Battleship of your heart

World War II General WWII Discussion
#61

Salutations,
This topic will always open numerous candidates for this honour. All of the names forwarded have their rightful place in the annals of gallantry. As an objective opinion, The Iowas are widely accepted as the finest class of battleships ever built by any nation, combining an excellent combination of speed, armoured protection and firepower. By direct comparison, our King George V class were blighted by several design shortcomings, all derived from the fact that they were designed to comply with the Washington treaty limitations, the quadruple A and Y 14" turrets were highly complex and as a result the instances of jams blighted these ships throughout their fighting career, During the final action with the Bismarck, the KGV gunnery efficiency was below 30% for extended periods. Looking at the Bismarck and Tirpitz, these excellent ships were built regardless of cost and presented the Royal Navy with a significant problem. Their armoured protection was so effective, that it is estimated that the Bismarck withstood in excess of 240 hits between 6 and 16" during the final action with the home seas fleet, the majority of which were at almost point blank range. The Yamato and Musashi super heavies were incredible vessels and possessed more firepower and armoured protection than any other Battleship afloat, but the extreme cost and effort that it took to produce these ships was far out of proportion to the strategic value that they gave the Japanese nation. My personal favourite warship will always be the Warspite as she was in the thick of fighting throughout her operational career. One earlier correspondent stated that she presented the greatest value to our nation, I cannot agree enough of this appraisal. But as a purely objective view, the Iowas, with their excellent combination of fighting characteristics, wonderful sleek lines and their long fighting careers probably represent the pinnacle of Battleship design. To answer another point on a previous post on the Warspite, there was a national petition to preserve her, but two factors forced the decision to send her to the breaker’s yard : a, She was in such a poor state after her battle damage, the cost to repair the outer hull would have been prohibitive, and b, The scrap value at such a time when the Nation was virtually bankrupt. As I have already stated however, fate (or the spirit of the ship as I prefer to belive) prevented her intended fate on the yard on Faslane. An appropriate epitaph would have been for one of her 15" guns to have been placed on display outside the Imperial War Museum. As it is, both of the guns are from “R” Class battleships (Ramilles and Royal Sovereign I think)

May I apologise for the errors in my previous post, the topic is one that I am particularly passionate about, my fingers were going so fast that I did not relaise that I had made so many errors!!. I hope that my testimony has proved of some interest.

Kind Regards,
Greycap Leader

#62

Excuse me my friend, but you miss a large fleet, the French fleet, that of my country without being chauvinistic, it was at that time one of the most powerful fleets, not by the number of its ships, but their share of modernities, Indeed if it had been a fight between Bismark and Dunkirk example, the advantage was definitely on the French side, the power of the pieces of French ships of the time though of lesser caliber than their foreign counterparts, was the fact of ammunition that penetrated the shields above the other and having a real focused much higher.
For me this remains the Jean Bart, which remains the finest cuirrasé I know. I had the chance to see him as a child to its home port of Toulon.
Sincerely Fred

#63

Dunkerque v Bismark at Denmark Strait would not have been an equal fight. Dunkerque was not designed to take on a modern battleship her mission was to hunt down and kill the panzerschiffe commerce raiders and to fight the Italian Conte di Cavor modernised dreadnoughts.

Dunkerque had relatively thin vertical 225mm armour and thin deck armour with not much coverage though her turrets were very well protected. Bismarks armour would be immune to Dunkerques guns in a zone from 10,000 to approx 30,000 metres but her 15 inch guns would be able to penetrate Dunkerques belt and deck armour at all battle ranges. All Bismark would have to do would be to close with Dunkerque get inside the range where the Dunkerques 330mm guns could theoretically penetrate her deck armour with plunging fire and stay at least 10,000 metres away then pound her to scrap.

Dunkerque was not a faulty design she just wasnt designed to go toe to toe with a battleship that outweighed her by 15,000 tons. Even Scharnhorst or Gneisenau would on balance outmatch the Dunkerque but probably not by much.

Jean Bart or Richlieu would have been a better match but even then Bismark probably had the upper hand.

#64

Such was the power of the Bismarck class of battleship, a covering force of at least two KGV class were on permanent station at Scapa Flow to cover the Tirpitz whilst she was at anchor in Norway. Fact is that no British or French Battleship could have successfully engaged the Tirpitz on a one to one fight. The only significant advantage which the RN could bring to bear was the advent of centrimetric gunlaying radar, which the USN also used to significant effect. During the Battle of the North Cape, when the Duke of York engaged the Scharnhorst in 20 foot pitching seas, two of her 14" shells found the target from her first broadside having located the target with her radar.

Kind Regards,
Greycap Leader

#65

Like the carrier Enterprise, the scrapped that one to… why do they destory so much history? Do they want to repeat it?

