Last ship thread hit image limit so Ill start a new one.
Conversation starters:
Iowa is really a battlecruiser
IJN pagoda vs RN citadel bridges
Last ship thread hit image limit so Ill start a new one
Easton Garcia
Evan Gonzalez
Tyler Ortiz
>Iowa is really a battlecruiser
stolen form wikipedia
>A fast battleship was distinguished from a battlecruiser in that it would have been expected to be able to engage hostile battleships in sustained combat on at least equal terms.
iowa was designed to have speed without compromise her armor, she would have been able to withstand nearly all shells available to the japanese, with the exception of the yamato
also, destroyers are the unloved members of the warship family
they do all the dirty work
Asher Wilson
Aurora
Jack Wilson
>also, destroyers are the unloved members of the warship family
Fuck destroyers
Henry Gonzalez
Evan Baker
Chase Allen
Iowas are battleships and some of the best built, a great high note for that kind of warship to go out on.
Fight me.
Carson Bennett
Large cruiser time!
Kevin Collins
Pagoda Master Race
Brody Flores
Wyatt Gonzalez
the last all guns cruiser.
Jonathan Stewart
Ayden Williams
Andrew Johnson
Matthew Walker
How cute, call your selfobsolete?
Jaxon Brown
Jace Kelly
USS Alexander Hamilton (SSBN-617)
Reactor Tunnel
Levi Butler
Robert Foster
USS Prinz Eugen.
Andrew Robinson
Queen Elizabeth
Isaac Sanchez
Underrated
Dominic Peterson
Ha! That's funny...
I suppose the pic was taken just before they nuked it then.
Jack Flores
Photo was taken in February '46, Crossroads happened in July
Samuel Hernandez
Dear God why
Jordan Wood
I think I gotta give it to the Japs on that one. The British superstructure looks cool but almost too big and blocky like they're trying too hard. Pagodas just look elegant and efficient. Though I wonder if they were more fragile and prone to being catastrophically damaged because of it...
James Morales
Jose Nelson
Pagodas were just built up tripods, British citadels were tore down to deck level then built new. It saved about 1000t compared to the built up tripods on non-rebuilt ships.
Nathaniel Hall
Connor Cox
Did it affect the Jap battleship handling characteristics in heavy seas?
James Morales
Never seen any concrete info either way, they enlarge the torpedo bulges as the pagodas got lager which probably off set it.
Jeremiah Taylor
Jap ships were notoriously top heavy
Nathan Perez
I had a dream last night that I was a USN cruiser fighting a swarm of Jap DDs. Frustratingly, I couldn't tell what class I was.
Adam Gray
Charles Wright
Ethan Ramirez
Parker Mitchell
Luke Garcia
>Pagodas just look elegant
They look like a vertical shantytown.
John Williams
To see further over the horizon.
Justin Thomas
I think there were some which literally could not sail straight.
Henry Green
>IJN pagoda vs RN citadel bridges
I'm actually interested in hearing about this
Jackson Sanchez
Kevin Jenkins
Christopher Jenkins
How common was it for destroyers to have an open bridge like that?
Jonathan Price
>1944
>deploying battleshits
heh
Colton Diaz
>Marat opened fire on troop positions of the German 18th Army from the Leningrad Sea Canal on 8 September. She was lightly damaged by German 15-centimeter (5.9 in) guns on 16 September.
>She was sunk at her moorings on 23 September 1941 by two near-simultaneous hits by 1,000-kilogram (2,200 lb) bombs near the forward superstructure.
>The rear part of the ship was later refloated and she was used as a floating battery although all of her 120 mm guns were removed. Initially only the two rearmost turrets were operable, but the second turret was repaired by the autumn of 1942. She fired a total of 1,971 twelve-inch shells during the Siege of Leningrad.
>In December 1941 granite slabs 40–60 millimeters (1.6–2.4 in) thick from the nearby harbor walls were laid on her decks to reinforce her deck protection.
Read about it as a kid back in 1993 or so. I remember this and "Mercury" brig's battle remaining the two most dramatic warship stories for me for quite a while.
Jayden Butler
The real question, is why haven't carriers taken advantage of harrier technology?
Caleb Phillips
You mean VTOL?
John Carter
Yes.
Wyatt Green
They have since the 70's?
Dylan Nguyen
He probably meant to ask something along the lines of "why nowadays warships in general don't look something like Project 1123" before terminal moonshine overdose got in a way of transferring this thought from the brain to the keyboard. The answer is because Harrier sucks and VTOL is shit.
Carter Young
>The answer is because Harrier sucks and VTOL is shit
It's one of those things that sounds great to people that don't consider lift or physics or that aircraft have to carry ordinance and fuel n' shit.
James Cooper
Luis Martinez
>monitor and batltecruiserposting
Daniel Martin
And don't forget hangar space consumption, maintenance, even reinforcing the deck to withstand exhaust temperature. Like, even if you get really stoned it's hard to ignore how much of a clusterfuck it would be if, for instance, fixed-wing VTOL was to be used instead of helicopters on modern warships.
Nathan Murphy
Wouldn't VTOLs have a harder time landing in rough sea than choppers?
Xavier Long
thats the one that shelled the winter palace no?
