What if: Battleship vs Battleship!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- I'm using my 1:700 Forces ships to talk about how I think the real mighty vessels would fair against each other in a fictional 1 vs 1 battle. As I said in the video, this is all in good, nerdy fun! :D
Missouri would win the Missouri had longer range guns even the experts say the Missouri would win.....
Keep in mind that HMS Hood was not a battleship, but a battlecruiser, and was never designed to fight battleships, as she had sacrificed deck armor for speed. Hood could run from anything heavy enough to hurt her, and sink anything fast enough to catch her (Speed = Protection)
ray west That's not entirely true. She couldn't outrun the Bismarck at full steam.
And Hood was a WW1 designed ship vs a WW2 modern battleship.
philipm06 My point exactly
philipm06 & Sam Deighton: True, we are comparing ships of a different era and character: HMS Hood was a magnificent ocean greyhound, that swelled the pride of the Royal Navy throughout her long service career, and Bismarck ended up on the ocean floor before her paint was dry. Bismarck was a re-hashed WW 1 design, which planted the seeds of her destruction, and although she proved very difficult to actually sink, it was remarkably easy to render her ineffective as a fighting unit. Battlecruisers were designed to fight cruisers, requiring only big guns and high speed, not heavy armor, and to send them out after battleships was reckless. Admiral Tovey considered ordering Holland to let Price of Wales lead the attack against Bismarck, but decided against it. What a thing to have to live with.
ray west I wouldn't say she was easy to render ineffective. Were she not hit by a lucky torpedo to the rudders, she probably would have been fully capable of escaping to the Atlantic. And Prince of Wales had it's chance--it fought Bismarck alongside the Hood. Two of it's experimental quadruple 14" turrets jammed, and it suffered damage from Prinz Eugen. Either way though. It's pretty obvious that the Bismarck was not a rehashed WWI design--her hull was modern in shape and design, and she was designed and built on Hitler's demand when he wanted to build up the German navy (before the unbuilt H43 and the Yamato-dwarfing H44). It was the most modern ship in the world at the time.
please tell me where I can get these models. they're amazing
FiveOgamer i have Missouri you can buy them
Yes please tell us
Its forces of valor models
I live in Norway, 100 meters away from Tirpitz
''Liegeplatz''
i showed two Tirpitz experts from Italy and germany around the fjord this summer. an amazing day, that was.
No way bro.
The tirpitz was the same as the bismarck
@@seansands424 She was a modified sister ship but they weren't completely identical.
As a matter of fact with her modifications Tirpitz was definitely the stronger of the two ships by far.
She also had some of her secondaries taken off In favour of torpedoes
@@tbayspotting yes, she was a special ship
You forgot to mention that the Tirpitz also had torpedos I believe. And if they were able to close the gap by that much to launch the torpedos, that could of been a game changer but that’s a big what if though.
Torpedoes were only used once in a battleship when Rodney tried to torpedo Bismarck
I totally agree.
The Missouri barely had any service in ww2
You should've included the USS North Carolina
Michael Jordon Hey Michael. I agree that the North Carolina would have been a more suitable ship for this A/B/C "what if" comparison. Unfortunately, Forces of Valor doesn't make a North Carolina model, so I stuck with the Missouri. Besides, it's fun to talk about the 'baddest of the bad' warships. :D
That sucks that there is no USS NC forces of valor model
Yamato was designed to fight other battleships of the time, the American North Carolina , South Carolina and Washington were the big boys at the time. The Americans knew about the Yamato's and purposeful built the Iowa's to fight the Yamato's. The armor was stresses for the 18 inch shells. In post war trials armor plate from the Yamato class were fired on by 16 inch shells and they penetrated. Makes you wonder. The Bismark and sister Tripez were fast much like the American Iowa's fast. 35 knot fast for their size that was impressive. Yamato was rated at 31 knots. For your comparison the USS Washington might very possibly be a better Tripez vs fight. The Washington was up in Iceland at the American start of the war as the American response to the Bismark being used as a surface raider early in the war effort. She stayed in the Atlantic for operation torch and finally crossed thru Panama canal and into the pacific only after that in time to make the night time naval battleship vs battleship slug fest of the Iron Bottom Sound off Guadalcanal. Finally a lot of speculation would come down to hits. In Hood vs Bismark Hood got hit first and repeatedly. While the Bismark was missed most of the engagement weapon accuracy becomes paramount when two big brawlers are slugging it out. Yamato missed often on the small destroyers coming in for torpedo runs and only got a few hits on the destroyers and light "jeep" carriers but would she have missed a larger battleship? To be honest that all she needed on the small targets. In battleship on battleship fights, hits matter, even if the shell doesn't penetrate the armor belt or citadel the direct effect of a shell hit depends on where they land. A 15/16/18 inch shell hitting the turret near to ring without penetration will still disable that turret. Take out the bridge first ouch the ships command is gone. Knock out the targeting optics or radar like with Scharnhorst and she goes blind. For Hood it was terminal, when an armor piercing shell penetrated deep and boom three sailors are left floating in the water. Bismark we now know suffered a total loss of one rudder with the other bent over, plus one propeller was also blown away. At that point she became the worlds largest circling target dummy that could still shoot back but was going to die when the main British force showed up.
St. Nick
The Iowas were not built to slug it out with the Yamato, that was the Montana’s job, but the Montana was abandoned in favor of bigger carriers. The Iowa was built to escort said carriers.
Quinn Von Kerman that’s true, but that’s not to say the Iowa Class couldn’t beat a Yamato, if they managed to stay at range or it was in a low visibility situation, I’d say the Iowa class would win without a doubt or at least a stalemate. If Yamato or Musashi got within close range to where her guns could fire accurately, Yamato would win. It depends completely on the situation. Iowa also had a 4:1 fire ratio on the Yamato.
I think you're forgetting that the energy imparted by the higher velocity 16in shells, plus their better armour piercing characteristics, would give Missouri quite an edge over Yamato. The ballistic properties and ability to punch up against thicker or harder armour is what made the Missouri's guns so deadly. The monsters on Yamato could certainly put Missouri's armour to shame, but Missouri's guns are no slouch either. I'd put them on par with Yamato's overall.
The REAL difference would be in the crew. Admiral Willis (Ching Lee) and crew from the Washington, armed with RADAR, would have beat the snot out of the Yamato or Mushashi. This introverted US admiral became without question the most adept and talented BB tactician on the face of the earth. He insisted on exhausting radar to gunnery practice until accuracy was guaranteed. His three salvo nine hits tore the Japanese BB Yamishiro to shreds during an engagement at Guadalcanal. A night time engagement. The Japanese superiority using their dreaded "Long Lance" oxygen torpedo was of far more importance.
It was the kiroshima the Washington sunk
I think the over riding factor that no one brings up, except you , is the commander of the ships. Admiral Willis was totally superb commander of battleships. In Guadalcanal however it was Washington & South Dakota that took on the Kirishima. The Douth Dakota was pummeled by Kirishima, her directors knocked out & she was in a bad position if not for Washington, which was undetected by Kirishima. The Iowas show a poor record against cruiser despite superior FC, scoring less than 20% ratio. At faster speeds Iowa class Battleships demonstrated less & less accuracy.I think a good analogy would be in comparing pilots of aircraft. A great pilot , despite having an inferior machine was more apt to score a victory over an inexperienced one, even though they may possess a superior weapon. As you said Admiral Willis (Chin Lee) drove his crew on pin point firing utilizing FC. Other captains did not necessarily do the same. In the battle between Hood & Bismarck Holand tried to close the distance & reduced his fire power, perhaps another tactic would have allowed him to prevail. We shall never know. But I think that the captain is the ultimate X factor and is underrated by most people.
This guy has something to say about Yamato vs. Iowa- class. Basically, the ships are pretty evenly matched. www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm
I think they can only do that from long ranges
Where did you get these models!? They are sick
Sorry for late reply but I found it. The brand is called forces of valor there is quite a few ships have a look.
@@lordfarqaad2238 Thanks for responding but i already found them ages ago 🙃👌
The Yamato could win when the day was perfect, however the Iowa class could win in any other day, due to radar systems, fire control and speed. Really the Iowa could win 80% of the time because weather isn't perfect.
even if day was perfect Iowa class could hit it beyond the horizon....Yamato cant see theat far even under perfect conditions.
Pretty much true.
@@34scot Yamato win 100%. Because the American thought that they fought against 16 inch Japanese battleship. So the US battleship was going to shoot in 16 inch gun battle plans.
But the Yamato 18.1 inch guns will gain much more advantage in US battle plan. The 18.1 inch shells could penetrate every inch of the Iowa class battleship ( Iowa, New Jersey, Missouri,....) but the American 16 inch shell could do no harm to Yamato's armour.
Moreover, the Yamato's guns are very accurate. ( hit the Gambier bay at very long distance )
The American thought the Yamato's guns were 16 inch. So the Yamato will win 100% .
@@จักษ์นาถะพินธุ
I beg to differ sir, I think your info is incorrect. The US new the Yamamoto class had 18.1" guns. The US went with the mk7 16"50 because it penetrated better than the rounds it was expected to go against.
@@จักษ์นาถะพินธุ Iowa could definetly penetrate Yamato's armor.
