Remove ads

Changing Destiny (Kancolle)

Reader mode
Still, if Bisko is active, that might warrant another carrier. Might.

Ehh.

Probably not.

Thompson probably would push hard for CVEs though.

Also, how active were US subs in the Atlantic?
 
I assumed this was because they thought the British could handle themselves. However with Bismarck (and possibly Tirpitz ) being more of a threat they might have a bigger part in the Atlantic.
 
Shroobmaster said:
I assumed this was because they thought the British could handle themselves. However with Bismarck (and possibly Tirpitz ) being more of a threat they might have a bigger part in the Atlantic.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Maybe Langley, but I can't see Thompson allowing a modern fleet carrier - Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown, Enterprise, Wasp, or Hornet - to be transferred away. In the Pacific, Langley was running ASW patrols with the Australians, I think, so the ripples shouldn't be that much, other than possible survival.
 
Last edited:
Langley is a seaplane carrier by now. And way too slow for anything else.

Also, Ranger was alone because CVs kept getting sunk so we stripped the Atlantic Fleet. Same reason the Essex sisters weren't transferred there. Wasp won't leave the Atlantic- she's not suited to hard combat -unless we lose two in the Pacific again.
 
Skywalker_T-65 said:
Langley is a seaplane carrier by now. And way too slow for anything else.

Also, Ranger was alone because CVs kept getting sunk so we stripped the Atlantic Fleet. Same reason the Essex sisters weren't transferred there. Wasp won't leave the Atlantic- she's not suited to hard combat -unless we lose two in the Pacific again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ah.

Well, there's the gospel.

Thompson probably won't let two get lost. Hopefully.
 
Then again in 1943, the USS Iowa first did service in the Atlantic. First as a counter against Tirpitz and then carrying Roosevelt to the Tehran conference. There is still a chance she could encounter the Bismarck during her time in the Atlantic.
 
On the subject of CVs sinking...


...the tear marks mean it is probably Sara holding the thing.

Bad muse. Bad.
 
Another threat Bismark would have to face against any american heavy is that the US Navy gave a much higher priority to escorts that the RN. I expect no less than a cruiser division and no less than twice as many destroyers within support distance of an american capital ship. And while the RN destroyer charge failed against Bismark's own escorts the superlative Fire Control Radar of american vessels and smart use of smoke screens will be enough to even the odds.
 
BF110C4 said:
Another threat Bismark would have to face against any american heavy is that the US Navy gave a much higher priority to escorts that the RN. I expect no less than a cruiser division and no less than twice as many destroyers within support distance of an american capital ship. And while the RN destroyer charge failed against Bismark's own escorts the superlative Fire Control Radar of american vessels and smart use of smoke screens will be enough to even the odds.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Remember that the USN's torpedos, at this point in the war, don't work terribly well.
 
The question is, will it be enough to overcome bureaucratic inertia, BuOrds pigheadedness, and ADM. Christie's frantic chants of "lalalala the Mk.14 is fine I can't hear you proving otherwise lalalala" and make the needed changes in time to make a real difference?
 
Well, the Mark 13 is going to be tested and fixed quicker than OTL, because it's air-dropped, and Thompson conclusively demonstrated problems with it.

Once they add the breakaway shrouds, the Mark 13 will be a reliable torpedo, since no finicky magnetic exploders. Good old fashioned contact exploder, and a properly designed one. (Mk 8 Contact Exploder)
 
PAGDTenno said:
Remember that the USN's torpedos, at this point in the war, don't work terribly well.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, but I was thinking of the destroyers using a more aggresive version of the smoke screens at Samar to cover their own heavier units without compromising the ability to shoot thanks to radar guided fire, plus at this stage of the war the americans are not even part of the conflict so maybe by the point they are Thompson's efforts to repair american fishes will have enough results for the sailors being aware of the deficiencies and to apply homebrew solutions.
 
00Zy99 said:
I'm pretty sure there was at least SOME overlap, especially as regards the detonators.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Nope! The Mark 13 used the Mark 8 Contact Exploder, which was a perfectly reliable piece of equipment.

The 14 and 15 used the Mark 6 Magnetic influence exploder, which is the troublesome one.

IIRC, all three shared the same wet-heater turbine, but there were never any reliability issues with the torpedos' powerplants.
 
Last edited:
Bismarck could win against a US Fast Battleship if she gets close. Her guns in theory according to the data charts on Navweps could punch through the belt of an Iowa class, hell if anything. The armored deck arrangement that Iowa class has is very similar to the armored deck of HMS Hood granted it has STS steel but it's three separate armor decks of decreasing thickness, but if Bisko can get a deck penetration, her rounds ought to bore deep into the ship, probably not into the Citadel unless they get extremely lucky but deep enough to give her a seriously hard knock. But Bisko will still likely loose unless clever maneuvering is used.
 
Thorthemighty said:
Bismarck could win against a US Fast Battleship if she gets close. Her guns in theory according to the data charts on Navweps could punch through the belt of an Iowa class, hell if anything. The armored deck arrangement that Iowa class has is very similar to the armored deck of HMS Hood granted it has STS steel but it's three separate armor decks of decreasing thickness, but if Bisko can get a deck penetration, her rounds ought to bore deep into the ship, probably not into the Citadel unless they get extremely lucky but deep enough to give her a seriously hard knock. But Bisko will still likely loose unless clever maneuvering is used.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Uh. Right. I'm at work, so I don't have the time to go into this, but here's a key difference.

Iowa's belt is inclined outwards. That's to optimize against high-angle long-range fire, which increases the effective thickness of the belt at range. (How much? To give an example, fire coming in at 45 degrees has to penetrate 24 inches of KCA.

Her armor decks are thicker than Hood's, and the first, sacrificial one is meant to trip the fuze of plunging AP bombs and shells.

To be blunt, Iowa is designed to take advantage of her ability to fight at long range, and her armor scheme reflects that. Bismarck's armor scheme is optimized for the close-in brawl, and she's slower than Iowa. Significantly. (Which is a damn funny thing to be saying about a 30-knot battleship. But I digress.)

Iowa, therefore, will be dictating the terms of engagement, and will choose a range that benefits her, rather than benefiting Bismarck.
 
Last edited:
Bismarck is also slower than an Iowa, by about 6-7 knots, so there's no chance.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top