Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Yamato and Musashi

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Yamato and Musashi Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Yamato and Musashi - 4/8/2011 10:27:42 PM   
Shellshock


Posts: 533
Joined: 12/31/2010
From: U.S.
Status: offline
Always wondered why does the BB Yamato have the big mystique cult with the Japanese as opposed to her sister. Is it the name....being the first of her class?
Post #: 1
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/8/2011 10:33:03 PM   
CyrusSpitama


Posts: 213
Joined: 2/21/2011
From: Naw'lins, Luzianna
Status: offline
From wikipedia and also verified elsewhere.

quote:

Yamato (大和) was originally the area around today's Sakurai City in Nara Prefecture of Japan. Later the term was used as the name of the province and also as an ancient name of Japan. The term was semantically extended to mean “Japan” or “Japanese” in general.


So you see, Yamato represents the people as a whole and is not just a ship.

(in reply to Shellshock)
Post #: 2
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/8/2011 10:37:57 PM   
Shellshock


Posts: 533
Joined: 12/31/2010
From: U.S.
Status: offline
Okay....does sound like it comes down to the pedigree of name.

(in reply to CyrusSpitama)
Post #: 3
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/8/2011 11:47:28 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
Interesting that the Germans (Hitler) renamed the Deutschland as the Lutzow for the specific reason that it would be unseemly for a ship bearing the name of the nation to be sunk.

(in reply to Shellshock)
Post #: 4
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/8/2011 11:47:40 PM   
topeverest


Posts: 3376
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline
Go up against her or her sister in straIGHT UP surface combat, you will have healthy respect...very healthy

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to Shellshock)
Post #: 5
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 12:03:30 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
If you believe that...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 6
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 12:28:43 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
well, when she was launched she was the ruler of the seas.. granted by 45 could use a technology refit... we will never know as surfase combat was not the norm for these massively wasteful, in hindsight, behemoths. So, back on track, she has the "cult" because she was first and in her day the greatest BB afloat
IMO

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 7
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 1:41:31 AM   
DivePac88


Posts: 3119
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Somewhere in the South Pacific.
Status: offline
I've always wondered just how well Yamato would have been in a gunfight, as Her gunnery practise shoots were some of the worst in the IJN.

_____________________________


When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 8
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 2:38:31 AM   
Tiornu

 

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline
Yamato's gunnery had some notable accomplishments at Samar, including the famous "puppy being smacked by a truck" hits on USS Johnston.
I wonder how the cult would be different if Yamato had gone down in Sibuyan Sea and Musashi had committed ritual suicide off Okinawa.

(in reply to DivePac88)
Post #: 9
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 3:19:22 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Interesting that the Germans (Hitler) renamed the Deutschland as the Lutzow for the specific reason that it would be unseemly for a ship bearing the name of the nation to be sunk.


The Yamato had a few close calls because of some weak points in her armor; since the IJN could lose face if she was lost at sea, she spent a lot of time safely tucked away at Truk.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 10
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 7:17:31 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
just a note, from childhood
I always heard this; " Yamato was sunk after being attcked by hundreds of planes, taking dozens of hits etc etc.." basically givingthe impression that she would not have been sunk without being torpedoed numerous times ... for what its worth. again imo these ships, in hindsight for both US and Jap navies where terrible investments.
After all, which would you have one super BB or 5 cv's?

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 11
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 7:54:27 AM   
Cyber Me

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 1/21/2010
From: the Cloud
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

I've always wondered just how well Yamato would have been in a gunfight, as Her gunnery practise shoots were some of the worst in the IJN.


The Yamato's gunnery crew were mis-reading the calculation tables during her trials. It took some time before the problem was addressed- including returning the ship to the yards. (This is why the Yamato appears in 1942 instead of pre-war.) Once it was discovered the directors were so incompetent they were busted off the ship and a new gunnery crew was assigned. This solved the problem and I think the ship worked as normal.

< Message edited by Cyber Me -- 4/9/2011 8:02:19 AM >

(in reply to DivePac88)
Post #: 12
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 9:42:50 AM   
Cyber Me

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 1/21/2010
From: the Cloud
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

just a note, from childhood
I always heard this; " Yamato was sunk after being attcked by hundreds of planes, taking dozens of hits etc etc.." basically givingthe impression that she would not have been sunk without being torpedoed numerous times ... for what its worth. again imo these ships, in hindsight for both US and Jap navies where terrible investments.
After all, which would you have one super BB or 5 cv's?


