Starfleet Jedi

I'd like to propose a contest/debate to determine which the "best" battleship design was under the restrictions of the Treaty of Washington of 1921.

In each post, make a pitch for one design, or try to disqualify one design from consideration. Use the nice technical details we like to throw around in the VS debate.

Here's the tricky part: At the end of your post, list each ship that you think is in the running, and which of the other ships you think it would beat. If it looks like a tie to you, flip a coin and assign the victory randomly.

The restrictions of the treaty: 35,000 ton standard displacement or less, guns no larger than 16". Minimum qualifications will be similarly drawn from the treaty: Let's call anything >10,000 tons standard displacement, and guns more than eight inches in diameter, a "battleship" for the purpose of this thread.

And I may as well start things off:

The HMS Nelson was the first new battleship designed to follow the restrictions of the treaty. It mounted the most powerful guns and the heaviest broadside of any ship ever fielded by the RN, matched only by its class sister, the Rodney; a full AP-shell broadside could deliver 3500 megajoules of energy through nearly any battleship's armor. 12x6" and 6x4.7" secondary guns - one of the most powerful secondary arrays of any contemporary ship - could sustain 32 megawatts of kinetic output for minutes on end. It even mounted a pair of fore torpedo tubes - each 24.5" torpedo powerful enough to sink a capital ship by itself if it hit.

The Nelson was not poorly armored, either; it had 14" of steel armor on its belt, 16" on turret faces, and 6.5" of deck armor over its magazines. Innovative "all or nothing" protection protected Nelson's vitals with remarkable efficiency, and water-filled torpedo bulges used a loophole in the treaty to stay under the 35,000 ton "standard" displacement weight limit.

Speaking of endurance, the Nelson had the fuel to go 10,000 kilometers at its maximum rated speed of 43 kph. It is no wonder that the Nelson served as the flagship of the fleet when it was launched.

Clearly the Nelson is the best treaty battleship; after all, the Nelson could handily beat all other designs currently in the running. As of this post.

And to contend against the Nelson, I put forth the latest and greatest American treaty battleship, the South Dakota.

The South Dakota has many advantages over the Nelson. One of the most obvious is its greater speed-27.5 knots vs. 23. This speed will enable the South Dakota to dictate the terms of the fight, so to speak. It can choose the range it wants, and gains the possibility of crossing the Nelson's T.

Another is in terms of gun power. The Nelson's guns could penetrate 14.4 inches of belt armor at 15,000 yards. In contrast, the South Dakota's could penetrate 20.47 inches of belt armor at the same range. While it's true that South Dakota's armor belt was only 12.2 inches, it was sloped to increase effective protection. When you look at the strength of their shells compared to the opponent's deck armor (which is what will be hit the most in long range, post-Jutland engagements), the South Dakota has it much better. At 30,000 yards, South Dakota's shells can go through 7.62 inches of deck armor-and the Nelson has only a 6.75 inch deck. Poor Nelson's shells can only go through 5.10 inches of deck armor at the same range-not enough to break through the 5.30 inch top layer of South Dakota's multilayered armored deck.

And not only does South Dakota have more powerful guns, but it also has them in a more efficient position. South Dakota has six guns foreward and three guns aft, while Nelson has all nine forward, with the rearmost turret only able to fire on a broadside, as it is blocked forward by another one. So if South Dakota crosses Nelson's T, it can fire with all nine guns and be answered back by only six. And of course, Nelson has a huge 45' angle zone to its back that it can't fire its main guns into. South Dakota has no such zone thanks to a superior gun layout.

In short, South Dakota is superior to Nelson in nearly every way.

While USS South Dakota truly did seem to be an excellent design on paper, and your comparison with the Nelson is a convincing one, I must turn the pages of history.

In one of the few battleship-on-battleship fights, IJN Kirishima clearly got the better of the USS South Dakota; despite facing two enemy battleships, IJN Kirishima forced a blinded and combat-ineffective USS South Dakota to withdraw from the battle - and the theater. It took over two months in New York before she was ship-shape again.

The Kirishima was a venerable Kongo class ship, originally a lighter battlecruiser. It was one of the capital ships retained by Japan after the Washington treaty; it was refit substantially in the 1920s to handle aircraft and better survive torpedo hits, and then completely rebuilt in 1934 - larger, faster, and more heavily armored.

The IJN Kirishima out-speeds the squat USS South Dakota by roughly 6 kph. Unlike with the South Dakota class, history records few complaints about its seaworthiness, blast interference between turrets packed too close together, cramped quarters, poorly designed and inadequate torpedo defense systems, et cetera.

True, her main battery of eight 14" guns seems anemic, half the throw weight of the USS South Dakota, and her armor thickness - although improved substantially from her original layout - is less impressive than that of the South Dakota class. However, these 14" guns were very capably used, and no ship was immune to their use at all ranges, except perhaps the massive Yamato class.

