Even more was put into MUSASHI; 17 bombs and 19 torpedoes!!! She took a terrible beating. They hit her from every quarter. But the Americans learned to focus their torpedo attacks on one side of the ship, and force her to capsize. This is why Yamato took less hits than her sister. Still, it was a terrible beating.
What I find strange is the US fired over 100 torpedoes on April 7. Not all at Yamato but I'm sure she saw about 90 fired at her. Out of those 90 or so only 12 hit? I find that hard to believe.
An enemy would have to put a similar amount or more ordnance on a modern US Navy CVN to sink one. The US learned a lot from WWII and the Nimitz Class especially has a lot of survivability features in its design. Armor didn't stop WWII era bombs or torpedoes and modern warheads like BROACH (JASSM. JSOW, LRASM, Storm Shadow) would defeat the thickest armor on any battleship ever made. Compartmentation and use of void spaces are employed to minimize damage and flooding. Putting stuff around critical spaces helps too. Better to tear up office and berthing spaces to absorb damage than engineering spaces or other critical spaces.
@@YamatoForever Yes that is interesting. I also find it intresting that in the Battle of the Philippines Sea, the air element did relatively little damage, to the Japanese fleet.
The oft forgotten classes (NC and SD) actually had an advantage in their 45 cal main guns vs the 50 cal of the Iowa class - although their range was a little bit less when firing the 2700 pound super heavy AP shells, their slightly lower muzzle velocity means the angle of impact would be against the thinner deck armor of an opponent vs the armor belt, thus would do more damage. The end result would be that a NC or SD class ship actually stood a better chance of destroying a Yamato class ship at a max range beyond the effective range of Yamato's main guns.
@@erichammond9308 Fun fact. The Iowas suffered from various accuracy issues during WW2, which meant that North Carolina And South Dakota, in practice, had more accurate guns.
@@metaknight115 I have a soft spot for the North Carolina, since as a child I donated as a first grader for the state to buy her and make her a museum, and that thought warms my heart, but realistically, would that not be more due to the longer service times? More practice, and time to dial in the radars and equipment? Admiral "Ching" Lee (USS Washington) was well known as a "gunnery nut." (This paid off against IJN Kirishima at Guadalcanal) rather than any mechanical issue or design flaw? As an adult I heard rumours in the service that the NJ lowered a hill in Lebanon by around 100 feet with a single broadside of Hi-Cap HE shells. Making every topographic map obsolete in a few seconds is an awesome feat.
@@erichammond9308 I do really like the Washington and North Carolina. Washington is higher on my top ten battleship list than the Iowa, And is my second favorite American battleship behind the Massachusetts
@@metaknight115 I don't think I can find fault with that! It's personal affection for a ship, and I totally get that! . The MA has a great service record, and is, if I'm not mistaken isn't she the only BB that fired her guns in anger in both theaters of WWII? I'd have to look it up, but if she's not the only one there aren't more than 1 or 2 others that did.
Admiral "Ching Lee" answered that question at Guadalcanal in 1942 at night with HIS perfected RADAR gunnery. The US battleship Washington hit the Japanese battleship Kirishima NINETEEN DIRECT 16" HITS and sank her. All without suffering a scratch. The Second Night Battle of Guadalcanal.
Lee was one of few Admirals of the time who embraced radar. He studied it so thoroughly it was said he knew it better than the men who operated it. Plus, he was a rifle sharpshooter with skills that landed him a spot on the Olympic team! He knew exactly what the guns of USS WASHINGTON could do, and would have lengthy discussions about naval gunnery. Some dubbed him, "the gunslinger of the south pacific." Take a man that understands radar and ballistics, give him a modern ship like WASHINGTON was at that time, and the outcome is no surprise. Lee was the weapon. USS WASHINGTON was his instrument.
20 hits in 75 rounds fired in about 15 minutes, that is some serious shooting on a dark night at any range, considering Kirishima was not trying to help Washington.
Washington also severely damaged the two heavy cruisers with the Kirishima. The Atago and Takao were out of service under repair for more than a year following that engagement.
I served in the USN while the New Jersey was an active member of our Navy. Every Gunners Mate I ever knew wanted to be assigned to a BB. I never got to sail on one, as I always got an LPH or a CV. As an officer on the staff of the COMNAVCARRIB I also secretly wanted to get TDY to one. Well, I couldn't keep that desire a secret. So they "punished" me by making me the 30 day ,TDY , on-sight Naval Staff presence to St. Kitts-Nevis. Yesssir, 30 days living at the Ocean Terrace Inn. Drinking dark beer, listening to cricket games on a radio, by the pool. Oh yeah, and again later, I was given the same 30 day, TDY, presence to Antigua . No OTI there. But a fun NAVFAC. "Don't throw me into that briar patch!"
I have met plenty of people to have served on USS Iowa during my various visits to the glorious ship. They are very lucky to have served on a battleship and not be 80-90 year old men
I did live the dream as a gmg3 back in 1985 when I got orders to the battleship Missouri. When I checked in I found out I was assigned to turret 3. The funny part during boot our CPOwas going over ships in the navy from the Bluejacket. He said forgetabout battleship duty, you'll never get it. Then at Seaport Village with wife once when I was on LST 1189, the Jersey was moored at North Island. Told my wife that wasthe real navy and would kill to get battleship duty. I was on the Missouri for 2 years, recomm, round the world. Best duty I ever had.
The USS Wisconsin is longer than any of the other Iowa class battleships (I wouldn't know this except we visited it last week in Norfolk and watched a presentation on it. There was a collision with another ship which damaged its bow and they decided to take the bow off the USS Kentucky (which had started construction but by this time they had halted construction of battle ships to concentrate on carriers). Anyway, the USS Wisconsin with its Kentucky bow became the longest Iowa class battleship by about 11 inches.
