The Landlubbers Battleship Thread - Now with 50% less cordite

[Urwumpe]

Really a "shot trap".
Nevertheless, in the maximum diameter area, the system can work in theory. In reality... well, three torpedos were enough to sink Littorio at Taranto...

In theory against theoretical torpedos .... :lol:

For determining how well an armor performs, it takes a lot of monte-carlo. But I am sure, it should not be impossible to create a special FEM solver to calculate the effectivity of a ships crosssection at least.

 

[K_Jameson]

Wikipedia provides this interesting image of the Littorio under construction, with the Pugliese cylinders clearly visible:

 

[Urwumpe]

Wikipedia provides this interesting image of the Littorio under construction, with the Pugliese cylinders clearly visible:

Takes a lot of volume from the ship...

The Minas Geraes class is also pretty interesting, though rather obsolete during most of its lifetime.

Especially the range clock on top of the main mast is a nice feature, you did not see that often.

 

[K_Jameson]

Yep, the ship should be a little cramped despite his large size.

Another cramped ship was the otherwise excellent South Dakota class. These ships was possibly the shortest of all the "treaty" battleships; in addition, the armored belt was well inside the hull, further reducing the living volume. For comparison, in the earlier North Carolina the armored belt was, in fact, the external hull, leaving more space for the crew (let alone the additional twenty meters in length). After the war, when the Navy had briefly considered to mantain in active service some of these six modern ships, the preferred choice was the NoCal over the SoDak (despite being the older of the two), mainly because more comfortable for the crew.

 

[mojoey]

From the article

And USS Iowa has the legs of Yamato easily. In her sea trials, Yamato achieved a maximum speed of 27.4 knots. That's impressive for a ship of Yamato's enormous weight, but unfortunately USS Iowa is capable of 33 knots. Not only that: in 1968, Iowa's sister ship USS New Jersey achieved a top speed of 35.2 knots, which she sustained for six hours! That, by the way, is still the world record speed for a battleship.

In 1989 while aboard the USS New Jersey transiting the Straites of Malaca... A 'small boy' in the Indian Ocean reported a medical emergency (crew member in cardiac arrest). NJ broke the speed limit inside the Straite and proceeded into the IO at 36 knots (so said the skipper from the bridge) with 7 of 8 boilers lit. Capt Tucker had the Master at Arms secure all weatherdecks 04 level and below. If anyone were to fall over they'd be goners (beat to death by the ships wake maybe) Once the other ship was in Helo range we slowed down a bit (to a leisurely 30 knots).

Eating on the mess decks meant you needed hearing protection, the Chiefs Mess was double hearing protection. That ship was casting an impressive rooster tail. I may have pictures packed away, I'll look once this outage is over.

Huh. TIL the Engine Telegram has a 'No ' position.

 

[K_Jameson]

An interesting topic is how a battleship, let's say a treaty or post-treaty one, can behave against a modern anti-ship missile (for example an Harpoon). Opinion on this topic are very mixed on the web.

 

[Evil_Onyx]

An interesting topic is how a battleship, let's say a treaty or post-treaty one, can behave against a modern anti-ship missile (for example an Harpoon). Opinion on this topic are very mixed on the web.

The problem is that no one has ever had the opportunity of testing a Anti-ship missile warhead against a late Battleship armour, Post WWII all the research I know of was in to the effect of nuclear weapons against ships.

One of the big things that is going for late battleships, is that they where designed to take damage and carry on fighting, split engine rooms, Two or more fire control rooms, ect.

Against a Anti-ship missile I would say anything with significant Armour would fair better than Modern ships.

Against Modern torpedoes, is an entirely different matter.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

I've no doubt that a Harpoon would have put Missouri in the hurt locker. However as you noted, the ship can still fight. And she has Harpoons of her own. And 4 CIWS mounts.

We had the CIWS warning alarms when that Silkworm was shot at us. HMS Gloucester was kind enough to shoot it down for us before we could engage.

 

[K_Jameson]

I don't think that a mere harpoon can have any hope to penetrate the citadel. A missile is far "softer" than a shell specifically designed to penetrate armor.

 

[Urwumpe]

I don't think that a mere harpoon can have any hope to penetrate the citadel. A missile is far "softer" than a shell specifically designed to penetrate armor.

That is not exactly true - it generally has a penetrating warhead and has generally the same speed and mass as a shell, but a larger explosive charge.

In some cases, the missile is even three times faster than the shell - with the corresponding effect on armor penetration.

Remember, technology progressed a lot since WW2. Even without ramming through the armour with brute force and mass, the missile should cause a lot of damage to the citadel armor or even get past it.

 

[K_Jameson]

Well, let me a confrontation.

Harpoon:
- weight: about 700 kg
- warhead: about 220 kg
- speed: about 900 km/h

406/50 shell:
- weight: 1,225 kg
- warhead: 300 kg
- muzzle speed: 2,750 km/h
- impact speed: I don't know, let's say 1,500-1,700 km/h?

