What If These Two Warships Met In Combat

[gatordad699]

What is your opinion of victor I/II/III

Soviet boats all sucked monkey ass until the traitors at Toshiba sold them the CNC Propeller milling machine. After that they started getting quite a bit quieter. They still sucked because their internal mounting was crap and their crews were still poor. Victor I not a chance against 637, 688, or Brit boat. Victor II maybe a chance against those 3. Victor III getting close, if not even, to 637, 688 1st Flight, and older Brit boats. Now everyone has shrouded propellers or propulsors. No cavitation noise, virtually no prop noise. It’s all WAA and computers. The above is all purely speculation of course. I have no first hand knowledge of any Soviet submarines performance. My submarines only conducted oceanographic research and the ability to stay deployed for extended periods of time.

In the spirit of the thread, if not pure letter of written, I always wondered how a single Oscar would do against a US CBG. Early Aegis with no VLS, no Burkes. Then VLS Aegis with Burkes. Then maybe late 70s with no Aegis. Just CGN and other escorts. Carrier can have Hawkeye and 2 F-14 up. F-14 each only have 4 Phoenix though. Battlegroup has no SSN protection either.

 

[Giant Man Eating Rabbits]

I'll say go ahead.

In that case, ARA San Luis or ARA Santa Fe going up against HMS Conqueror or any of the S class in 1982.

 

[sparky42]

Could a Des Moines class inflict a "mission kill" on one of the WW1 modernised Battleships like the Italian Conte di Cavour class?

 

[La Rouge Beret]

My submarines only conducted oceanographic research and the ability to stay deployed for extended periods of time.

Completely understand, likewise I too exercised the right of innocent passage with arrays extended to better understand whale migration patterns as part of the same oceanographic research project.

 

[mudhead]

Scharnhorst vs dunkerque

Ninja'd there.

My other thought:
Dunkerque/Strasbourg v Kongo-class (post late-'30s refits)

 

[Parmenion]

Alaska vs Kongo or maybe Nagato could be fun.

 

[YYJ]

1. Some random G class HMS destroyer
2. A heavy cruiser

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Glowworm_in_flames.jpg

 

[YYJ]

Could a Des Moines class inflict a "mission kill" on one of the WW1 modernised Battleships like the Italian Conte di Cavour class?

Absolutely! The range of Des Moines guns is actually 1000 yards longer than Conte di Cavour's 320mm guns, and are directed by radar. And Des Moines can fire 90 rounds per minute. (10rds. per min per barrel x 9 barrels.)

USA 8"/55 (20.3 cm) RF Mark 16 - NavWeaps

www.navweaps.com

Italy 320 mm/44 (12.6") Model 1934 and Model 1936 - NavWeaps

www.navweaps.com

 

[Blue cat]

(Taking a cue from the "What if these 2 aircraft met in combat" thread)

Pick any two possible warship combatants from 1900 forward and pit them in combat.

• for this discussion, any escorts are battling their enemy escort counterparts, and are on the sidelines of the main event
• Keep the combatants reasonably consistent with the time period of their construction. You can bend historic availabilty at sea within limits. No ISOTs please.
• If the combatants are Battleships, "total constructive loss" is good enough for this discussion
• If you must, you can make a case for a two-on-one, or a two-on-two battle
• Feel free to suggest alternative rules

To kick things off:

• MN Strasbourg vs KM Gneisenau
• USS Washington (BB-56) vs Nagato (1942?)
• HMS Renown vs KM Scharnhorst (Norway 1940)
• MN Algerie vs RM Zara (France Fights On - pushing the AH frontier)

Suggest your own matchups, or post your thoughts on the outcomes of the fights I've suggested

WW2 era Fletcher vs WW2 era Gordy class destroyers.

Pick either “as built” for both or 1945 end of WW2 configs for each.

 

[Blue cat]

(Taking a cue from the "What if these 2 aircraft met in combat" thread)

Pick any two possible warship combatants from 1900 forward and pit them in combat.

