Remove ads

Belated Battleships (KanColle) [REHOST]

Reader mode
Thorthemighty said:
Granted that is for Armored Vehicles, but you can certainly expect something similar to happen. At least in a smaller area, at the very least. Not to mention, even if they didn't do a lot of damage to the hull itself, everything above decks would be managled.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But even the tiniest destroyer is orders of magnitude bigger than the biggest tank. Can you give one, just one example of a ship of destroyer tonnage or greater getting sunk by 30mm-sized shells?
Thorthemighty said:
I know that as well, but again, German Radar AA Gun Directors weren't the best in the world and they certainly didn't like rough seas, having chaff get deployed, doesn't help matters. Still the flak did tear the hell out of the A-10s, I mean, both A-10s got shot to pieces. That is what I learned with my Google-fu.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You know that footage of American bombing raids over Germany? The one where B-17s are getting entire wings torn off by flak? Yeah, those were 8.8cm shells. These are 12.7cm.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We know more than you. Cite a source in your argument, or people will just assume you're continuing the same pattern of ignorance and ignore you.
 
theJMPer said:
But even the tiniest destroyer is orders of magnitude bigger than the biggest tank. Can you give one, just one example of a ship of destroyer tonnage or greater getting sunk by 30mm-sized shells?

You know that footage of American bombing raids over Germany? The one where B-17s are getting entire wings torn off by flak? Yeah, those were 8.8cm shells. These are 12.7cm.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We know more than you. Cite a source in your argument, or people will just assume you're continuing the same pattern of ignorance and ignore you.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I know that, but you have to remember, even though a GAU-8 can't sink a destroyer, they can certainly tear one up.

Now the A-10 well, here is something you should know, it can tank up to a 57mm round into the area around the cockpit, as for 88mm Flak Rounds and 127mm flak rounds, most of those pics that I have seen are due to a flak round detonating like right under the bomber. Then again, I have also seen cases were B-17s have had like flak 88 rounds detonate so close to the bomber that they tear the back end of the bomber apart. Not to mention the planes were jinking all the way in, which was throwing off the solutions, it's a rather effective tactic, B-17 Bomber streams during WWII limited losses to flak by make subtle adjustments in their course as they approached the target.
 
Last edited:
They cannot 'tear up' a destroyer anymore than a person with a machine gun can tear up a cruise liner.

And you're just not getting it are you? 127 mm rounds can cause craters that are metres deep if detonated into the ground.

And you're talking about planes flying at thousands of metres evading flak fire. There's a delay of a couple of seconds as the shell reaches maximum height. Here? When you're telling A-10 pilots to go shoot at planes? Like I said before, you have to be perfectly vertical or perfectly horizontal in order to get the rounds to even go through the armour, much less do damage to the internal machinery of the ship (which, by the way, act as spaced armour, reducing the penetration power of the round even further) and causing one to shut down. Sure you can get lucky and claim that you can sink one by hitting the powder magazine, but that's a million to one shot that you can't replicate reliably. Especially when you're getting shot at because you have to fly in a predictable manner.
 
Thorthemighty said:
I know that, but you have to remember, even though a GAU-8 can't sink a destroyer, they can certainly tear one up.

Now the A-10 well, here is something you should know, it can tank up to a 57mm round into the area around the cockpit, as for 88mm Flak Rounds and 127mm flak rounds, most of those pics that I have seen are due to a flak round detonating like right under the bomber. Then again, I have also seen cases were B-17s have had like flak 88 rounds detonate so close to the bomber that they tear the back end of the bomber apart. Not to mention the planes were jinking all the way in, which was throwing off the solutions, it's a rather effective tactic, B-17 Bomber streams during WWII limited losses to flak by make subtle adjustments in their course as they approached the target.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A. Still no source.
B. None of this is applicable to the situation. The A-10 as it is strafing the destroyer, is incapable of evading anything because it is strafing! It needs to aim the gun!
C. what does it matter that it can tank an 57 mm round? it still won't stop the 127mm!
"Look at my Sherman, it can tank 50 mm rounds with ease!" A Tiger won't care about that!
 