No the Wisconsin IS Not longer than before the Collision only the lower &shorter part of the bow was replaced,with the Eaton , the N.J. is still the longest by 4 inches .
@@glennwinter2197 Go tour the USS Wisconsin and watch the presentation. They will tell you the bow from the unfinished USS Kentucky battleship was used to repair the Wisconsin. (the Eaton was a Destroyer, not sure why you say "was replaced with the Eaton" - it was not a suitable donor ship). Anyway, the museums are out there to be visited. The Wisconsin was the last ship in its class so it all all the improvements from lessons learned with the older ships too. My son is stationed nearby and we got to visit for a bit.
wrong!!!!!!! only the lower shorter part of Kentucky's bow was put on Wisconsin below the anchors to the keel , the top part of the bow is still is the longest &still is Wisconsin's original bow , they put it right back on because it wasn't undamaged &Kentucky , wasn't built to main deck to second deck only ,same length as before ,!!!!!!!!! repaired in 16 days .i have toured the Wisconsin twice ,while at Norfolk and i have all the books on the Iowa's they all say 887 ft 3 inch same as before N.J. is the longest 4 inches longer !!!!!! i've read from that museum she is 16ft ,8 ft , 2 ft ,12 inches , ,when it was cut off & welded back on to bulkheads .
They should have never decommissioned the USS Missouri they should have brought her in a rebuilder and gave her better guns even though she had enough to do anything she needed to do and I'm from Nebraska
When I was just a pre-adolescent whipper snapper, I became enamored with battleships - loved the looks, and - when I was a little older - the histories. This was before I learned that the historic battleship class gave way to what is today the modern aircraft carrier; just look at the Pearl Harbor attack scenario: the Japanese carrier planes were hoping to find and sink all the American aircraft carriers, of which there were three in the Pacific theater. Luckily, Enterprise, Yorktown and Lexington were at sea at the time of the Japanese attack. (The US also had 4 more carriers in the Atlantic). After the Battles of Leyte Gulf, Coral sea, and - most importantly - Midway, America had taken control of the Pacific and - for all intents and purposes - won the War against Japan. Today, the aircraft carrier (not to mention our nuclear submarines!) is the mainstay of our naval presence around the globe, and has probably saved many more lives in many countries just by its presence! LET THE CHINESE AND RUSSIANS TAKE NOTE!!! Meanwhile, we maintain a few battle wagons in case naval support of any conflicts that might arise anywhere in the world are needed. Here's to all three of these iconic naval vessels that have helped protect American lives and those of our allies around the world!
Yorktown and Lexington were not "Luckily" out to sea. Their orders to ferry aircraft were sent down from Washington. At Pearl Harbor trials and hearings years later War Department higher ups initially denied this and said it was a local order from Kimmel, until confronted with physical evidence and testimony. FDR, Marshall and Stimson knew of the impending IJN task force attack on Pearl and wanted the Carriers safe. The old, slow white elephant battleships were to be sacrificial lambs, but even dim wits like Marshall did not expect the carnage to be so extensive. But he and FDR knew that to make an omelette, you have to break a few eggs. [IJN Military codes broken by CAST +-October 1940]
@@mac2626 It would have been interesting. The crews of the IJN didn't do all that well against US Battleships in the few "toe-to-toe" encounters of WWII (Kirishima, Surigoa Straight, etc). Factor in mediocre Japanese radar I don't see them doing much better than a "draw" with an Iowa. Sorry.
@@mac2626 without seeing some tests done I could not fully concur with your assessment of a fact American fire control was usually more accurate, and whether a ship is hit by a 16-in gun or an 18-in gun there will be massive damage so as I see it it comes down to accuracy and it is known that the Americans had better fire control accuracy. The Iowa class ships had a significant speed advantage over the Yamato class. The side armor belts were about equal on the two classes. Obviously the Yamato class could sustain more damage if for no other reason there is much more steel that would need to be destroyed. That is a fact. In the event of a direct hit on the Yamato's magazines that is a liability. The Japanese admiralty referred to the Yamato and Musashi as floating luxury hotels as for what Little damage they did compared to their size and expense. Their fuel burn would have been incredibly high.
@@mac2626 I would have been interesting to see the New Jersey or Missouri or something in that class go up against your model the American ships had far better fire control and whether your shell is about 2600 lb or about 3,000 pounds either is going to cause hell. Luck would be a factor, look what the Bismarck did to the hood one Lucky magazine shot.
Interesting..I'd put the Yamato's #1 with their size and 18" guns. Didn't expect Vanguard and was expecting the King George's to be on the list..nice to see them in the video though. All were obsolete by wars end. Crazy the Iowa's were used as long as they were.
Vanguard does not belong on this list at all. I think that this video was made by a Brit. It was not available at all for WW II. It is like calling the B-47 a WW II bomber! I was also expecting the Yamato to be #1, but also that the Italian BBS was definitely better than the French one, which was never in battle, other than getting pounded in their harbor in North Africa. Also, the Bismark and its sister ship do not belong up that high either since it had fairly weak guns, although not as weak as the British had, but it did have good armor, although not good in all the right places because a WW I bi-plane brought it to its knees! If you are interested in seeing the real ballistics stats on these battleships, as well as the other main ones of WW II, click on my name here and then on 'About', and either send me an email of go to my website, and click on 'Miscellaneous Information' from its home page. I have a ballistics file, mainly about and for purchasing handgun and rifle ammo online in the USA, but I also list the main big WW II battleships at the end with all their relevant data. You will easily see how the Yamato was well above all others, and that the Italian Littorio class was better than the other European BBS's.
