Search found 3095 matches

by Dave Saxton
Wed Apr 15, 2020 4:19 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

Accounts of Prince of Wales operations in the tropics indicate that the KGV's were poorly suited for operations in such environments. They were not equipped with air conditioning and ventilation below decks was poor. In fact the crew engaged in unauthorized ventilation improvements which probably co...
by Dave Saxton
Tue Apr 07, 2020 4:11 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

Thanks to you both for the info, it makes interesting reading. I'm sorry that I have strayed way off topic here,perhaps it should go back to the 'Shell v Armour topic. But as we are here, I'm not sure at what range these tests were carried out, presumably as they were only aiming at a small piece o...
by Dave Saxton
Mon Apr 06, 2020 9:44 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

The obsolescence of the British and American battle fleets was driven by foreign developments of more powerful ships and aircraft. Hood's armor is good against Scharnhorst's 11 inch guns but overmatched by the Bismarck's 15 inch guns. I can't see how building 14 inch KGV's and NC's makes the Yamato...
by Dave Saxton
Sun Apr 05, 2020 8:39 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

None of the 35,000 ton treaty battleships were worth building in view of the international arms race in the late 1930s. The Japanese were expected to build 16 inch/46,000 ton ships to complement the Nagato class. The Italians already built 15 inch/40,000 ton ships. Then the Bismarck 15 inch/44,000 ...
by Dave Saxton
Sat Apr 04, 2020 3:37 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

As an aside, I also asked if the KG's had been built with 12 x!4" (and all working properly!) would they have been a match for most of the ships of other countries, except perhaps the Iowas and Yamatos? They didn't need 12- 14" guns to match up with contemporary battleships. They matched up good en...
by Dave Saxton
Sat Apr 04, 2020 3:09 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

Gentlemen, I'm going to try your patience once again! Going back to the original question of updating the KG's. In an earlier post which seems to have got lost in the debate about the seaworthiness of the KG class, I asked why that it was possible to build the 'Nelsons' with 3 x 16" turrets and sti...
by Dave Saxton
Fri Mar 27, 2020 3:59 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

One has to consider that the Japanese were unwise to invest such enormous resources into only two battleships. The five KGV class ships made significant contributions to the ultimate Allied victory. This is particularly true in northern waters were operations by aircraft carriers were hampered by en...
by Dave Saxton
Fri Mar 27, 2020 3:43 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

It's easy to see the attraction of quad turrets because one then has 8 guns firing forward and 50% more guns in full broadside than a Bismarck or a Vanguard. However, as Sean points out, bigger turrets and mountings really require larger ships. Once one is dealing with a larger platform then it's a ...
by Dave Saxton
Sun Mar 22, 2020 4:44 pm
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Updating the KGV class
Replies: 77
Views: 3798

Re: Updating the KGV class

Churchill was also critical of the KGV class and thought they compared unfavorably to the North Carolina, and sent memos to the Admiralty about it. The Admiralty replied that the KGV compared favorably on several factors. The KGV had heavier armour protection, and the aircraft hanger amidships did n...
by Dave Saxton
Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:27 am
Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
Topic: Enigma enigmas during PQ17
Replies: 3
Views: 456

Enigma enigmas during PQ17

One of the puzzling aspects to Ultra Intel during PQ 17 was that PQ 17 occurred during July 1942 but the German navy as a whole had gone to the M4 Enigma no later than Feb 2 1942. The literature generally agrees that this resulted in a naval Enigma black out of M4 messages until Dec 1942. Now compou...
by Dave Saxton
Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:32 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: GEMA Radar Development
Replies: 2
Views: 393

Re: GEMA Radar Development

The TS1 was a close clone of the American 316A/B. The early cavity magnetron they were using proved too unstable in frequency for the type of radar they were developing, so they dropped the magnetron and went to triodes. (see page 43 of von Kroge's book) The context given for needing GEMA or NVA tec...
by Dave Saxton
Tue Mar 03, 2020 3:47 pm
Forum: Naval Weapons
Topic: Who won?
Replies: 33
Views: 2378

Re: Who won?

but returning to the Yamoto class ships which were considerably heavier in armament and armour than anything else at the time, would they really have been invulnerable to any battleship shell except perhaps an 18" from a similar sized ship (if one had existed on the allied side)? I just got through...
by Dave Saxton
Mon Mar 02, 2020 10:40 pm
Forum: Naval Weapons
Topic: Who won?
Replies: 33
Views: 2378

Re: Who won?

Another method to shift the balance from favoring the shell winning, and battleships having virtually no IZ at likely combat battle ranges, was to manipulate the striking angle.* Simply increasing armour thickness was not practical in most cases, so manipulating the striking angle could improve the ...
by Dave Saxton
Mon Mar 02, 2020 10:06 pm
Forum: Naval Weapons
Topic: Who won?
Replies: 33
Views: 2378

Re: Who won?

There were two basic concepts in play about how armour could defeat shells. One was that armour could destroy the shell or render it inert. The other was based on preventing effective penetration of a shell. The advent of Krupps Cemented Armour or face hardened armour meant that a shell would shatte...
by Dave Saxton
Mon Mar 02, 2020 5:45 pm
Forum: Naval Weapons
Topic: Who won?
Replies: 33
Views: 2378

Re: Who won?

This is a vast and complex topic! Who won? Neither completely won and neither completely lost. In the case of WW2 designs, it came down to the concept of immunity zone. The concept recognized the reality that no armour could defeat any shell at any battle range. However, it could defeat a given shel...