Thorthemighty said:
Now the A-10 well, here is something you should know, it can tank up to a 57mm round into the area around the cockpit
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hold up. This is wrong.
Allow me to demonstrate citing sources:
Popular Mechanics said:
The A-10's cockpit and portions of its flight control system are protected by 1,200 pounds of titanium aircraft armor, called the "bathtub." The bathtub can withstand direct hits from armor-piercing projectiles up 23 mm. The front windscreen and canopy are resistant to small arms fire. This protection combines with double-redundant hydraulic flight systems, and a mechanical system that still works even if hydraulics are lost.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Why the A-10 Warthog Is Such a Badass Plane

Oh, and in case you're wondering...
Wikipedia on the A-10 said:
The cockpit and parts of the flight-control system are protected by 1,200 lb (540 kg) of titanium aircraft armor, referred to as a "bathtub".[64]​[65]​ The armor has been tested to withstand strikes from 23 mm cannon fire and some strikes from 57 mm rounds.[60]​[64]​ It is made up of titanium plates with thicknesses from 0.5 to 1.5 inches (13 to 38 mm) determined by a study of likely trajectories and deflection angles. The armor makes up almost 6 percent of the aircraft's empty weight. Any interior surface of the tub directly exposed to the pilot is covered by a multi-layer nylon spall shield to protect against shell fragmentation.[66]​[67]​ The front windscreen and canopy are resistant to small arms fire.[68]​
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bolded emphasis mine. SOME Strikes. Not complete protection.

Thorthemighty said:
it's a rather effective tactic, B-17 Bomber streams during WWII limited losses to flak by make subtle adjustments in their course as they approached the target.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It was only effective in the context of some bomber crews only getting mauled and limping their heavily-damaged bombers home instead of 'just' being shot down. When there's so many targets in the skies, there's not much you can do. When applied to A-10s making low-level bombing runs...It's about as useless.
 
@Thorthemighty If you want to continue this argument, I'm willing to set up a PM with you and the other participants in this debate so that we don't clog the thread.
 
wtdtd said:
A. Still no source.
B. None of this is applicable to the situation. The A-10 as it is strafing the destroyer, is incapable of evading anything because it is strafing! It needs to aim the gun!
C. what does it matter that it can tank an 57 mm round? it still won't stop the 127mm!
"Look at my Sherman, it can tank 50 mm rounds with ease!" A Tiger won't care about that!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

1.

That is damage to a M-113, thanks a to a GAU-8, granted its a M-113, it's so damn hard to find info on the sort of damage that a GAU-8 will do to a WWII era DD. So, I was just estimating.

2. Granted, but also, seeing a Hog spewing rounds at you when you are manning a Anti-Aircraft Gun mount, I would likely be going for cover, not to mention, the instant rounds begin to hit, non-penetrating hits or no, that will raise hell on deck, I mean, having something that weighs as much as a PGU-14/B will do some harm.

3. Uh, have you seen how much junk a fleet with 127s has to throw into the air even with VT-fuses to bag a plane? Without VT-Fuses that number goes up drastically.

Still getting back on track, you have to admit, wonder how Pringles would react if she saw one of her sisters, gone Abyssal.
 
Last edited:
Thorthemighty said:
1.

That is damage to a M-113, thanks a to a GAU-8, granted its a M-113, it's so damn hard to find info on the sort of damage that a GAU-8 will do to a WWII era DD. So, I was just estimating.

2. Granted, but also, seeing a Hog spewing rounds at you when you are manning a Anti-Aircraft Gun mount, I would likely be going for cover, not to mention, the instant rounds begin to hit, non-penetrating hits or no, that will raise hell on deck, I mean, having something that weighs as much as a PGU-14/B will do some harm.

3. Uh, have you seen how much junk a fleet with 127s has to throw into the air even with VT-fuses to bag a plane? Without VT-Fuses that number goes up drastically.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nobody's saying you can't penetrate a DD with a GAU-8.

What we're saying is it doesn't matter. A 30mm is such a small round that it won't damage enough of the ship do do anything unless you get really lucky. It can kill tanks because tanks are cramped machines where almost every cubic inch of stuff inside the armor is crucial to keeping the tank operational. If you penatrate a tank, you're going to hit A: a crewman, B:the gun, C:ammo, D:fuel, E: some combination of the above.

If you penetrate a destroyer, you're gonna hit berthing spaces, the galley, fuel tankage (remeber, heavy fuel oil doesn't burn nearly as readily as avgas), or something like that. Unless you hit the ammo or cook off the torpedoes, one strafing run will not kill the ship. Even hitting the bridge isn't enough.

When the USS Johnston was hit and had her bridge almost sheered off, the captain just moved his command to the stern, yelling orders down though torn-open steel to a few strong lads who'd physically manhandle the rudders around. And this is a ship that got hit with 46cm shells. Shells 15 times bigger around and almost 4000 times heavier.
 
theJMPer said:
Nobody's saying you can't penetrate a DD with a GAU-8.