If I was fighting in a demolition derby then yeah, Yamato all the way. In any kind of a realistic scenerio the Iowa's come out on top. No so much by capabilities, but that the economy of the US can actual support their use. The Yamato's nickname during the war was Hotel Yamato because it spent much of the war tied alongside a pier because the Japanese refused to risk it, because they couldn't replace it. Personally I consider the Kongo's to be better battleships, at least from a use perspective.
@@frednone If that's where you're heading with this then take the Italian and French ships off too. Throw old ships like Warspite on the list If you're making usage an issue.
@@bcain3729 Not so much the Italians, they actually went to sea a time or two, the French though I agree with completely. The best they can claim is Jean Bart tied to the pier in Casablanca. For that matter the US Fast Battleships should have been on the list. Warspite was a bit small and slow to make the cut, though considering she basically had the same main armerment as Vanguard she should have at least got an honarable mention.
It's absolutely amazing what went into these ships, The Heavy Armor plating, the huge guns, Teakwood decks, Etc only to have many of them lay on the ocean floor. And obscene waste of lives and resources.
No HE didn't. YAMATO was the one that took so much punishment. Admiral YAMAMOTO used her as his command ship. (And, no offense, but the fact that she took so much punishment undermines the whole concept behind ships like her. She took so much time, effort, and treasure to build that there would never be enough ships of her class to keep the enemy from dogpiling her, even leaving carrier aircraft out of it.)
My dad was on the Missouri in the Korean War. He did not see much as he was a radarman in the bowels of the ship but he said when they shot broadside it would move the ship.
USS West Virginia vs IJN Yamashiro was the last Gunfight Between two Battleships. USS West Virginia was modernized with the new Fire control system that is also equipped by the Iowa and late war battleships, during the gunfight against IJN Yamashiro, USS West Virginia made the most hits at night thanks to her fire control systems that replaced the old manned range finders. The US Battleships that are equipped with this Fire Control system are the most powerful. Also, the Yamato Class ended up in the top of the most Useless things in the world.
@@jimbelcher6877 Duke of York sank the Scharnhorst on 26 Dec 1943, The WeeVee, California, Tennessee and Maryland sank Yamishiro on 25 Oct 1944. Prince of Wales was sunk by the Japanese on 10 Dec 1941.
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 The ships themselves were worthy of legend. They performed amazingly well given how the odds were stacked. Besides, we shouldn't be complaining that the Germans and Japanese lost what were very powerful ships. And, actually, Bismarck did yield a result. The entire Royal Navy was scrambling to find her. Had anyone been able to actually take advantage of that, Bismarck would have been a success story either way.
@@bigmonkey1254 By "the entire RN" what you mean is 15 ships that actually made contact with Bismarck plus about another 50 that received orders to join in the search... so 60 odd ships from a RN strength of approximately 330 ships. Also the number of ships involved in the hunt is, contrary to wehraboo delusion, utterly nothing to do with the "awesomeness" of Bismarck, and everything to do with searching for a kriegsmarine "needle" in a 41,000,000 sq mile North Atlantic "haystack".
@@waynevan5069 I'll edit my OP to say "next to no result". 193,000,000 reichmarks for a ship which had a 9 day operational lifespan, and completely failed in her only assigned mission. NOt a good investment for winning a war, I@m sure you'll agree. Oh certainly its enthralled generations of impressionable young schoolboys ever since, but it was NOT a major force by ANY stretch of the imagination.
I worked a spill in Philadelphia and saw a HUGE ship. I knew it was a battleship, but didn't know which one. Then I saw the No. 2 turret. Oh yeah, the Iowa.
I would suggest another topic for consideration on battleships; the most significant battleships not by size but by actual deeds. For example the USS Washington sank the IJN Kirishima. Bismarck battled HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Hood sinking Hood. Bismark was sunk at the of a battle with HMS King George V and HMS Rodney. USS Massachusetts battled an incomplete Jean Bart silencing Jean Barts single turret. and there are more. HMS Warspite record long range shot against an Italian battleship (did not sink it). (My list above is a partial and unordered list of engagments. More significant than size.)
@@cyrussalinasal7829 Pointless argument. It didn't matter who let the water into the hull, she was going to sink. Had it not been for the Royal Navy, would have the Kreigsmarine scuttled the ship? No matter how you spin it, the Bismarck is on the bottom of the Atlantic because the Royal Navy wasn't going to allow the battle to end any other way.
SORRY THIS IS LONG.. When I was in the US MARINE CORPS I was so lucky. I was stationed on the USS MISSOURI BB63 during end of 80s. The USA has wasted BILLIONS of dollars trying to make modern BATTLESHIPS they have FAILED EVERY TIME. The 4 BATTLESHIPS could have been updated easy. We carried over 32 tomahawks, 16 harpoons, 4 cwis , 12 5in guns, 9 16in guns. There was talk back then to use 14in shells with GPS nose & rocket after 25 miles the 16in case peal off rocket kicks in for another 60 to 80 more miles ( like 70% cities are within 50miles from oceans) hell take 2 5in guns off replace with surface to air missiles. The engines could be replaced. I was on the bridge when came from Hawaii at over 30 knots attacked the attackers with 2 other ships on our side. WE CRUSHED THE ATTACKERS. SORRY TO MY MARINE BROTHERS THAT TRIED TO TAKE HAWAII, with all of there protection ships. Honestly it was an AWESOME to feel the BB63 going in there formation swing the big 16in guns. DAM I STILL GET AN ERECTION THINKING OF THE ATTACKER. so many stupid ppl in Washington want to waste money on BS.
