DBWI-Wreck of the USS Alaska Found

[Lost Freeway]

According to a press release from the government of Japan, a salvage team has discovered the wreck of the US "large cruiser" USS Alaska 195 miles north of Okinawa. The discovery comes four weeks after the 70th anniversary of her sinking in the Battle of the Ryukyus. In that battle, the Alaska received a hit on her forward magazine from the massive guns of the battleship Yamato, causing a massive explosion that tore the ship in half. Out of a crew of 1,520, only eight survived. US Navy officials have been dispatched to confirm the identity of the wreck.

 

[joeferrito]

*Waits for Calbear's tears of joy at the destruction of that loathed ship of his*

 

[kclcmdr]

The U.S.S. Guam, sister ship to the U.S.S. Alaska whom had been blown up by the salvo by the IJN BB Yamato..

She is able to use the smoke and explosion from her sister ship to cover her advance and she then fires her own salvos and wrecks the Yamato's superstructure and decimates her command crew and as the backup command crew tries to take over and tries to order her main batteries to reload......

The USS Guam fires a second salvo and wrecks both her front 18.1 inch turrets before they were able to cycle their reloads, thus leaving the rear turret the only heavy armament available but unable to traverse to aim her 18.1 inch rifled cannons at the USS Guam reloading to blast the Yamato again to avenge the death of the Alaska...

 

[Lost Freeway]

The U.S.S. Guam, sister ship to the U.S.S. Alaska whom had been blown up by the salvo by the IJN BB Yamato..

She is able to use the smoke and explosion from her sister ship to cover her advance and she then fires her own salvos and wrecks the Yamato's superstructure and decimates her command crew and as the backup command crew tries to take over and tries to order her main batteries to reload......

The USS Guam fires a second salvo and wrecks both her front 18.1 inch turrets before they were able to cycle their reloads, thus leaving the rear turret the only heavy armament available but unable to traverse to aim her 18.1 inch rifled cannons at the USS Guam reloading to blast the Yamato again to avenge the death of the Alaska...

You must be reading the highly embellished account of the battle given by one of the Guam's crew. Most of the hits on the Yamato were scored by New Jersey and Missouri.

 

[Ming777]

Ah... the last purely surface to surface action in history and the last time battleships fought with battleships.

Of course, the Yamato was doomed, along with her two sisters, the Nagato, Haruna, and their escorts. They were facing all of the USN's post Treaty Battleships including all 6 Iowa's, plus the British brought along their varsity to the brawl. IIRC, Warspite and Nelson both got a couple scores on the IJN ships alongside the Americans.

 

[CalBear]

OOC: Except for all the USN casualties, the sound you are hearing in the background is my tail thumping on the floor.

 

[CuirassPolisher]

Do bears have long enough tails to do that?

 

[The Sandman]

Don't forget the Montana. We're pretty sure she fired the shot that annihilated Yamato's bridge, although she spent the rest of the battle pounding Musashi, Shinano and Ibuki into scrap.

 

[Lost Freeway]

Ah... the last purely surface to surface action in history and the last time battleships fought with battleships.

Of course, the Yamato was doomed, along with her two sisters, the Nagato, Haruna, and their escorts. They were facing all of the USN's post Treaty Battleships including all 6 Iowa's, plus the British brought along their varsity to the brawl. IIRC, Warspite and Nelson both got a couple scores on the IJN ships alongside the Americans.

Of course, the vulnerability of battleships to air power had already been proven by the attack on Pearl Harbor, the destruction of Force Z, and the sinking of the Fuso and Yamashiro at Leyte Gulf. As a matter of fact, the IJN used the Unryuu-class carriers as decoys to lure the US Navy carriers away so that their battleships wouldn't have to face air attack on their way to Okinawa.

OOC:How many OTL ships would the US Navy have to sacrifice to get the extra Iowas and the Montana?

 

[Zheng He]

Great, they found the wreck. Now History Channel is going re-run that, "Last Clash of the Dreadnoughts" special it made back in the 1990s for I don't know how many months.

Oh well, I guess it will be a welcome relief from constant re-runs of Ancient Aliens...

 

[kclcmdr]

Of course, the vulnerability of battleships to air power had already been proven by the attack on Pearl Harbor, the destruction of Force Z, and the sinking of the Fuso and Yamashiro at Leyte Gulf. As a matter of fact, the IJN used the Unryuu-class carriers as decoys to lure the US Navy carriers away so that their battleships wouldn't have to face air attack on their way to Okinawa.

OOC:How many OTL ships would the US Navy have to sacrifice to get the extra Iowas and the Montana?

Six Iowas in total plus two Montanas?..

You would probably need the allies to crush the German U-boat threat in 1943 so that the U.S. wouldn't need to build those extra 500 to 750 Liberty Cargo ships and likewise could have cut escort destroyer and frigate build up from 800 in total to just 500 .

