Battleship Top Ten

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:35 pm

No Problem Marcelo

RNfanDan · Post by **RNfanDan** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:38 am

Nellie wrote:Why not have a list of the most important ships during WWII based on number of operations, what ship or class served their countries best, or changed the warhistory to their countries favor.

Okay, I'll second that motion!

Beginning of List:
HMS Warspite.
End of list:
(See beginning)

Karl Heidenreich · Post by **Karl Heidenreich** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:51 am

RNfanDan:

Nellie wrote:
Why not have a list of the most important ships during WWII based on number of operations, what ship or class served their countries best, or changed the warhistory to their countries favor.

Okay, I'll second that motion!

Beginning of List:
HMS Warspite.
End of list:
(See beginning)

That was great!

Let´s generate some of the Old Tiornu Effect:

Bismarck's crew was nothing special. Richelieu's crew had more preparation time.

Many of us, Bismarck fans, had agreed that She wasn´t the greatest BB of all. After all, in the list I wrote she barely got in fifth place and, probably, in a draw with Richelieu. I demostrated some open mind in this, but, somehow, I feel some "anti-Bismarck" position, as if this ship was a worthless raft. Man! Bismarck, like or not blew HMS Hood and damaged PoW, the Brits went nuts trying to sink her at all costs. So, Bismarck was some piece of a war machine.

And what is this talk about Richelieu "superior" firepower over Bismarck. Last time I saw both had 8 x 15". How´s that?

Marcelo, nice list!

Best regards!

Tiornu · Post by **Tiornu** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:24 am

I don't know why a statement that a crew was nothing special can be interpreted to mean a ship was a worthless raft, any more than calling a crew average is the same as saying it was the best ever.
Richelieu's 15in guns generated roughly 13% greater muzzle energy than Bismarck's.

Nellie · Post by **Nellie** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:27 am

I nominate Rodney to be on the list of ugliest battleships.

Personally i like those ships because i think they are something personal, 3 triple 16 in a row followed by a high an impressive superstructure, imagine be on the bridge and look forward over 9x16 inch turrets as already one said. It´s something i had payed a lot for to see today if the ships had been preserved.

Tiornu · Post by **Tiornu** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:33 am

Rodnol = self-propelled pimple

ontheslipway · Post by **ontheslipway** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:13 am

Perhaps Rodney & Nelson are best reclassified as fast monitors

But, I rather like the French BB's. You can see how much History has influenced people to these endless debates. Richlieu is rarely mentioned.

About the equation:

guns x shell weight x muzzle velocity x ship speed

Sooo, where's the rate of fire

marcelo_malara · Post by **marcelo_malara** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:52 am

Hi Foeth:

I explained in my post that the rate of fire was disregarded because all of them are at around 30 seconds. And as the flight time was more than that, it doesn´t make sense to put it into que equation.

Nellie · Post by **Nellie** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:29 pm

I see you have forgot the HMS Vanguard, lets put her in place around Bismarck in the list of ten most powerful ships. I think she is also very good looking.

Karl Heidenreich · Post by **Karl Heidenreich** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:00 pm

Foeth:

Perhaps Rodney & Nelson are best reclassified as fast monitors

But, I rather like the French BB's. You can see how much History has influenced people to these endless debates. Richlieu is rarely mentioned.

I agree with Foeth about the Nelson and Rodney. But they still make it in the list, as Gary said, instead of Hood.
About the French BBs I admit that months ago I disregard them but not now (after ostriker get into the forum actually). In the list I placed Richelieu into the Most Powerfull list and in the Most Beautiful list also. Marcelo also take them into account rating the Richelieu above the Bismarck. And I took into account the Italians and the Russians (even for the ugly ship category). So, I believe we are being fair.
If ostriker translated his Richelieu webpage to English I believe we will apreciate more that great French BB.

Tiornu:

Richelieu's 15in guns generated roughly 13% greater muzzle energy than Bismarck's.

Point taken, I forgot that detail.

Marcelo. If you accept I will average your list with mine to see what happen.

Best regards!

RNfanDan · Post by **RNfanDan** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:15 pm

foeth wrote:Perhaps Rodney & Nelson are best reclassified as fast monitors

Nah....no bulges. BIG, WIDE bulges, each more than 1/3 of the total hull beam, are what make monitors MONITORS!

marcelo_malara · Post by **marcelo_malara** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:31 pm

Karl:

I will send you my excel so you can touch the formula adding other factors or coeficients for the factors.

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:19 pm

Battleships are meant to fight, not win beauty contests.

True, Nelson and Rodney were no beauties but I think many battleships would be glad of the speed advantage they had over N + R so that they could avoid an engagement with them.

marcelo_malara · Post by **marcelo_malara** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:36 pm

Nelson and Rodney were dangerously underpowered at 45000 hp. Besides they had only two screws, so damage to one would reduce drastically their speed. Their only advantage was that they were so strange looking, that they could be disguised as a building in the middle of the sea!!!

Karl Heidenreich · Post by **Karl Heidenreich** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:08 pm

After receiving Marcelo´s Excel with the formulas and averaging them with mine we came up with new results. The funny thing is that the new results are very much like the first list but with three new elements:
1. There is a draw in the first place. So, Marcelo composed an 11 ship list and there will remain a 11 ship list but in 10 places because there are 2 in the first place. There is triple draw in the last place also.
2. The competition between Bismarck and Richelieu is settled.
3. After striking it out of the list to give chance to Nelson, the HMS Hood appears again in the list.

Watch:

(The number at the left is the average between Marcelo and me)

Top Ten Most Powerfull WWII Battleships:
9,9375 Yamato
9,9375 Iowa
9,75 South Dak
9,625 North Car
9,1875 Richelieu
9,375 Bismarck
9,1875 Nelson
9,125 Nagato
9 Litorio
9 KGV
9 Hood

I believe that having three ships in a draw in the las place then we canplace them at 8th and open two more places for 8th and 10th.
What do you think?

Best regards