Joe Hayward, I was gmg2 turret 3 from 1985 to 1987. I was LPO ships armory for round the world cruise. You remember the Marine who fell from the second deck down to turret 3 powder flats?
I don't think they spent "Billions" on any one Battleship. Sorry. Plus: during the Falklands the Brits were being killed enmasse in their aluminum hulled frigates and enduring hundreds of casualties from Exocet missiles fired from Argentine Fighter Bombers. An Exocet missile impacting on an Iowa Class battleship would impact and, well, not bounce off but just explode. It would not make an impact on an Iowa Class Battleship's hull. Not one bit. Welcome to the later 20th Century.
Interesting fact but the US Navy tried to mount Sea Sparrow on the Iowas during their reconstruction. New Jersey mounted them briefly but every illumination radar they mounted on her was destroyed by the concussion of the main battery. Eventually the Navy gave up trying to mount anti aircraft missiles on them.
You do not mention that the battleship that saw the most wars, decorated the most,and was on active duty the most as well as seen the most combat of the 4 Iowa class battleships was BB62 the New Jersey
What? 1 world war and some piddling little local skirmishes with 3rd world countries? Try HMS Warspite, Queen Elizabeth class battleship that served right through WW1, stood her ground at Jutland (twice circling infront of the entire Hochseeflotte battleline ALONE), and then fought from the first to the last right the way through WW2, Destroying a fistful of Kriegsmarine destroyers in the frozen confined fjords of Norway, through to the baking heat of the Indian Ocean, including 2 years in the cauldron of the Mediterranean facing off against everything the German and Italian navies and air forces had to throw against her, and they still couldn't take her down. The RN's most honoured ship in its LONG illustrious history.
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Warspite was the capital ship when it was designed, air power really didn't exist when the ship was designed, world war I was fought mostly in the trenches on land. In world war II the aircraft carrier relegated the battleship to mostly, but not all, to shore bombardment and anti-aircraft defense of carrier task forces. Take the Enterprise a capital ship and stack it up against Warspite, capital ship of its day and see which one comes out on top Enterprise shot down more planes and did massive amounts of damage. Technology, weapons and war tactics all change with time.
You are absolutely right… thank you for pointing that out… I always appreciate your criticism and corrections, that’s the only way for my channel to grow … I always try to provide the best and most reliable info but sometimes it’s not possible due to many contradictions in the internet…. Best regards
It's impossible to say which battleship would win in a one on one slugout between a Yamato Class and a Missouri Class. The Yamato was more heavily armored, had a more devastating main gun and could lob it further than a Missouri. The Missouri was faster, had greater range and, most importantly, had a vastly superior radar fire control system. I honestly don't think that either battleship would outright sink the other most of the time in a duel, but there is much less doubt in my mind that the Missouri would, in most cases, come out far less scathed than the Yamato.
The Iowa class (as well as the NC and SD classes) had radar controlled gunnery which gave them an effective range of 21-22 miles, very close to their max range. The Yamato class had optical only which limited their effective range to 17 or 18 miles. Thus, the US ships, using the 2700 pound super heavy AP shells combined with their better speed could remain outside of the Yamato's effective range and pummel the Yamato to oblivion. Barring an admittedly immensely devastating extremely lucky hit, they'd be untouched. The evidence is there. look at the Battle of Samar - the Yamato only managed to get a single hit at a range of 18 miles on a light aircraft carrier. (a single hit that eventually sank that ship)
@@neonstratusguy Actually the NC and SD classes had an advantage. The lower muzzle velocity of the 45 cal guns means their shells would be impacting the thinner deck armor and not the main belt, and they used the same 2700 lb AP shells as the Iowa's did.
The high muzzle velocity caused disperse as well, and wore out the gun barrels very quickly. Result, considering also the mentioned quality problems of the propellant bags, Littorios could hit barely anything, not shure if they ever hit a moving enemy vessel during their couriers. Narrow misses are recorded, though.
@@Ah01 yes, but being as fleet was strictly for Mediterranean (close to home ports) replacing barrels frequently not much if any of an issue. No radar and the inconsistent powder kegs were 2 huge problems - but no fault of ship design.
In comparing the Iowa class to the Yamato class, you have to factor in the advanced American CIC targeting capability utilizing radar. The Yamatos had more firepower and range, but the Iowas were much more likely to deliver actual hits. Just look at the results when American and Japanese battleships met off Guadalcanal (1942) and the Philippines (1944).
Thank you. I haven’t decided what about the video will be, but I will definitely resume publishing next week... apologies for the long time not publishing but I am very busy with personal issues to sort out. Thank you for your interest. Best regards 🇨🇦
Yes, many people forget the Shinano. perhaps because she was sunk by a single spread of torpedoes from a single submarine? A lesson in poor damage control.
@@LIE-zn2uu unfortunately the "translate to English" is not available on longer comments, could you divide it up into several shorter parts so that I can read it?
The Navy still has one battleship still on active duty and as far as I know it is one the most famous. It's stationed in Pearl Harbor. It's sitting in the mud on the bottom. The Arizona.
Still on active duty you say? That's damned interesting. God bless her, but her only active action is leaking fuel oil, I'm afraid. Reminds me of Star Trek and how Star Fleet didn't "have the heart" to retire Captain Christopher Pike...."
When discussing the battleship Bismarck the flag shown is that of the present-day German Federal Republic. However, the Bismarck was one of the ships of the NAZI Kriegsmarine which used a different flag featuring a swastika.
@@michaelpielorz9283 Because the Bismarck was part of the German navy between 1933 and 1945, i.e. Nazi Germany. The ship was not part of the Imperial Navy of 1871 -- 1918 nor the Federal navy of post-1955.
