It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Best Battleship of WW2

page: 8
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 22 2008 @ 11:56 AM
Longbow: Your view of history is a long shot. King Edward the Third did in fact defeat Scotland. He was also rumored NOT to be the son of Edward the Second, but of his queen. She purportedly escaped England while she was pregnant with someone else's son.

Now then, which do you think would have won, the Yamato or the Iowa? Granted, they wouldn't have been alone, but we will never know how the chips would have fallen. Halsey might have gotten the notion to leave that task force behind where it belonged, but lets assume all else being equal. A lucky hit from the Yamato might have sunk the Iowa, but it would have been a lucky shot indeed. The improved aiming technology of the Iowa class provides that the Iowa would likely have scored first.

With improved ballistics of the 16/50 caliber guns, the first hits from the Americans might well have disabled the Japanese ships targeting system. It then would have been a matter of time before the 16 inch guns were able to finish her off. Still the reality is that the Iowa class was more of a heavy cruiser than a fully armored battleship: historians agree that up until the Montana Class, American battleships were not armored to defend against their own caliber. One lucky hit from the Yamato's 18/45 caliber guns could have conceivably taken out the Iowa entirely.

posted on Dec, 22 2008 @ 09:01 PM
It's either a three way tie between the American Iowa-class, the Yamato-class, or the Nazi Bismark. The Iowas had little time to prove their worth but had a speed advantage. The Bismark had an overall balance of power and the Yamato was a behemoth.

Battleships with railguns are what we need.

posted on Dec, 22 2008 @ 09:18 PM
reply to post by Rajin_Cajun

1. Yamato
2. Iowa class
2. Bizmark


I would of loved to see them go at it that's really the only way to know would be boss hog

posted on Dec, 22 2008 @ 10:34 PM

Originally posted by devilwasp
u did watch the news didnt u ?
in gulf war 1

March 22: A British Royal Air Force (RAF) Tornado jet is accidentally shot down by a US Patriot missile. The Tornado's two crew are killed.

March 24: Two British soldiers are killed when their tank is mistakenly targeted by another British tank in southern Iraq.

our tank crews need glasses

March 27: 37 US Marines are injured when US troops mistakenly fire at each other near the southern city of Nasiriyah.

March 28: A British soldier is killed and four others are injured in the region of Basra when a US A-10 ground attack aircraft fires on them.

April 2: An F-18 US fighter jet is downed, probably by a US Patriot missile. The pilot is reported missing.

April 3: A US serviceman mistaken for an Iraqi soldier is shot dead by his own troops in central Iraq.

April 6: 18 Kurdish fighters are killed and 45 wounded near Arbil in northern Iraq when US aircraft mistakenly bomb a joint US-Kurdish convoy.

According to the website of the American War Library, just over half of the coalition troops killed or injured during the 1991 Gulf War were victims of friendly fire incidents.

Of those, about 165 US casualties were due to "friendly fire" out of a total of 367 Americans who lost their lives, it said.


March 22: A US soldier at a camp in Kuwait lobs grenades into the tents of fellow soldiers, killing two and wounding 11 others.

March 30: 15 American soldiers are injured at a military camp in northern Kuwait when a disgruntled Egyptian employee rams a truck into the group. The truck driver sustained two gunshot wounds.

us air control

tank attack
us attack on the us

see what i mean now no offence u americans are good we give u that u guys rocked in ww2
all we can say is this u need to tweak ur tech a bit or do something

Give me ONE friendly fire incident that was caused by a Iowa class US battleship.
and leave out the ones that were caused be someone sending the wrong target to the ship to fire at.
with the US battleships there were very few things that could cause a miss and friendly fire incident

posted on Dec, 23 2008 @ 01:51 AM
The Bismarck was great. It is possibly THE best Battleship of the Second World War. I say this because she had the greatest influence in the shortest amount of time of any battleship in that War. At one point the Bismarck had most of the British Navy looking for her. Even the Canadians and the US Navy had helped search for her, even though we were still over a year from getting into that conflict. For longevity, though, I would have to say that the USS Missouri was the greatest battleship of the Second World War.

posted on Dec, 23 2008 @ 07:28 PM
Hotel Yamato!

If only they had surrendered sooner we'd have an amazing piece of history; a piece of insane engineering. Too bad those damned Japanese dictators had to uphold their honor and send all those good men to slaughter, and the Yamato to the bottom on a suicide run. She put up a hell of a fight and went in a flash of glory, so I guess she went out with a bang!

Looking at it from an academic standpoint.

posted on Dec, 25 2008 @ 01:05 AM
How about the best battleship built by 1942? It's down to the yamato, bismark, or KG 5th class. I'd put them in that order, but not as much difference as you might think. All had their merits.

America doesn't count, it could have taken on the entire world for a good while if it wanted, we were starting to peak as an empire. Not so much anymore. a bankrupt country can't maintain expensive weapons systems very long.

