Quicksand Fans

Thought a number of you (particularly Kham) would be interested in this, if you hadn't seen it already. I'm looking forward to more photos. Unfortunately, the water is probably too dark and murky at that depth to get a good long shot of a bigger portion of the ship.

Thanks DG

First heard this on Twitter, and was first even heard they had been looking. Those shots are new, the only one I'd seen was a close up of the bow where the chrysanthemum would go. Detail is sketchy so far. But the bow at least appears upright. The other scattered bits though suggest a less than gentle sink. What is it with Japanese battleships, they almost all blow up when sink?

kham wrote:Thanks DG

First heard this on Twitter, and was first even heard they had been looking. Those shots are new, the only one I'd seen was a close up of the bow where the chrysanthemum would go. Detail is sketchy so far. But the bow at least appears upright. The other scattered bits though suggest a less than gentle sink. What is it with Japanese battleships, they almost all blow up when sink?

Pretty much, yes. Remember, the Zero was an awesome plane on paper but didn't have self-sealing fuel tanks. They used petrol in their armor rather than diesel most of the time too. In WWII Japan had issues with flammability all around.

According to Wiki she was hit by 19 torpedos and 17 bombs in the battle that sank her. Between that and hitting the sea floor what's left probably looks like a stepped on beer can.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese ... ip_Musashi

gluednylonfeet wrote:

kham wrote:Thanks DG

First heard this on Twitter, and was first even heard they had been looking. Those shots are new, the only one I'd seen was a close up of the bow where the chrysanthemum would go. Detail is sketchy so far. But the bow at least appears upright. The other scattered bits though suggest a less than gentle sink. What is it with Japanese battleships, they almost all blow up when sink?

Pretty much, yes. Remember, the Zero was an awesome plane on paper but didn't have self-sealing fuel tanks. They used petrol in their armor rather than diesel most of the time too. In WWII Japan had issues with flammability all around.

Its a bit more complicated than that. An expendable aircraft cannot compare to capital warships, particularly those which until the bitter end, the IJN persisted in the delusional belief were the primary focus of their war at sea. By definition, they require protection and safety systems just to operate normally, never mind in combat

Yamato -- beaten like a dog , just like Musashi, rolled over and blew up, found on ocean floor in two primary pieces
Kongo - Torpedoed by USS Sealion II 2 hits (possibly 3, there is dispute even now) Took progressive flooding damage and increasing list until finally rolled on beam ends , then exploded; one historian in the re-examination described it as "it's HMS Barham at night! " Damage made worse by trying to maintain fleet speed only causing more bulkheads to collapse.
Kirishima - Gutted from end to end by USS Washington, 20+ main battery hits until eventually foundered from damage and poor DC. Rolled over and sank, nearly taking destroyers with it. Exploded while on bottom about 20 min later This analysis is posted in another thread here a while back
Mutsu - Exploded and sank, Hiroshima Bay. Cause undetermined. Likely ammunition handling accident
Hiei - Reduced to wreck by cruiser, destroyer gunfire, aviation strike with bombs, torpedoes. Scuttled but sinking not witnessed

Yamashiro and Fuso - Better explained at Nihon Kaigun which tries to sort out their fates at the Battle of Suriago Straits, aka Fish n a Barrel..

Capital warships when in extremis, do tend to meet with catastrophic ends; although that is not always the case. Bismarck was pounded to scrap for hours and still had to be scuttled, and quietly rolled over and sank. Scharnhorst ,also beaten to a pulp, rolled over and sank with her screws still turning. Royal Oak, torpedoed at anchor, rolled over and sank in shallow water, no explosion. It may be a combinations of training and "this is how we do things" on a case -or navy basis. While true the IJN remained more concerned with attack than defence, and DCO (even after the holocaust at Midway) they weren't complete fucking morons running around with lit cigarettes in a gas-filled room, either. Luck IS a factor, in spite of what Obi-Wan thinks

Interesting link here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana-class_battleship

Had this class of U.S. battleship been built they would have given the Yamato and Musashi a run for their money.

A 12-gun salvo would be a deadly ranging ladder in a battleship, very likely allowing you to range on target that much faster. But as noted, the ship never got off the design table. Carriers and the Iowas were the way to go. It is interesting to note, that the Montana-class is ALMOST the full load -displacement of a Yamato-class. And it has the same maximum speed of 28 knots. The Iowa-class, capable of speeds north of 33 knots, have the advantage to choose engagement or not; to close or to run away. Yamato doesn't have that option. And why they didn't even try using her in the Solomons


Nihon Kaigun has a great page on this stuff, originally done years ago but has been updated. Pretty much in agreement with *most of their conclusions, but there are a few nits

"Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall
Who's the Baddest of Them All?"

It's sad but the era of tons of armor and big guns is passed. Even a 16" gun can't compare to cruise missile systems we've had since the 70's. Pitting an 80,000 ton Montana battleship against a 8,000 ton Arleigh Burke destroyer would be a very unfair fight.....for the battleship.

Depends on the playing field

If both sides are horizon-limited, thats about 30,000 yards. You are now in gun range. Well, Montana is Better hope those cool missiles in limited numbers work. Because just one 16"/50 will blow you in half

In February 1985 CBS news (channel 2 for L.A. County, CA) did a little news bit from Long Beach Naval Ship Yard when the Battleship Missouri was being refurbished. At one point the news reporter made a interesting statement about the Mighty Mo...
"...gliding at just over 30 knots on a 17 inch thick hull which even the most modern warheads aren't designed to penatrate."
So if the Arleigh Burke (or even the Ticondroga guided missle cruiser)popped off some harpoon anti ship missiles at the Musashi (or any other battleship for that matter) not really going to have that much effect if any.
This goes for the anti ship verson of the tomahawk cruise missle though it does have a greater range and bigger warhead than the harpoon. I've read that if the excercet anti ship missle hit an Iowa class battleship head on on the thickest armor on the hull, all it would do is put hair line cracks, any other angle it would just bounce off.
The amount of steel that went into the Yamato alone was equal to 100 WWII destroyers.