I think speed is the key. The Missouri was faster and more maneuverable. Combine that with the radar technology, the Missouri would have a better chance of scoring the first hits while being fast enough to keep her distance from all those secondaries
Getting close to a Iowa class Is never a good thing
It is to Yamato. Iowa fairs the best at long range in my opinion, so close range means death for Iowa ur it was fighting the Yamato
me at the beginning of vid: hmmm u got the tirpitz huh, wonder why him over his more famous brother, Bismark..... *few seconds later .....bismark comes out * "ahh there he is, okay" *introduces hood shortly after * me _wheezing_
Uss missouri with its superior secondary battery and 16 guns with greater shell velocity therefore greater penetration power would definitely beat yamato
After the Bismarck was sunk , the Germans hid the Tirpitz in a fjord in Norway! She only went out at night. The Tirpitz was sunk by RAF bombers in 1944. Her remains were cleaned up in 1950's.
Yamato has more secondarys and 18 inc guns. Yamato is superior
@@Admiral_fed-up74 In a nutshell, I think Missouri would prevail over Yamato. Missouri had a 6 knot speed advantage and excellent all weather radar controlled guns. In the battle of Surigao Strait old American battleships fitted with new radar fire control systems were able to hit and sink Japanese battleships with their opening salvos at great range and at night. The Japanese battleships never even saw the American battleships. Yamato had excellent optical rangefinders which were very effective in daylight but were unable to accurately determine range at night. Missouri however in daylight could keep radar contact with Yamato while using it's superior speed to stay out of range of Yamato's guns then wait for nightfall to close the range and engage Yamato. American radar was not only able to track ships in all weather but was also able to see shell splashes on their radar screens! This gave the Americans a huge advantage in that they could see fall of shot in real time and thus very accurately adjust their aim.
The Iowa class (Missouri) would destroy both battleships plus the Bismarck took much more of a beating than the yamato
True
LOL
Bismarck and tirpitz would sink all iowa class ships
@@FLASH24x do you even know how more advance the iowa class is kid?
Bismarck/tirpitz has 8 15 inch guns
While the iowa class(4 of them) has 9 16 inch guns
Also the iowa class will outrange both of them
Even for a 1 iowa class can handle both tirp and bis
@@LINK-is3oc ye, but I think you exaggerate.
Edit:Ohhh I thought you were saying 1v2 lol
@@FLASH24x In a nutshell, I think Missouri would prevail over Yamato. Missouri had a 6 knot speed advantage and excellent all weather radar controlled guns. In the battle of Surigao Strait old American battleships fitted with new radar fire control systems were able to hit and sink Japanese battleships with their opening salvos at great range and at night. The Japanese battleships never even saw the American battleships. Yamato had excellent optical rangefinders which were very effective in daylight but were unable to accurately determine range at night. Missouri however in daylight could keep radar contact with Yamato while using it's superior speed to stay out of range of Yamato's guns then wait for nightfall to close the range and engage Yamato. American radar was not only able to track ships in all weather but was also able to see shell splashes on their radar screens! This gave the Americans a huge advantage in that they could see fall of shot in real time and thus very accurately adjust their aim.
I have 1 predicament about what you explained and that's to factor in weather. the second you factor in any weather the yamato has a worse and worse chance as the weather gets worse. the Iowa and Bismarck classes had radar that could easy pinpoint you through thick and dense weather conditions. they could then send that info to either the fire control recorders and computers as the Americans would have or sent that info straight to the guns and controller as the Germans would have done. the yamato on the other hand was old and not equipped with such systems, they still had the radar and fire control computers but these were nowhere near as advanced as their German or American counterparts. because of this lack of technology the yamato would be at a serious disadvantage during adverse weather conditions as its fire directors would be at a lack of visibility and their spotting aircraft would as well. with fall of shot and enemy position unknown the yamato would be a sitting duck until the faster and more prepared Iowa fired its first salvo. now most likely the Iowa would take advantage of how it was built and it would stay at around 71% of its max range or around 30km. at this range the Iowa could easily take advantage of its sloped belt and its incredibly deck pen and pen trough not the main guns but the secondary gun and inflict major damage to the ammo racks as well as to the superstructure leading to a possible secondary ammo or powder explosion which no ship can take but again its really impossible to say what would really happen so this is just one of millions of possibilities
The Yamato had no problem badly damaging USS White Plains off Samar in rain clouds with its third salvo using 18.1 inch Type1 shell at 34.800 Yards
The bismarck radar was obsolete garbage could only see battleship size target out to 26.000 Yards
no the Bismarcks radar system could spot cruiser size targets out to approx 32,000 yard and battleships size targets out to more than 44,000 yards , her 15 inch guns had a range of only 39,000 yards , the problem with them were the ( if you look at what happened in real life) blast of her own guns damaged them
@@michaelworsley3341 bad placement lol
@@jers59 She(Yamato) needs to zero in the target
Not only was the Big M better with shooting systems but also a more maneuverable ship ,advantage Missouri
James Anagnos yes Yamato was BUILT to sink battle ships advantage Yamato
+Bradens reviews Radar vs Eye Optics? iowa class could lob 16inchMk7 on the yamato without knowing. so yeah Advantage iowaclass
NerizzJaye Abo what if they miss? What if Yamatos crew see the flash. Overall they both have the advantage
It's based on situations.
If it's raining,Iowa wins(better radar tech)
If it's clear and closer range,Yamato.
Big M 🤔 we called her the Mighty Mo when I was aboard. We called the Jersey BB62 the Big J when I was aboard her also.
Remember the Missouri's guns were radar guided or aimed thus the Missouri could do some wild maneuvering and still score hits where as the Japanese would bracket fire which meant they would have to fire at least
three salves to "zero" in on its target. With the ability of the Missouri to maneuver and fire meant bracketing would be difficult if not impossible. So I give it to the "Mighty Mo" and besides the Japanese talk funny.
Actually the Yamato had good accuracy. It was equipped with the latest range finder of its day.
De CapitanFluffy no it was one of the worst the Iowa class had the best radar
Bill Williams lmao, I'm sure they'd think that you talked funny also.
A range-finder is only useful in clear weather, and in visual range. The advantage of radar targeting is that it's useful in all weather, out of visual range, at night, and etc. Ships I served on had rangefinders as *backups*, but in practice all gunnery was radar-guided.
The Bismarck for example took 700 hits from 16 and 14 inch guns 12 torpedos and was still sunk by scuttling. If the crew hadnt scuttled it was predicted that it woudlve taken another 2 DAYS of shelling to sink her
german historical facts... you can also read or hear that in every documentation
Aye, the Bismarck's best weapon was her armour. While in thickness and placement, it was comparable in most respects to HMS Hood, Bismarck had the advantage of a turtleback armour scheme, which improved overall protection of the citadel, effectively making Bismarck immune to anything but the heaviest plunging fire.
Bismarck might just be the model battleship of her time. Even the more modern Iowas couldn't compare to Bismarck. She was almost perfectly balanced. Only her relatively weak torpedo protection and exposed rudders presented any serious flaw in her design.
I think only Vanguard, the Iowa-Class and the Yamato-Class could ever really match her. Prince of Wales as we know couldn't penetrate Bismarck's armour. Not even Hood's impressive artillery had much of a chance of doing so. Rodney reported bounces and ricochets!
The super-steel that was Bismarck's Krupp cemented armour was just that good. Combine that with a turtleback scheme, and you have one seriously tough ship against even the heaviest barrage that could be mustered against her.
Dylan Wight don't forget Prince of Wales put a 15 inch hole in the armor belt . Main fuel tank was ruptured and the Bismarck had to head for repairs immediately.I don't think you guys are giving the south Dakota class enough credit.heavy, shorter .all or nothing armour.
@Randy Johnson
The damage sustained from Prince of Wales was hardly lethal, but it was ultimately the damage that mission killed Bismarck regardless of her eventual fate. It was the critical damage that prevented Bismarck from fulfilling her mission, and that's all that matters.
That being said, miracles do happen and PoW managing to put a 14in shell through Bismarck's armour was just as unlikely (*HMS Queen Mary laughs derisively*) as Bismark scoring that miracle hit against Hood.
South Dakotas were certainly an improvement of the North Carolinas, but an all-or-nothing scheme is only as good as its flooding control. The USN was always at a serious disadvantage in their armour scheme. For one, USN battleships were designed for the Pacific since the Britain and the Royal Navy were responsible for safeguarding the Atlantic. The Pacific favoured faster ships, and this could only ever be achieved by reducing armour *somewhere*.
Moreover, long ships are fast ships, but heavy ships are slow ships. So armour had to be sacrificed anywhere but the citadel. The result was a scheme that left much to be desired in hull integrity. If hit below the water line in the bow or stern, even the best protected battleships of the USN would suffer the same problems that befell Bismarck.
What we need to remember is Lutjens ordered mission abandonment to effect repairs. Bismarck herself was still in fine fighting condition, but her mission *wasn't* to duke it out with the RN. Prince of Wales, killed Bismarck, not by sinking her (she didn't), but by preventing her from ever fulfilling her mission. In all other respects, Bismarck would have floored Hood and Prince of Wales in the same engagement. One penetrating hit to her fuel tank wasn't fatal, but it was enough to force Lutjens to abandon the mission. As a fighting ship, Bismarck's armour, artillery and superb fire control (as far as Atlantic ships are concerned) was still very much in her favour.
Had it been a simple slugging match, Bismarck would have eventually prevailed.