However, she mounted a greater number of secondary weapons, many of them substantially more powerful 6" guns capable of causing substantial damage to lighter ships and, as history proved, USS South Dakota's vulnerable radar and fire control systems. Had there not been a second US battleship present, catching the Kirishima by surprise at point-blank range, it is quite likely that history would have recorded the loss of the slower USS South Dakota to the venerable (but well-refit) IJN Kirishima.

So:

IJN Kirishima defeats USS South Dakota and HMS Nelson. (the speed advantage vs the Nelson is truly incredible.)
USS South Dakota defeats HMS Nelson.

The only advantage that the Kongo's have over South Dakota is speed. In almost every other respect, South Dakota crushes them. . The one 14" hit that Kirishima scored on South Dakota failed to penetrate the armor and inflicted only minor damage.

In fact, it's wrong to say that the Kirishima "got the better" of the South Dakota during the action. Kirishima was traveling with a fleet of four other ships, and the hits that smashed up South Dakota's upperworks came from the entire enemy force. At least 26 shells hit South Dakota during the battle. Of these, eighteen of them were 8" shells from a pair of heavy cruisers in the Japanese fleet. Kirishima herself landed seven-the 14" hit mentioned earlier, and six 6". So two-thirds of the hits on South Dakota were scored by other ships besides Kirishima.

And while South Dakota's vulnerable upperworks were smashed up, the ship itself was in no danger of sinking, with no armored areas pierced by the Japanese shells. The same cannot be said about Kirishima. Also, the claim that the Kongo was better than the South Dakota because of its smaller-caliber guns being able to destroy unarmored yet vital upperworks is in error, because the same thing happened to the Kongo-class Hiei in a battle the night before. Although none of the smaller-caliber American guns could penetrate her main armor belt, the Hiei's upperworks were reduced to a shambles by many hits.

Finally, the reason that South Dakota got hit so many times is not due to her design, but simply due to her position. Of the two American battleships, she was the one closest to the Japanese fleet, and it is little surprise that she was spotted first and targeted with the full fury of the Japanese force. If Washington was the closer one, she may have been the one that got beaten up.

The South Dakota class was actually protected better than the North Carolina class that immediately proceeded it. They were armored against 16" shells and were not as vulnerable to underwater shell hits as their predecessors were. The poor torpedo defense system was indeed a drawback, but the seakeeping difficulties and cramped conditions were considered acceptable tradeoffs by the designers. A warship is meant to fight and stay afloat, not be comfortable. And the South Dakota did stay afloat through all her fights.

Opecoiler wrote:The only advantage that the Kongo's have over South Dakota is speed. In almost every other respect, South Dakota crushes them. . The one 14" hit that Kirishima scored on South Dakota failed to penetrate the armor and inflicted only minor damage.

In fact, it's wrong to say that the Kirishima "got the better" of the South Dakota during the action. Kirishima was traveling with a fleet of four other ships, and the hits that smashed up South Dakota's upperworks came from the entire enemy force. At least 26 shells hit South Dakota during the battle. Of these, eighteen of them were 8" shells from a pair of heavy cruisers in the Japanese fleet. Kirishima herself landed seven-the 14" hit mentioned earlier, and six 6". So two-thirds of the hits on South Dakota were scored by other ships besides Kirishima.

And while South Dakota's vulnerable upperworks were smashed up, the ship itself was in no danger of sinking, with no armored areas pierced by the Japanese shells. The same cannot be said about Kirishima. Also, the claim that the Kongo was better than the South Dakota because of its smaller-caliber guns being able to destroy unarmored yet vital upperworks is in error, because the same thing happened to the Kongo-class Hiei in a battle the night before. Although none of the smaller-caliber American guns could penetrate her main armor belt, the Hiei's upperworks were reduced to a shambles by many hits.

Finally, the reason that South Dakota got hit so many times is not due to her design, but simply due to her position. Of the two American battleships, she was the one closest to the Japanese fleet, and it is little surprise that she was spotted first and targeted with the full fury of the Japanese force. If Washington was the closer one, she may have been the one that got beaten up.

The South Dakota class was actually protected better than the North Carolina class that immediately proceeded it. They were armored against 16" shells and were not as vulnerable to underwater shell hits as their predecessors were. The poor torpedo defense system was indeed a drawback, but the seakeeping difficulties and cramped conditions were considered acceptable tradeoffs by the designers. A warship is meant to fight and stay afloat, not be comfortable. And the South Dakota did stay afloat through all her fights.

The Kirishima certainly did a fair share of the damage (at least seven hits). While the South Dakota would not have sunk from the 14" guns of the Kirishima, it certainly was rendered incapable of effective combat and removed from the theater of operations, and the Kirishima did a lot more damage to her than she did to the Kirishima. It's accurate to say the IJN Kirishima got the better of the USS South Dakota, and the "cramped" nature of the ship did reduce its speed and interfere with fire control (see comments about "blast interference" above).