@@michaelpielorz9283 because some of us prefer to remember WWII and why we fought against the ultra nationalist, fascists, and Nazis. Hiding the name hides their EVIL.
The Iowa class was a marvel in its design. It was the backbone of the US and Allies drive at sea during the WW2 Pacific War. Missouri one of their class was were Gen MacArthur signed as the Supreme Commander of the Allied force for cessure of hostilities bringing the end of WW2.
Correct it was HMS Victorious. My Uncle was in the fleet air arm and was one of the pilots that attacked the Bismarck. All he would was that it was huge.
Hi there ! I just realised that when already published… after is published I can’t change it… I will take your critics into consideration next video…. Thank you and best regards
@@vincentlavallee2779 Why do so many warship veterans claim that their ship could go a lot faster than it actually could go. I know that Japanese sailors claimed that Yamato reached 30 knots in trials.
@@metaknight115 Guinness Book of World Records has the USS New Jersey as the record for a battleship top sustained speed. The New Jersey did 35+ Knots for 6 hours on her shakedown for Vietnam.
It turns out that statistics don't translate into performance. The Queen Elizabeth class battleships were small, slow, old, didn't have the biggest guns, didn't have the best tech (some don't even have radar), but they outperformed every single ship on this list in actual naval engagements that happened. King George V class won 3 out of 9 battleship vs battleship battles in WW2, but statistically they're not going to make any list.
Tirpitz was indeed more armed than Bismarck, had torpedoes, & Bismarck did not. She scattered a convoy & used up British resources spent trying to sink it.
Fortunately all 4 Iowa battle ships have been preserved Missouri is at pearl harbor Wisconsin is in Norfolk new Jersey is in her home state and Iowa is in long beach if you want to sleep on one contact the Wisconsin in Norfolk va its better than staying in a hotel
The most decorated? Of the Iowa class, yes, but you get extra credit if you can name the most decorated US battleship of WWII without the aid of Google!
@@chazbo0715 It's a trick question, the most decorated WWII battleship is in fact USS New Jersey with 19 battle stars total, but the most decorated battleship of WWII (counting only awards for service during WWII) was the USS North Carolina with 15 battle stars earned during WWII. The New Jersey earned 9 battle stars during WWII, and the rest after WWII. Just depends on how the question was phrased.
@@erichammond9308 Come on: you can decorate a Christmas tree if you want. But who sank an enemy Battleship? Shot for shot broadside? Hmmm? Yeah I'm talking USS Washington. I don't want to minimize shore bombardment duty but... what the hell. Except for Normandy they never shot back in any regard. Points for Nevada for trying to sortie Pearl and for getting so close to the Normandy coast they received return fire. The oldsters at Surigao deserve more credit for their service than a couple of battles stars collected by the Iowas for... shore bombardment.
The two Yamatos were garbage. If you ships cannot be used because they burn too much fuel (and the Yamatos were inefficient for their size) then they were a bad investment. Gun size matters little when your armed services call you Hotel Yamato.
Should have just mentioned the Iowa class battleship that had the most awards. BB62 the " New Jersey ". Now sitting in fresh water Delaware river at getto Camden NJ. Right across from Philadelphia where she was built.
@@timclaus8313 And another great place to visit is the Viet Nam Memorial a few hundred feet to the West of the Olympia. Then a halve block away is the Korean War Memorial. A student from my grade school is on the Nam memorial wall. Philly had the most young men killed from not only any public high school ( Edison high school = 58 students ) & Catholic high school.( Father Judge = 27 students ) in the country.
The six most powerful battleships of WWII were the Yamato and Musashi, and the Missouri, Iowa, New Jersey, and Wisconsin. No question. Just based on speed, armament, and general power, they were the top of the class. None of the rest are really contenders.
ummm. when ranking battleships you dont include members of the same class.. with classes, Iowa, Yamato, Vanguard, South Dakota, KGV. Also bear in mind that Vanguard could give Iowa a run for her money, and in joint trials, proved much more seaworthy and much more accurate.
@@thetorturepenguin I have to disagree. There are so few battleships built that each ship should count. So you do it your way, and I will do it my way.
Iowa's definately at the top, engines and propulsion, speed and manuverability, firepower and firing systems, armor and radar systems. The main reasons is the quality and effectivness of these systems vs the other ships that were not American.
If I am not incorrect I seem to recall a huge 21 foot odd model of the scharnhorst in a room at H.M.S. Vernon when I was a young anti submarine controller. I seem to remember something about twenty one inch guns on some of these capital ships. Could any one with a younger mind than mine enlighten me if I am correct on this matter or not. Regards Nick Viner.
Very informative...thank you. Annoying "voice", with its mispronouncements reduces this to "tolerable". Why include Vanguard? It wasn't launched and commissioned til the mid-50s! This rationale should then include the Convair B-36 among WW2 bombers, right?
Sorry about the voice… I am not confident about using my own voice but I will use it on my next videos… thank you for your reply… your opinion is very important for my channel improvement…. Best regards
@@jaybee9269 Probably should have been preserved as a museum ship, Jay. Even if she was commissioned years before her actual launch(rather unusual?), that still would not have been WW2, yes?
@@Diversusmilitary There's nothing wrong with your voice. It worked in well and it was very informative as Jkdm said. I thoroughly enjoyed it and I was also pleased to see my favorite Battleship of all time, Yamato.