Deaf

#66

Economics,these gallant leviathans costs tons of money to preserve and with today’s fiscal situation communities and goverments just don’t have that kind of money to fund such operations.Add to this the fact that the educational systems just don’t teach history as it should be taught.Young people today have little intrest and knowledge in the past and the older folks that used to relay and convey this knowledge and used to take their kids and grand kids to visit these living peices of history are fast becoming lost to age and time.When I was a kid it was the coolest thing in the world to us but now,if it ain’t at the mall or prime time TV,who cares.

#67

Absolutely, The Big E fought valiantly throughout the Pacific theatre, a real thorn in the side of the Japanese. Where carriers took the place of the battleship of the most important units of any battlefleet, as it is today. I understand that over 20 Franklin class 32,000tn fleet carriers were built in 3 years (I think that the Intrepid is one of this class), it is a shame that the Enterprise, with such illustrious Battle Honours as Midway, Santa Cruz, Guadalcanal and Okinawa,the most decorated ship in the USN, the Enterprise should have been preserved. Only a direct hit from a Kamikaze off Okinawa prevented her from serving throughout the entire Pacific war.

There can be no finer epitaph to a valiant ship and the brave sailors and airmen who served on her.

Kind Regards,
Greycap Leader

#68

No offense, but there was no such thing as a “Franklin class carrier.”

The Franklin CV-13, Intrepid CV-11, and all 22 of their sisters and near-sisters which were eventually commissioned, were known as Essex-class carriers after the lead ship of that class. The Essex CV-9, was laid down in April, 1941, and commissioned December 31, 1942.

The Enterprise CV-6, was a Yorktown-class carrier and was laid down in July, 1934, and commissioned in May, 1938.

#69

No offence taken, thankyou for the correction. I am a keen student of the pacific theatre, but by no means is it my speciality. I still find it amazing that over 20 fleet carriers could be built and commissioned in 4 years. Admiral Yamamoto was correct when he said that “I fear that we have awoken a sleeping giant”, when he referred to the immense industrial might in the USA. By far it was the Aircraft Carrier which proved to be the most important strategic element in naval warfare in WW2.

Kind regards,
Greycap Leader

#70

Actually, it’s not really amazing, but the reasons that the USN was able to build so many large aircraft carriers so quickly have all but been ignored by historians. The conventional wisdom is that the loss of the old battleships at Pearl Harbor forced the “Gun Club” Admirals to rely on the few aircraft carriers for the Navy’s offensive punch in the Pacific; this is not entirely true.

The truth is that as early as 1938, the USN planned on building up a large fleet of fast aircraft carriers to to use as the Navy’s main striking force. That was the year that the Iowa-class BB’s were designed. Their design incorporated a speed of 33 knots which was very costly (in terms of other desirable features), but necessary, if the Iowa-class ships were to escort carrier task forces. Speed was an absolutely top priority in ships operating with carriers, as carriers needed speed to launch their aircraft. Battleships, on the other hand did not need more than about 28 knots to be competitive with other fast battleships.

Moreover, when the original 13 Essex-class carriers were ordered in July and September, 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor, the Navy gave the construction of these vessels absolute top priority in funds, materials, labor, and yard space to insure that they would be built quickly. This resulted in the unheard of average building time of 18 months; some were built in as little as 14 months. Contrast that with pre-war American carriers which averaged more than 40 months to build, and Japanese carriers which also took around 40 months to build even in time of war.

Additionally, in mid-1939, the US Navy began ramping up it’s pilot training facilities to produce the large numbers of naval aviators which would be needed in a carrier-centric navy. My father was fortuitous enough to enlist in the Navy in 1938 and graduated from pilot training in 1940, subsequently serving on the Ranger CV-4 and the Enterprise CV-6 as an SBD pilot.

It may be that the historians are correct when they assert that the USN was simply fortunate in making these decisions at random, but designing fast battleships with the speed to escort carriers, giving top priority to construction of aircraft carriers so they could be built in less than half the normal time, and training large numbers of pilots that just might be needed, all several years before Pearl Harbor, is just too much of a coincidence to ignore.

#71

Question? Is this the BB thread or the CV thread…

#72

It’s a battleship thread.

And we’re discussing the historical demise of the battleship in the United States Navy.

#73

Its got to be the Bismarck for me.The greatest battleship ever.