Please don't forget that the speed is not quite the IJN Kirishima's only "raw numbers" advantage; the Kirishima also has more secondary guns in more turrets firing more powerful shells, allowing it to rip up vulnerable superstructure (and cruiser hulls) more easily.

That said, if a higher rate of medium-sized shells combined with superior accuracy and mobility makes the best battleship, able to blind and disable its opponents, then clearly, the best treaty battleship was from a power with virtually no naval reputation: The SS Scharnhorst, with a top speed of about 60 kph, and a main battery of nine eleven inch guns (backed up by a dozen six inch secondaries).

Eleven inch guns, you say, with derision? Ah, but high-velocity (890 m/s muzzle velocity) eleven inch shells. According to some sources, capable of piercing 13 inches of belt armor at 15 kilometers, and firing a shot every 17 seconds - close to twice the rate of fire than the main guns of the other three battleships mentioned so far.

On top of this, the Scharnhorst seems to have had excellent fire control, possibly the longest range gun hit in the war.

Certainly, were the Scharnhorst to successfully blind an enemy battleship, it did mount torpedoes capable of sinking nearly anything - six tubes! The Scharnhorst's defenses were good enough that before it sank, the British fired over 50 torpedoes and over 2000 shells in their final battle against it - a remarkable quantity.

On the down side, the Nelson's sister ship Rodney did quite a number on the Bismarck, usually thought to be more dangerous than its smaller cousins...

First off, I messed up when I said that only two-thirds of the hits were inflicted by ships other than Kirishima. It's closer to three-fourths. 7/26=0.269, or about 27% of the hits inflicted by Kirishima, which renders its performance less impressive still. Out of the five ships in the Japanese fleet, the two cruisers scored 69% of the hits. I won't deny that South Dakota was knocked out of the fight, just that the bulk of the damage was done by other ships.

Your statement about the Kongo having more and heavier secondary guns is only partially right. The Kongos had 16 6" secondaries, as opposed to the 20 5-inchers the South Dakota possessed.

And the Scharnhorst? Both wartime experience and hard data refute your claim of Scharnhort being the best treaty battleship. A battle between both ships and the class and the WWI-vintage battlecruiser Renown was indecisive, with only a handful of hits being scored by both sides. Furthermore, standard operating procedure for the Scharnhorsts was to run from any British battleship they saw, even old WWI-era dreadnoughts-not blind them before sinking them with torpedoes. And of course, there was the Battle of the North Cape, where a modern battleship smashed Scharnhorst before destroyers moved in.

The statement of 2000 shells and 50 torpedoes is useless without knowing how many hits were scored from all those shells and torpedoes.

And hard data makes things even worse for the Sharnhorst. At 30,000 yards, its shells could only break through 3 inches of deck armor-bad considering that the South Dakota has over 5.3 inches of deck armor. And South Dakota's guns could easily break through Scharnhorst's 13.8 inch belt and multilayer deck armor.

Opecoiler wrote:First off, I messed up when I said that only two-thirds of the hits were inflicted by ships other than Kirishima. It's closer to three-fourths. 7/26=0.269, or about 27% of the hits inflicted by Kirishima, which renders its performance less impressive still. Out of the five ships in the Japanese fleet, the two cruisers scored 69% of the hits. I won't deny that South Dakota was knocked out of the fight, just that the bulk of the damage was done by other ships.

That's still seven more hits than the South Dakota landed on the Kirishima.

Your statement about the Kongo having more and heavier secondary guns is only partially right. The Kongos had 16 6" secondaries, as opposed to the 20 5-inchers the South Dakota possessed.

No, it's completely right. The USS South Dakota actually only mounted 16 5"/38 DP guns in eight twin turrets, reduced in order to carry other equipment. Did I mention the deck was a bit cramped? The later members of her class carried ten turrets, but they still had fewer and less powerful secondary guns than the Kirishima as rebuilt.

The Kirishima used single turrets for its 6" secondaries, which were reduced to 14 in in its final configuration, but also carried eight five inch guns in twin mounts. The 12.7cm/40 guns were actually slightly more powerful than their US counterparts and fired heavier shells (75 lb vs 55 lb; the 6" guns fired 100 lb shells). So the Kirishima carried 22 secondaries in 18 turrets, while the South Dakota carried 16 secondaries in 8 turrets, and all the Kirishima's secondaries were more powerful.

Before you go into the drawbacks of multiple caliber weapons, I'll remind you they were also dye-marked to avoid confusion of which weapons were causing which splashes. The Kirishima really did have more and heavier secondaries in more turrets. The American guns had a superior rate of fire, meaning both ships put out similar poundage of secondary shot per minute if all guns fired, but the Kirishima has the advantages of layout (more turrets on a less cramped deck plan) and shell penetration (individually more powerful shells).

