Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

I think you should consider battleships taken out of action for extended periods. That's a rather long list. Sure, battleships were survivable, but all you usually wanted was a mission kill. Anchoring a heavy ship within air attack range just so the ship would be available when needed--read what I wrote--was simply asking for a load of hurt.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

[active] battleships sunk by SAP or AP bombs alone were:

Marat
Tirpitz
Arizona
Roma

(not counting the sinkings of the inactive remenants of the Japanese fleet sitting in their harbors, nor the two greek pre_dreadnought BB's sunk at their moorings)

Artwork graciously provided by Dixie

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005
But, I would argue that 4 BBs taken out by bombs is considerable. How many (in fighting condition) were taken out by other BBs (during WWII)?

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

Some of the ships listed above were not sunk by BB gunnery alone but by ship launched torpedoes too. That's why I asked.

Artwork graciously provided by Dixie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

well you asked what BB's had been "taken out" by their own bretheren. Bismarck was most certainly "taken out" by Rodney and KGV. But yes, they wouldn't have caught up to her had she not been stopped by a torp to the rudders.

I made a boo boo though. Fuso was not taken out by a BB. She was killed by a mass torpedo attack prior to the bombardment. I'll edit accordingly.

Artwork graciously provided by Dixie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

I think you should consider battleships taken out of action for extended periods. That's a rather long list. Sure, battleships were survivable, but all you usually wanted was a mission kill. Anchoring a heavy ship within air attack range just so the ship would be available when needed--read what I wrote--was simply asking for a load of hurt.

Then why wasn't the Home Fleet destroyed at Scapa Flow?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl
Hood wasn't a BB and should not be on the list of BBs sunk by gunfire. It was a CB with that class' known deck armor weaknesses. Any of the larger bombs in the USN and IJNs arsenals could have penetrated Hood's deck armor....
And yeah, the last of those end-war Japanese BBs were not at sea. But as this thread was about whether or not a few bomb hits could do sufficient damage to a BB to sink one, I'm not sure the objection is germane. Those ships did have crews and were at action stations (and presumedly with watertight integrity and damage control teams on board) when they were sunk.

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

I think you should consider battleships taken out of action for extended periods. That's a rather long list. Sure, battleships were survivable, but all you usually wanted was a mission kill. Anchoring a heavy ship within air attack range just so the ship would be available when needed--read what I wrote--was simply asking for a load of hurt.

Then why wasn't the Home Fleet destroyed at Scapa Flow?

Been there. (They remember my family, but not with love.) It was garrisoned by a large number of troops and fighter squadrons.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

It's certainly true that Hood was a battlecruiser, but it's easy to misunderstand what that means. It does not imply a lack of protection, believe it or not. Really all it means, in Hood's case, is that she had cruiser-like speed. The battlecruiser term went through a spectrum of meanings; Hood herself was the ship that prompted the RN to use the term to indicate any fast capital ship. That's why you will find official RN documents referring to the early drafts of the modern KGV class battleships as battlecruisers. Terminology shifted again in the midst of the KGV design process, so she began construction as a battleship instead. Hood was arguably the best-protected ship in the RN at the time she entered service.
The two Fusos both sank in Surigao Strait, or Sergio Strait as Nik likes to call it. The similar Ise and Hyuga, though, were both victims at Kure. The bombs that sank them came not from B-29's but from carrier planes (Avengers?). This certainly proves that bombs could sink battleships, but I personally don't find it any more compelling than the Mitchell tests. The state of shipboard readiness was as good as possible under the circumstances, but the ships were completely swarmed, targeted by multiple dozens of bombs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

The "3-inch" armor deck aboard Hood needs some qualification. It consisted of three layers of HT steel. Obviously a lamination of three plates is not as effective as a single 3-inch plate, and HT steel is far inferior to NC armor. And the 3-inch thickness covered only a limited area.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BrucePowers

Hi Pasternakski! Long time no see. How are you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

I think you should consider battleships taken out of action for extended periods. That's a rather long list. Sure, battleships were survivable, but all you usually wanted was a mission kill. Anchoring a heavy ship within air attack range just so the ship would be available when needed--read what I wrote--was simply asking for a load of hurt.

Then why wasn't the Home Fleet destroyed at Scapa Flow?

Been there. (They remember my family, but not with love.) It was garrisoned by a large number of troops and fighter squadrons.

So was Pearl Harbor, Taranto and Kure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

quote:

ORIGINAL: BrucePowers

Hi Pasternakski! Long time no see. How are you?

I'm better than a sharp stick in the eyeball, Bruce. Howz yer own nasty self?

Oh. The thread topic. What's the point here, fellas? GP bombs didn't do much against BBs. Later in the war, when there wasn't much left to sink by way of armored ships, SBDs and SB2Cs got big, bad AP bombs.

Time marches on. Rust never sleeps.

Now, let's move on to the greatest failing of WitP (and one that doesn't promise to be fixed by AE), that lame-o attempt at modeling the Japanese war industry.

I mean, deciding which and how many aircraft engines to produce? Come on.

Of course, we are, apparently, going to get Brady's wet dream in midget subs, that vitally important element without which no Pacific war simulation could ever be successful, so I suppose I shouldn't seppuku just yet...

Should I militate for Japanese jet fighters, do ya think?

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

I think you should consider battleships taken out of action for extended periods. That's a rather long list. Sure, battleships were survivable, but all you usually wanted was a mission kill. Anchoring a heavy ship within air attack range just so the ship would be available when needed--read what I wrote--was simply asking for a load of hurt. It couldn't stay ready, and it would get hit if it remained static for long enough.

quote:

Hood had nothing like a BBs overall deck armor protection and therefore was not remotely construable as a BB.