Or just summon Enterprise.
Belated Battleships (KanColle) [REHOST]
- Thread starter theJMPer
- Start date
Which isn't happening.
- Location
- Nowhere
You could summon Louisiana with her 20-inchers.
Leafninja91
The man that makes the impossible real.
- Location
- The Great White North
Montana Louisiana? cause she had 4 Triple 16-inchers not 20's
- Location
- Mountains of Appalachia
One thing to remember is that right now no one but Snow Queen knows about said monster. Abyssmark does not know in fact until she arrives for her repairs. Our heroes certainly don't know and won't know until someone gets eyeballs on the abyssal archdemon.
This could become very relevant if Jersey and company either attempt to storm Snow Queen's lair, or plan on ambushing Abyssmark when she comes out. This said, I would not be surprised to see Musashi joining the killgroup, since Mushi is overkill for a convoy escort, and has a history with Maya (143 of Maya's crew went down with Musashi at Leyte Gulf) who was sunk early as part of Center Force. In addition, since this is probably being based out of a US base (either San Diego, Bremerton, or Pearl), the logistics requirements for Shinano and Musashi can be handled by the USN.
Last edited:
- Location
- State of Denial
I feel it should be noted the last of the H series to actually be considered for construction was the H-41, and what came after that was only designed to stoke Hitlers ego, so idk if designs the Germany navy didn't seriously consider are summonable, even by abyssals
Last edited:
CompassJimbo
Where’s Your North?
- Location
- The former Rubber Capital of the World
She cannot be summoned by BelaBat rules. She was never laid down, nevermind crewed. We'll need torpedoes instead. Lots of them. Wait a minute…
That seems like a job for Shimakaze and KTKM-sama (lol).
ijnfleetadmiral
CinC Rengo Kanmusutai
- Location
- Admiral's Bridge, HIJMS Kongo
Bit of trivia: one of Maya's casualties at Leyte Gulf was LT Togo Ryuichi (72), grandson of FADM Marqius Togo Heihachiro.
- Location
- Nowhere
There was an alternate design in the early stages. Both her and Ohio got 20 inch and 18 inch guns, respectively. (I think. I may have that mixed up.)
Break out the Torpedobeats. All of them.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds like a job for Albacore, Sealion, & Harder.
Sandy River DL
(Verified Destroyer Leader)
- Location
- Lake Michigan
- Pronouns
- Her/She
You forgot the Japanese subs.
- Location
- Mountains of Appalachia
Sadly the last two are not back yet.
You could make a pretty good anti-capital ship wolfpack with Archerfish, Iku, and Albacore, though. That's three CV killers (Shinano, Wasp, and Taiho respectively) looking for a battleship to bag.
Last edited:
Invite U-511 and a bunch of her sisters too. We can have the Ocean's 11 of Submarines.
- Location
- National Capital Region, USA
Never heard of that one. AFAIK, the intended armament would have been would have been twelve 16"/50 caliber Mark 7 gun, in four 3-gun turrets. Same as the Iowas, just 3 more. The Louisiana and Ohio were just like the rest of the class. Where did you hear 18" or 20"?
still_guns
For the Empire!
- Location
- Bridge of ISS Conundrum
Yeah, the only 18 inch battleships that the US ever designed were the Tillman designs, I think the Tillman IV-I
Spectre
eternal servant to the Fire/EMS gods
- Location
- NY
doesn't that mean H-41 and later are out as well, given only two of the h-39's had anything laid down.
- Location
- Nowhere
- Location
- National Capital Region, USA
(At work at the moment. First link blocked by work filter, since it leads to 'Gaming'.)
A never-even-completed-a-prototype that was cancelled and converted into a 16" in by the Washinton Naval Treaty 1922, long before even the Iowas were designed, let alone the Montanas. How is that supposed to have been the planned armament of Maine or Ohio?
Oh, wait, it was revived in '42. Serves me right for not reading to the bottom first. But the article here doesn't mention it being included in anything about the Montanas. Just that it was too heavy and no better deal than carrying more 16"/50s. Wait, it says:
So, considered briefly and dropped for the above reasons? Yeah, if they're that much heavier, but no better penetration, what's the point?
- Location
- Nowhere
Bigger boom? Larger shell = more explosive filler.
Fallenworldful
Stan by me
Friedman mentioned that they were considered for the Montana's armament when the design was first on the drawing board, but their ballistics were subpar at long range and did not have appreciably more pen at range than a superheavy 16". The 18"/47 actually had the issue of having too much muzzle velocity, giving them a flat arc even at long ranges that made their large size less useful than it should've been. Making a superheavy version might've worked, but that's extra weight that couldn't be justified with the ships the USN thought Japan had.
Sandy River DL
(Verified Destroyer Leader)
- Location
- Lake Michigan
- Pronouns
- Her/She
The USN settled on the 16" because it's got a good balance of range, penetration and HE capacity. Anything bigger is only really useful as a bombardment weapon. And we have cruise missiles for that.
- Location
- Nowhere
I meant for WWII. IMO conventional shells are out completely. Railguns, however... But that's a different topic altogether.
It was still considered.
Last edited:
I think I found the problem, folks.