What we're saying is it doesn't matter. A 30mm is such a small round that it won't damage enough of the ship do do anything unless you get really lucky. It can kill tanks because tanks are cramped machines where almost every cubic inch of stuff inside the armor is crucial to keeping the tank operational. If you penatrate a tank, you're going to hit A: a crewman, B:the gun, C:ammo, D:fuel, E: some combination of the above.

If you penetrate a destroyer, you're gonna hit berthing spaces, the galley, fuel tankage (remeber, heavy fuel oil doesn't burn nearly as readily as avgas), or something like that. Unless you hit the ammo or cook off the torpedoes, one strafing run will not kill the ship. Even hitting the bridge isn't enough.

When the USS Johnston was hit and had her bridge almost sheered off, the captain just moved his command to the stern, yelling orders down though torn-open steel to a few strong lads who'd physically manhandle the rudders around. And this is a ship that got hit with 46cm shells. Shells 15 times bigger around and almost 4000 times heavier.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

35.6cm shells, the shots that ravaged Johnston's engines came from Kongou, the three hits that tore the Bridge apart either came from one of the Light Cruisers or Yamato, but I am betting Yamato rangefinders were mounted pretty damn high, plus the seas were awful that day, but that's beside the point. I know a strafe won't kill it, but imagine the hell that would ensue from it. Plus I did throw the thing together in like four days, so it wasn't as good or as thought out as it could have been. I might come out with a revised version, one that actually fits better with how everything has been set. So, theirs that.

Still, wonder how Pringles would react if she sees one of her sisters, twisted by the Abyssals.
 
Last edited:
I DO remember a scene where Soviet naval officers were given a severe shaking by a mock attack by 4 A-10 Thunderbolts. BUT that was in the novel 'Hunt For Red October'

Could a 30mm rotary cannon or 4 tear up a lot of soft targets on a modern warship? I expect probably so. Especially squishy human meat of exposed crewmen. Also radar antennas and other sensitive targets. In Clancy's novel, the speculation he makes has some sense. But even in Clancy's book, it wasn't a free ride and the Soviets weren't at war or expecting trouble they still locked on to some of the A-10s. It was a good tactic to startle the Soviets, not fight them.

You can't sink a ship with the cannon and in Abyssal terms, the Abyssals are expecting they will be taking hits by 12.5 cm and larger shells and keep going. That is what WW2 ships were made for: to be hit and keep fighting.

The 30 mm round IS a good way to piss them off though.



Don't give up writing but first I suggest that fanfic ideas and recs might be a better place to float ideas. BelBat has a specified universe structure and anything here must operate according to theJMPer's design as G.O.D. (Greatly Overworked Designer)

Second: ask questions and take constructive criticism. Now it IS possible for the majority to be wrong, but when most folk tell you you are on the wrong road, then yeah.. checking the map and asking directions are in order.
 
Thorthemighty said:
35.6cm shells, the shots that ravaged Johnston's engines came from Kongou, the three hits that tore the Bridge apart either came from one of the Light Cruisers or Yamato, but I am betting Yamato rangefinders were mounted pretty damn high, plus the seas were awful that day, but that's beside the point. I know a strafe won't kill it, but imagine the hell that would ensue from it. Plus I did throw the thing together in like four days, so it wasn't as good or as thought out as it could have been. I might come out with a revised version, one that actually fits better with how everything has been set. So, theirs that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nope, it was Yamato. Kongou was out of position and according to her own logs, she wasn't firing at the time. Yamato's logs report her firing on an American "Heavy Cruiser" (remember, the IJN mis-identified the USN ships as CVs and CAs, not CVEs and DDS) that was in the position Johnston was at the time Johnston was hit.
 
OK, to provide an outside perspective:

An A-10 strafing run will not kill any warship bigger than a PT boat except by a golden BB hitting a magazine or a torpedo. (A PT boat, of course, would pretty much instantly turn into flaming mahogany splinters from a good burst from a GAU-8, though.) On the other hand...

Even in WW2, even with .50-caliber MGs, strafing runs were a serious problem for warships in that they were very effective at cutting down exposed crewmembers, knocking out AA gun mounts, and tearing up things like gunfire directors and radars. Indeed, the US Navy kept the 20mm Oerlikon guns even after they were found to be essentially useless in shooting down enemy aircraft, specifically because what they were good at was breaking up strafing runs that could have caused serious degradation of the ship's combat effectiveness.