The Alabama was close by the cowards of the tirpitz.one on one.the tirpitz declined.obviously the Alabama was dominate
You might want to consider the more modern fire control system of the Bismarck
TheCdwechsler you also have to consider that the Bismarck was rushed into battle and damaged her own rangefinder radar in the engagement with HMS Hood when she first fired her 15 in guns, none the less, she had a lot of fire power and contrary to popular use at the time, Germans used radar as a means of rangefinding, so to damage their own rangefinder and score a magazine hit that sank the Hood in 3 min with only 3 survivors is nothing short of spectacular
TheCdwechsler you also might want to consider the Missouri's fire control.The Missouri could take evasive action and still hold its fireing solution.If the fight takes place at night or in poor visibility game over Missouri wins.
not that fast... to sink the tirp/bis you have to fight her at least 12hours and no night (exept at the pole) is longer then 12h
Moreover, you have to take into account that Rodney reported bounces against the turtleback scheme of the Bismarck and Tirpitz.
Missouri had a much better radar central fire control system than either the Yamato or the Tirpitz. Combine that with the greater speed of the Missouri, it would not be a contest. The Missouri could stand out of range of the either of the opponents with her speed and pound them to rubble with her accurate radar fire control.
And the crew of the Bismarck was trained specifically to take out the hood for nearly 4 months I think
Quality of steel of USA warship may have been superior compared to
quality of steel on Yamato
Ye
US had better tech
it was, it was actually about 12-15% stronger
The Sumitomo steel was the best in WW2. The US had to copy Sumitomo's duramenium. ( found on the Zero's wing spar )
It really comes down to shell ballistics (accuracy). The Iowa class were thge most heavilky armored battleships. The Hood was old already and anything the British make is crap right off the bat. There were several BB vs BB actions in the Pacific. The Japanese didn't fair too well.
Bismarck made for a very interesting story in my youth, but lets get real. She was designed by a country which had been prevented from building battleships for 20 years, and she was base on a design that was 20 years old. She was built that size because her designers lacked recent experience building large warships. The 15 inch gun was very good, but they came out with the WWI Queen Elizabeth class battleships. The last BB's built by Germany were Baden and Bayern, with matching caliber guns. Twenty years later, Germany starts building battleships again, with the same caliber. Other countries have moved on yo 16 and 18 inch guns. So, all that displacement was wasted on a ship with smaller (and fewer) guns, and a lot of important equipment that was not well protected. And while she was capable of soaking up a lot of punishment at shorter ranges, that was because her armor scheme was designed to do just that. While formidable when she was launched, Bismarck was quickly and decisively surpassed by new construction in other countries.
Not really. RN ended up moving to smaller guns on the kgv class and bl15 at the largest (used on the last bb) Reason was simply carriers signed the end of bbs. Everyone knew the bb days were over except USA and jp.
Hello but eliminating Tirpitz is wrong because she has 350mm armour and Missouri has 301mm armour so Missouri can't penetrate the citadel and coning tower of Tirpitz but Tirpitz could damage a lot with 380mm guns so the real second is Tirpitz.I m not saying anything to yamato but in a long range combat Tirpitz and Missouri could win because yamato doesn't have radars but Missouri and Tirpitz have so the list is this(in long range 1v1)1.Tirpitz or Missouri 2.Missouri or Tirpitz 3.yamato--------(in short-medium range 1v1) 1.yamato 2.tirpitz 3.Missouri (Thanks for reading)
On the other hand all USA battle ships had Ford instrument analog computers that were faster and more able to find weak points the anything Japan, Germany or Italy had. The same test was run at UT-Austin in 174 and the Iowa had the advantage per there Super Computer system.
Just a thought: Wiki on Russian "World War II saw the end of the battleship as the dominant force in the world's navies. On the outbreak of the War, large fleets of battleships-many inherited from the dreadnought era decades before-were one of the decisive forces in naval thinking. By the end of the War, battleship construction was all but halted, and almost every remaining battleship was retired or scrapped within a few years of its end."
In many of the crucial battles of the Pacific, for instance Coral Sea and Midway, battleships were either absent or overshadowed as carriers launched wave after wave of planes into the attack at a range of hundreds of miles. The primary tasks for battleships in the Pacific became shore bombardment and anti-aircraft defense for the carriers. The two largest battleships ever constructed, Japan's Yamato class, which carried a main battery of nine 18.1-inch (460 millimetre) guns were designed to be a principal strategic weapons, but Yamato fired her main guns in only one engagement, while Mushashi never fired her main guns in an engagement. They were hampered by technical deficiencies (slow battleships were incapable of operating with fast carriers), faulty military doctrine (the Japanese waited for a "decisive battle", which never came), and defective dispositions (as at Midway).[8]
wow....times have sure changed.....when was the last time you heard a statement saying Ford's precision machinery was better than japan's lol
The Germans also had such computers. The Germans and the Americans were the only nations that had RPC (remote power control) from computer to guns. They had been invented by the British (Pollen and Dreyer). The British called their computers “tables” and the USN range keepers.
The Missouri 16" 50 were better than Yamato, they could shoot farther, faster and accurately because the range finders were better. Missouri could engage earlier than Yamato and was faster, they could stay out of range of Yamato and defeat it.
Finally someone who doesn't base fights off specs but on how life would go. Congratulations :)
I see this kind of thing in these amature comparisons very often. People tend to focus too much on the design characteristics of the ship itself, while ignoring some of the critical points that may decide these kinds of battles.
The first thing is gunnery. It's critical that no matter what kind of armament you have, that you can do little beyond scaring the shit out of your enemy, if you don't hit them. Some of this has to do with secondary systems, like the optics of the German and Japanese guns. A large part has to do with training, and how well your crew aims, and how many shots they are getting off per unit time. This last does depend on the officer corps, the admirals and the captains who readied these ships for war.
The second thing, and it is only second because you can never win if you don't actually hit the enemy, is damage control. Standing to, against the best that the Kriegsmarine, the IJN, or Her Majesty's Navy, you are going to get hit. Now I can have no opinion on this, lacking any experience, but I have read the opinions on offer by many officers of many navies... and I think that given the limits of the officer corps and crew training against possible catastrophic damage, that US ships generally have an edge here. USN ships were well crafted to begin with, and were better set up for the exigencies of damage control than almost any other.
Given these two points, there was a design philosophy that takes into account how these ships were to be used. The secondary armament on Yamato were indeed impressive. If you are going to steam the ship up next to an island and try to sink it, they would be quite useful. Less flippantly, if you wanted to, or were able to, steam the ship into an inner city harbor, and sink that, they might prove devastating. Against the first line battle lines of another modern navy, however, there would be few scenarios where they would come into action. End of battle, steaming in to finish people off, I'll grant you. In most cases, this did not happen, considering the damaged being caused at extended ranges by Sixteen or even Eighteen inches.
Iowas, on the other hand, were never designed for knife fighting. Any admiral or captain who chose to initiate one, must needs have been in a very tight pickel indeed. The secondary armament of dual purpose 5" 38's was a much more useful and modern mix of weaponry, considering the threats that actually pertained once the nations that owned these battleships came into conflict.
The notion that Iowa was not designed to take on a ship like the Yamato is, to my mind and reading, the height of absurdity. She was designed to be fast, and to maneuver beyond the effective range of such ships, hitting them with main batteries that were designed with ranges and penetrations that no ship could withstand for extended periods. That was how she was designed, and how she was to be fought, and how here captains and admirals would have used her in a surface engagement. Her radar, her optics, her mechanicals and rates of fire, and all here training were geared toward this end.
Likewise, the notion that the design bureau that came up with this class did not know or appreciate the threat of ships like Yamato or Bismarck, Is equally absurd. Granted, that would have been better if we had executed the people responsible for designing our torpedos, or better, put them to work doing something more useful to society like picking crops along with other farm workers; but, overall our ship designs performed well.
I'm grateful every day that I never faced the need to serve in such battles, based largely on the sacrifices and service of those very brave men. However, with all things being equal, In a battle between these ships, I would have chosen to be aboard the Iowa class every day of the week, and three times on Sunday.
The Japanese fire control systems were problematic, being unable to develop an accurate firing solution while maneuvering. US gunnery was radar-guided and much better able to track contacts and compute firing solutions on the run. If I was the commander of a US battleship formation and had to take on Japanese battleships I'd want to find them in the dark, in bad weather, at long range. Running dark-and-dirty I'd parallel them and start firing at long range, where they'd have to try and range on my gun flashes. Then turn towards them, close the range by 1-2 miles, turn away to open the range, turn back towards them, speed up, slow down - change something every 30 seconds or so, keep the situation in a state of flux so the Japanese can't develop a good solution, and keep hammering away at long range.
Missouri's search and fire control radar was far superior to that of the Yamato, seriously tipping the scales in favor of the Missouri always assuming her commander is able to use that to his advantage in the manner of Duke of York v Scharnhorst.Enjoyed your presentation.
The Iowa class were in fact bigger then the Yamato and has better designed fetchers to reduce weight and add speed so she could keep up with the heavy battlers cruisers that were converted to flat tops
I will take the Alaska over the Scharnhorst.
Also we had more testing time;
Among US-built battleships, Texas is notable for her sizeable number of firsts: the first US Navy vessel to house a permanently assigned contingent of US Marines, the first US battleship to mount anti-aircraft guns, the first US ship to control gunfire with directors and range-keepers (analog forerunners of today's computers), the first US battleship to launch an aircraft,[10] from a platform on Turret 2,[11] one of the first to receive the CXAM-1 version of CXAM production radar in the US Navy,[A 2] the first US battleship to become a permanent museum ship,[A 3][10] and the first battleship declared to be a US National Historic Landmark.[A 4] Current plans have been set to build a dry berth around the ship to help prevent further deterioration on the historic ship.
Number 1: Where did you get those models????