Using anything connected with WoWs as a source for real-life stuff is... unwise. Unwise on a par with using Wikipedia as your sole source when doing research. Wargaming is more interested in gameplay than accuracy, to begin with (hence their nerfing and buffing various ships for "balance" reasons), but beyond that, they want to fill out "tech trees" (for want of a better term) by making sure that all the nations have the same number of roughly-equally-capable ships (and, in WoT, armored vehicles) in each tier, with the one exception being that they deliberately unbalance it a little to favor whatever flavor-of-the-month they're featuring--and also to favor stuff you have to pay actual real-life money for (witness Massachusetts, a buy-with-real-money premium ship, having advantages over Alabama, which you can buy with in-game-only currency... despite the two being literally identical in real life).
This means that, not only do they frequently nerf and/or buff ships' performance relative to each other (hence the Montanas being essentially useless against the Yamatos in-game), a lot of the ships in the tech tree are napkinwaffen, not real ships. They admit that some of them were "never built," but what they like to claim is that they have super secret documents that prove that their designs were considered, at some point, but never built, for reasons. A fine example is the "Phoenix-class" cruiser, the US Tier IV cruiser in the game. They claim that it's a preliminary design that "never materialized, but informed the design of the Omahas". Friedman's exhaustive history of US cruiser design lists nothing that matches those characteristics; it actually seems to be something in between Design 112 and Design 116 of the April 1915 scout cruiser design studies, albeit with double the horsepower. (Essentially, 112 was an unarmored scout cruiser with ten six-inch guns; 116 was the same ship, but enlarged to allow a four-inch belt and a 1.5-inch deck, to protect against destroyer guns.)
Meanwhile, a fine example of a pure napkinwaffe would be the Japanese "Zao-class" cruiser, which doesn't appear to be based on any actual IJN design studies and is instead created out of whole cloth simply so that the IJN cruiser tree can have an equivalent to the Des Moines class; likewise, the "Hakuryu-class" CV is an entirely fictional design extrapolated from Taiho to give the IJN carrier tree an equivalent to the Midway class. While the Amagi-class design isn't fictional, it was overtaken by the Washington Treaty, with the two ships scheduled for conversion to aircraft carriers during construction, like the Lexington class was for the US; when Amagi was overturned by the Great Kanto Earthquake, she was scrapped and the similarly-Treaty-stopped battleship Kaga was converted in her place. (The Kii-class design is based on preliminary design studies only, having never gotten to the point of the kind of detailed design needed to actually build a ship.) Great whacks of the Soviet and German trees never got past the "back of the napkin sketch" phase, along with the Tier VIII and Tier IX British battleships (and the Conqueror seems to be pure fantasy). (Another example of WG creating stuff out of whole cloth would be the entire Chinese tank destroyer line in WoT; historically, China never had any TDs.)
So don't take anything from WoWs too seriously--and even if it crops up on their forums, take it with a grain of salt the size of your fist, because it's entirely plausible that any "design information" that someone from WG mentions on there is really just them either testing the waters for a new fantasy design they thought of, or trying to build up anticipation for a new variant they're getting ready to release.
The 18"/48 wasn't something that was being planned for; it was entirely a BuOrd project to develop a gun that would let them be ready should anyone else continue the caliber race that was ongoing in the teens, so that if the General Board demanded something more than the 16"/50, they'd be able to provide it in a timely manner. Likewise, the 18"/47 variant that they tested in the 40s was, again, not something seriously considered a realistic prospect, given the performance of the 16" superheavy shells; it was simply BuOrd going back and reviving the project as a fallback position should some unforeseen contingency require even bigger guns.
The only time any study of a gun bigger than 18" was undertaken by BuOrd, it was in connection with the Tillman designs; the request for designs included specifying 24" guns, which was then changed to 20" guns at BuOrd's protests that they could not provide any sort of accurate characteristics for a gun with such a large bore, at least not through extrapolation from known data. Thus, the Tillman designs were outfitted with 16", 18", and 20" variants, with balanced protection; the hypothetical 20" gun's characteristics and performance were extrapolated from known 16" gun data and estimated 18" gun numbers based on their well-advanced 18"/48 design studies. Of course, the Tillman designs were never meant as serious designs for production; they were a simple exploration of the limits of what we could build if Congress gave the Navy a blank check, meant primarily to shut up people who were complaining that the new battleship designs were too big and too expensive to keep building them when they were then obsolete a couple of years later. (Said people were saying, "Just go all the way to the logical end, build the ultimate battleship, and leave us some money for more useful purposes!"; the idea was to show them just how horribly expensive it would be to build said "ultimate battleship" instead of continuing to go with gradual escalation of the designs that leave them with obsolete-but-still-useful ships after each new iteration arrives.)
While there may have been brief consideration of putting the 18"/47 on a couple of the Montanas, it was never a realistic prospect; likely the only major difference between the Montana class design and what would have actually been built would be incorporating Admiral King's proposal for a more-efficient secondary battery layout to increase AA firepower. (Said proposal was under consideration for Illinois and Kentucky, as well; it basically took a cue from US cruiser design practice and removed the midships pair of five-inch mounts from the sides, instead planting them on the centerline, fore and aft, superfiring the main battery--the benefit was that this would not only increase the secondary broadside by two guns, it would do the same for end-on fire, as the midships mounts were screened from firing directly forward or aft by the presence of the rest of the secondary battery.) While I'm not certain it would have happened, it seems like a relatively minor change that could be made easily enough. Otherwise, the only things that would be changed would be the inevitable addition of approximately ninety kajillion Bofors and Oerlikon mounts, as happened with just about all US warships of the era.