Most likely results of a good lengthwise strafing run on a DD with an A-10: DD fire controls knocked offline or limited to Local Control in each gun mount, numerous small fires, some of the AA guns disabled, many AA gunners and some of the main battery crews killed or incapacitated (remember, those gunhouses are basically sheetmetal on a destroyer), slight reduction in power from perforated uptakes and minor steam leaks, possibly dangerous situations involving torpedoes or depth charges; ship will be hors de combat for maybe ten to fifteen minutes while the crew regroups and conducts DC to fix the problems, assuming the torpedoes and depth charges can get jettisoned before they go up. A-10 fucked the hell up and unlikely to make it back to base.

Realistically, in this situation, Hawg drivers would be best advised to reserve the GAU-8 for pulling the Warthog Stomp on enemy fighters, since the AIM-9s are unlikely to guide on them, but the Hawg can turn just as tight as a WW2 fighter.
 
Thorthemighty said:
35.6cm shells, the shots that ravaged Johnston's engines came from Kongou, the three hits that tore the Bridge apart either came from one of the Light Cruisers or Yamato, but I am betting Yamato rangefinders were mounted pretty damn high, plus the seas were awful that day, but that's beside the point. I know a strafe won't kill it, but imagine the hell that would ensue from it. Plus I did throw the thing together in like four days, so it wasn't as good or as thought out as it could have been. I might come out with a revised version, one that actually fits better with how everything has been set. So, theirs that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
theJMPer said:
Nope, it was Yamato. Kongou was out of position and according to her own logs, she wasn't firing at the time. Yamato's logs report her firing on an American "Heavy Cruiser" (remember, the IJN mis-identified the USN ships as CVs and CAs, not CVEs and DDS) that was in the position Johnston was at the time Johnston was hit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Dammit, where's that commentary when I need it?
 
theJMPer said:
Nope, it was Yamato. Kongou was out of position and according to her own logs, she wasn't firing at the time. Yamato's logs report her firing on an American "Heavy Cruiser" (remember, the IJN mis-identified the USN ships as CVs and CAs, not CVEs and DDS) that was in the position Johnston was at the time Johnston was hit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's interesting, because I have read Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors and it said that the shots came from Kongou. That is really interesting.
 
theJMPer said:
Even if it was Kongo, that doesn't change the fact that 14 inch shells aren't enough to kill a DD if they don't detonate. In what possible universe could 30mm rounds do that?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The thing is, it states in the book that of the three rounds that hit. Only one Over-penetrated. One hit the boiler in the portside boiler room and exploded while the other hit the reduction gears for the Portside Turbine and also exploded.
 
Thorthemighty said:
35.6cm shells, the shots that ravaged Johnston's engines came from Kongou, the three hits that tore the Bridge apart either came from one of the Light Cruisers or Yamato, but I am betting Yamato rangefinders were mounted pretty damn high, plus the seas were awful that day, but that's beside the point. I know a strafe won't kill it, but imagine the hell that would ensue from it. Plus I did throw the thing together in like four days, so it wasn't as good or as thought out as it could have been. I might come out with a revised version, one that actually fits better with how everything has been set. So, theirs that.

Still, wonder how Pringles would react if she sees one of her sisters, twisted by the Abyssals.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Those are battleship and cruiser grade shells. What's the point of your argument? They're supposed to destroy ship-sized targets.

The hell that would ensue from them would be minimal, because again, you have to be flying horizontal or vertical to do any sort of damage to them. Otherwise you're just going to annoy them.
 
A-ha! Found it, @Thorthemighty !

IXJac said:
Actually Robert Lundgren's research from "The World Wonder'd: What Really Happened off Samar," indicates that the Yamato's role in the Battle of Samar has been grossly understated. Part of the problem was that at the time no one in the USN knew the true size of the Yamato or its armament. Because of that there are no reports of 18" hits in the official records - because the Americans didn't even know the Yamato mounted guns that big. Many shots likely fired by the Yamato were listed in contemporary accounts as 14" shell hits, and so ascribed by later historians to other ships. Similarly, several of the US warships reported engaging a "45,000 ton battleship" when attacking the Yamato, but due to this innacurate reporting these reports have led historians to assume they engaged one of the smaller Japanese battleships.

From Lundgren's book, which gives virtually a blow by blow, shell by shell account of the battle it appears the Yamato scored the longest ranged damaging hit by a battleship ever with her third salvo against the escort carrier White Plains at the start of the battle. At a range of 34,587 yards she scored a perfect and close straddle with six 18.1" shells. One of the shells hit the water and detonated under White Plains' keel, doing her very serious structural damage - more in fact than the shell would have done had it scored a direct hit against the hull. This was because Yamato's 18" shells were engineered to dive and maintain a stable trajectory under water with a 0.4 second fuze delay to inflict just this kind of damage.