Man ... the problems I have with this video.... Nobody abided by the Treaty because they choose not to sign on to it. This tends to make people not bound to it. Holy fuck what a problem this moderator has with that concept. All the pictures of the "Tirpitz" are actually the Bismarck. And if you are going to talk about a ship class you should probably use existing pic and images of the ships themselves instead of stock footage, an example would be when you are talking about the Yamato class where you used virtually no pics of the class. Also, the Vanguard is hardly one of the best battleships built. Her guns were of pre-WWI origin, had a short range and could not penetrate any of the other battleships on this list. She may have had a good hull, which is debatable since she was never tested in combat, but this doesn't overcome other deficiencies.
I agree with most of your opinions. Not the best video, and Vanguard probably shouldn't have been in it. As to the ship herself, she incorporated numerous improvements based on experience with older ships. As you said, she had a good hull (watertight integrity) and was a couple knots faster than the KG5 class with longer range. She also had good armour and A/A armament, and the most modern fire control radar. It was too bad that in the rush to complete her they had to give her those old guns, and that is where I must disagree with you. While they were old, the British twin 15" turret was one of the best ever made. Right from the get go the design had very few teething troubles and those had long been worked out. They were very efficient and dependable. Between the wars the three Queen Elizabeth class ships that were reconstructed had their turrets max elevation increased from 20 degrees to 30 degrees allowing greater range. This was shown to good effect when Warspite hit an Italian Battleship at over 26.000 yards, a record I believe still stands. I don't know if Vanguard had these improved turrets. As to penetration, that's more a factor of the shell than the gun. Early on in the war the British did have some problems with their armour piercing shells exploding too soon, before penetrating the armour, but they quickly fixed this and afterwards their A/P shells were as good as any ones. I think Vanguard would have given a pretty good account of herself in any ship to ship action. Your thoughts? Agree or disagree?
Hi, you are absolutely right my friend. But only because the ww2 ended earlier but she was being built for that purpose. I just thought that she deserved a little tribute. Best regards
Bismarck is only the best in the fanboy’s head. Did not, could not stand up to any of the modern American designs. Notice even this video says Tirpitz was best battleship in Europe at the time of launch. Not better than North Carolina’s, South Dakotas, or Iowas.
Yes, the Bismarck, got a lucky shot on the Hood (very likely right in the trough of the bow wave, letting it bypass most of the armor, which was equivalent to the QE class), was mission killed by the PoW, disabled by a string bag biplane, that along with all of it's buddies, flew home, failed to do any major damage to the oncoming Rodney, who in return, destroyed Bismarck's B turret, disabled A turret, and took out the bridge and conning tower all in the matter of a few minutes. To be fair to Bismarck, of all the final classes of battleship built by each nation (funny enough, the classes seen in this video), Bismarck is the only one to get a kill on another capitol ship, and one of the 2 that saw other capitol ships in combat (as advisaries), with the Richelieu class Jean Bart being the other. The Littorio class almost saw some British battleships a few times, Vanguard was launched post war, and the Iowas, and Yamatos never saw combat against other battleships (or at least battlecruisers). The best Battleship is the Grand Ol' Lady of Jutland, HMS Warspite, a ship that managed to sail into the teeth of the entire High Seas Fleet, for the second time that day, all alone this time, with a jammed rudder, and survived. Then she made it through the end of WWI, the treaties, rebuilt in time for the start of WWII, delete a number of German DDs and a sub (with the use of the same kind of sting bag the disabled the Bismarck) in Norway, deleted some Itallian CAs at Mattapan, got the longest range hit between two fighting battleships, survived a direct hit and two near misses from the same bombs that took out the Roma, not long after that, opened up the bombardment of Normandie, albeit with X turret out of action from the bomb hits, emptied her magazines three times and wore out her gun barrels that day, was the first RN BB to pass through the Dover Strait since the fall of France, survived the war, and when it finally came time for them to try and scrap her, she broke free and grounded herself, giving the scrappers all hell to the very end. I also left out a few of Warspite's other adventures during the wars.
HMS Vanguard should NOT be considered to be a WW2 battleship as she was commisioned AFTER WW2 ended. While the Vanguard was completed before the Jean Bart, the Jean Bart was laid down BEFORE the Vanguard.
Vanguard was under construction during ww2. Its the same reason why Hood and Nagato are called ww1 era battleships, despite both being commissioned in 1920
I can agree, and if you want to make the argument that Iowa was the most effective, Yamato still had the bigger guns and more powerful armor, making her more powerful, even if Iowa was technically a better ship
18 inch guns, poor radar, poor fire control, less effective shells. The 16/50 guns on Iowa class used ammunition that was more effective than Yamato’s 18” ammo. So shall we judge power based on paper or reality?
@@TheBruceGday The 50 cal 16 inch gun could only rival Yamato’s guns from long range, and was completely inferior from short and mid ranges. While Iowa had a better fire control, the idea that Iowa could aim better is pure fantasy. She had a better fire control, but it simply told the guns where to aim, and if the guns themselves had aiming issues, it would not matter too much. Iowa had numerous problems with accuracy during ww2 due to poor gunpowder charges. The idea that Yamato could not aim is also fantasy, and she displayed excellent gunnery during the battle off Samar. On paper, Iowa could stand a chance, but in practice, she would have been blown to bits by a ship with better guns, armor, maneuverability, and accuracy. Iowa’s only real advantage was her much higher speed, which she could use to show her tail and run away from a vastly superior opponent.
@@metaknight115 The 16"/50s were tested against armor pulled from Shinano in her carrier conversion after the war, while the one remaining 18.1" test gun was fired against US armor plating used in the construction of the Iowa Class. They were comparable at all ranges - meaning it would come down to accuracy. The Iowas had a greater maximum effective range, and the speed advantage to control the range. Not sure how you can use the Battle of Samar as an "excellent display of gunnery" as they only hit one ship, allowed American destroyers and destroyer-escorts to close within 5"/38 gun range and maul their upper works, and then send them running for home with their tails between their legs. In practice the Yamatos were the ultimate paper tiger, but beautiful coffins for thousands of Japanese sailors.