Michael Young
There’s a couple photos of the Ises and Fusos listing in calm sea
Eli Gray
Based Dutch shipbuilding
Anthony Robinson
I'd imagine so.
Andrew Morgan
I think that one is a corvette
Carter Cooper
Gentle reminder that Battlecruiser is not an insult, that Battlecruiser does not mean "deathtrap" and that HMS Hood had about as much Belt as Iowa. Also Iowa is not immune to her own guns with SHS at any range
Ryan Adams
Caleb Carter
Kevin Perez
Yeah I'm sure you know better than all those military forces successfully using them in combat
Luke Edwards
Chase Ward
Easton Adams
I saw this ship at port 2 years ago
William Stewart
Cooper Brooks
Successfully using what in combat?
Grayson Reed
Adam Reed
Shame the last two Iowa hulls weren't converted.
Eli Adams
I think you mean “thank god”
Thomas Ortiz
Carter Bailey
Justin Russell
Warning, informed or nuanced posts are highly suspicious
Elijah Hill
Commando carriers.
Dylan Wright
>Dat TDS bulge
Anybody have the meme of the Type 55/Renhai's trap bulge?
Noah Howard
Justin Moore
Daniel Garcia
Robert Johnson
>Also Iowa is not immune to her own guns with SHS at any range
the iowa-class was immune to the 45-caliber 16-in in use at the time, and would have been nigh impregnable to any comparable gun of the era
the upgrade to 50-caliber weapons that can penetrate its own armor was made independently of their goal to maximize its protection, they just thought it would have been too much of a hassle to increase its armor to match its new guns, and the decreased speed would have made them useless
a fast battleship is not a battlecruiser
David Anderson
Isaac Rogers
Hey guys, I made this 33 knot ship with the heaviest armor and the biggest guns. It's a super badass battleship. Oh fuck, we invented nuclear rounds. Guess it's a BC now? Are the Kongos BCs or BBs post refit?
Nonsense. The Iowas could withstand any other BB's weaponry in the world, aside from maybe the 18.1 'Special 40cms' on Yamato.
BC classification was always for vessels that were not primarily for use in the line of Battle. They compromised nothing except added tonnage and expense for more speed vs the next most powerful battleship class, the South Dakotas.
British usage of 'BC' post WW1 was for Fast Battleships anyway, as any capital ship that exceeded 25 knots.
Jose Reyes
I feel like as long as it's reasonably accurate, you should define something by what the designers and nation using it called it.
While it really wouldn't matter if the Iowa class were battlecruisers, it seems like every time it's called that it is meant as a diss.
Robert Peterson
The whole point is moot anyway as both BBs and BCs were obsolete due to airpower before Fast Battleships were even a thing.
Gavin Martin
Iowas are battlecruisers in the same way that the Alaskas are: they aren't, and people who claim otherwise are fucking retarded
Eli Fisher
Alaska's fit every definition of battle cruiser, not the worlds fault the U.S called them CA
Jason Ross
The US planned one battlecruiser class and that was the Lexington class, which were of course converted into aircraft carriers. Those actually followed the philosophy of the battlecruiser by giving up armor for speed and having battleship caliber guns.
Everything else planned and built by the US were battleships. Though as says, the point's mostly a moot one since past the the 1930s there was no reason to have to choose between speed OR armor.
Nathaniel Richardson
Hm, let's see.
At least 5kts faster than contemporary battleships? No
Do they have the endurance to chase down contemporary battleships? No
Hull form? No, the Alaska hull is quite literally a Baltimore hull enlarged by ~120%
Role? No, Alaska was meant to be a cruiser-killer
Armament? No, as the 12" guns lacked sufficient range to damage battleships before they could damage the ship
Protection? No. While it was protected against 12" shellfire, it was not sufficient against battleship fire.
TL;DR, no the Alaska is not a battlecruiser. It is a large cruiser.
Thomas Phillips
Battlecruisers weren't meant to go toe to toe with battleships, they were meant to chase down (german) commerce raiders/cruisers and skullfuck them into not fucking with anglo trade or providing effecive screening. They were used in entirely the wrong way in Jutland with predictable results. Beatty should have turned away the second he saw a battle line.
Matthew Sanchez
It wasn't the lack of armor that caused battlecruisers to explode at Jutland, it was poor shell handling practices by the British which led to flashback into the magazines. So again, how is the Alaska a battlecruiser when it doesn't even fit the definition used by the British?
Jordan Hughes
>Alaska's fit every definition of battle cruiser
Except the most important part, being commissioned as a CC.
>not the worlds fault the U.S called them CA
But that's also wrong.
Nathaniel Edwards
>by giving up armor
The Lexingtons had particularity bad armour for a early 20s battlecruiser, not much better than HMS Tiger.
Christian Cooper
Gentle reminder that the Hood was sunk by plunging fire, making the size of her belt armor and comparing it to the Iowa a moot point.
David Hernandez
Wans't it CB, or large cruiser? Similar to the RN Courageous class and the Soviet Project 82.
Austin Nelson
They also had guns which could cut through contemporary battleship and battlecruiser armor like butter.
Aaron Perez
Okay, cool, but iowa was a Fast-Battleship
Angel Sanders
>Similar to the RN Courageous class and the Soviet Project 82.
Only in the same way an strv 103 is similar to a stug.
Wyatt Jones
>1991
>deploying battleships
yep