And the Scharnhorst? Both wartime experience and hard data refute your claim of Scharnhort being the best treaty battleship. A battle between both ships and the class and the WWI-vintage battlecruiser Renown was indecisive, with only a handful of hits being scored by both sides. Furthermore, standard operating procedure for the Scharnhorsts was to run from any British battleship they saw, even old WWI-era dreadnoughts-not blind them before sinking them with torpedoes. And of course, there was the Battle of the North Cape, where a modern battleship smashed Scharnhorst before destroyers moved in.

If the Germans and the British each lost a battleship, that was to Germany's strategic disadvantage. The Germans had a lot fewer battleships.

The Scharnhorst did successfully run away until the one time a lucky long-range shot pierced its boiler room - at which point, yes, a slower battleship accompanied by a large fleet of destroyers battered it to pieces. Prior to that, the Scharnhorst had lost its radar - but somehow managed to score a couple hits back on the Duke of York.

That battle went much in the same manner as the King George V and Rodney pummeled the Bismarck after it took a torpedo to the propeller, although Rodney demonstrated a remarkable advantage in gunnery in that exchange. Honestly, the Scharnhorst performed more impressively than the Bismarck in its demise.

The statement of 2000 shells and 50 torpedoes is useless without knowing how many hits were scored from all those shells and torpedoes.

It's unclear how many torpedoes hit - perhaps up to half of them. It's also not clear how many shells hit. The visibility was poor, and there were almost no survivors when the Scharnhorst finally went down.

And hard data makes things even worse for the Sharnhorst. At 30,000 yards, its shells could only break through 3 inches of deck armor-bad considering that the South Dakota has over 5.3 inches of deck armor. And South Dakota's guns could easily break through Scharnhorst's 13.8 inch belt and multilayer deck armor.

At 30,000 yards, neither battleship would be scoring any hits. The South Dakota notably failed to hit the Kirishima (or damage the smaller ships accompanying it; one destroyer turned on the smoke and retreated essentially undamaged during the initial exchange) starting at 18,000 yards. You might read the account here.

The main engagement happened at under 6,000 yards. The South Dakota caused light damage to one Japanese cruiser, putting out its searchlights and not much else. At this range, the Scharnhorst's high velocity 11-inchers could actually penetrate the South Dakota's belt armor.

The Scharnhorst (and its sister ship, the Gniesau) had a very good gunnery record - see, for example, the description of the record-setting battle here. Had the Scharnhorst been put in the position of the Kirishima, the South Dakota might well have taken more damage - and the Scharnhorst had armor protection not too far from the South Dakota's, substantially superior to the Kirishima.

Nor do I think is it worth glossing over the South Dakota's inadequate TDS. Torpedoes - launched from submarines, surface ships, and airplanes - were, IMO, the biggest threat to a battleship. Even in the few cases where battleships actually clashed, torpedo damage usually was a critical factor, as in the sinking of the Bismarck.

I'm not even clear that the class was a true improvement over its predecessor. True, the North Carolina class had propeller problems initially, but once those were corrected, they were slightly faster. Because the ships were more hydrodynamic, they had better fuel economy. They also had a better torpedo defense system, comparable armament, almost as much armor protection, and crucially, a more spacious deck; no blast interference.

Both members of the class had illustrious service records - the North Carolina earned more WWII battle stars than the other nine of its contemporaries, and the Washington didn't lose a single crewmember to combat (in addition to performing very well in the battleship-on-battleship action that the South Dakota did so poorly in).

I concede the number of secondaries on the South Dakota-given that I personally visited a 20-gun ship of the class, I developed the mistaken belief that every member of the class had 20 secondary guns. However, since the OP states that we're comparing entire classes, that means I can refer to the entire South Dakota class, including the 20 secondary gunners.

Now the reason why the South Dakota was very cramped was both because of the treaty limit and because of the ship's design. The designers wanted a ship that was both armed with and adequately protected against 16 inch shellfire from both above and below the waterline (the latter was a weakness of the North Carolinas). They got their design, and the extremely cramped conditions were considered an acceptable tradeoff.

US Battleships: An Illustrated Design History, page 302 wrote:Perhaps the best verdict on the class as a whole is that it showed, first, that a ship could be armed with and protected against the 16-inch gun could be built on 35,000 tons, and, second, that such a design would entail major sacrifices in seakeeping ability (particularly dryness forward) and in habitability. The South Dakotas were badly cramped internally.

And in combat, habitability comes second to actual battle performance.

That's still seven more hits than the South Dakota landed on the Kirishima.

Naval gunnery has always been inaccurate, even with the advantage of modern radar control. Besides, due to a glitchy radar, South Dakota couldn't even see the Japanese fleet until just before it opened fire and pummelled its upperworks. It fired back only a handful of salvos, and because of the damage to its fire control systems, it's no surprise that they all missed.

You have to remember that the action off Guadalcanal was not the only surface battle the South Dakota class engaged in. The USS Massachusetts fought against Vichy French ships as part of Operation Torch. During the battle, the Massachusetts was only hit once, suffered no crew fatalities, disabled the unfinished yet still modern battleship Jean Bart, and helped sink two destroyers. It's a great contrast to the Guadalcanal action, and shows both the power of the South Dakota class and that the performance of a ship in battle can be as much due to chance factors as it is to the ship's design.

