have been able to inflict any meaningful damage against the American forces during Leyte Gulf, not to mention that Yamato wasn’t really the critical part of that plan (it was Centre Force in general, not Yamato specifically; she was only really a part of the force because she happened to be available, not because the Japanese wanted her specifically to attack the landing beaches, which would have been pointless overkill and wasteful at any rate).
@@B52Stratofortress1
Actually Yamato and Musashi were less costly than building smaller battleships for the same amount of tonnage; the bottleneck Japan faced in naval construction was in the number of building slips and engine parts, and those are things determined by how many ships you build, not how big your ships are.
46cm? Damn that's big
Finally someone who uses measures that i can understand
Even if they had built it, given how slow the rate of fire for such huge guns would have been, a Montana would probably been able to put more weight of shot down range.
There reaches a point where bigger isn't better.
Should just have used the third yamato hull
Bruh
Yamato's hull is too small to carry 51cm gun.
51 centimeters? Is that anything like a 20 inch gun?
20.1”
All the plans but no time no resources no budget and fewer fleet aux units for support! Doomed to design only and even that didn't survive long!
A-150 had her own name is ijn shikishima the yamato class
No point increasing turret armour with double plate.. just stick to yamato scale
Haha. N o
The Satsuma!
If they managed to built that thing, it would probably look like a unfinished Floating Battery or a massive target ship for the U.S navy at Bikini.
This Super-Yamato seems just as vulnerable to mass air attack as Yamato and Musashi were. Even with the added armour, you can still bomb the superstructure until the ship is just a floating hull with guns that are firing blind (because everyone top side is dead or dying).
That isn’t the biggest issue for battleships facing aircraft.
The biggest issue is that a battleship (and ANY battleship) is only ever going to be a target in that situation because it has no way to hit back at the carrier launching those planes. No amount of defensive capability is ever going to fix that.
Untrue so much here, but like we never want only our ex’s lawyer to give evidence, but even concensus amongst our own historians,
I suggest post war books by our SOI racing around hoping to find evidence before the Japs and Koreans incinerated all.
Post war testing we alarmed that that Japanese Tyoe 88, we would call computer, optical targeting system guaranteed first salvo strike within visibility, 3 over horizon air or submarine spotting, something our admiral Lee was all about.
Reel weapons ballistics armour testing engineers agree even a non-penetrating 18” Yamato shell kinetic energy alone would end my beloved Missouri or Iowa longer thinner all more so.
While we were literally seaering and blaming each other the impossible number of successful torpedo strikes to ONE side and most modern bombs,
Like Bismarck bs Hood, turns out we flukes 1/1000000 éxsct oerfect right angle st only moments the turrets opposing vulnerable inky because the magazine lift was also delivering more shells.
Otherwise we would d taken a lot longer.
Musashi we only recently found out, was less than 10 minutes from the shoal she wanted to ground herself on, unsinkable flak target, to be towed off or beached rather than lost in the night.
She also took ‘impossible’ damage the retired admiral at pearling related to joking of classified jao photos showing she still found 16 knots with water between the mowsorit and A turret, ‘and the battleship submarine is born’ in the captions.
They could be at least as good as us in fire and damage control.
I’m a member of the Missouri Mission, support museum, relatives served on her under Adn Lee.
No she was not a mistake. Just morais alone, not just like our Constitution, but how we feared every German tank be a tiger, has effect on its own, both ways,
As for being obsolete, disagree. One thing Rundstedr and Rommel agreed on was they fears the RN battleship guns firing inland more than our total air superiority, Med and Normandy.
The Japs same thing, our bbs we raised from Pearl invaluable island hopping.
Fast or slow especially carrier strike groups the flak support a Nb could provide given a square mile was far far better than as many cruisers etc we could close up.
We benefit a lot in accuracy from German and Italian accounts and records we have none from Japan and often racist about them.
Had Kurita not disobeyed both his adc, and Yamato led the surface fkeet against our landing fleet, would’ve been catastrophic.
As Admirak Lee, furious at Halsey write, they could stand off and couldn’t miss if they closed they eyes,.
Our Pearl BBS raised would blow horribly along with our munition ships and oil tankers.
At BEST, it would take us at least a year to rebuild the shipping, only a pittance was left to Brit’s land Indian Ocean.
WORST case, Nimitz ‘our Dunkirk’ we’d sue for peace to save 3-400,000 men if ours, tanks, planes, vehicles,supplies. Hostage. Otherwise as even MacArthur whined, no govt would survive such a military disaster.
Btw. We did have 18”tested, not viable. One barrel exploded killing observers.
