Superior in some aspects like armor. Reliability is another thing. German tanks were more reliable, at least in the initial stages. The reason the German tanks got bogged down was because of the Russian winter and their equipment wasn't fitted out correctly when it arrived. Otherwise, the Germans were winning before winter came along. My sources aren't biased as well.

The Americans were most certainly lagging behind slightly in the naval front. The Japanese had better carriers, battleships, cruisers and destroyers at the time the war started. The Japanese had better weaponry like torps, bombers and torpedo planes. In fighters they had the advantage of speed over ruggedness but which later on the Americans exploited.

The Japanese had better carrier operations initially with their bombing and torpedo percentages in the 80s, sinking the Prince of Wales and Repulsive in a short amount of time as well as the Dorsetshire. Even after Midway, they had operations which were successful at Guadalcanal. Had they sunk the Enterprise, the Americans timetable would have been set back by half a year to a year. Japanese torpedoes, both shipboard and airborne sank a lot of US shipping. It was only when they lost these veterans at Midway that Japanese carrier operation effectiveness started declining.

The good American battleship designs came later, though it began when the North Carolinas were introduced. We won't ever know how effective the 18" shells vs the 16" shells will ever be. 3200 pounds vs 2700 pounds, I think there would have been differences and Yamato could have fired a few kilometers farther away more. However, in the end, it was the irreplaceable loss of the Japanese veterans coupled with American industrial might that doomed the Japanese.

Well then you are stating the main reason for German tanks getting bogged down as being the Russian Winter? IF that is the case the Russians in that combat environment ended up with Quality and Quantity which tipped the balance and allowed the Germans to win. There was the chance that they knew that the winter would allow them to being their experience in fighting in that war theatre and thus one could argue that perhaps they sought to grind the germans in a war of attrition.

In either case it was not just Quantity that won over the Germans Quality... Unless you can explain otherwise?

The Prince of Wales and Repulse (not Repulsive) fought brilliantly during that engagement when you look at the way the Japanese attacks, however i won't get into the argument about Japanese tactics and the superiority of their forces. It could be a long discussion.

As to the 16" shells vs 18" shells, why is it that every person studying Naval engagements seeks to look at the raw destructive power of weapons as opposed to their ability to hit and their compatibility with the technology at the time.
Harking back to between WW1 and WW2 many critisised the Royal Navy for not using the 15inch shells the Germans used. It was found however that despite the 15" shells increased payload it was a less accurate, more faulty and inferior shell to the 14". Further more the ammunition stockpile was less and the guns themselves didn't actually have all that much more range.

As regards the 16" vs the 18" shell, the Americans you have to remember used superior gun and shell design so their 16" was a more high tech shell than the 18" shell. Also the engagement ranges of the 18" shell with its larger pay load may have been greater however the reality is at that time engagement ranges where limited by the range finders on the ship. These were... to be blunt, fairly archaic in the Japense Battleships. Even in American battleships the accurate fire was well inside the maximum range of even a 16" shell.
This was something that the Vangaurd would prove time and time again after WW2 with her guns in shooting practice against the Iowa class.

an extra 500 pounds means very little if you can't engage the enemy reliably and 16" shells cut through the armour of the day as easily as 18" shells. Remember although the hull of a battleship was well armoured things like the Conning towers, Gun turrets, Bridge and the like were all very very vulnerable to fire. It was relatively easy to score a mission kill (or critical hit) on a battleship either through chance in BB vs BB engagement or by design with nimble and specific aircraft attack.

I have quite a few books on the topic of WW2, including a lovely one that tells WW2 in pictures, some of them are quite scary... however thats offtopic.


Vaaish;

2 IC are deffinately getting a hit (4+ on shields or hull i believe) and 2 WB are likely to get another (thats assuming the target is moving abeam and is 45cm away)

However i said two protectors combining fire as i have only played a few but in each game i either squadron the protectors or have them opperate as a pair anyway.
In this case, even in the worst senario you are getting 4WB which against 5+ armour translates to 1.333 hits. As well as 4 IC's which translates to 2 hits. Your looking at 3 hits right there.
Thats WORST case.
What i think you are missing however is that Space Marines, Eldar, Chaos Space Marines, Orcs and to a lesser extent IG tend to have a lot of 30cm cruisers. As such it wouldnt suprise me if when you move forwards 20 to come within 40-45cm range the enemy ship is still prow on.
Even with a range shift that has tended to result in 6WB from each protector. That is 12, on 5+ armour you are looking at an average of 4 hits. Plus another 2 from the IC which will mean on average 6 hits. A ship is not going to happily take that in my opinion and is likely to brace.

Of course the ship could be abeam, or it could have longer ranged weapons etc but then your ability to deploy 6 torpedoes from each protector can restrict enemy movement quite effectively. I got to see a match before i started playing with an experienced Tau player using missiles to restrict movement and allow a full forward alpha strike on an opposing team coming head on because they didn't want to scatter the fleet and allow the Tau to push through the middle and come about. With a messenger in the middle of 3 Protectors they each got 8 rolls on the weapons battery plus 2 from Ion cannons. He was unfortunate in not being able to reload ordnance with 2 of them but 1 did and promptly placed 6 Torpedoes right in front of a chaos cruiser armed to the teeth with broadside guns that was already braced... It Kinda restricted the Chaos players options.