The Kirishima really did have more and heavier secondaries in more turrets. The American guns had a superior rate of fire, meaning both ships put out similar poundage of secondary shot per minute if all guns fired, but the Kirishima has the advantages of layout (more turrets on a less cramped deck plan) and shell penetration (individually more powerful shells).

The fact that a similar weight of shell could be fired from both battleships means that South Dakota's secondary guns are more efficient-as it can achieve a similar weight of shell with fewer guns. And you have to look at the 20-gun layouts on the other ships in the class, which improves the situation even more for the South Dakota.

And you have to look at the greater picture of air attack. The 6-inchers were next to useless against aircraft-besides their slower rate of fire, they could only elevate up to 30 degrees, while the 5-inchers on the South Dakotas could go up to 85 degrees. The South Dakota definetely had more versatile main secondaries than the Kongo.

If the Germans and the British each lost a battleship, that was to Germany's strategic disadvantage. The Germans had a lot fewer battleships.

Fair enough explanation.

The Scharnhorst did successfully run away until the one time a lucky long-range shot pierced its boiler room - at which point, yes, a slower battleship accompanied by a large fleet of destroyers battered it to pieces

So if it wasn't for Duke of York's lucky hit, Scharnhorst would have..... run away successfully. It still would have been defeated by a superior battleship if it had to run to escape destruction.

The Scharnhorst (and its sister ship, the Gniesau) had a very good gunnery record

LOL. During their battle with Renown at 16,000 yards, the lone British ship actually scored more hits than the two German vessels.

Nor do I think is it worth glossing over the South Dakota's inadequate TDS.

It is a serious design flaw, yes. Of course, all of the torpedoes aimed at South Dakota in the Guadalcanal action missed, and its excellent AA suite could down enemy torpedo planes.

I'm not even clear that the class was a true improvement over its predecessor.

It was. The North Carolina's were the prospect of a long, tortured design sequence, and they were not as well protected against 16-inch fire as the South Dakotas. Their superior TDS is balanced out by their lack of protection against underwater shell hits-a flaw the South Dakotas did not have.

Both members of the class had illustrious service records - the North Carolina earned more WWII battle stars than the other nine of its contemporaries, and the Washington didn't lose a single crewmember to combat (in addition to performing very well in the battleship-on-battleship action that the South Dakota did so poorly in).

As did many of the South Dakota's. The Massachusetts also didn't lose a man to enemy action, and did well in a battleship-on-battleship fight.

Opecoiler wrote:I concede the number of secondaries on the South Dakota-given that I personally visited a 20-gun ship of the class, I developed the mistaken belief that every member of the class had 20 secondary guns. However, since the OP states that we're comparing entire classes, that means I can refer to the entire South Dakota class, including the 20 secondary gunners.

Now the reason why the South Dakota was very cramped was both because of the treaty limit and because of the ship's design. The designers wanted a ship that was both armed with and adequately protected against 16 inch shellfire from both above and below the waterline (the latter was a weakness of the North Carolinas). They got their design, and the extremely cramped conditions were considered an acceptable tradeoff.

I have been talking about individual battleships (e.g., the Kirishima), actually. At the ranges actually used, the South Dakota wasn't particularly well protected against its own shells, either. Overall, it had up to a 10% increase in armor protection for selected areas against AP shells - which weren't the biggest threat.

And in combat, habitability comes second to actual battle performance.

Except being cramped did reportedly hamper battle performance (blast interference).

Naval gunnery has always been inaccurate, even with the advantage of modern radar control. Besides, due to a glitchy radar, South Dakota couldn't even see the Japanese fleet until just before it opened fire and pummelled its upperworks. It fired back only a handful of salvos, and because of the damage to its fire control systems, it's no surprise that they all missed.

You have to remember that the action off Guadalcanal was not the only surface battle the South Dakota class engaged in. The USS Massachusetts fought against Vichy French ships as part of Operation Torch. During the battle, the Massachusetts was only hit once, suffered no crew fatalities, disabled the unfinished yet still modern battleship Jean Bart, and helped sink two destroyers. It's a great contrast to the Guadalcanal action, and shows both the power of the South Dakota class and that the performance of a ship in battle can be as much due to chance factors as it is to the ship's design.

Actually, the Jean Bart only temporarily went silent. It was not anywhere near complete - it was missing its entire secondary battery and half its main battery, and quite a few other things. After it resumed firing, it was disabled by aircraft bombs. The Jean Bart was eventually ungrounded and refit after the war, although not, I think, within the treaty weight limit.

The Jean Bart's classmate, the Richelieu, was actually completed before WWII started, and was deployed while under the treaty weight limit, so rather than nominate the halfway complete Jean Bart with no secondary armament and half its main battery, I'll nominate the Richelieu itself.