#74

The Bismarck and the Tirpitz were magnificent warships, far superior to anything that the RN could deploy on a one to one basis. Fact is though that the Bismarck was doomed by one hit by the Prince of Wales during the engagement in the Denmark strait. Prince of Wales struck the Bismarck forward on her bows, denying her of over a 1000t of fuel oil. she was also low in the bows having shipped in seawater through the damaged section. It was this factor that drove Lutjens to change his operational sortie in to the north atlantic with the Prinz Eugen and to put in to for repairs at the French port of St Nazaire. The RAF Catalina that located the Bismarck heading for port was in fact piloted by an American, as we did not have sufficient trained pilots for the Catalina at that time. The judgement was taken that if the aircraft was shot down, it would have been unlikely if the crew would have been captured or even survived. This is significant though as the US were still officially neutral at this time. Following the air strikes from the swordfish from the Ark Royal, one torpedo struck and jammed her rudder 15 degrees to port. The persuing force of the Home seas fleet (King George V, Rodney, Sheffield, Dorsetshire etc) commanded by Admiral Tovey made the decision to alter course away from the Bismarck in order that upon engagement the following morning, the sun would rise behind her thereby increasing gunnery accuracy. Whereas Lancelot Holland (commander of HMS Hood) had denied John Leach any freedom of manoeuvre during the Denmark strait engagement, John Tovey allowed Dalrymple-Hamilton (commander of HMS Rodney) complete freedom of movement. Dalrymple-Hamilton became the first RN commander to leave the line of battle during an engagement since Horatio Nelson at the Battle of Cape St Vincent in 1797. The Bismarck was coming under considerable fire from all of the major units during this phase, the Rodney blew the Bismarck’s “A” turret clean over the side, wrecking both forward 15" mountings. The punishing fire had to be persisted with as she was still under way and firing with her aft guns. Tovey said " Can someone get my Darts, perhaps I can sink her with those". Bismarck had remained afloat after a considerable time, with in excess of 240 hits between 6" and 16", Tovey ordered the Dorsetshire to close and attack with torpedoes, at least two were launched from each side. and it cannot be stated that after such punishing damage that she was sunk, as the remaining survivors on board the Bismarck opened her sluces. Such was the integrity of the Bismarck design is that she is intact on the sea floor, minus her remaining turrets which fell out of their mountings as she capsized. She may have been lost on her maiden voyage, but few sips in history will invoke such powerful emotion.

Regards,
Greycap Leader

#75

At the time,Britain stood alone against Germany and her survival depended on the ocean supply lines remaining open.The biggest threat came from the Bismark and the potential havoc she could reign down upon the shipping lanes as she was deemed faster and with more firepower than anything the British had,though the Hood matched up pretty well she was 20 years older and only carried about half the fuel load and half the deck armour.Some one once said that the Bismark was faster than anything stronger and stronger than anything faster,or something to that effect.

#76

In my opinion, the threat of the German heavy ships to the trans-Atlantic convoys has always been exaggerated. There just weren’t enough of them to sink a significant number of logistical ships. The U-boats were far more efficient at the task, yet even at the height of the U-boat’s success, they were sinking less than 5% of the cargoes transiting the Atlantic. This was no where near enough to defeat Britain.

The rapid loss of the Bismarck on her very first operational voyage demonstrates the efficiency of the Royal Navy’s counter measures against raids by German heavy ships against the Atlantic convoys. The German AMC’s were slightly more successful, but the Royal Navy was, after all, essentially a trade protection navy.

#77

You are correct,the actual threat,though low in percentage,of loses caused by U-boats far exceeded what would have been accomplished by battleships,battle cruisers or heavy cruisers. My point was the perceived fear factor that the building and launching of the Bismark caused,which at the time of commission,was the largest to date.She was to be the 1st of a fast battleship squadron to preceed larger main line battleships.The economics of an overburdened wartime industry put an end those plans.I remember the stories told by veterans who worked for Public Service or the Road Dept. would tell us about the mighty Bismark,how big and fast she was,how far and accurate she could shoot, how much damage she could sustain and how hard it was to sink her.But like all great and powerful things there was the achillies heal,the rudder.

#78

Keep in mind guys, subs did’t shell the Japanese steel mills into rubble. Nor did they shell Henderson Field till it was one big pot hole.

And subs didn’t plaster the beachs from Casablanca to Normady and from Tarawa to Okinawa.

The battleship had it’s uses, it just stopped being king of the hill.

Deaf

#79

Don’t jump to conclusions that aren’t there; no one is claiming that battleships didn’t have their uses in WW II, only that commerce raiding wasn’t an efficient use of the German battleships and battle cruisers in the Atlantic. If the naval side of WW II proved anything, it was that ships of all types depended on other categories of combatant vessels to be most effective. The most effective navies realized long before WW II that fleets needed to be “balanced”; that is to say fleets, including battleships and aircraft carriers, needed to have specialized combatants to provide ASW screening, AAW screening, and escort against attack by enemy heavy ships.

Twice in WW II, aircraft carriers, due to operational mistakes, were caught by heavy enemy surface ships and damaged or sunk. Battleships provided the best escort against such possible scenarios, and as long as the enemy had operational battleships, it was prudent for the Allies to include battleships in their offensive surface formations.

#80

Then there are the 1,177 reasons why the USS Arizona BB-39 tugs heaviest at my heart.