Yamato fired one more salvo at White Plains before losing her in the smoke laid by her escorts. Yamato then engaged the escort carrier Kitkun Bay, scoring a straddle with her first salvo against her, before being forced to maneuver to avoid air attack. When Yamato turned back to engage, she scored multiple hits on the destroyer USS Johnston at a range of 20,000 yards. Johnston's after action report assumed the shells were 14" projectiles, but Lundgren calculates that due to the angles and the reports from both sides Johnston was almost certainly hit by three 18.1" shells from Yamato's main guns, and three 6.1" shells from Yamato's secondary battery. These hits were historically attributed to Kongo, but Lundgren says that the angles make no sense as Kongo likely wouldn't even have been able to see Johnston at the time she was hit, and Kongo's own logs indicate she was not firing on the destroyer at that time.

Yamato then engaged the destroyers Hoel and Heermann, before being forced to turn away due to torpedoes. In the process Hoel was hit multiple times by shells and fragments from the Yamato and badly damaged, although still underway. For her part, Hoel reported she had engaged the Haruna, and it was previously assumed that the battleship that crippled her was the Kongo, but again the positions and reports don't line up, and it was almost certainly the Yamato that she attempted to torpedo, and who hammered her with shellfire.

Having turned back around after the torpedo attack, Yamato found her view of the American carriers completely obscured by smoke. Switching to radar direction Yamato began to engage a target she identified as an enemy "battleship," at a range of 21,920 yards. The target was actually the escort carrier Gambier Bay (Yamato didn't actually gain a visual on her until a minute later). At least one of Yamato's radar-directed 18.1" shells sideswiped Gambier Bay, ripping out a 4 foot by 4 foot hole forward of her engine room. Yamato finally gained visual contact and identified its target as a carrier, continuing to fire, now joined by Kongo. Between them the two battleships scored a further four damaging near misses and direct hits, crippling Gambier Bay's engines, reducing her speed to 11 knots, and so dooming her.

Yamato then passed the crippled Hoel and engaged her with her secondary battery, scoring six more hits and reducing Hoel to sinking condition. At this point Hoel's captain gave the order to abandon ship. Yamato then came under heavy air attack and had to manuever to evade several torpedoes, again losing contact with the carriers.

Kurita, deciding that he was losing control of the battle and wanting to regroup his fleet, and made the fateful decision to disengage, ending Yamato's part in the surface action.

The key takeaways are:

1.) The Yamato was far more active and effective in the Battle of Samar than previously though, in part due to serial misidentification of her size and armament by the American warships she was fighting. This has led previous historical accounts to attribute her actions to smaller Japanese battleships.

2.) Yamato's gunnery was extremely accurate. Yamato scored what can be argued to be the longest range hit by any battleship, ever, with a highly damaging under the keel detonation by one of her 18.1" shells against White Plains at a range of 34,587 yards. Sorry Warspite.

3.) Yamato scored a hit against Gambier Bay at a range of around 21,000 yards using only radar.

4.) Yamato was directly responsible for the sinking of the destroyer Hoel, badly damaged Johnston, and - combined with Kongo - scored the hits that doomed the escort carrier Gambier Bay.

Basically, she did pretty well for herself, and was arguably the most effective Japanese warship of the battle.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

EDIT: Thank you based IXJac!
 
MissingJimbo said:
A-ha! Found it, @Thorthemighty !



EDIT: Thank you based IXJac!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well hot damn! Didn't know that! Then Johnston one lucky S.O.B; because two of those rounds detonated unleashing a 74 pound bursting charge from 46cm shells, that would also explain why the three 6in shell hits occurred seemingly moments later. That is incredible shooting from Yamato hitting a Fletcher like that at range.
 
Warning: Stay On Target
  • Staff Post
    • stay on target This is a user warning. There are many like it, but this one's mine. And I'm going to ask that everyone stay on target and stop derailing the thread to talk about whether 30mm shells can kill DDs.

    @Thorthemighty, if you're going to continue arguing this point (which I very much disapprove of, because that will be furthering this monster of a 7-page derail and that means my fury) allow me to grace you with the wisdom of SV:

    Put up, or shut up. This is your only warning. And half-remembered excepts are not 'putting up'. I want links and sources and citations. Not that it matters, because this derail ends now.
     
  • Staff Post
    • That sound you hear is the cry of Warspite as her "longest ranged hit by a battleship" trophy is being taken away from her.

    Edit: either that or the mod warning
     
    How many JMSDF BBs are back. I know we got the Kongos and Nagatos, and we have Musashi and Yamashiro. I know Yamato's not here, but what about Fuso and the Ises? They here as well, or are they still in non-corporeal la-la land?
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top