The fact that a similar weight of shell could be fired from both battleships means that South Dakota's secondary guns are more efficient-as it can achieve a similar weight of shell with fewer guns. And you have to look at the 20-gun layouts on the other ships in the class, which improves the situation even more for the South Dakota.

And you have to look at the greater picture of air attack. The 6-inchers were next to useless against aircraft-besides their slower rate of fire, they could only elevate up to 30 degrees, while the 5-inchers on the South Dakotas could go up to 85 degrees. The South Dakota definetely had more versatile main secondaries than the Kongo.

The South Dakota's secondaries were better against air attack. The Kirishima's, however, were much better against armored ships and large numbers of ships, with up to twice the armor penetration and over twice as many independently rotating turrets. That also meant the secondary battery was less vulnerable to combat damage that disabled a turret.

So if it wasn't for Duke of York's lucky hit, Scharnhorst would have..... run away successfully. It still would have been defeated by a superior battleship if it had to run to escape destruction.

The question of what would have happened were the Scharnhorst under orders to engage, rather than avoid, enemy battleships remains open to question.

LOL. During their battle with Renown at 16,000 yards, the lone British ship actually scored more hits than the two German vessels.

British naval gunnery was also quite good in many cases.

It is a serious design flaw, yes. Of course, all of the torpedoes aimed at South Dakota in the Guadalcanal action missed, and its excellent AA suite could down enemy torpedo planes.

All of them missing was very lucky, considering how many were fired. The South Dakota was lucky that destroyer was in the way...

It was. The North Carolina's were the prospect of a long, tortured design sequence, and they were not as well protected against 16-inch fire as the South Dakotas. Their superior TDS is balanced out by their lack of protection against underwater shell hits-a flaw the South Dakotas did not have.

Barely worse protected against 16 inch gunfire.

As did many of the South Dakota's. The Massachusetts also didn't lose a man to enemy action, and did well in a battleship-on-battleship fight.

The Washington did so while accumulating two more battle stars, in many cases fighting against worse odds, as in the battle we've talked about so much - where the Washington alone faced the ships that sent the South Dakota fleeing and sunk most of their destroyer escort.

But let's go back to the Richelieu a minute, the one so similar to the Jean Bart, only actually completed. The French scrupulously stayed within the treaty and produced a truly excellent treaty battleship - four knots faster than the South Dakota, easily matching the speed of the SS Scharnhorst and IJN Kirishima.

It had peak deck and belt armor to match the South Dakota. On paper, we're looking equivalent. However, it carried a greater mass of armor - 13,500 tons. The obvious conclusion is that the less armored parts of the Richelieu were a little more heavily armored than the "all-or-nothing" protected South Dakota.

It carried 15" guns firing 1950 pound shells, and was rated to pierce the South Dakota's peak belt thickness out to about 29,000 yards, and those shells would punch through the thickest deck armor on the South Dakota at about 30,000 yards. It is highly unlikely that the slower South Dakota would be able to sit in the narrow band in which its armor protected it against the lighter (but high velocity) shells of the Richelieu.

The Richelieu's weak point is its secondary guns. It carried six inch secondary DP guns in three triple mounts, backed up by a half dozen twin-mount 100mm flak guns. This meant the Richelieu only had nine secondary turrets, similar to US battleships (less than the Scharnhorst or Kirishima, in other words). Lower than expected firing rates meant that the Richelieu's secondary batteries had something like a 17% deficit in throw weight relative to the South Dakota's secondary batteries; in addition, the heavy investment in its six inch triple turrets meant the secondary armament could be more easily reduced significantly by battle damage.

To its advantage, though, the Richelieu's secondary six inchers fired the heaviest secondary shells of any battleship mentioned so far, with correspondingly better armor penetration and therefore, while not as flexible or as numerous, had the best ratio of damage to throw weight against armored targets. This means that against enemy armored cruisers and other enemy battleships, its secondary battery is not much below the Kirishima's (with almost twice as many six inch guns in individual turrets) and far above the South Dakota's (which only had five inch guns).

That is, I will reiterate, the weak point of the French battleship Richelieu as deployed in WWII. As demonstrated above, it was not a terrible weak point.

In addition to matching or exceeding the protection and speed of any of the battleships mentioned so far, the Richelieu had what today's experts say is the best torpedo defense of any battleship in the war. That's including the ships that were in clear violation of the 35,000 ton weight limit, and this was coupled with a unique damage control system designed to prevent flooding from torpedo hits.

So. Fastest, best protected, with main guns capable of piercing the armor of any other battleship under consideration at almost any range, and a slightly lackluster secondary battery, although with very good armor penetration - do we have a winner in the battleship that barely fled France ahead of the Blitzkrieg?

Jedi Master Spock wrote:The question of what would have happened were the Scharnhorst under orders to engage, rather than avoid, enemy battleships remains open to question.