• for this discussion, any escorts are battling their enemy escort counterparts, and are on the sidelines of the main event
• Keep the combatants reasonably consistent with the time period of their construction. You can bend historic availabilty at sea within limits. No ISOTs please.
• If the combatants are Battleships, "total constructive loss" is good enough for this discussion
• If you must, you can make a case for a two-on-one, or a two-on-two battle
• Feel free to suggest alternative rules

To kick things off:

• MN Strasbourg vs KM Gneisenau
• USS Washington (BB-56) vs Nagato (1942?)
• HMS Renown vs KM Scharnhorst (Norway 1940)
• MN Algerie vs RM Zara (France Fights On - pushing the AH frontier)

Suggest your own matchups, or post your thoughts on the outcomes of the fights I've suggested

Various NATO vessels in a one vs one match with a Sverdlov (sp ?) class cruiser ?

Belfast is one possibility ?

Maybe two or more FRAM Gearings might be another opponent ?

 

[prester.john208]

Soviet boats all sucked monkey ass until the traitors at Toshiba sold them the CNC Propeller milling machine.

Who was convicted of Treason ?

 

[Monk78]

Various NATO vessels in a one vs one match with a Sverdlov (sp ?) class cruiser ?

Belfast is one possibility ?

Maybe two or more FRAM Gearings might be another opponent ?

It would be a graf spee like situation, one sverdlov cornered by 3 opponents

 

[GarethC]

In the spirit of the thread, if not pure letter of written, I always wondered how a single Oscar would do against a US CBG. Early Aegis with no VLS, no Burkes. Then VLS Aegis with Burkes. Then maybe late 70s with no Aegis. Just CGN and other escorts. Carrier can have Hawkeye and 2 F-14 up. F-14 each only have 4 Phoenix though. Battlegroup has no SSN protection either.

K525 commissioned at the end of 1980 so realistically this is at the earliest a 1981 scenario. By that time don't the CGs have Standards and everybody has Phalanx (Phalankoi? Phalanxes? how shall we mangle Greek plurals today?)?

America, a couple of CGs - Belknap or Leahy, or the CGNs if you want - and three or four Spruance and Adams DDs as the ASW escorts. A bit later and you could have a Kidd, I guess.

Back of an envelope calculation suggests that 24 P-700s will not penetrate 2 Belknap's area-SAM defenses, and even if the CG's are pointing the wrong way and under EMCON so have to turn to unmask the SAM launchers and warm up the radars, a handful of leakers will be stopped by the carrier's ESSM and CIWS. Soviet doctrine IIRC said that the Oscar was intended to either support Naval Aviation ALCM attacks with an off-axis threat to complicate the defender's geometry, or to shoot individual missiles at individual high-value commercial targets.

If the Oscar is really going after a CV, the captain is more likely to try to get into range of the big Type 65 torpedoes - and that's why CVBGs have an SSN escort.

 

[lionhead]

Iowa wins handily. In fact, even South Dakota might have decent enough odds.

against a Yamato? How does a South Dakota class have a chance? A Yamato can start shooting from 5 miles further away than a South Dakota. Thats beyond the horizon, if i'm not mistaken. They were equals in speed, but the Yamato has way thicker armor. A South Dakota will be ripped to pieces. Same trouble for the Iowa, athough the Iowa is faster

 

[brazen]

against a Yamato? How does a South Dakota class have a chance? A Yamato can start shooting from 5 miles further away than a South Dakota. Thats beyond the horizon, if i'm not mistaken. They were equals in speed, but the Yamato has way thicker armor. A South Dakota will be ripped to pieces. Same trouble for the Iowa, athough the Iowa is faster

So is the battle on the one perfect day a year when you can reliably range past 25000 Yards, because the Yamato is just going to be wasting shells at maximum range.

Sou Daks will get into range because the Yamato will actually need to hit it's target to sink it, so the range will close.

 

[brazen]

HMS Belfast Vs the Hipper.

A study in whether rapid fire 6" shells will out damage slower but heavier 8" shells.

I'm going for a Belfast win due to Hippers topsides being wrecked quite quickly and unable to range effectively, Belfast will be hurt but still sea worthy, the extra size helping her soak up the damage that would probably sink a standard Town class.

 

[NoMommsen]

Could a Des Moines class inflict a "mission kill" on one of the WW1 modernised Battleships like the Italian Conte di Cavour class?