Number2: Are they die-cast models or plastic????
The video author (Shiden Kai) has a lot of valid points, and it makes logical sense that it would come down to the Missouri vs the Yamato.
However, while the Yamato does have larger guns and heavier armor, the Missouri's better gun technology and munitions, would put them on "close to" an equal playing field.... at least enough to where the deciding factor may come down to which ship captain utilized the best tactics and strategy, given their ship's strengths and weaknesses.
And like the author suggested, IRL (in real life), it could go either way, and nobody could say for sure, without it actually happening.
And luck
In a nutshell, I think Missouri would prevail over Yamato. Missouri had a 6 knot speed advantage and excellent all weather radar controlled guns. In the battle of Surigao Strait old American battleships fitted with new radar fire control systems were able to hit and sink Japanese battleships with their opening salvos at great range and at night. The Japanese battleships never even saw the American battleships. Yamato had excellent optical rangefinders which were very effective in daylight but were unable to accurately determine range at night. Missouri however in daylight could keep radar contact with Yamato while using it's superior speed to stay out of range of Yamato's guns then wait for nightfall to close the range and engage Yamato. American radar was not only able to track ships in all weather but was also able to see shell splashes on their radar screens! This gave the Americans a huge advantage in that they could see fall of shot in real time and thus very accurately adjust their aim.
@@1982nsu I believe you are right, and your argument is full of fact-based legitimate claims, and makes use of real-world logic and reasoning.
Nice video and models. The Bismark got a lucky shot that hit the Hood in its' ammo compartment and it blew up. Bismark and Tirpitz were sister ships. The Iowa class ships were the best.
an EMP war would be the rebirth of analog technology
Then again the Missouri never sailed alone at one point she even sailed with all three of her sisters (Iowa, New Jersey, and Wisconsin), that would be a bad day even if Yamato brought Mushashi along.
Yeah and when both take their transformed aircraft carrier sister it would be funny
The Hood was Actually a Battle cruiser, not a battle ship.
only in name. it was a battle ship.
It was a very big Battlecruiser. Almost the same tonnage as the Bismarck, with the same sized guns.
Mar Well, it had less armor, but the same power as a battleship. It’s a battlecruiser, but an absolutely gargantuan battlecruiser.
Hey Shinden. Like your models! Iowa class BBs vs Yamato discussions seem to be everywhere. I don't know why since neither ship achieved much during WW2 & certainly were not critical to the final result. The 2 Yamatos in hindsight were an enormous waste and the construction materials better dedicated to making 2 more Shokaku carriers. A one on one Iowa class vs Yamato battle was a near impossibility as the Iowas almost never traveled the Pacific alone. The US built 10 modern fast battleships to the IJNs 2. More than likely one or 2 Yamatos would have to face 2 or more times their number. Both ships had their Achilles heels. Most specifically the Yamatos torpedo belt welds were very weak & peeled like an orange when struck. During the war the US knew very little about Yamato in fact some of the Admirals who commanded both ships were not permitted to know the size of the main battery. After the war the USN war gamed Iowa Yamato encounters and a Defence think tank did a computer simulation in the 90s and the Iowa ships won in all cases. However the Iowa Fire control radars however were out in the open and an early hit could knock them out and remove most of the Iowa advantage. Of course in that case she could easily run away.
this was a good video. your assessment were good, but I saw where they tested one of the Yamato's 18.1 inch guns after the end of World War 2 against a slab of the Iowa class's armor. The Yamato's shell didn't punch thru. However, they did a test of the Yamato's armor against an Iowa's 16 inch gun and the 16 incher punched straight through the Yamato's armor. In terms of gun power, Yamato was more powerful, but the Missouri's guns were more accurate and more able to punch through. Also the Missouri had better radar than Yamato, so Missouri could shoot first, see where her shells landed and redirect her fire before Yamato could return fire. With that, both Yamato and Missouri would have killed both Bismarck and Tirpitz. thou Bismarck and Tirpitz were modern ships, their design was based on a world war 1 battleship, so they would have been a good fighting ship, they would have been sunk by Yamato and Missouri with little trouble, if they weren't victims of airpower. as far as the Hood, her battlecruiser design left her weak from her birth, and the Missouri, Tirpitz, and Yamato would have sunk her in the same matter as bismarck
accuatly it was on perfect condition for penetrate but another test show that 16 inch cannot pen the yamatos thickest armor ,just a piece of cake
Had Lutjens not been aboard Bismark on 24 May, 1941, Lindemann almost certainly would've pursued the compromised Prince of Wales and finished her off.
Yup and looking and conditions at hand he would have made his way back to Norway not like lutjens to France through open waters without radar. I mean what was he even thinking
Where the hood where the hood where the hood at!? :D
I see you, DMX!
logan Cooper at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean XD
Fak you M8
Is right beside me m8
logan Cooper the hood is in half by the bottom of the see
yea the Hood is at the bottom of the sea, but so is the Bismarck and Yamato. Although Hood was in no way our most powerful warship, something more like the kg5 or vanguard would be more suited
BRO CAN YOU MAKE THE BISMARCK THE MOVIE AND THE YAMATO AS WELL
The 18" gun was inferior to the 16" in terms of range, reload time, muzzle velocity, and accuracy. 16" mrk 50 gun was on par with 18" gun, now account for the fact that the Iowas as all US battleships armor were designed to withstand the impact of their own guns that they carried.
Except the Iowa class bbs
Yes they did pretty sure I studied these ships pretty well
Test after the war showed Iowa steel could protect from Yamato's 18.1 inch guns but the YAMATO STEEL COULD NOT PROJECT FROM THE 16 INCH 2700 LBS ROUNDS.
Bruce Lendrum true the Iowa's were just way better ships
Bruce Lendrum This proves that it is the quality of the armor not the quantity.
Tirpitz is way better armored than the uss missouri cause the uss missouri is lightly armored and the tirpitz also had radar
missouri had bigger guns AND better radar
@@trishasellesin2998 missouri had 16 inch guns and tirpitz 15 so taht means the length and width ar a bit wider wich doesn't make that much difference and the radar of was said to be the best in the world according to america but that's not totally true cause with radar you will track a ship and the ship wasn't stealth but the range of missouri's radar was a bit more than the radar of the tirpitz and the tirpitz could take way more blows than missouri and way more torpedoes at the main armour belt thus the tirpitz would have won
in my humble opinion the Iowa class would win in a fight with the Yamato , the Iowa class was faster , slightly greater range , radar controlled gunnery systems , faster rate of fire , the Iowa could standoff at a longer range and just keep shelling the Yamato , with a 5 knot speed advantage and radar controlled guns the Iowa class battleship would hold the most advantages , IF the Iowa class could make it a night action then yep she wins
the Yamato was still larger, and had larger guns, and most people think of it as a stupid heavy ship, but it had very technologically advanced radar, it had 3 spotting aircraft, and its secondaries were insane, so yes, the Iowa class could have the advantage, the Yamato would most likely win. The Missouri hits a deck shot however, good-bye Yamato, however the islands around Japan are large and could hide the Yamato. the Yamato, big as it is, could hide and pop out and fire and get the first shots off
in some cases a larger ship could be a massive advantage, i was not saying in this case it was either, but a larger ship also usually means more armor, so while its larger and easier to hit, it did have lots of armor, like any confrontation, this battle would solely rely on circumstances
The Iowa-class had better armor than Yamato. Size is actually a disadvantage for Yamato here: bigger target, slower, and higher fuel consumption.
actually the Iowa class didn't have any more armor i don't think. but if it did it wasn't enough to make it an advantage
Not in terms of raw thickness, but the quality of the armor was better. And the Iowa-class only needs rough parity in armor, not an advantage--the advantages in other areas are enough.
I mistaken tirpitz for bismarck because they look similar
You must have the 4th most powerful battleship class WW2, the mighty Littorio Class!
4th? I'd say 3rd.
3rd or 4th, but first most beautiful. Those red and white stripes, that green underbelly. HRRRNNNNNG
JimMonsanto Absolutely!
Here ya go: kancolle.wikia.com/wiki/Littorio/Gallery
The South Dakota Class should also get an honourable mention here. Very very comparable to some of the battleships mentioned here
where did the ships you have come from because i really would like to have a ship or two myself, by the way i love battleships to :)
It’s called forces of valor
I'm sorry, but your assertion that the Iowa class was not designed to take and inflict punishments on competing battleships is absurd. Naval shipbuilding knew of Yamato.
I think the biggest mistake that the US made with the Mk7 16 inch caliber 50, was in the assumption that their rate of fire would be substantially higher than the type 94's on
Yamato and Musashi. On the other hand, they were precisely correct that any such dual would come down to gunnery. The penetrative and damage potential of the Mk 7
long rifles, firing the heavy weight AP Shells designed for it, were certainly and respectably within the damage range of the much larger shell from the IJN's 18 inchers.
Likewise, I think that the fantasy of the one on one duel obscures a critical concern, which is battleship tactics. It was never desirable, either strategically or tactically, to
arrange singular duels with battleships. Their tactics were always to act in concert, allowing for greater concentrations of fire upon the enemy in the least amount of time.
The calculus being, that the number of battleships squared represented the relative power of each formation, and the likelihood one could atrit the power of the opposing
formation before it could do the same. Had the US not had the requirement of passing through the Panama Canal, we would likely have seen larger main armaments on those
battleships completed during the war. Had airpower, and the range to strike first, not rendered mere gunnery ranges so completely obsolete, perhaps such duels might have
been settled historically.