Scharnhorst's fate in the battle of North Cape illustrates what would have happened if she'd taken on even one of the old Royal Sovereign or Queen Elizabeth class dreadnoughts. A single heavy shell hit could have crippled her sea-keeping or range or speed, or all three; Bismarck's fate was sealed when Prince of Wales put a 14in AP shell (that failed to explode) through her forward fuel tanks.

Also, the strike of Fairey Swordfish from HMS Ark Royal that hit Bismarck didn't hit her in the screws; that would have left Bismarck in far worse shape than the rudder hit she actually received (cf. P of W loosing half her electrical power in consequence of a single hit to the screws off Malaya).

As to the figures for hits on Scharnhorst during her final action, it seems to stand at ~13 14in (Duke of York) and a dozen mixed 8in (Norfolk), 6in (Belfast, Sheffield & Jamaica), 5.25in (Duke of York), 4in (Belfast & Jamaica), 4.5in (Savage) and 4.7in (other destroyers) shell hits, and ~11 torpedo hits from Jamaica, Belfast and the destroyers (Winton, The Death of the Scharnhorst, pg. 138). Claiming that anything close to all the shells and torpedoes fired at her hit home is exceptionally spurious; in much better conditions at Jutland and Dogger Bank, the hit rates of both were in single-digit percentages.

The Kirishima certainly did a fair share of the damage (at least seven hits). While the South Dakota would not have sunk from the 14" guns of the Kirishima, it certainly was rendered incapable of effective combat and removed from the theater of operations, and the Kirishima did a lot more damage to her than she did to the Kirishima. It's accurate to say the IJN Kirishima got the better of the USS South Dakota, and the "cramped" nature of the ship did reduce its speed and interfere with fire control (see comments about "blast interference" above).

You're missing the most important part of the South Dakota vs Kirishima incident, which was that the South Dakota wasn't firing back. Her electrical systems had shorted out just before the battle, rendering her armament inoperative; by the time she brought her systems back online, the concentrated fire of the entire Japanese fleet had smashed her fire directors and rendered her blind.

In any case, USS Washington utterly OWNED Kirishima, and she's "only" a North Carolina class. She blew Kirishima into scrap in less than seven minutes, scoring at least nine 16" and forty 5" hits.

No, it's completely right. The USS South Dakota actually only mounted 16 5"/38 DP guns in eight twin turrets, reduced in order to carry other equipment. Did I mention the deck was a bit cramped? The later members of her class carried ten turrets, but they still had fewer and less powerful secondary guns than the Kirishima as rebuilt.

The Kirishima used single turrets for its 6" secondaries, which were reduced to 14 in in its final configuration, but also carried eight five inch guns in twin mounts. The 12.7cm/40 guns were actually slightly more powerful than their US counterparts and fired heavier shells (75 lb vs 55 lb; the 6" guns fired 100 lb shells). So the Kirishima carried 22 secondaries in 18 turrets, while the South Dakota carried 16 secondaries in 8 turrets, and all the Kirishima's secondaries were more powerful.

The Japanese 12.7 cm/40 gun fires a heavier shell than the American 5"/38, but it also has a much lower rate of fire (8-14 RPM versus 15-22 RPM), a lower muzzle velocity (700-725 MPS versus 762-792 MPS), and lacks an equivalent to the Mark 37 Fire Control System. As a result, it is in fact a totally inferior weapon to its American counterpart, particularly in the antiaircraft role. With a low rate of fire, low muzzle velocity, no advanced fire control, and no proximity fuzes, its only real virtue is that it is cheap and lightweight.

The Japanese 6"/50, similarly, isn't nearly as good as you think it is. It can only fire 5-6 rounds per minute compared to the 5"/38's 15-22, and it too lacks an equivalent to the Mark 37 FCS. As a result, its effective throw weight is very low.

Calibre isn't the end-all, be-all of firepower as you appear to believe. Accuracy and rate of fire are just as important, as are a myriad of other factors, and it's for good reason that the American 5"/38 is universally considered by military historians to be the finest secondary weapon of WWII.

Flashman wrote:

Jedi Master Spock wrote:The question of what would have happened were the Scharnhorst under orders to engage, rather than avoid, enemy battleships remains open to question.

Scharnhorst's fate in the battle of North Cape illustrates what would have happened if she'd taken on even one of the old Royal Sovereign or Queen Elizabeth class dreadnoughts. A single heavy shell hit could have crippled her sea-keeping or range or speed, or all three; Bismarck's fate was sealed when Prince of Wales put a 14in AP shell (that failed to explode) through her forward fuel tanks.

Also, the strike of Fairey Swordfish from HMS Ark Royal that hit Bismarck didn't hit her in the screws; that would have left Bismarck in far worse shape than the rudder hit she actually received (cf. P of W loosing half her electrical power in consequence of a single hit to the screws off Malaya).

The rudder hit did impair mobility.

I don't think the British really did wrong in arming the King George V class with 14" guns. 14" guns really did seem sufficient to pierce battleship armor in actual combat.