Every admiral dreams of having an unsinkable battleship. And the Yamato is probably as close to that as the Japanese could expect. A powerful surface force was seen as the only way to win the "decisive battle" that the Japanese doctrine. National pride also was built on the number of battleships you had in your fleet. I think these battleships were on the limit of the technical achievements and had to be constructed before the carriers took control of the oceans. Naval aviation grew from here for both sides could design better planes with advances in aero-engines. Until these improved planes could be made in numbers the battleship admirals held sway in all fleets.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 13
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 12:15:03 PM   
Shellshock


Posts: 533
Joined: 12/31/2010
From: U.S.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

The Yamato had a few close calls because of some weak points in her armor; since the IJN could lose face if she was lost at sea, she spent a lot of time safely tucked away at Truk.


Yeah....that swinging at anchor shed did at Truk always seemed like such a waste. Having built this paragon of naval surface supremacy, you get the sense that the Japanese were loathe to dent her paint in the common night fights of the Solomons. But given her astronomical fuel and unique ammunition requirements I can see why. Even for the US, committing the battleships South Dakota and Washington to a night action was a desperate gamble that involved risking the last heavy surface force in the Pacific in a way that was contrary to established doctrine and in a type of fighting that the Japanese had shown themselves to be masters.


(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 14
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 4:01:00 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shellshock


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

The Yamato had a few close calls because of some weak points in her armor; since the IJN could lose face if she was lost at sea, she spent a lot of time safely tucked away at Truk.


Yeah....that swinging at anchor shed did at Truk always seemed like such a waste. Having built this paragon of naval surface supremacy, you get the sense that the Japanese were loathe to dent her paint in the common night fights of the Solomons. But given her astronomical fuel and unique ammunition requirements I can see why. Even for the US, committing the battleships South Dakota and Washington to a night action was a desperate gamble that involved risking the last heavy surface force in the Pacific in a way that was contrary to established doctrine and in a type of fighting that the Japanese had shown themselves to be masters.




I think that fuel supply was an issue as well.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Shellshock)
Post #: 15
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 8:21:38 PM   
Tijanski

 

Posts: 30
Joined: 11/24/2010
Status: offline
The people at combinedfleet.com have figured this out a long time ago. They look at details that people don't even know that exist. They look at guns and armor and how good it really was. And they look at fire control and protection and how good it really was. Maybe it was Yamato class because Yamato was first ship in the class. But it was not all the big deal that everbody thinks.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 16
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/9/2011 10:35:39 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

Yamato's gunnery had some notable accomplishments at Samar, including the famous "puppy being smacked by a truck" hits on USS Johnston.
I wonder how the cult would be different if Yamato had gone down in Sibuyan Sea and Musashi had committed ritual suicide off Okinawa.



Excuse me? "Notable"?

I think it's called "blind luck".

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Tiornu)
Post #: 17
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/10/2011 12:28:42 AM   
stuman


Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shellshock


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

The Yamato had a few close calls because of some weak points in her armor; since the IJN could lose face if she was lost at sea, she spent a lot of time safely tucked away at Truk.


Yeah....that swinging at anchor shed did at Truk always seemed like such a waste. Having built this paragon of naval surface supremacy, you get the sense that the Japanese were loathe to dent her paint in the common night fights of the Solomons. But given her astronomical fuel and unique ammunition requirements I can see why. Even for the US, committing the battleships South Dakota and Washington to a night action was a desperate gamble that involved risking the last heavy surface force in the Pacific in a way that was contrary to established doctrine and in a type of fighting that the Japanese had shown themselves to be masters.




I think that fuel supply was an issue as well.




I think she was afraid of PT 73.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 18
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/10/2011 1:59:06 AM   
Tiornu

 

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Excuse me? "Notable"? I think it's called "blind luck".

If you hit what you're aiming at, I don't know how much we can credit luck. I mean, luck is a factor in any such gunnery, but the main battery and secondaries hit the target within one minute of each other. Somebody must have done something right.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 19
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/10/2011 2:18:34 AM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

Yamato's gunnery had some notable accomplishments at Samar, including the famous "puppy being smacked by a truck" hits on USS Johnston.
I wonder how the cult would be different if Yamato had gone down in Sibuyan Sea and Musashi had committed ritual suicide off Okinawa.



I've always read that Johnston got hit by 14" shells. She continued to operate for quite a while after receiving the main battery BB hits (3 of them, I think). I wonder if she received 3 18" hits if she could actually continue to operate. I think it's amazing that she could operate after 14" hits anyway.