Either way, and as for the duel, I think that it would have come down to gunnery and who fired first. The Yamato's advantages were significant, but perhaps, not so final as
you seem to think they were.
Two point on a post war test done with Yamato's 18.1 inch guns would not penetrate the Iowa Class steel plate. On the other hand Iowa class 16 inch 50 caliber did penetrate very well. With the Ford Analog computers the USA Battleship had more effective fire power. Also the Heavy 16 inch 50 Caliber guns from the Pre-treaty South Dakota that were shore mounted would have reduce the Yamato's to a coffin.
The primary difference in the design of the Iowa class was she first goal was to protect the very fast classes of flat tops. South Dakotas: both classes were more of a slug it out ship and the 45 calibers on the post treaty ships had a lining able to last longer then the 50 calibers on the Iowa class.
Except he's not... The Iowa call was a massive break for US strategy, and all in all was basically an elongated South Dakota class, better armed, sure, but the gain was all for the sake of speed.
First off, Iowa was not designed to take on comparable battleships, and most certainly not Yamato - who the rest of the world assumed at 410mm (16.1") guns, not 460mm (18.1") guns, something only discovered post-war.
Iowa was designed to counter the threat of the Japanese Kongo-class battlecruisers, which had been substantially rebuilt into small fast battleships. They presented the US with a problem, as these small battleships with their 203mm belts and 4x2 armament of 14" guns were more powerful than any US cruiser, and while far weaker than any American battleship (old standard types, the fast BBs are a whole other level), were far faster than any American BB, and could thus disengage easily.
Iowa was meant to operate with carriers, not only to provide AA defense as so many American fast BBs did in WWII, but to catch and destroy the fast Kongo-class battleships should they attempt to attack a CV group, as the cruisers were judged insufficient to stop such an attack.
That's why the Iowa's, fast as they were, were such a break from American battleship design. The Americans stressed homogeneity in their battle line, hence why all the older 'standard-types' were all capped at a 21 knot top speed. In a battle line, your top speed is limited by the slowest ship, so for the US, they believed there was no sense is splitting your battle line and sacrificing other features (such as armor or firepower) to achieve higher speeds.
This is why the design for the Montana-class was a step away from the Iowa's, and back towards more balanced types like the South Dakota. They were slower, but with the loss of speed balanced their firepower and armor out. They were an evolution of your standard American BB type (although much faster than the older standard-types with a designed top speed of 28 knots). Iowa was the deviant meant to deal with the Kongo class, and th rumored supercruiser type ships. They were literally just South Dakotas that gained an extra 200 feet and 10,000 tons in order to elongate the hull for an extra 6 knots of speed over the South Dakota, and armed with more powerful guns.
Iowa was an effort to work more speed out of an existing design, and that was pretty much it. Thus, she was somewhat under armored for her size... for example, she had no immunity zone to her own guns, nor to Yamato's 18.1" guns (not that you can really blame her for that), or the Italian 15" gun. She did have a good 4,000 yd IZ against Bismarck's guns, however (from 34 to 38 thousand yards)... just to get in all the top guns of the Axis BBs.
The Iowa-class, ironically, in it's designed role, was probably the most likely out of any US BB class to actually get in a 1 on 1 fight with another BB... but this would've been against a BB like the Kongo, and would've been a 1-sided stomp.
DaGreenskin Orc there is plenty of evidence, and or assumptions that point to the fact that the Yamatos accuracy was incredibly poor. First bit of evidence was the fact that several gunnery officers after her launching were commissioned elsewhere soon after, to go with that Yamamoto was incredibly reluctant to the point of ignoring her existence in the early years of the conflict. When a ship like herself would have been able to clear a path with the almost non existent US BB force non operational and the US carriers being in short supply. Many historians point to her lack of use and many other aspects of her career to show just how underwhelming of a ship she was, and how the Japanese navy understood this. The only evidence we have of her engaging US ships was at A Lyte, and she scored very few hits on a large slow escort carrier from relatively close range.
Sometimes I wonder if the Kongos were the only viable BBs that the Japanese had.
First of all the Iowa class battleship was a larger ship and the 18 inch were not used due to very heavy
barrels and Turrets. As far as the Yamato, the site you say I think is correct but this was the AA round (almost 4,000 lbs) that was never fully tested. Yamato spent most of the war at Japan in Port. She did not have air support, etc.
The Kongo class was designed in UK and the Kongo was built in the UK and others in the class built In Japan for WWI. For WWII Japan added steel to the ship at the cost of one knot and called her a Battleship.
Yamato Vs missouri
1 yamato had bigger and had more firepower guns but less secondary guns so That's Tie To Them
2 Yamato is heavier and had more armor but slower and missouri is faster of 37.09 Knots So Advantage to missouri
3 yamato is just for heavy missions and he was designed to just stand up to a day of fighting and missouri is for escorting carriers
4 Yamato had less radar power and U.S.A Had more good radar missouri's radar can see yamato at 17 Miles So Another Advantage to missouri
5 Yamato Had 57 AA Guns But missouri is just 37 AA Guns
6 Yamato had range of 17 miles but missouri is 16 miles so a advantage to yamato
( i want to know your reply here i want to here them! )
In a nutshell, I think Missouri would prevail over Yamato. Missouri had a 6 knot speed advantage and excellent all weather radar controlled guns. In the battle of Surigao Strait old American battleships fitted with new radar fire control systems were able to hit and sink Japanese battleships with their opening salvos at great range and at night. The Japanese battleships never even saw the American battleships. Yamato had excellent optical rangefinders which were very effective in daylight but were unable to accurately determine range at night. Missouri however in daylight could keep radar contact with Yamato while using it's superior speed to stay out of range of Yamato's guns then wait for nightfall to close the range and engage Yamato. American radar was not only able to track ships in all weather but was also able to see shell splashes on their radar screens! This gave the Americans a huge advantage in that they could see fall of shot in real time and thus very accurately adjust their aim.
Shiden Kai you are awesome keep making videos
gabriel keepes Naw, you're awesome! Thanks for watching!
Shiden kai sounds like kai shiden from gundam but reversed ik its not but it just sounds like it
the big MO used radar to down aircraft the Yamato is hit time and time again from max range.post war tests on the armor piercing ability of the 16"50cal is as good as the Yamato 18"45cal. I go with the Iowa class.
t hos Mighty MO*
Hood was NOT a battleship. It was a cruiser
*Battlecruiser
Edit: to clarify, a battlecruiser is a capital ship, like a battleship. the main difference is that it is faster and has thinner armour, but general comparable guns to a battleship.
You mean Battlecruiser, larger than a Heavy Cruiser, lighter than a Battleship.
@ wibble wobble . Not really. It doesn't fit between battleship and cruiser. Its another doctrine entirely. Hood was for instance larger than all the battleships in the RN and had larger guns than most of them. She was only 3000t lighter than the Missouri for instance. She was also faster than them but had thinner armour. Different design purpose entirely. No battlecruiser should ever have slugged it out with a battleship, but it was often just too tempting when appropriate resources were not available. Sadly war is not entirely predictable and compromises have to be made. Often those compromises get men killed.
yeah, this is why the British lost so many of their Battlecruisers, they simply treated them like battleships, sending them in with the main battle line at Jutland, where their lack of armour cost the Brits dearly.
interestingly, the Iowa class was actually faster than the Hood, as it was a much more modern design focused on speed.
@Anthony Sellick That's what I was getting at as lighter than a Battleship. Not quite a Battleship due to lack of armour, and not a heavy cruiser due to it's large guns.
It was an outdated and flawed concept, but as you say needs must, can't quite understand why they kept building them though after Jutland.
And not just the armour Dash, the lack of safety to increase rate of fire (Blast doors being left open)
where you buy this
Awwwww he just wants to show us his man toys :))))))
and you are watching it
I really like his kick ass tiny battleships....so do you I suspect....your comment sounds as tho you have a bit of man toy envy....you must be lacking motion in your ocean I'm guessing.
Necromax nothing wrong with that! I wonder if they float in the bath?
davy1458 motion in to ocean XD. But really i want one of those.
I have them
The Missouri is the only ship you can tour today without scuba gear
Not quite. All 4 Iowa class are open museums, as well as Alabama, North Dakota, Massachusetts, Midway, Hornet, and more...
I have the Tirpitz, Yamato, and the Missouri on its way from delivery
jackie kuang You should post up a video once ya get them. :)
Saber FNS I already have them
I want models of those ships so much
The model I want would be one of the six Pre-treaty South Dakota with the 12 heavy 16 inch 50 caliber guns there were able to fire 26 miles. They were so bad Germany, France, Russia, Italy, Russia and Japan signed a treaty limiting Battleships.
Would that be why it was called the Washington Treaty?
where did you got your name from? Sounds like a name for japanese fighter aircraft.
Missouri has a key advantage over Yamato and that's 6 knots of speed. So she with her 33 knot speed could and would dictate the range the fight was held at. She had good radar and the first of its kind targeting computer. She was more accurate and being thinner she was harder to hit. She also had 30 second reloads Yamato's are longer.
Yamato hits harder and can take hits better. She has slightly better range. But when were talking ranges of 23-25 miles its really hard to hit targets at that range making battle maneuvers. Missouri could flee with her speed Yamato cannot. So the question becomes we know Missouri with her radar sees Yamato at 23 miles does Yamato see Missouri at that range well enough to engage. If not then its a no brainier Missouri holds all the cards. If she can then worse case its a draw because Missouri can brake off. But far more likely Yamato is doomed because Missouri pulls back till dark then engages at night when her radar still works and Yamato is Blind at that range.