Absolutely! The range of Des Moines guns is actually 1000 yards longer than Conte di Cavour's 320mm guns, and are directed by radar. And Des Moines can fire 90 rounds per minute. (10rds. per min per barrel x 9 barrels.)

USA 8"/55 (20.3 cm) RF Mark 16 - NavWeaps

www.navweaps.com

Italy 320 mm/44 (12.6") Model 1934 and Model 1936 - NavWeaps

www.navweaps.com

... sry to say but "absolutly" NOT ...
There seems to be a miread about the ranges. Properly reading the linked entries one can learn, that even with the low elevation Conte di Cavour was able to it was the dreadnaught excelling the cruisers guns range by about a thousand yards -not vice versa.

... and at the edge of range EVERY gun becomes unaccurate regardless the target laying method (like radear with the Des Moines).

So ... given some shorter range rather improving the shot accuracy of the italian guns the effect of the MUACH heavier italian shells (3 1/2 times heavier: 525 kg on the italian side to 'mere' 152 kg max. on the american side) will greatly improve the efficiency of every italian hit while with shortening distance the penetration ability of the american shells dwindles. Even at its best the american shells are far form efficient enough (at max 102 mm) to penetrate the italian armor (as upgraded in the thirties to 135 mm above the 'operating' parts and even 165 mm above the magazines).
However ... even with 5 times the possible ROF (and as fast depleting of ammo ;-9 ) with hits not able to penetrated important parts it wouldn't need many hits to severely hit DesMoines with the much larger italian shells.

 

[gatordad699]

K525 commissioned at the end of 1980 so realistically this is at the earliest a 1981 scenario. By that time don't the CGs have Standards and everybody has Phalanx (Phalankoi? Phalanxes? how shall we mangle Greek plurals today?)?

America, a couple of CGs - Belknap or Leahy, or the CGNs if you want - and three or four Spruance and Adams DDs as the ASW escorts. A bit later and you could have a Kidd, I guess.

Back of an envelope calculation suggests that 24 P-700s will not penetrate 2 Belknap's area-SAM defenses, and even if the CG's are pointing the wrong way and under EMCON so have to turn to unmask the SAM launchers and warm up the radars, a handful of leakers will be stopped by the carrier's ESSM and CIWS. Soviet doctrine IIRC said that the Oscar was intended to either support Naval Aviation ALCM attacks with an off-axis threat to complicate the defender's geometry, or to shoot individual missiles at individual high-value commercial targets.

If the Oscar is really going after a CV, the captain is more likely to try to get into range of the big Type 65 torpedoes - and that's why CVBGs have an SSN escort.

Not going to consider a torpedo attack by the Oscar. I’ve done that. It doesn’t turn out well for the targets. Having been the escort I know why they are there. In the early scenario they have SM-1, but each ship has to guide its own missiles. Why would the US SAMs be so effective? You’re talking 2 ships with only 2 launchers each. How long does each reload take? The P-700s are going around 1 mile every 3 seconds. How close did the Oscar get before launching? How fast can an Oscar launch all of its missiles? What would happen to one of the escorts that CIWS killed a huge missile at close range going Mach 1.6? Do the debris damage the ship? Radar antenna? How effective was US ECM? Soviet ECCM? One hit on any escort and it’s dead. Mission killed if not sunk. Are the P-700s really able to network? Seems like too many unknowns. In the later VLS, Aegis scenarios I can see the US defeating 24 missiles. SM-2 or better, ships being able to guide other ships missiles, Aegis control, etc. It’s the early one I wonder about. Probably why we spent a lot of time operating with a CV in the 80s.

 

[I lurk therefore I am]

A modernised G3 Battlecruiser Vs Turpitz.

 

[gatordad699]

Who was convicted of Treason ?

Traitor: noun, “a person who betrays a friend, country, principle, etc.”

Toshiba betrayed the Western world by selling advanced milling machines to the Soviets.

I didn’t use treason because the typical used definition is, “ the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.”

Even though one of the definitions is , “the act of betraying someone or something.”

To answer your question. No person or corporate entity was accused, or convicted of treason against the Japanese government.

In many people’s eyes, especially those of us out there, they betrayed the West.