I suppose I'm confusing Johnston with Hoel. I wouldn't advise anyone to tell Tiornu that he's mistaken. But, everything I've read about the battle, Yamato was a non-factor, Kongo was the only one who hit anything, and Nagato tried to hit Taffy 2 most of the time. I don't remember the 4th BB.

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to Tiornu)
Post #: 20
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/10/2011 3:56:56 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

Yamato's gunnery had some notable accomplishments at Samar, including the famous "puppy being smacked by a truck" hits on USS Johnston.
I wonder how the cult would be different if Yamato had gone down in Sibuyan Sea and Musashi had committed ritual suicide off Okinawa.



I've always read that Johnston got hit by 14" shells. She continued to operate for quite a while after receiving the main battery BB hits (3 of them, I think). I wonder if she received 3 18" hits if she could actually continue to operate. I think it's amazing that she could operate after 14" hits anyway.

I suppose I'm confusing Johnston with Hoel. I wouldn't advise anyone to tell Tiornu that he's mistaken. But, everything I've read about the battle, Yamato was a non-factor, Kongo was the only one who hit anything, and Nagato tried to hit Taffy 2 most of the time. I don't remember the 4th BB.



did the shells explode or did they just go through the destroyer? Sounds amazing if three (no matter if 14" or 18") shells hit and actually explode and the DD keeps operating.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 4/10/2011 4:09:03 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 21
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/10/2011 4:17:37 PM   
Gregg

 

Posts: 143
Joined: 7/26/2004
Status: offline
It takes hitting something substantial (lots of deceleration) to set off the base fuse in a big AP projectile.
In this instance, the rounds pass right thru with out hiting any thing substantial enought to set them off.
Still having a 14, 16 or 18 inch diameter object weighing 1800 to 3400 pounds, plow thru your ship even with out detonating, could mess you up badly.
It all depends of they passed thru something important or not.
Gregg

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 22
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/10/2011 4:19:10 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregg

It takes hitting something substantial (lots of deceleration) to set off the base fuse in a big AP projectile.
In this instance, the rounds pass right thru with out hiting any thing substantial enought to set them off.
Still having a 14, 16 or 18 inch diameter object weighing 1800 to 3400 pounds, plow thru your ship even with out detonating, could mess you up badly.
It all depends of they passed thru something important or not.
Gregg



yeah and that´s what I´m thinking about because if those three shells really go booom within the inner of the destroyer I seriously wonder if the ship would stay afloat after even one hit.

_____________________________


(in reply to Gregg)
Post #: 23
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/10/2011 4:59:21 PM   
Tijanski

 

Posts: 30
Joined: 11/24/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregg

It takes hitting something substantial (lots of deceleration) to set off the base fuse in a big AP projectile.
In this instance, the rounds pass right thru with out hiting any thing substantial enought to set them off.
Still having a 14, 16 or 18 inch diameter object weighing 1800 to 3400 pounds, plow thru your ship even with out detonating, could mess you up badly.
It all depends of they passed thru something important or not.
Gregg



yeah and that´s what I´m thinking about because if those three shells really go booom within the inner of the destroyer I seriously wonder if the ship would stay afloat after even one hit.

There was interesting studys of the Bismark battle that show how trajectory works. if a warship is close the trajecory is flat and the shell goes through the superstructure and makes a hole but does not explode unless it hits something massive. There was talk about defective British fuses but the holes in the Bismark was in places that would not set off the fuses. If a destroyer could set off the fuses so can hitting the water and that is not good. Battleship shell fuses were set to explode after penetrating armor. for everything else it just makes a hole.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 24
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/10/2011 7:55:40 PM   
Tiornu

 

