The YAMATO goes into the Slot

It won't change the outcome. The most likely result is some deeper holes to cover with pierced steel plating on the airfields. There is a chance that the Yamato is lost, but is unlikely. The Mk 13 torpedo was still having problems at the time and it was the most effective way to kill her.

Could the Yamato do so much damage that the airfields could not be fixed with steel plating?

At some point, it becomes cost-ineffective to keep repairing.
 
Correction: It took only 7 minutes for the brand new USN battleship to leave the IJN modernized WW1 battlecruiser a burning cripple. The question is what happens if she runs into a brand new BB twice her size?


Markus,

No. The actual question was about the admittedly superior Japanese optics and night fighting tactics and their effects on a Yamato sortie into the Slot.

My answer to that question described how thirteen IJN ships somehow missed spotting USS Washington as she closed to under 9,000 yards from IJN Kirishima, somehow never opened fire on Washington has she pounded Kirishima, and somehow let Washington retire unmolested after Kirishima was a burning wreck.

I was attempting to point out that, like USN radar, IJN optics and night fighting training wasn't perfect. I was not commenting on the relative merits of a new USN battleship and an elderly, "modernized", IJN battlescruiser/battleship upgrade. I was commenting on the "ambush" that occurred and not the participants in that ambush.

I'm well aware of the differences between Washington and Kirishima. The former was a far superior vessel as proven by her sister ship, USS South Dakota, who was fired upon by the same squadron that somehow missed Washington and suffered relatively minor damage.

This thread is about whether a sortie by Yamato-class battleship into the Slot would materially effect the Guadacanal campaign and is not about the warship trivia genitalia sizing contest that too many of these topics devolve into.

If you follow the link I provided, you can read an essay by an actual naval historian who opines that a single sortie by Yamato;

- Would not damage Henderson by any significantly greater amount than occurred historically,
- Would also use over 5% percent of the IJN's monthly fuel budget during the period and,
- That multiple sorties would still not guarantee the airfield's destruction.


Bill
 
Last edited:
From what I understand the Slot was a treacherous area with a lot of unmarked shoals. YAMATO's deeper draft means she'd probably have to stand off further to avoid running aground. Also, her larger turning circle will put her at a disadvantage in this confined area.

I do believe her heavier guns will do a _lot_ more damage and her better protection will make her far more survivable, especially if backed up by cruisers and destroyers with the Long Lance torpedo.

In the end, though, I don't see any change in the outcome; Japan still ends up being thrown off of Guadalcanal.
 
Could the Yamato do so much damage that the airfields could not be fixed with steel plating?

At some point, it becomes cost-ineffective to keep repairing.

Considering how expensive a sortie by the Yamato would be for the Japanese even if it succeeds and how cheap dumping concrete in holes is for the Americans, with their open shipping routes, it will probably never become cost-ineffective to keep repairing the field. However, the morale effects of the field spending more time wrecked than operating might get the Americans to give up. A single raid is not going to do it though, no matter how devastating, unless they send out the entire First and Third Battle Divisions, which would be quite a sight even if it would burn an entire months worth of fuel in one night.
 
Could the Yamato do so much damage that the airfields could not be fixed with steel plating?


MP,

Simply put, no. The IJN bombardment missions were never supposed to permanently put Henderson out of business. Instead they were meant to do so temporarily. It was during those temporary periods that troops and materials could be safely landed and, hopefully successful, offensives against the US perimeter launched.

Both Axis and Allies learned during the war that permanently damaging airfields was next to impossible. It was far easier to damage or destroy the aircraft using those airfields.

At some point, it becomes cost-ineffective to keep repairing.

That assumes multiple bombardment missions over a lengthy period of time, something the IJN fuel budget cannot handle easily if at all.


Bill
 
There must be, the Kongo class had 14" guns and served as a model for HMS Tiger which only had 13.5". Various other sources onfirm this including Ian Allen
 
There must be, the Kongo class had 14" guns and served as a model for HMS Tiger which only had 13.5". Various other sources onfirm this including Ian Allen

There must be what?

There is also evidence to suggest that the two designs came about independently of each other. The Japanese did insist upon the increase to 14in.
 

burmafrd

Banned
The US 16" 45 had a better shell then the Japanese 18.1"
At close range the punching power of the US Shell would be able to penetrate all but the thickest of the Yamato's armor (conning tower and front of turrets). BOth would be able to penetrate the side armor belts.
The SG radar on the washington was very good and Ching Lee and Glenn Davis were very good at what they did- and the Washington had a very good gunnery crew.
WOuld have been very interesting.
 
Top