IJN Yamato - A different fate

My dad worked on the Bikini tests, instrumenting the ships (he was a Navy EE at Pearl during the war). So, for sentimental reasons, I vote for that option.
 
The Mikasa was a wreck after the war, only saved because of the efforts of Admiral Nimitz in the late 1950s. It had been a museum since 1925, so using it as a BB is out of the question, even before one considers its rusted condition by 1945. Nagato and Yamato might be keepable, owing to the fact that it wasn't long before Tokyo and Washington were talking again. The two would be confined to port for a good long time, but if NHBL's scenario is possible (has holes but is possible) the two battleships would probably sail again in the early 1950s, with Yamato first as a result of her being far younger and in far better condition. The two ships are used more in the 1960s and 1970s. As Japan's importance in the world grows, so does the Yamato's profile. Age forces Nagato to retire in the late 1960s, but Yamato stays as the flagship of the Japanese Navy.

I know about the state of the Mikasa in post-war Japan, but ws modeling the suggestion on the Treaty of Versailles and what the Allies left the German Navy with. I think the Yamato would be war prize and the Japanese left with battleships that were second rate compared to the newest US battleships.
 
Why not, it seems an obvious thing to do.

When did it change, and how could we keep it from changing?

It changed when spare parts became a significant supply issue, and when ammunition became more complex.

A Napoleonic ship could be kept in service indefinitely with the issue of basic stores; her crew could make any needed modifications from the ship's own resources. A captured French ship that needed some spars replaced, a bunch of new rope, and some blocks could easily use standard British equipment with no noticeable reduction in effectiveness. Gun types were standard enough between navies that supplying shot was no problem, and anyone could use anyone else's powder.

Modern ships aren't like that. You can't keep a WWII German power plant running with US spares. A 15" main gun won't work with 14.5" ammunition - in fact it may not work with another nation's 15" ammunition if the bore/breach are different.

In WWII the US Army had 155mm "guns" and 155mm "howitzers" whose ammunition was only partially compatible. They also had 8in "guns" and 8in "howitzer" - same problem. These weren't captured equipment or limited-use items, these were US-made artillery in wide use in every theater of operations (OK, the 8in "gun" was pretty rare - big sucker). That's a designed family of field artillery from one nation, all of fairly recent manufacture. Consider that some WWII ships had served in WWI, and while there were many similarities on first glance (8in gun heavy cruisers being used by the USN and IJN), a detailed examination of the ships will find more differences than similarities.
 
Top