The Brit’s had 2 versions actually worked from ground. One slot longer but lesser range than Yamato, the other slot more punch. They also couldn’t mage a Nb wide enough even tests for Nelson clad only firing forward failed. They were emplaning 4 they had on concrete coastal invasion defense monitors but no confirmation there either.
If weather allowed surface engagements, our engineers conceded even the kinetic energy alone even non-penetrating hit would knock out all our radar, communications and electronics as Adm Lee complained my own Missouri Solomon’s. But break even wider Missouri beside Iowa. Penetrating worse.
While we now know we got Bismarck vs Hoid lucky 1 in million shot blowing the magazine ending her. Otherwise it would’ve taken us agonizing longer.
At Pearl I got too see from ret adm relative photo of Musashi, literally from bowsprit to A turret under water, and yet. Sick uo ti 16 knots claimed.
The caption joke below I’ll never forget, ‘and the battleship submarine is invented’.
He explained how ‘impossible’ damage they took, against far more ands than sank 10x at Pearl. That finding Musadhi they realize she was inly 10 minutes from her goal of beaching, surimvuv undjinsbor tierd rauddd during night post battle.
He was ever so angry at our ‘authors’ who diminished how good the enemy designs and all were. Disrespects what risks they took, what they went through all for ‘ignorant patriotic vanity’.
Sadly Adm Lee, who turned out right, our 16” guns alone knocking out our own radar, electronics and communications. An issue the japs solved but we wouldn’t until the Korean War when battleships again invaluable lending shore bombardment.
No like our Constitution, Yamato was worth the national and engineering ooryde.
Yamamoto huge mistake according to our admirals not following through Mudawt and used against Washington and Missouri Guadalcanal.
The sirigao invasion site even MacArtuhrr admitted sane Nsvt could very well have ebddd the war. Our Dunkirk but at best we make peace save 399,000 othewuss obliteration and captured equipment no govt could survive.
Only Yamato guns and shells had chance of defeating her armour surface fight.
My relative write it would’ve been horrifying slaughter. Our bbs only had he shells e en so no chance in hell and they couldn’t miss ‘blind’ we do packed in, they couldn’t even maneuver the ammunition and oil tankers try spread out, each one would be what Brits recall the Halifax explosion? WW1?
The japs would be most honourable if they spared our men, we grateful.
Halsey wasn’t sacked unfortunately Lee would die by wars end.
No all humanity should take pride we can engineer such things, when we expand to other solar systems, such altitudes in engineering, metallurgy, architecture, targeting and fire control skills we can use in peace in future too!
Think of them as reminders what potential we as a species are capable of, and be proud even in peace.
Quite the opposite if you research your topic. Books better than internet.
My research interests lie elsewhere (philosophy), history is just a minor interest of mine. Feel free to present your argument for the opposite.@@jamiejones7325
Thats why the ships had big guns to reach air craft carriers.
As Yamato and Musashi were completely useless and a gigantic waste of money and ressources, an ever bigger battleship would have been a real disaster for Japan.
Yamatos waste of money and steel.
I agree. And Japan proved that at Pearl Harbor.
So were literally all battleship classes built in WWII.
Ahhh, but you never would have said that about any battleship when Yamato was laid down in 1937. Hindsight is 20/20, my friend.
As we’re all battleships once carriers were developed.
If built, would have made an excellent museum ship based in Long Beach, California.
Silly idea in reality, just like Yamato was. Better to put those resources and manpower into 3-4 separate vessels than one that is such a mission specific kind of vessel.
Japan didn’t have enough infrastructure to build 3-4 separate smaller battleships, because 3-4 battleships, or even 3-4 aircraft carriers, are going to take up 3-4 slipways to build no matter how small they are-and Japan couldn’t spare that many slipways unless they wanted to stop building other large ship construction projects. That’s the entire reason the superbattleship concept even became a thing in Japan: they couldn’t have built more smaller battleships to start with, so they were forced to go bigger so they could get more out of the smaller number of ships they could actually build.
And smaller battleships wouldn’t be any better than larger battleships in WWII when they’re both going to be equally useless in the face of naval aviation.
Indeed. I wasn't talking about battleships though. Nor was I specifically talking about Japan or WW2 really. Just saying it's better to have 3-4 platforms instead of 1, if can be built for roughly the same cost. Obviously there's other considerations to be taken into account.@@bkjeong4302
Shikishima
Montana vs A-150
Montana. Having twice as many main guns really makes a difference there.
@@bkjeong4302 Along with the most up-to-date radar directed fire control.
The winner is Essex class.
Japan was never remotely capable of building a ship like this