For that matter Tirpitz has radar and 30 knot speed and could also defeat Yamato if she waited for night she also has 4 torpedoes a side.
SithLordmatthew And always take into consideration, the crew. Im pretty sure the crew of Iowa were more experienced but if it were to fight in a slug fest, Yamato would do more damage, if not, sink the Missouri.
I consider this comment to be the most plausible and accurate. sithlordmathew offers up concrete facts...he also mentions something the author of this post failed to address and that is training and tactics....the Iowa class crew was much better trained and supplied. the yamato and musashi spent the majority of their short lives confined to port for fear of being lost. that itself speaks volumes in regards to the opinion the Japanese held concerning the capability and odds of survivability of their ships....if they thought their yamato and musashi had any sort of substantial advantage they would have employed it against American war ships....the Japanese had pretty accurate intelligence as to the whereabouts of American warships in and around Japan and the Philippine sea. they were losing the war and they knew it was all but over....if they thought their great battleships were capable of defeating American battleships they would have sent them into the fight with little hesitation since the battleship was the predominant obstacle preventing the Japanese from destroying American air craft carriers. after all it was the American carriers and Japan's failure to sink them during the pearl harbor attack and the battle of midway that was the most decisive reason for their loss in the Pacific theater of ww2. the Iwo class where the best battleships of ww2 without question....the fact that they are the only battleships still afloat today strongly supports that.
That did send the tomato "against American ships" but in its suicide mission, it just got torpedoed to hell.
Alex Houghton I never hear of the battleship "tomato"....I assume that all those American torpedoes must have turned it into a giant hulk of ketchup resting on the sea floor.
davy1458 Oh, apologies for making a spelling error. Please, tell me of your obvious proficiency in the English language.
Also, really? I get the "ha-ha, he spelled something wrong" but it is in no way comedic or, well, anything other than annoying.
Also, again, the Tomato is a fearsome warship. Its massive leaves provide excellent propulsion, it's massive rounded hull distributed the force of attacks across the entire thick hull. Sadly, she was finally sunk by the carrier 'HMS Turpentine' a legendary Scottish aircraft carrier, all the way back in 2083.
Your punctuation was incorrect.
You forgot the Three most Important word's, Essex Class Carrier's!, the end of the Battleship!.:-)
He's comparing BATTLESHIPS
I also have loved warships since I was young
Andres Zambrano Do you have any of these models?
Shiden Kai I have the clemson model and the new York I always have battles in the bath😂
Shiden kai I have the IJN YAMATO model
@@juanbenavides4005 ye but her deck should be yellow
Umm I need to get my hands on these models. Where did you get them and for how much? Very nice video btw. Interesting.
Sorry for late reply it’s called forces of valor
The armour belt on the Iowa class only went from the 1st main turret to the last main turret the first 200 ft of the Iowa was not armoured nor the last 150 ft ,if any hits from either Yamato or Bismarck would have blown the front of the ship right off, this was exposed when one of the Alabama class, armoured the same way struck a tug boat and damaged that put in dry dock for over 6 month ,the Bismarck had nickel chrome steel armour ,the Rodney's 16 inch shells actually bounced off that armour , if Ludgens was the Captain ,he would have out manuvered both other ships ,he handled Bismarck like a distroyer ,history lesson here ,the world called for -"sink the Bismarck" not the Iowa or Yamato
A single 16" shell from the Rodney actually knocked out two of the Bismark's 15" turrets - quite a feat for the weakest 16" gun afloat. The Bismark was destroyed without landing a single shell on the Rodney or King George.
the Bismarck was not able to use destroyer tactics at this moment because of the damaged rudder. In fact, Bismarck lost all her adventages (speed, agility, etc..) due to the most powerful weapon at surface battlefelds: Planes with torpedos.
in my opionion, the sinking of Bismarck was the real beginning of the aircraft carrier era.
Cool stuff
USS Missouri would win easily vs Yamato with one simple strategy. The Missouri should use its superior speed to stay out of Yamato's range till nightfall. Once dark close in for the kill. Radar vs Visual targeting.
Japanese had light intensifying optics. Iowa class is better in waiting for squall or fog.
A Spatha easily?....
@ A spatha... damn dude you ever heared of Immunity zone of armor?... Yamatos was vastly higher then iowa's because of it being superior + Iowa having much smaller shells with less penetratin power. Iowas shell wouldnt do much on long range, and to it Radar at times of WW2 wasnt perticulary good, thats why US has the lowest from 5 biggest Navies scored max range hit in WW2.
Also ships never fought on max speed, but on combat speed's. as on high speed they were much less stable, and for Iowa being a very wet BB the speed was quite slow for normal standards. Means if you want to shoot your not running away at max speed.
T0ffik1 the Mark 8 shells from Iowa's 16 inch cannons had similar penetration values against Yamato's heavier 18 inch shells, let's not forget that the only advantages that the Yamato's cannon had was, sheer kinetic energy during close combat and long range, and nothing else. And comparing radar to optics is like comparing Windows 10 to Windows 1997
Further, While Yamato had thicker and more armor over the entire ship. The US steel was superior quality including on the interior with better damage control and fire control systems. While You have to give an advantage in armor to the Yamato it's really not much. The Iowa is superor in every other factor other then entirety of armor.
There is on display at the US Navy museum a 26" piece of armor from a Yamato class battleship that the 16"50 punched right through.
The gun was fired from almost point blank range.
@@manilajohn0182 16" guns at point blank, 🤔 that's a brave gun crew.
@@34scot Point blank range for the 16" .50 cal. gun.
That was fired from point blank range. Ironically, the armor plating was estimated to be immune to any and every naval shell ever built from all battle ranges
Iowa is the best all around battleship of the 3 both in general and in a fight.
The Iowa class was the best and largest class of battleships WWII. The North Carolina class was better Sea worthy ( per My Dad). Also 16 inch 45 cal had a longer barrel life then 16 inch 50 caliber so was concerted better for pre-landing shore bombardments. BB 35 Texas was the test bed for 5 major navel developments. She was the flag ship for Adm King for the Right coast and defended the food systems for England and Russia etc for the Total WWII period. The Ford Instruments analog computers were fir debugged on HER. (per My Dad)
what do you mean by "in general and in a fight" what use do battleships have other than fighting?
+Lord Dash Donald Dappington what i ment by fight was a 1v1 fight with any other battleship.
Battleships also do roles such as provide a HQ for command, Escort carriers and protect with AA defense, Bombard shorelines and costal defenses ect ect in which Iowa does amazingly well in.
she is either the best or at the least in the top 5 for every situation a battleship can undertake thus being the most flexible battleship.
nice model must be awesome to see the whole collection hope you have it in display
Fantastic video, some points I'd like to raise, Tirpitz whilst having range disadvantages, she does have a set of torpedoes that could be used at medium to close range that could even out the fight, she is a battleship that was designed with turtle back armor so the closer she gets, the better the chances for her victory. But that said, you are right that at range, she is most likely in a disadvantage given an open seas scenario with good visibility.
Missouri vs Yamato, would be a good match up, the Yamato can launch her spotter plane which can spot the missouri even when she's not in line of sight (over the horizon) her spotter will then triangulate with the yamato and plot some firing solution. Now all of this is in theory, but if perfect calculations were taken place and stars aligned, she could in theory hit a target 42km away... I mean you can't even see the mass over the horizon due to the shape of the earth, but if missouri took the hit, it'll be pretty devastating.
Missouri on the other hand had radar and better speeds, assuming yamato got off the first few salvos which most are likely to miss at max range, once missouri closes in to her optimal firing range, I believe she will score more hits on the yamato than yamato on her. But both ships would take heavy casualties and personally, I believe it would end up in a stalemate where both ships will be badly crippled or put out of action for the remainder of the war.
But in real life, both battleships would never sail without their escorts.
Let's thank God that they did not meet in real life, it would be a tragic loss of life where thousands of families would be effected by the meaningless battle.
The Yamato is at the bottom of the ocean
Because of too many aircraft carriers and too many torpedo hits because she was a bit too overpowered.
experts have said and Iowa like the Missouri vs a Yamato, the victor would be based on conditions. The Yamato would win In good, but an Iowa can fight just as well in fog, rain, and darkness, giving her an advantage. Don't discredit the Bismark, however, she was to stubborn to just roll over and die. She only got sunk because the British attacked her with planes so old they were to a slow for he AA fire directors, jamming her rudder, letting the British catch up to her. So really, it is a condition game, plus luck of hitting magazines like what ended the HMS Hood.
The thing is, the Iowa-class can control the engagement. Want to attack? Yamato can't run away. Want to leave? Yamato can't catch you.
Not really. The fire control of the Iowa out ranges the ability of the Yamato to fire an aimed shot. Biggest problem is not knowing the true strength of the Yamato an American captain may try to close the distance and throw away its advantage. Closing to 20,000 yards could easily result in an Iowa being hammered by the heaver 18.1 inch guns.
FawfulDied Yamato had guns that could shoot over the horizon. Hard to run from that. But you do have a good point about Iowa's speed.
Wrong all torpedo bombers are designed to flow low and slow the Kate, devastator and Avenger all flew low and slow. The bismarck had poorly trained crew and lousy AA protection.
The problem is that Yamato couldn't see over the horizon. After all, it relied on visual targeting. Spotter planes would be ineffective, since they'd just get shot down by AA, fighters, or even the Iowa class's own spotter planes. Plus, it would only work in the day and in clear weather.
