IJN Amagi VS. USS Alaska
- Thread starter USS_Ward
- Start date
The Alaska wins assuming no torpedoes(or at the very most 1 or 2) hit her and bo golden BBs occur due to her armor being designed to protect her from 8" gunfire at battle ranges unlike Admiral Graf Spee not to mention the fact the Alaska has a slight speed advantage or outright superiority depending on the sea state.
Last edited:
How does Alaska lose to AGS or E,A&A......?
Alaska can and will stand off and simply kill them under almost all circumstances unless they pop up from behind an island and torpedo her.....?
With the Alaska's exceptional gun laying radar, 12"/50 Mark 8 main battery (which out performed most 14" main guns) in three triple turrets meaning all three smaller ships can be engaged at once, 8,000-13,000 yard greater main battery range, and equal speed?
Might as well ask how they would have done against HMS Howe.
Please don't make me support the Alaska class. It makes me throw up in my mouth a little.
But raising her might make us ask what cost more Howe or Alaska........
(and who would win after all everybody says the 12"/50 Mk8 are as good as 14" are they not.....)
I the KGV were cheaper than the Alaska class, much cheaper. U.S. captial ships and even cruiser made lavish use of STS steel in their construction which was great as far as protection, but costly as hell, and there was far more expense undetaken in improving habitability than was the case in Royal Navy designs. The KGVs came in around $40-45M 1939 USD, or about half the Alaska class and around 40% of the Iowa class.
McPherson
Banned
Alaska is a late war lessons learned new build construction.
What would she look like on 13 December 1939?
(Source The Blueprints.com. Modified by McP.)
Guns are Mark 7, not Mark 8 in the main battery.
AAA is the .50 M2 machine gun, the 1.1"/L70 and the 5"/L38
That means the relative engagement range of a 1939 built Alaska is about 5,000-24,000 meters with a maximum range of 30,000 meters assuming a 40 degree elevation which is the USN mid 1930s standard.
The defensive AAA hemisphere 3 layer onion is set at 1,000 meters, 3,000 meters and 5,000-10,000 meters. Secondaries in the anti-ship role are set out to 2,000 to 15,000 meters effective.
Armor, belt and deck 9 inches and 4 inches. GUNHOUSES including facing mantlets… 5 inches
No torpedoes.
No RADAR, cause the Fudds in the USN are late to the party and it really is not back-fitted (panic time for the USN) in quantity until 1940-1941.
Captain Fischer AFAICD was a USN "dud".
Can we look who leads the British; here? and what he has?
I love the USN, but I am a realist. The leadership, tech edge and the training on 13 December 1939 is all Royal Navy. Without radar or a battle-trained captain who knows how to use his ship in an optical gunfight, against 3 independent targets, the Alaska (1939 version) is in very serious trouble. I predict a loss.
SsgtC
Banned
Ummmmm, you do realize that the Alaska class design was finalized in mid 1941, right? With the first ship laid down that year. Also, your link doesn't give any information to back you up. It's a book cover image...Alaska is a late war lessons learned new build construction.
What would she look like on 13 December 1939?
McPherson
Banned
The Alaska design was modified as she was constructed, as the lessons learned rolled in. What comes off the weighs in August 1943, took over a YEAR to refit and work up before she was deployed in November 1944.
I have to retrograde to the time in 13 December 1939 to what the USN could do THEN. LAY DOWN for any mistake has to be around early 1937 at the latest. Guns, armor, and existent weapons of 1937 are to be the expected fit. Not what the USN had in 1941.
As for the "Book cover image" it is the first page of a series of a sailor's scrap book. Scroll through "next page" to see the series and get a feel for the ship. Pay close attention to the comment about the attack on the USS Pennsylvania...
That is not a tight ship. Fischler (I misspelled his name.) might not be the guy, who I want in command of her at the Plate.
McP.
I don't think it matters its still 9x12" + at least 8x 5"/38 v 6x8" and 16 x 6" its not even close Alaska will unless she is incredibly stupid or completely unready for war simply kill Exeter and then its over unless a torp hits and in daylight that's very unlikely.
Its 8500t + 2x 7,270 = 23,040t v 30,000t and Alaska should survive any 8" or 6" hits and at range that's far from likley v 12" accuracy and has more speed.....
Its almost exactly what Alaska was made for killing CA squadrons its just a very weak CA/CL force to fight that makes it even easier......
McPherson
Banned
Alaska's gun-houses are not resistant to 8"inch shellfire or even 6" shellfire or had you not noticed? If I'm Harwood, I aim for those and snipe Alaska's long vulnerable forecastle. And... with the Leanders; I'm thinking torpedoes. If there is one thing I might question about Harwood's tactics, it is about laying screening smoke with two of his ships and ringing in the third to make such a torpedo attack. This is doable.
No it isn't,
Alaska is a 33kn ship fighting smaller 32kn ships torpedoing her is very unlikely and Harwood will have little say in the fight geometry unlike OTL when he had a significant speed advantage.
Alaska has 12.8" turret faces...... and 5" roof (and a 4" deck and 9" thinning to 5" belt that would be angled)
http://www.navweaps.com/index_nathan/Penetration_Britain.php
8" has to be under 4000 yards to pen the 12.8" face and over 25,000 yards to pen the deck....... (not going to happen) (Edit to add this is probably on a vertical face but angled would still be very hard to pen at realistic ranges)
6" is worse its totality immune at all ranges.....
The RN ships can only achieve anything by being lucky ie hitting gaps or exposed things (bridge/range finder) agaisnt this the Alaska 12" is going to be deadly.
Looking at fall angles at 20,000 yards,
12/50 20,000 yards (18,288 m) 17.5 Angle of Fall
8/50 20,000 yards (18,290 m) 28.5 Angle of Fall
6/50 20,000 yards (18,290 m) 39.9 Angle of Fall
The 12" will find it far easier to hit with that angle of fall giving a far larger danger space....... and at 20,000 yards it can pen 12.73" (323 mm) belt and 3.02" (77 mm) deck....
Smoke is near irrelevant as Alaska then simply holds her distance and kills the one she can see first.
At 20,000 yards you don't aim for features (mounts or forecastle) you hope to straddle and let lady luck give you hits........
Last edited:
SsgtC
Banned
Again, how does that, in any way, apply to this discussion? The men in that anchorage had just been told that the war was over. I'm fairly certain that they would have been far more alert had they thought the war was still going