---------- Post added at 03:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:18 PM ----------

Remember, technology progressed a lot since WW2.

Obviously.
But the general statement is that current missiles aren't conceived to deal with armored vessels. Current naval vessels have about zero armor and rely exclusively on active defence.

 

[Linguofreak]

I've no doubt that a Harpoon would have put Missouri in the hurt locker. However as you noted, the ship can still fight. And she has Harpoons of her own. And 4 CIWS mounts.

We had the CIWS warning alarms when that Silkworm was shot at us. HMS Gloucester was kind enough to shoot it down for us before we could engage.

Actually, I doubt a Harpoon would do much, it could chew up the upper works but would be unlikely to penetrate the belt. With the right terminal guidance it could attack the deck, but even then I doubt it would penetrate, and as none of our potential enemies since WWII have had battleships, I'm not sure we would have thought of maneuvering to attack the deck in designing the terminal guidance. A lot of Soviet/Russian anti-ship missiles seem to be a lot faster and heavier, and I have no doubt that at least a few of them would have been built with the possibility of engaging the Iowas in mind, so I'd expect them to be able to maneuver to attack the deck. I'd expect the Iowas to fair against these about as well as any WWII battleship fared against aerial attack, which is to say, not well.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

Well, my concern with a Harpoon was that it would pop up and hit us mid-ship right around the 02 or 03 level. Right about where my GQ station was...

 

[Andy44]

Back in the 80s there was a lot of discussion after the loss of HMS Sheffield to an Argentine Exocet missile about the vulnerability of modern ships. I recall an interview with the captain of the New Jersey where he seemed to think his ship would be able to handle an Exocet strike, given that the Exocet is a sea-skimmer and would tend to strike its target just above the waterline, where battleship armor is effective.

Some anti-ship missiles are faster and have different attack profiles, which may do more damage.

 

[Urwumpe]

- warhead: 300 kg

Divide by 20. The explosive charge of such an APCBC shell was just 18 kg.

EDIT: Also the impact velocity was about 400 m/s at longer distances, similar to other artillery shells.

 

[boogabooga]

I don't think that a mere harpoon can have any hope to penetrate the citadel. A missile is far "softer" than a shell specifically designed to penetrate armor.

You should read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge

 

[K_Jameson]

Divide by 20. The explosive charge of such an APCBC shell was just 18 kg.

EDIT: Also the impact velocity was about 400 m/s at longer distances, similar to other artillery shells.

My bad, memory made a bad joke.
Well, the HE shells has nearly 70 kg, not bad.
My source: http://wargametechnology.weebly.com/comparazione-cannoni-di-grosso-calibro-navali.html

Yeah a missile as the harpoon has more explosive... but if isn't capable to penetrate, who matters?

Also, the data you provides about terminal velocity is in good accordance with my estimate.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

A missile unable penetrate the armor belt, conning tower or turret glacis is one thing. It's still more than capable of penetrating other places on the superstructure.

In which case, the dead crew members matter.

But the ship is still fighting. During GQ I was an outside/flight deck damage control guy. Provided they shut down turret 3. No way they'd let us out with it in active action. Inside the skin of the ship I'd just be I the way, or I'd be hauling OBA canisters to the guys fighting the fires. Or maybe providing relief to members of a hose team.

 

[K_Jameson]

A missile unable penetrate the armor belt, conning tower or turret glacis is one thing. It's still more than capable of penetrating other places on the superstructure.

In which case, the dead crew members matter.

Surely.
Well, this apply also in the previous "Bismarck vs Yamato" discussion. Bismarck has weak guns in comparison with the amount of armor Yamato shows, but still can hurt if his shells hits in the appropriate positions.

 

[Urwumpe]

Yeah a missile as the harpoon has more explosive... but if isn't capable to penetrate, who matters?

Not sure about the harpoon, but most anti-ship missiles use armor penetrating warheads. usually smaller than the missile diameter, so the old trick of a thinner layer of armor removing the ballistic cap does no longer work.

Should the missile use a small shaped charge in advance, like possible thanks to modern miniaturization, it should get through a lot more armour. A modern HEAT warhead can get through ten times its diameter of calibre of steel. About 1200 mm are common estimates (necessary, because the composite glacis armor of modern tanks has such a steel equivalent). Bunker busting cruise missiles use this for getting more armour penetration with less missile and warhead weight. The Yamato had just half of that value.

Technically, just 10 kg of a 300 kg warhead would need to be precharge to "pre-drill" a hole for the main armour piercing warhead to pass through.

Should an old Russian anti-ship missile approach at Mach 4 at a steep angle, I doubt the amount of deck armour would even matter. Even by just crashing against the armour, tons of cruise missile should cause damage inside the armoured volume. (Luckily modern air defenses made these missiles mostly harmless)