Also, Iowa-class ships could also shoot over the horizon.
There is no comparison between the armor and construction of the Bismark and Hood...................The Bismark would win a 1 on 1 every time.......................
I love Yamato for these reasons in the video. go Japan!!!!! 🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🗾🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🇯🇵🗾🗾🗾🔫🔫🔫🇯🇵
There is all but no comparison between the Yamatos and the Iowas in a surface action. In every area of consideration except that of maximum speed (armor protection, gunnery accuracy, broadside weight, bursting charge, danger space), the Yamato were clear superiors. This is due primarily to the fact that the Japanese spared no expense in constructing the most powerful battleship ever built. On the other hand, the Iowas were simply treaty battleships with the provisions of the escalator clause worked into the design. The result of the additional 10,000 tons was a capital ship with slightly better armor protection and slightly better firepower over the South Dakotas, but with a 5.5- knot speed advantage. The intent of the navy was to use these ships to escort carriers and to overtake and destroy the Japanese Kongo class fast battleships.
Shell dispersion of the Iowa class was half again as large as that of the Yamatos (1.9% of range vs. 1.3% of range for nine- gun salvos)- and this more than offset the marginal range accuracy of the U.S. Navy Mark 8 Radar Range Keeper over the foretop rangefinder and Type 22 radar of the Yamato class (approximately 50 and 70 yards respectively). The sole clear advantage of the Iowas lay in remote power control. This was the ability of the Mark 8 to directly maintain the ship's main battery on target in both range and bearing in all visibility conditions- but the U.S. Navy never developed tactics to take advantage of this during WW2.
Combat performance revealed a marked difference in the performance of the two classes. None of the Iowa's ever obtained main battery hits on any warship of destroyer size or larger during WW2. Off Samar, Yamato obtained three first- salvo 18.1" hits on USS Johnston at over 20,000 yards. She also registered one first- salvo hit from a six- gun salvo of her forward turrets, aimed solely by the ship's Type 22 radar (the Yamatos used radar- assisted gunnery at this point in the war) on USS Gambier Bay from just under 22,000 yards. She also dropped two shells 'right alongside' USS White Plains from just over 34,000 yards. One of them exploded, and the damage removed White Plains from front- line service for the remainder of the war.
Below are the immunity zones of the two vessels against one another's main battery (in yards, and with a 90- degree target angle). Information is courtesy of the U.S. Navy Bureau of Ordnance. Long range in the U.S. Navy was considered to be in the area of 22,000- 25,000 yards.
Iowa class immunity vs. the 18.1" gun ;
Citadel 24,800- 29,800
Turrets 24,700- 31,600
Barbettes 26,500- 31,600
Steering 24,700- 28,800
Control Tower 26,500- 31,600
Yamato class immunity vs. the 16" .50 cal. gun;
Citadel 17,000- 34,500
Turrets 0- 36,800 (Impenetrable)
Barbettes 16,600- 36,800
Steering 19,100- 33,400
Control Tower 16,600- 33,400
The Bismarcks were designed (and armored) for operations in the North Sea and North Atlantic where visibility was typically lower. Consequently, they were very vulnerable to long- range plunging fire. In 1941, this was a relatively minor issue. By 1944, this was largely reversed.
Yamato has longer range gun, so if Yamato hit Missouri, Missouri will probably be done.
You are an idiot in thinking about that
1. Yamato is only 27.7kn max speed but Iowa class can go up to 35.5kn
2. Iowas have radar that out matches japanese or german radar even by 1951 3. It doesnt matter in what size yamato’s guns are they’re to big to slow and yet weak enough for mk7 16’ gins of iowas match destructive capabilities
@@maryannfeliciano6572 the hell? He was talking about the Missouri, not Iowa. And that's correct, the Yamato is stronger than Iowa
Missouri is an Iowa class battleship
100% accurat
I don't know if you know but the HMS Hood was a heavy battle cruiser and NOT an actual Battleship……I would highly recommend watching the UA-cam channel: the mighty jingles…………and watch under hood world of warships videos INVOLVING in CERTAIN ones of his videos where he actually will explain the or at least some of the history of which ever ship……depending on the video………that just my recommendation
Nah, Yamato is pretty overrated by battleship enthusiasts. It is bigger, with thicker armor and has larger gun. But it does not mean it is better protected. This can be indirectly observed through Japanese industrial capability. At the time, they don't have competent and the manufacturer technic to produce high power engine for their fighter, so they were forced to go trade off the protection for maneuverability. And the armor used on tank is basically paper, how often do you see a tank get blow up and flip over by home made land mine? As I recall, that happened on their Chinese front. So, going back to Yamato, the thick Amor might not provides the same protection as it's us counterpart with same thickness. And the damage inflicted by the main gun can be just on par with Iowa... oh, by the way, the crew competent will be a big let down. Yamato crews are hand picked. Not solely on their competent, but they have to look handsome( in Japanese culture) as well. So, if you don't have the best hand on deck, you are going uphill when going against elite opponents.
Well Japan conquered most of Asia so I would say they were capable of building a well armored ship.
The Iowa had a hull made of STS steel - not stainless.
As a Kid, My Father took Me on the USS Missouri when it was in mothballs at Bremerton! I got to go on it again 2 years ago at Pearl Harbor!
Did you see the USS Arizona
@@jamiezoeller5380 It was over crowded and closed the rest of that day
Remember it's the hunter that chooses the ground! Remember it took 700 rounds and 12 torpedoes to sink Bismarck.. actually it was proven the crew scuttled her. Remember the Rodney's guns were 16" on par with a North Carolina most of them bounced off Bismarck's belt armor. My point is either Missouri or Yamato can and will sink the Tirpitz or Bismarck at range. But if the Bismarck or Tirpitz catches either ship in close she can beat them. also the caliber of Bismarck and Tirpitz secondary guns were 155mm were as Yamato's were 127mm and Missouri had 5" 38 cal guns. in a knife fight those big secondary guns go a long way. Take into consideration each ship was designed for different things. It would depend on the Captain s to exploit the opponent s weakness and knowing their ships and crews abilities. no matter which ship is bigger has bigger guns ect. It depends who can land first round hits. who has the most experience.
BL 16"/45 (40.6 cm) Mark I (HMS Rodney)
Range Belt Penetration Deck Penetration
15,000 yards (13,716 m) 14.4" (366 mm) 1.95" (50 mm)
20,000 yards (18,288 m) 12.2" (310 mm) 2.85" (72 mm)
25,000 yards (22,860 m) 10.3" (261 mm) 3.90" (99 mm)
30,000 yards (27,432 m) 8.8" (224 mm) 5.10" (130 mm)
35,000 yards (32,004 m) 7.6" (193 mm) 6.50" (165 mm)
16"/45 Mark 6 (USS North Carolina)
Range Belt Penetration Deck Penetration
0 yards (0 m) 29.74" (755 mm) ---
5,000 yards (4,572 m) 26.60" (676 mm) 0.76" (19 mm)
10,000 yards (9,144 m) 23.51" (597 mm) 1.87" (28 mm)
15,000 yards (13,716 m) 20.47" (520 mm) 3.04" (77 mm)
20,000 yards (18,288 m) 17.62" (448 mm) 4.29" (109 mm)
25,000 yards (22,860 m) 15.05" (382 mm) 5.76" (146 mm)
30,000 yards (27,432 m) 12.77" (324 mm) 7.62" (194 mm)
35,000 yards (32,004 m) 10.49" (266 mm) 10.57" (268 mm)
The North Carolina's 16' guns were light years ahead of the Rodney's
oh definitely. Rodney's 16" guns were considered crap by the British themselves XD
Agreed. The Rodney's 16" guns were the worst 16" naval guns afloat, and one shell still knocked out two of Bismarck's 15" turrets without hitting either.
The 16 in 45 cal were the same as the North Carolina class but only shot 2048 lbs APR vs 2700 lbs for all US Battleships. Also they did not have the Ford Interments analog computers. The 5 in 38 cal were duel as they were able to do AA as well as ship to ship.
It had been the HE shells of the King George V that bounced off Bismarck's Armor (probably due to a defect in the fuse, since HE shells must explode on contact), so the ship reverted to AP shells, that, like those of the Rodney "cut into the Bismarck like a hot knife through butter".
The attempted use of HE shells VS a battleship simply demonstrates that the British didn't want to finish it too soon, and were targetting the superstructure instead of going for the belt (that, at that distance, would have offered the resistance of tissue paper).
Didn't the Hood have 16" guns ????? while the Bismark had 15 " guns.......
The Iowa class would have won by a long shot, better fire control because of a better radar.
You know, there is something that you missed. The US battleships were built almost entirely out of armor plate, while the other ships only had armored plate in critical areas, but had milder steel in other places. In terms of armor, the Missouri actually had an advantage as it was almost entirely constructed of armor plate.
i dont know if this has been said but the Iowa class was said to be fitted with the same guns as the paper BB Montana...18In guns. but when the armory staff tested out the US 16in and the 18in guns they found the 16 to do the same amount of damage as the 18in guns
The Montana was to be fitted out with 12 x 16"/50 Mark 7 guns. The Iowa had 9 of these guns. The 18" guns were rejected because you'd only be able to fit 2 per turret for the same weight as 3 16" guns, and there was no need for a larger caliber gun.
This is an very interesting point. The 18 inch was originally tested for the Pre-treaty South Dakota class before the Heavy 16 inch 50 caliber was chosen. After the treaty was signed the Navy gave these guns to the Army for shore battery because they were too heavy for the Iowa class.