@@jimbelcher6877 Tirpitz was not better than Vanguard. Vanguard was bigger, better protected, far better fire control, and more powerful main guns. For the secondary and AA defense, Vanguard no contest.
@@13stalag13 Vanguard was about 2000 tons heavier than Tirpitz for standard displacement. Most analysis shows the Bismarck and Tirpitz were, heavy and well compartmented, but the overall utilization of tonnage for armor, speed and armament was not terribly efficient. Plus the triple screw design lead directly to Bismarck's demise and inability to fight the RN. Of all WWII era ships, arguably none utilized their armor protection better than the KGVs and SoDaks. Extremely well protected ships, especially considering the tonnage of the ships. Vanguard was an extension of the KGV scheme, with even more tonnage allocated to protection, as it was a considerably bigger ship. The RN 15" gun was more accurate and fired better, and heavier shells than the German equivalents. Utilizing Okun's data, the 15" RN shell had more penetration at pretty much every distance and armor thickness. As demonstrated during the final stands of both Bismarck and Scharnhorst, the RN had long corrected the shell problems that plagued their ships at Jutland. The shells fired in WWII worked very well. Warspite demonstrated the British 15" guns were very accurate at long ranges. These are the same guns installed on Vanguard. While Vanguard was completed too late to fight, all the Tirpitz did was absorb bombs and capsize. The Germans wouldn't even risk it during combat operations.
I dont know why you are complaining. This ship dont belong to this list. She was commissioned after the war,in 1946. You should be happy for this mistake,mate .At least showed up.
The North Carolina class and the South Dakota class being ranked beneath ships with 8 15 inch guns? The Italian ships were pretty but they lacked radar fire control and a host of other modern features. This list is....silly without the rest of the American heavies.
Top 10, simple enough, four Iowas, four south dakotas and two north carolinas, by a very long mile ahead of the rest. If someone tries to say yamato, just study the battle of Samar. And Bismarck, obsolete WW1 - influenced design basicly from the day one. Us navys radar fire control was so much more effective than any other navy's. WV hittin a first salvo in pitch black night, Washington trashing Kirishima etc. Had Tirpitz confronted one of Iowas in 1943, it would have been too weak to survive, too slow to run.
I took a look at the battle of Samar, and apparently, Yamato recorded some of the longest ranged shots ever fired when she hit the US support carrier White Planes, and US destroyer Johnston, and sunk the US support carrier Gambier bay , all from 20 miles. I guess the Yamato is missing it's rightful place at number one. And yea, Bizmarck is pretty overrated.
@@metaknight115 Samar was a miserable failure to the imperial navy, and Yamato. They could not intercept nor destroy the virtually undefended troop ships, but were scared away by a bunch of escort carrier planes and destroyers. That is a golden opportunity lost, if there ever was one. Yamato was not able to make her presence matter, just as was case in the Midway two years earlier.
@@Ah01 Yamato’s performance was actually pretty good. As I said before, she hit multiple ships, and sunk the carrier Gambier Bay from a distance of 20 miles(an extremely long range). However, she was, forced to turn away due to torpedos, leaving the battlecruiser Kongo as the only ship in the center force that could actually aim. Later, she finished of the destroyer Johnston.
@@metaknight115 Regardless of that, the mission was to intercept the invasion fleet, which the japanese failed to do, despite the overwhelming odds in their favor. The japanese doctrine was not to build worlds biggest battleship and use it to sink two cheap escort carriers converted from freight ships and a couple of destroyers. That`s a terrible trade from their point of view, and they knew that too after the battle.
These battleships were manufactured and commissioned. All of them were modern and large in size. But their usefulness and effectiveness were not so noticeable. But the points concerning the German battleship were completely different. This is a Bismarck-class battleship. Only the battleship Bismarck itself has shown that its theoretical advantages do not contradict its practical capabilities in a real combat situation, that is, in the classic method of naval battle, when a battleship fights against a battleship and where submarines, especially aircraft carriers, almost do not participate as the main unit. Speaking on the basis of facts, the armament, armor and survivability of the battleship "Bismarck" turned out to be the best of all battleships. Although the rest of the newest battleships of their time simply could not show their capabilities in the battle of the battleship against the battleship, probably finally due to historical circumstances.
😂 bismarck have the best armament and armour among other battleship not really most of them have thicker and better armour then bismarck like yamato or vanguard having thicker and better armour then yamato also armament iowa yamato and vanguard have better armament since the guns were already upgraded having better ranges and technology but in the battle bismarck knock out its radar because of his own shot and you say bismarck is great at armament😂
@Caughtin4klol-nj4zi There is a tradition of saying and proving in words and demonstrating on paper something outstanding in the product being produced, that everything will be fine with its quality and benefits. But the reality is often different. Because it's business and greed, as well as fame and pride. But for this, true facts are needed so that words do not contradict reality. Undoubtedly, the Yamato, Iowa and Vanguard were well armed. But historically, they have not shown anything noticeable in the fight against warships with similar parameters. They actually became warships, designed mainly to escort aircraft carriers and bombard the coast. And so that with the help of their weapons they could sink an enemy battleship in this war, and indeed in the history of dreadnoughts there was no other fact when one battleship sank another enemy battleship. Thus, the battleship Bismarck is the undisputed leader in this matter and the only one of its kind who was able to do this.