As to the figures for hits on Scharnhorst during her final action, it seems to stand at ~13 14in (Duke of York) and a dozen mixed 8in (Norfolk), 6in (Belfast, Sheffield & Jamaica), 5.25in (Duke of York), 4in (Belfast & Jamaica), 4.5in (Savage) and 4.7in (other destroyers) shell hits, and ~11 torpedo hits from Jamaica, Belfast and the destroyers (Winton, The Death of the Scharnhorst, pg. 138). Claiming that anything close to all the shells and torpedoes fired at her hit home is exceptionally spurious; in much better conditions at Jutland and Dogger Bank, the hit rates of both were in single-digit percentages.

Thank you for coming up with those figures. Energy at target of a 14" HE shell at 5,000 yards: 250 MJ (160 MJ KE, 90 MJ bursting charge. At 15,000 yards: 190 MJ (100 MJ KE, 90 MJ bursting charge).

Total striking energy of a 21" torpedo: 2300 MJ (almost all bursting charge).

Now, shells in general get a little more effect out of their limited bursting charge - they burst inside the ship if they pierce the armor, and strike various systems located on the surface of the ship.

However, the torpedo hits dumped a lot more destructive energy on the Scharnhorst, and they did it down under the waterline, attacking the part of the ship that keeps the water out.

By comparison, a comparable number of lighter shells rendered the USS South Dakota incapable of further combat (if still perfectly seaworthy). Had the South Dakota been hit by 11 torpedoes, it certainly would have sunk, to judge by all the expert complaint about its TDS.

The Kirishima only took nine 16" hits from the Washington. The Hood's rather unlucky explosion happened with substantially fewer hits, and the Prince of Wales pulled out of action with substantial damage after seven shell hits. What sank the Scharnhorst was not an unusually small amount of ordnance for its weight class. Sure, it took less punishment than the Yamato, but I have a suspicion the Yamato was not compliant with the Treaty of Washington's restrictions...

The real question for the Scharnhorst, I think, is not its ability to stand up to fire. The question is if its guns' high velocity and high rate of fire can compensate for the and it can't really run away from something as fast as the low shell weight. That's a pretty hard sell, and its only certain advantage against the South Dakota and Nelson - speed - doesn't apply to the Kirishima or Richelieu.

JaceCady wrote:In any case, USS Washington utterly OWNED Kirishima, and she's "only" a North Carolina class. She blew Kirishima into scrap in less than seven minutes, scoring at least nine 16" and forty 5" hits.

And you are quite welcome to throw the USS Washington's hat into the ring. As I mentioned above, I'm not fully convinced the USS South Dakota was truly the superior of the two ships.

The Japanese 12.7 cm/40 gun fires a heavier shell than the American 5"/38, but it also has a much lower rate of fire (8-14 RPM versus 15-22 RPM), a lower muzzle velocity (700-725 MPS versus 762-792 MPS), and lacks an equivalent to the Mark 37 Fire Control System. As a result, it is in fact a totally inferior weapon to its American counterpart, particularly in the antiaircraft role. With a low rate of fire, low muzzle velocity, no advanced fire control, and no proximity fuzes, its only real virtue is that it is cheap and lightweight.

The Japanese 6"/50, similarly, isn't nearly as good as you think it is. It can only fire 5-6 rounds per minute compared to the 5"/38's 15-22, and it too lacks an equivalent to the Mark 37 FCS. As a result, its effective throw weight is very low.

Hence why - as I mentioned earlier - the total throw weight per minute from secondary batteries is pretty similar. The ranges have very substantial overlap.

The Kirishima throws much heavier shells from slightly more guns at a slower rate, with substantially better penetration characteristics against heavily armored targets, i.e., other capital ships.

Calibre isn't the end-all, be-all of firepower as you appear to believe. Accuracy and rate of fire are just as important, as are a myriad of other factors, and it's for good reason that the American 5"/38 is universally considered by military historians to be the finest secondary weapon of WWII.

The best reason that it was an excellent anti-aircraft flak weapon, and military historians rightly consider the ability to engage aircraft effectively the most important function of a battleship's secondary battery. How else can a battleship protect aircraft carriers against enemy aircraft?

On the whole, the Richelieu's secondary 6" guns were terrible against aircraft. The six inch triple turrets simply could not swivel quickly enough and fire quickly enough to be very useful in the role. However, they were excellent weapons for anti-ship work.

Jedi Master Spock wrote:Hence why - as I mentioned earlier - the total throw weight per minute from secondary batteries is pretty similar. The ranges have very substantial overlap.

The throw weight overall is similar, but the 5"/38 is going to score a much higher number of hits thanks to its superior FCS.

The Kirishima throws much heavier shells from slightly more guns at a slower rate, with substantially better penetration characteristics against heavily armored targets, i.e., other capital ships.

Except that all of the guns in question are loaded with HE shells, not AP. Their penetration against heavily armoured targets is diddly squat.