The BB 51 Montana was 27% finished had 12 Heavy 16 inch 50 cal Mark 2 guns and sixteen 6 inch 53 cal mark 13. Her 16 inch could out shout the Iowa class because they could handle more powder.
doing more damage is not the only goal of a larger shell. more size, more mass, more penetration.
Benjamin Parma 18Inch had 3 times the explosive filller and out preforms 16inch at long rand and close via navywheps in penetration
My understanding of the bismarck and tirpitz is they were sister ships. but i do recall that the bismarck had radar fire control. It was used for predicting range. Which made her quite accurate. I am also a big fan of the iowa class battleships. I really love the bismarck and her story as well.
The Tirpitz Armor is superior to the Missouri or Yamato, it was incredibly tough like the Bismark. German Ships even of older design were so Rugged. The Missouri Guns are considered better then Yamato's with Super Heavy Shells , and more accurate & precise. At the Aberdeen Testing grounds their is a sample of the Yamato / Musashi Armor that was Blasted right through by the Iowa class 16" (Mark 7 ) Guns. its something to see , its so thick. Yamatos had crazy thick Deck Armor too.
The big thing is to disable their Fire Control then damage their Guns.
The "super armor" of the Bismarck is a myth. The armor its self was inferior to the British and possibly slightly superior to the American armor. The difference is the American armor scheme was much superior to the old school layout of the Bismarck class.
Krupp Armor a myth? German Armor superior to all as are German Guns., British about 12 % better than American ( never shared during the War.) Japanese last. Out of the Hundreds of Hits Bismark took only about half a dozen penetrated . None penetrated the Hull Armor.
And the Iowa class were designed with the Bismark in mind, neither the British or American Navy wanted to take the Tirpitz head on. thats why the Tall Boy program happened.
The greatest and most powerful navy that hid its Capital ships after Guadalcanal? not even a year into the war and was getting its ass kicked by American High School Boys, the Navy that had been at War since 1931, that Navy ? you are such a fucking moron,
When they were designed they had no idea what Japan had and was limited primarily by the ability to transit from the atlantic to the pacific, dum dum.
Where do you get your bizarre fantasies? watch the Bismark expedition. but dont cry. This is someone folks that never even has seen a Battleship , at least I have been on some and under some (in Drydock) and talked to the Men who Manned them.
BISMARCK wins because of experienced crew against mo. wins against Yamato because I'd take German sailors against Japanese sailors any day.
Also Iowa class out ranges and out speed tripitz
Mewmewcat i am pretty shure the tirpitz ist faster haha
no the Iowa class was the fastest battleship ever built it out speeds the Bismarck class by about 1.6 knots
If the two ever met all the Iowa had to do was stay out of tripitz range while firing at tripitz. Also was way more advance for that time.
@cozmic brandon
More like 3 to 5 knots depending on what source you use.
Benjamin Parma that's even worse for the Bismarck class lol
Where’d you get the Missouri and the Yamato
Forces of valor
Bismark and Tirpitz 15 inch guns had a higher rate of fire than the other ships and 4 turrets vs 3= More likely to hit there enemy first, and therefore win the fight.
Sorry but the Ford Analog computer was faster and more likly to hit first. Look at the results of the Jean Bart!!
Also, If you like extra Guns the BB35 Texas would be #1 with her 10 14 inch 45 cal. She was Admiral Earnest King flagship and test bed for the Ford Analog. She protected food for England and Russia in convoy formation. The fleet also had several baby flat tops (Jeeps)
Bruce Lendrum Texas is most powerfull of the older dreadnought style battleships. Very glad it has been restored
Jean Bart !? wtf, she was not even compleated, only half of her guns was even installed, no rangefinder and manned by an untrained skelleton crew, docked in a harbour... At Savo island USS Washington had a good radar, capabel crew and comander, and was undetected but still missed most of her 75 16" shells fired at Kirishima at POINT BLANK range.
Sorry, My point was how powerful the 16 inch 2700 lbs rounds were on the decks. The 45 calibers gave them a steeper angle then the 50 caliber. Me Bad. What you said was all true. Good show
sorry to say i have looked into all 3 ships and i feel you are underestimated the Tirpiz the British had to send a hole fleet after the Bismarck to sink her and the Tirpiz was a better ship. after building all the ships in 1/200 it a two horse race between the Germans and the Japanese as the American battleships at the time were not anywhere near as powerful.
Things that would win or lose a battleship encounter. Tactics, Intel, Range of the weapons, Ability of the shells to penetrate the other ships armor, and most importantly Gunnery (the ability to land the rounds where they can do damage). The last, weakest factor is "Luck" (having the weather in your favor, the "lucky shot" like the one landed on HMS Hood). That's my 2 cents on it.
Great video.
Iowa Class....33+ knots speed compared to 30 Tirpitz and 26 Yamato. Iowa....very thick armor....high quality steel. Yamato super thick armor....crappy steeel. Tirpitz. thick armor good steel. Guns. Iowa….brand new 16 inch guns with best at tieme radar control. Tirpitz only 8 15 guns with decent radar. Yamato….9 massive 18.1 inch guns.....no radar.....Iowa wins. Iowa gould stay and hit Yamatos at a range the Yamato could not get a bead on them.
The Bismark fought against Hood and Prince of Wales. One German battleship vs two British battleship ( old Hood, new Prince of Wales ). The other German ship was not battleship.
In keeping within the realm of authenticity, the Bismarck had Nazi swastikas painted within the white circles,fore and aft, Sir. Also, people like myself are amused by such `nerdish` offerings. However, nobody is ever amused by politically -correct nerds. A Nazi regime produced a Nazi ship, swastikas flags and all.
When the Yamato left port on its Operation Ten Go death ride that IJN task force was quickly spotted by the USN. 5th Fleet Commander Raymond Spruance ordered Task 54 to detach USN surface units to confront the Yamato. The following USN ships which were sent: Massachusetts, Indiana, South Dakota, New Jersey, Missouri and Wisconsin. This strike force included 7 cruisers (including Alaska & Guam) plus 21 destroyers to sink the Ten Go strike force. Commanding Task Force 58 was Admiral Marc Mitchner. He was an aviator sailor. He had been ordered to provide air cover for the USN battleships. Instead, in attacking waves, he sent nearly 400 USN attack war planes. He informed his immediate commander, Spruance, of his plans after the first wave had been launched.
The Hellcat & Corsair air sweep found that the IJN had provided no air cover at all. USN pilots radioed this information back to the following torpedo & dive bombers. The fighters then began strafing attacks on the IJN ships. When the bombers arrived they organized themselves and began their co-ordinated effort. Only 10 USN planes were shot down & that included planes destroyed during the Yamato’s explosive end. USN casualties were 12 air crew.
The video game side of me would have enjoyed a fleet action but realistically the USN casualties would have been higher & Yamato still would have been sunk.
What about a battle between Yamato and Musashi, and Iowa, New Jersey, Missouri, and Wisconsin. Thats a fight right there
Some issues here that was not brought up. The Yamato may have had bigger guns, but actually had less effective shells. The fire control of the Missouri was much better, including more accurate radar. The Yamato would struggle to keep a fire solution from long range while maneuvering, while the Missouri still could. Maneuvering is a key factor. Missouri was also faster, and would thus be able to control the encounter, i.e. choose distance of engagement. The Yamato was more heavily armed, but the Missouri had its best armour over the most vulnerable parts, so the difference in real life would not have been too serious. The Yamato was very inefficient in real life, and I think it would be in such a duel. Also, the Yamato was never used tactically in an aggressive fashion, as she was deemed to important as a symbol. There is a tactical disadvantage in that. All these factors would be to the Missouri's advantage. Barring lucky early hits from the Yamato, I think she could have carried the day.
The Tirpitz was never intended to fight other battleships, but was a commerce raider and was designed to sink cruisers at most. She would usually never have wanted to engage any other battleship, so on that one you are spot on. She would indeed have favoured to leave such a battle, if it could. She could have outrun the Yamato, but not the Missouri.
Well all the Iowa Class Battle ships are still afloat as museums, mean while The Bismarck, Yamato are sitting at the bottom of the ocean and the Tirpitz was sunk in shallow water and scraped and all 3 were sunk by airplanes dropping torpedoes. USS Iowa (BB-61), USS New Jersey (BB-62), USS Missouri (BB-63), and USS Wisconsin (BB-64) were not finally decommissioned till the early 1990s and the USS Iowa was not Released out of the mothball fleet (emergency reserve fleet) by the Navy till 2012 where it now sits in Los Angeles, I Am proud to say my father served 2 years on the Iowa in some of her last years on the seas.
The bismack blown up the hood in 4 min and beat the prince of wales in 10 min admiral Lütjens let escape the prince of wales, captain lindemann let hunt and sink the prince of wales.And return to Germany . But lütjens was a admiral............... poor lindemann.
Bismark( Battleship) .. Brand new. H ms Hood (Battlecruiser) ..Ww1 though upgraded was Old. Lucky shot and that's history. Had that lucky shot not happened a decent battle would have taken place. Hms Prince of Wales was dogged with probs as she was a brand new ship also. Turrets kept jamming and or did not work but still she damaged Bismark enough for it to try and head to port for repairs. After sinking Hood, Hms pow could not engage both as it was not match fit to take on both Prince Eugene and Bismark, so broke off.
it all depends on HOW GOOD your gunnery systems are............and HOW WELL your ship can withstand a couple of hits.