WI no Yamato class, more Fubuki.

What if the Japanese never built Yamato, Musashi or Shinano, but instead used the labor, steel etc to build more Fubuki class destroyers? How might that have affected the course of WWII in the Pacific and Indian oceans?
 
Basically wouldn't happen, the 'Black Shoes' IE the big gun club of the IJN was very firmly in charge. Officers who suggested more DD's would probably be banished to backwaters. The IJN needed more modern battleships to replace their WW1 builds.
 
What if the Japanese never built Yamato, Musashi or Shinano, but instead used the labor, steel etc to build more Fubuki class destroyers? How might that have affected the course of WWII in the Pacific and Indian oceans?

It would not have started, without the big guns of the Yamatos on hand they have no chance of winning the decisive battle against the US battleline.
 
Furthermore why Fubuki class? The Japanese know they have flaws, hence why the Asashio class existed

Anyways assuming same cost ratio vis a vis a Yamato (destroyers are on a different cost curve than battleships, so just hoping for relative ratios) as a Fletcher vis a vis an Iowa, you're talking 17 Destroyers each, or 51 total. Let's be optimistic and make it 60. Of course you need to find an extra 3,000 sailors to man the Destroyers, extra 5,000 if you are optimistic
 
Top