[edit on 25-12-2008 by CapsFan8]

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 04:05 AM
reply to post by devilwasp

They were 18in guns on the Japanese Yamato and Musashi. Ahh some of you all need to do some research here. I just glanced and someone named the Enterprise... hello!! and the bloody Iowa class was a late commer to the war so of course she is going to be better than the other classes. Had Germany had more time, money and materials they would have built an even better ship. Some of you here are thinking of the Graf Spee, a Battlecruiser with 11in guns that fended off 3 cruisers, 1 being a heavy Cruiser with 8in guns, took place in the South Atlantic. Bisark took on 1BB POWales, and the BC HOOD. Hood sank, and the POW was rocked hard. The british also had 2 heavy cruisers in the area Norffolk and suffolk. and when the Bismark sunk, she was sunk by her own crew, some idiot put out a whos who of battleships and gave bismark low scores, I would beg to differ because that ship had it been commanded properly would have done great damage in the atlantic, had it the opportunity to sail with the Gneisenau and Scharnhorst.

Ok im done.

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 04:13 AM
Wasn't the Yamato, like the biggest one ever made? Too bad for Japan it wasn't used most effectively. Good for us, though, I guess.

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 12:44 AM
Hey, I stumbled across this forum and figured I'd add my two cents.

First of all, There was NO ultimate warship. They all had limitations.

My worst list. R-class and Scharnhorsts. R-classes were a backwards step from the QE's and were considered expendable in WWII. Next up, Scharnhorst and her sister were doomed from the they day they were launched. Over weight and under gunned, their armour decks were actually below the waterline. The armour scheme was a reversion to WWI designs. Their fickle machinery was unable to fit below the armoured decks and lay exposed behind only 3" of plating. They had short legs and water splashing over the decks would often interrupt function of both forward turrets.

Now to look at the rest.

Nelson and Rodney: Dangerous and well protected, but slow and poorly laid out. In fact, Rodneys own blasts damaged her greatly while dueling with Bismarck. Her 6" guns with high angle were an AA failure, and her 4.7" didn't live up to expectations.

KGV: Undergunned for new design. Notoriously wet forward and their Quad turrets jammed in battle. They gave up 2 main guns for more armour(hence the dual turret), even though they had questionable watertighness.

Bismarck: Her armour was built for short range gun duels. Hard to sink with great internal subdivision, but with almost everything above the waterline unprotected they were easy to silence in battle. Their achilles heel was the triple screw, they could not steer without her rudder. AA fit was adequate when designed, obsolete by the the time they commisioned.

Yamato: What can be said. The biggest, thickest everything couldn't prevent the her crew from dubbing her "Hotel Yamato" The overly thick armour actually hindered their underwater protection. A torpedo hit in 1943 allowed 3,000 tons of water in, three times as much as a torpedo hit on the North Carolina. They had masses of AA, but unguided and proved ineffective.

Richeleu: superb ship, with a great amount of protection with a very deep belt and antitorpedo system. On paper, especially after "Americanization", she was a fine warship. Her main drawback being all her main guns forward in two turrets.

Litorio: A fine class of seaboats, if hampered by poor craftsmanship and the Pugilese torpedo defense system. No more glaring faults than any of the other treaty BB's

N. Carolina: Designed to fit 12-14" on 35,000tons. An escalation clause allowed for the adoption of 9-16" and some extra tonnage. The 16" was a real performer. Low muzzle velocity and heavy shell weight combined for great long range accuracy and the best deck penetration of WWII. They had a unsolved vibration at high speeds and armour offered NO immunity to their own 2700lb shells.

S. Dakota: Designed for 16" with better protection than N. Carolina on the same tonnage. They too had a weakness with their internal armour belt and anti torpedo system. This was very apparent when Washington rammed Indiana. Although she steamed into port under her own power, the story could have been much different had one more bulkhead failed. Tthey had a marginal immunity to the 2700lb super heavy.

Iowa: They too were imperfect. The long narrow bow accounted for a very wet ship forward and a large unprotected volume. The same armour scheme as S.Dakota with more angle to the belt to increase resistance to heavy shells. They were the best AA ships afloat. The 16"/50 was longer ranged than the 16"/45 and had better side armour penetration.

The best WWII BB is very debatable. I have to say Washington. While not perfect, she prowled the Atlantic for Tirpitz, sank Kirishima and Ayanami in night action, and never was hit or lost a man to enemy fire while earning 13 battlestars. She sank more combat tonnage than any other US BB in WWII. For 5 weeks she patroled Japanese waters alone, being the only US BB in the Pacific.

posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 12:11 AM
The U.S. Iowa class-fast and manueverable with the firepower (16" guns) and defensive capability to survive encounters with Kamikaze planes and able to defend the vital carriers from air attack. Certainly would have been able to take on even Yamato or Musashi. Too bad Halsey didn't leave them to defend the beachead at Leyte Gulf, we would have had a chance to find out!

top topics

<< 5  6  7   >>

log in