Need at least half of them 500 DEs & FFs to do duty in the Pacific against the kamikazes.

That might have free up more slipways, more menpower and steel & specialized metals that were needed in OTL to combat the Atlantic Ocean thread by Donitz's subs

 

[HongCanucker]

Do bears have long enough tails to do that?

The noise is amplified by the much heavier rear end.

 

[CalBear]

Six Iowas in total plus two Montanas?..

You would probably need the allies to crush the German U-boat threat in 1943 so that the U.S. wouldn't need to build those extra 500 to 750 Liberty Cargo ships and likewise could have cut escort destroyer and frigate build up from 800 in total to just 500 .

Need at least half of them 500 DEs & FFs to do duty in the Pacific against the kamikazes.

That might have free up more slipways, more menpower and steel & specialized metals that were needed in OTL to combat the Atlantic Ocean thread by Donitz's subs

Actually it wasn't the Liberty ships, or the DDE/CVE that needed the steel. It was the massive number of amphibious platforms, from assault transports to LCVP (the U.S. constructed 20,000 LCVP alone, that is a LOT of steel).

Even for the U.S. there was only so much production capacity.

 

[Somedevil]

Well the Alaska was trying to line up a torpedo run. which the Guam did manage to do during that battle. Which I believe what made the Nagato turn hard to Port and opened her up for the fatal shot from the Kentucky

 

[Ming777]

There was a reason why Fleet Admiral Halsey almost got booted down to a Rear Admiral. He fell for the same trick twice. First at Leyte Gulf, which led to Samar, then in Okinawa, which led to the Battle of the Ryukyus.

 

[Ming777]

Actually it wasn't the Liberty ships, or the DDE/CVE that needed the steel. It was the massive number of amphibious platforms, from assault transports to LCVP (the U.S. constructed 20,000 LCVP alone, that is a LOT of steel).

Even for the U.S. there was only so much production capacity.

Perhaps, some of the landing ships were outsourced to Canada, since a presumably smaller U-boat threat may have freed room in Canadian yards that would be making the hundreds of corvettes and frigates of the RCN.

 

[Andras]

OOC:How many OTL ships would the US Navy have to sacrifice to get the extra Iowas and the Montana?

A lot, it's not the steel, but the time spent in large slips in the yards.

A single Essex generally took about a year in the slips, a single BB about 30 months.


Norfolk NSY built CV38 and CV40 in the time Kentucky would have been in the yard.

If Illinois was laid down right after NJ came out, then Philly NSY would not have built CV36 and CV45.

If NY NSY lays a Montana down after Iowa, CV20 and CV33 are gone

If Newport News lays down a second Montana after BB58, then CVs 10, 14 and 32 are lost.

That's 9 Essex class sacrificed for 4 extra BB hulls, most of which will not be commissioned before 45 because they require ~3 1/2 years from keel to commissioning. Any BB class ship laid after Jan42 will not see service before mid 45, and more likely 46. Missouri was laid Jan41, was launched in Jan44, and commissioned mid 44, while not actually arriving in the Pacific for action until Jan45. Lay down a BB hull one year later, it won't see the war at all.

Essex hulls averaged 20 months between keel and commission, with Newport News schooling everyone on building Essex class, commissioning CV13 and CV14 in 13 and 14 months respectively. The Naval Shipyards dragged down the average construction time while Newport News and Fore River knocked them out.

I time-lined out 32 Essex class commissioned by end 45 if the last 2 Iowas and all the Alaskas were not built. Two in 42, 12 in each of 43 and 44, and 6 in 45. In OTL 14 Essex were commissioned by the end of the war, I can commission 14 by the end of 43, along with 6 CVLs in 43.

 

[Somedevil]

What about using private shipyards? To Build the Montana class

 

[Andras]

What about using private shipyards? To Build the Montana class

Commercial shipyards with 900-1000ft slips are going full blast making Essex hulls.

The Naval Shipyards actually had relatively few large slips.

Newport News, Fore River, and New York Shipbuilding were the commercial yard involved in building large capital warships.
Other commercial yards built destroyers and such.

The absolute earliest you could get a 5th BB hull laid down is in place of CV-9 (comm'd '42) in NNSD in Apr41. Don't expect that BB in action before Apr45. This also costs you CV12 ('43) and CV21('44). And that's assuming a Iowa (887ft) can be built in a 900ft slip, when the others were laid in 1000ft slips.


Here's a reconstruction I made of OTL ship building.
http://i.imgur.com/VvEIblP.png
http://i.imgur.com/nkRJWT7.png
http://i.imgur.com/QYstsUe.png

 

[Ian_Yorkland]

Didn't Yamato get scuttled by the crew to stop it falling into enemy hands?