Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 32 of 32
Thanks Tree19Thanks

Thread: i don't get it this

  1. #31
    Veteran Member Micro Machines Champion, Race Against Time Champion Tedminator's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    21,772
    Thanks
    11713

    From
    South Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Here are the dimension comparisons.

    Iowa class:

    Displacement:
    45,000 long tons (46,000*t) (Standard)
    52,000 long tons (53,000*t) (mean war service)
    57,000 long tons (58,000*t) (pre 1980s full load)
    58,000 long tons (59,000*t) (post 1980s full load)
    Length:
    861.25*ft (262.51*m) pp
    887*ft (270*m) oa
    Beam:
    108*ft (33*m)
    Draft:
    36*ft (11*m) maximum

    Armament:
    World War II, Korea:
    9 16-inch (406*mm)/50 cal. Mark 7 guns
    20 5-inch (127*mm)/38*cal. Mark 12 guns
    80 40*mm (1.57*in)/56*cal. Bofors guns
    49 20*mm (0.79*in)/70*cal. Oerlikon cannons
    Cold War, Gulf War additions:
    32 BGM-109 Tomahawk
    16 RGM-84 Harpoon
    4 20*mm (.78*inch).Phalanx CIWS

    Yamamoto:

    Class and type:
    Yamato-class battleship
    Displacement:
    65,027*t (64,000 long tons)
    71,659*t (70,527 long tons) (full load)
    Length:
    256*m (839*ft 11*in) (waterline)
    263*m (862*ft 10*in) (overall)
    Beam:
    38.9*m (127*ft 7*in)
    Draft:
    11*m (36*ft 1*in)
    Installed power:
    12 Kampon boilers
    150,000*shp (110,000*kW)
    Propulsion:
    4 shafts; 4 steam turbines
    Speed:
    27 knots (50*km/h; 31*mph)
    Range:
    7,200*nmi (13,300*km; 8,300*mi) at 16 knots (30*km/h; 18*mph)

    Armament:
    (1941)
    9 46*cm Type 94 guns (3x3)
    12 15.5*cm 3rd Year Type guns (4x3)
    12 127*mm Type 89 (6x2)
    24 25*mm Type 96 AA guns (8x3)
    4 13.2*mm Type 93 (2x2)
    (1945)
    9 46*cm Type 94 guns (3x3)
    6 15.5*cm 3rd Year Type guns (2x3)
    24 127*mm Type 89 (12x2)
    162 25*mm Type 96 AA guns
    4 13.2*mm Type 93 (2x2)

    You can see the big difference between these two classes of ships.

    One on one the American ships would have been at a disadvantage
    Yeah and so? The Yamato was still fucking useless.. that white elephant spent so much time in port that the IJN sailors serving onboard her nicknamed it The Hotel Yamato.

    The one time Yamato could have made a difference was in the battle of Leyte gulf... but it turned tail and ran away scared from USN Destroyers.

    Last edited by Tedminator; 10th June 2017 at 06:10 PM.

  2. #32
    Veteran Member Pragmatist's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    44,358
    Thanks
    12755

    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    America in WWII built our battleships based on if they could fit through the Panama Canal.

    This means that the Japanese could build bigger ones then us.

    Our Iowa class ships were thereby limited to their size and thus their armaments.



    Compared to:



    So I get that they needed to use the Canal for a shortcut but why couldn't they just build a bigger one and sail it around South America?

    What does it take, like a week extra or something?

    Hell, with all the time it took to build the ship what's an extra week to compete with what Japan was building?
    you don't get much do you?

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Search tags for this page

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Facebook Twitter RSS Feed