All i was getting at is head on the Protector is a lovely ship if used aggressively. Its just unfornate the rest of the FW list is so.....bland.

Lack of preparation did the Germans in. Hitler assumed that Russia was going to be the same as the French. Kicking the door in and the house will fall down. They nearly got to Moscow. Had they prepared for a stubborn Russian defense prolonging the advance and brought the proper gear and consumables in, they most likely would have gotten Moscow. Had they taken Moscow, Russia might have folded but of course, that would depend on how Stalin would have reacted. The smart commander would let the German's have Moscow then still kept up the war. The Russians were already moving their tank building facilities back to the Urals and they had the real estate to give up until such a time they could hit back. Land can be taken back. Odds are that the Russians would still have won albeit at a later date.

Yes, Repulse, my bad. I wouldn't call the fight between the fighters and ships brilliant. It was unfair to say the least. Of course, he was the commander at the scene and we are discussing things with the benefit of hindsight. But Admiral Philips (if I am not mistaken) should know by then how dangerous aircraft were against ships since the British already had some idea with the attack on the Bismark and if I am not mistaken the decimation of the Italian fleet.

We won't know how 18" would fare against 16" now would we? All we can do is play with the theory. Discussing the raw power is essential though not the only characteristic as you point out. But the raw destructive power is the heart of gunnery. Sure you may hit but if you can't damage then it's pointless. So we have to use raw power as the foundation and that extra 500 pounds can generate a lot of force. Even then, Yamato had 650mm armor which the 16 inchers could just barely penetrate unlike the American armor which the 18 inchers would can definitely penetrate.

Next, targeting. Japanese gunners, especially those in the beginning of the war, were good. They may not have had radar but their rangefinders were excellent enough and their shooting cannot be denied. Kirishima making a mess out of South Dakota is proof enough of their shooting. They were effective enough.

Radar is a useful tool but as you so pointed out, it would be easy for it to be taken out. Radar was also in the infancy at the time with many bugs. A hit could easily disable the radar. Note also that even with radar, in the battle between Washington and Kirishima, the former only managed to score 9 direct hits out of the 75 she flung out at the latter. I posit that in a combat situation, things can get very chaotic that even with radar, especially one that has just been integrated, you won't really say you can hit the target more reliably than using traditional optics. The enemy does do their best to prevent you from hitting them as well.

It would have been interesting to see them battle but that was missed when Halsey took TF34 away from the San Bernardino Straits.

OH hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing, when i say fought Brilliantly i do mean the Repulse, the ship defended the Prince of Wales with true skill. Avoiding torpedo and bomb attacks and causing a problem. Of course once the Prince of Wales was badly hit it all went down hill.

I do look at some of our WW2 (and WW1) fleet engagements and think....what?

The British had planned to attack the High Seas fleet in port if WW1 had gone on a year longer. They were going to do so with Planes dropping bombs, torpedoe attacks by limited submarines, destroyer hit and run attacks and then in the chaos the Fleet would move in and engage the Germans at point blank were the rapid fire of the battle cruisers would be lethal. Before pulling out.

Looking at the planning and what not, and taking into account our blockade already having been in force i do believe it would have replaced Pearl Harbour as the iconic surprise attack on ships in port.

Indeed as you stated the Royal Navy did a similar thing against the Italians in port and caused chaos.

Despite all this inovitive thinking, and the experiences with small escort ships and escort carriers proving their worth in the Atlantic it did seem that some Admirals held on to the glory of the "big gun" ship.

In the end all i can say is that i think thats totally understandable. I've been on the HMS Belfast and i've been on several ships now in service. The big gun ship is what BFG is based off, it is what most future sci-fi space battles are based off and i completely understand why. They are symbols of a golden age of naval power that has not been the same since the development of the Torpedo, the Submarine, the Aircraft and the Destroyer.

We are way off topic lol... so yuh um shields.... Blatently the Repulse and Prince of Wales needed more shield generators. (I jest btw, what happened to them was actually very sad)

As you say we can only speculate and i don't mind doing so with another intelligent individual. Its challenging when another person argues the other side of the fence well, so to speak.

However i have no regrets that the face off never came. It would have been a horrible thing had a full fledged American Battleship and a Japenese battleship met in combat.

worst case is 2 dice, you will never get 4 dice against an abeam cap ship over 30cm out:

S12wb against capital ship abeam is 4 dice, over 30cm right column shift to 2 dice. Against 5+ that's only .66 hits with your WB and then 2 from the IC. Against most players, going diagonal up the table will put you instantly abeam so this will happen quite often unless you close to under 30cm.

"Best" case is closing against IN's 6+ gives you 6 dice and about 1 hit plus the other 2 for the ions.

_________________
-Vaaish

Yeah against 6+ armour, forgot about that. *shrugs* Theres still a salvo of 12 Torpedoes that will be 5-10cm away from the ships now. No one likes that.. Especially when you can have 2 Mantas from each Protector ready to swoop in as well.

Protectors are very good ships, they do me fine in a 45cm Alpha strike, especially if you get a messenger in with them or they go on lock on special orders.