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline
The fuze delays on Japanese shells were literally ten times longer than in most foreign fuzes. That greatly increases the chances for through-and-throughs if you don't hit something solid. Sadly for Johnston, the shells hit a boiler and engines--all three shells detonated on board. The ship's response to the hits was more pronounced than you see in the other Samar DD large-caliber hits. The shock was so great that it snapped the master gyro frame in half, a fact so unusual that BuShips didn't want to believe it. After all, the thing was designed to withstand a shock of 2000 ft-lbs. Well, guess what...?
At the time when Johnston was hit, Haruna was not firing her main battery. Nagato also had checked fire but was preparing her secondaries to open fire. Kongo's main rangefinder was out of action, and she too checked fire before the Johnston hits. However, Yamato reported firing on and hitting an American cruiser at that time.
Now, we all know that action reports are not perfect, so there is some possibility that the timelines are sufficiently inaccurate to allow other possibilities. Nagato makes no claims of a hit during this period, and even if her chronology is shifted a few minutes, she checked fire some minutes before Yamato's "cruiser" got hit. Haruna likewise makes no hit claims and her chronology would have to be seriously off, by ten minutes or more, to match the hit with her reported gunnery. Kongo did claim hitting a destroyer, but it was about 13 minutes off.
Johnston's report describes her hits as 14in, and this is the only source for that caliber. BuShips, as I recall, didn't believe it and speculated it was actually 8in. You may recall that North Carolina was hit by a torpedo with 660 lbs of explosive...or so say the official reports. We now know the charge was 50% larger than that, but they were going with what they understood at the time. Ah, let me correct something. BuShips said the hits were 7.87in, because they thought IJN cruisers were still using 200mm guns. Sometimes intelligence ain't so intelligent. (I just made a comment on 200mm guns in another thread. I think the only ships still using the gun after 1939 were the Thai coast defenders, Kaga, and Akagi. One of the Furutakas still had its original guns but bored out to 203mm.) The BuShips claim was based on descent angles. In fact, BuShips was mistaken about the relative positions of the ships, and the descent angle they site actually favors the battleships over cruisers. Specifically it favors Yamato, who was closer than Kongo and whose guns fired at a lower trajectory at any given range.
Anyway, it's Johnston's claimed caliber that has caused historians to favor Kongo. In fact, Johnston does not say simply that they were 14in: "Ship sustained first hits which were composed of a salvo of three 14" or 16" projectiles...." Keep in mind that Yamato supposedly had 16in guns. The Johnston report actually allows for the culprit to be any of the four Japanese battleships.
If we ignore the timelines, we're left with two ships claiming hits that might be Johnston. Yamato was nearer, thus more likely to hit and better matching the estimated descent angle. The three-shell salvo favors Yamato, and we can also note the three "6-inch" hits that followed the big shells. There is nothing to favor Kongo except our disbelief that Johnston could survive three 3219-lb hits. But it sure likes she did.
Maybe further research and analysis will uncover something conclusive, but I think the evidence points to Yamato.

(in reply to Tijanski)
Post #: 25
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/11/2011 6:31:20 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
all three shells ignited? Wow, that makes my thinking about the effect of BB shells different, thought such a shell hitting a DD pretty much would have the effect of a 5 inch shell hitting a PT. But if a DD stays afloat after taking three of them...

< Message edited by castor troy -- 4/11/2011 6:34:20 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Tiornu)
Post #: 26
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/11/2011 7:46:36 AM   
Puhis


Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline
I don't think AP shells had that much explosive content. I couldn't find any info about japanese AP shells, but for example Type 99 No.80 Mk 5 AP bomb (basically a converted 40 cm AP shell, used in Pearl Harbor) had only about 30 kg explosive content (out of 750 kg).

Of course inside a ship 30 kg explosive can be devastating...

< Message edited by Puhis -- 4/11/2011 7:47:19 AM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 27
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/11/2011 12:40:59 PM   
Tiornu

 

Posts: 1126
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline
A Japanese AP shell carried a burster totaling about 1.5% of its weight, or not quite 50 lbs in this case.

(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 28
RE: Yamato and Musashi - 4/11/2011 3:17:21 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cyber Me


quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

just a note, from childhood
I always heard this; " Yamato was sunk after being attcked by hundreds of planes, taking dozens of hits etc etc.." basically givingthe impression that she would not have been sunk without being torpedoed numerous times ... for what its worth. again imo these ships, in hindsight for both US and Jap navies where terrible investments.
After all, which would you have one super BB or 5 cv's?


Every admiral dreams of having an unsinkable battleship. And the Yamato is probably as close to that as the Japanese could expect. A powerful surface force was seen as the only way to win the "decisive battle" that the Japanese doctrine. National pride also was built on the number of battleships you had in your fleet. I think these battleships were on the limit of the technical achievements and had to be constructed before the carriers took control of the oceans. Naval aviation grew from here for both sides could design better planes with advances in aero-engines. Until these improved planes could be made in numbers the battleship admirals held sway in all fleets.



Every admiral?

_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to Cyber Me)
Post #: 29
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Yamato and Musashi Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.266