Changing Destiny (Kancolle)

Say Sky, how much does our dear time displaced admiral remember of Yamato her spec´s?
And is there anyway he could use this?
Because even if he remembers them, I do not see a easy way for him to use this, unless he can somehow make sure Hornet her B-25(?) strike on Japan, flies over one of the dockyards used for that class it´s construction.
And even then, the camera caring planes were lost, so.....

I ask, because it might just be what is needed to fast track the Montana class, as a speedy bird.
We today know she had nine 18 inchers , but back then...
Is there anything he could use to express a fear of a 18 inch BB capable of doing 27 knots?
Or get a sub near Bungo Strait around 20 October 1941?

Don´t have to answer directly, in story is fine too.
I bet he already doesn´t like the current butterflies, so that could be a big one to worry about, right?
The only thing Montanas would be good for, is getting converted like the Lexingtons.

Period.
 
Lexington-class didn't gain that much speed from the conversion.

Granted, the carrying capacity is a good argument, but given that the Iowas were capable of keeping up with carrier forces, then they go back to a slower carrier design? Uh, am I the only one to frown at the thought?
 
Lexington-class didn't gain that much speed from the conversion.

Granted, the carrying capacity is a good argument, but given that the Iowas were capable of keeping up with carrier forces, then they go back to a slower carrier design? Uh, am I the only one to frown at the thought?
The Montanas didn't make 30 knots. They were a tad slower than Yamato and therefore were unable to keep up with the Essexes. I also don't think we made purpose-built fleet carriers that did less than 30 knots.
 
The Montanas didn't make 30 knots. They were a tad slower than Yamato and therefore were unable to keep up with the Essexes. I also don't think we made purpose-built fleet carriers that did less than 30 knots.
Neither the USS Ranger and the USS Wasp managed 30 knots but while they were fleet carriers in theory, in practice they were failed experiments.
 
The Montanas didn't make 30 knots. They were a tad slower than Yamato and therefore were unable to keep up with the Essexes. I also don't think we made purpose-built fleet carriers that did less than 30 knots.

That's my point. The removal/remodelling of weapons and ancillary structures vs the whole carrier rig would not make the difference, and it was proven by earlier examples.
 
Wasn't there also a problem with launching certain planes on carriers that couldn't make 30 knots? I know the IJN had this problem on a few of their carriers (none of the fleet carriers), and a number of them could not launch torpedo bombers.
 
Wasn't there also a problem with launching certain planes on carriers that couldn't make 30 knots? I know the IJN had this problem on a few of their carriers (none of the fleet carriers), and a number of them could not launch torpedo bombers.
Yes, according to RADM Ofstie's November 14, 1944 Comments and Conclusions report:
LIMITATIONS OF CVE'S

...
When the going got tough, however, and these ships were subjected to serious enemy surface and air action as was the case at LEYTE, the deficiencies and limitations of the class became extremely pointed. The major features contributing to this unfavorable status are:

(a) A maximum sustained speed of about 18.5 knots, with the resulting restriction on choice of position, defensive maneuvering, and ability to operate aircraft under low wind conditions. The last may require substantial reduction of aircraft loading.

(b) Consequent to (a), plus a short flight deck, the plane complement necessarily comprises types of reduced performance.

...
 
They never made anything as they were never built,but designed top speed was to be equivalent to the Iowa Class at full speed 32 Knots Flank on an Iowa is 35.
Where in the world did you get those figures? Every source I've found agrees on 32-33 knots for the Iowa class, and that the Montanas were designed for 28 like the older fast battleships.
 
You see, this discussion is on topic. No issues with it, because people aren't making silly suggestions. This is good for the thread.

Also, Midway was already based on the Montana hull form, IIRC. So a conversion would be redundant.
 
The Montana's were about the Yamato's displacement with slightly more horsepower. That means they are a little bit faster, no way are they going to break 30 knots let alone 32.

Also, best speed a WW2 combat-loaded Iowa ever made was 32.5 knots as far as I can tell. Maybe a bit faster if she recently had her bottom cleaned.

You see, this discussion is on topic. No issues with it, because people aren't making silly suggestions. This is good for the thread.
How about Bismarck versus a British convoy with battleship escort?
 
The Montana's were about the Yamato's displacement with slightly more horsepower. That means they are a little bit faster, no way are they going to break 30 knots let alone 32.

Also, best speed a WW2 combat-loaded Iowa ever made was 32.5 knots as far as I can tell. Maybe a bit faster if she recently had her bottom cleaned.

How about Bismarck versus a British convoy with battleship escort?
The Montana's where a full 10,000 tons lighter then the estimated weight of a Yamato, and where slated for the same level of engines as those installed on Iowa. Which you might recall as having a full 80K Horsepower more then the Yamato's. Montana's would Flank out at ~31-32 in combat load, 2 knots below where an Iowa could hold at flank.
 
The Montana's where a full 10,000 tons lighter then the estimated weight of a Yamato, and where slated for the same level of engines as those installed on Iowa. Which you might recall as having a full 80K Horsepower more then the Yamato's. Montana's would Flank out at ~31-32 in combat load, 2 knots below where an Iowa could hold at flank.
But did the hull allowed that much speed? Horsepower isn't everything in ship designs, the hydrodynamics are important as well.
 
Back
Top