@justman77.21 not really if you are talking battleship that have fought against other battleship well ijn kirishima fight uss washington in a one v one and also bismarck have design flaw from his own shot destroyer her own radar also when bismarck fought king george v his armour were easily penetrated by kgv and also vanguard and king george v both have thicker and stronger armour then bismarck
@Caughtin4klol-nj4zi This is the first time I've heard about the battle between the battleships Kirishima and Washington. I Googled the history of this battle. Without a doubt, this is a great victory for the US Navy. But? What is this "but"? But this battle was part of a larger naval battle. The Kirishima had a weaker armament. And it was one of the secondary, in terms of power, in the list of Japanese battleships. But, nevertheless, a victory is a victory. As for the size, that is, the mass, as well as armor and weapons. Later, battleships with almost similar characteristics and even more were launched. But, unfortunately, we cannot say with certainty what would have happened if Bismarck had fought with Avangard, Iowa and Yamato. But one thing is clear, the Bismarck won the battle. And only after the attack of the aircraft carrier did he receive critical and fatal damage and actually lost the ability to move and, accordingly, fight effectively. After a prolonged artillery barrage, the ship was still afloat. Despite the fact that it was finally finished off by torpedoes, experts believe that the ship was sunk by its own team. The armor penetration of large-caliber shells of the ship's hull from all direct hits was very low. And most importantly, the ship did not explode. Underwater research has shown that the ship is in fairly good condition after so many hits from shells and torpedoes.
@justman77.21 yes indeed it doesnt sink but just in 30 minutes bismarck have been silence it is still afloat but all the turrets were knocked down or destroyed command tower destroyed killing admiral lutjens and other commanding officer also bismarck is still afloat but inside the bismarck is dead 2200 men in the ship only 114 survived it was destroyed by the crew that means during the battle only 114 manage to escape because the others were already dead hms prince of wales 14 inch manage to make a hole in the early battle making a oil leak in the final battle hms king george v and hms rodney manage to destory all of its turret
I would like to see more histury on Heavy crusesr like The USS NEWPORT NEWS CA148 i WAS ABORD HER In the Cuban Missles crises In B div and that ship holdes 777397 gales of fual I refuled her many times Im Thomas B Kernan Sr FN
evidence now shows that thie Bismark was scutled and sank from that damage. Please also get rid of the robotic voice that cannot pronounce anything correctly. PS its thats your own voice you need to learn to prounce things.
Pointless argument. It didn't matter who let the water into the hull, she was going to sink. Had it not been for the Royal Navy, would have the Kreigsmarine scuttled the ship? No matter how you spin it, the Bismarck is on the bottom of the Atlantic because the Royal Navy wasn't going to allow the battle to end any other way.
American radar and fire control was vastly superior in World War II. North Carolina class and South Dakota class should be 2 and 3. They would engage a Yamato or Bismarck at night and by daylight they would be annihilated. Vanguard 4. Bismarck 5 Richleau 6 Yamato 7. Roma 8. Nelson 9 ww1 Queen Elizabeth class 10. Colorado 11 King George V 12. Any other order not supported by reality. Roma would move up two notches if their powder chargers were more consistent. They had great fire control but terrible disbursement because of inconsistency in manufacture of powder kegs. Then again they had really short range built specifically for the Mediterranean. Nelson and Colorado I would move up if they weren’t so slow. Yamato with low-grade steel Bismarck from obsolete WW1 Bayern designs two most overrated ships of all time
Okey, I do not see how the North Carolinas and South Dakotas could beat the Yamato. Both ships had a lower maximum range, inferior guns, inferior armor, and about the same speed, and Yamato's fire control wasn't as bad as some people make them out to be. The Kirishima shown that IJN capital ships could do well in night battles, and Yamato fired some of the longest shots ever fired when she hit multiple ships, and sunk an escort carrier from 20 miles., and how in the hell could Vangard, Richleau, and Bizmarck beat Yamato. King George V should be higher, as she had the best armor at the start of WW2, and was only barely beat out by Yamato by the end of it. Finally, Vangaurd could probably beat South Dakota and North Carolina with her superb armor.
@@metaknight115 4, 5, 6 7: Vangurard Richleau Yamato, Bismark. The 1st 2 were most modern at end of WW2 and Vanguard wasn't active till it was over anyway so shouldn't be on list. After Richleau's US modernization it was likely as good as Iowa class. Thicker armour on Yamato but far worse steel and relied on optical range finding almost exclusively - many admirals didn't trust their radar - some believed it would give away position so didn't even use. US Radar advantage was like advantage of an F22 over F15. The cost of 2 Yamatos likely near same as 4 Iowas or 5 KGVs. They were so not worth it!!!!! They should have built 4 Shinano class carriers instead. If not for radar and range finding advantage - shipwise - Yamato of course is #1.
@@donalddemo A little known fact is that the King George V and Vangard would have had a superior belt armor to Yamato if not for inferior armor schemes. As you know, Yamato's armor thickness was not actually 16 inches, because of a lower quality armor, and it's effective thickness is estimated to be around 14 inches. However, Yamato's armor just barley surpasses the British ships because of it's superior armor scheme(though I haven't heard it been explained why it has a superior armor scheme, just that it does)
@@metaknight115 I can't imagine the Yamato would have stuck around to engage any battleship unless they were cornered. This is the same vessel that was chased out of Leyte Gulf by American destroyers.
The Iowas' main battery was NOT "16.5 inches" The guns were 15 inch 50 CALIBER guns, meaning the bore diameter was 16 inches and the length was 50 times 16 inches or 800 inches or 66.66 feet long.
While it might not have been the among the most powerful the USS Pennsylvania should get a honorable mention. It logged the most miles, was the flagship of it's fleet, took part in every battle in the Pacific and fired the most ammunition during the war. After being in dry dock at Pearl Harbor.
You are absolutely right about that but as a tribute to the magnificent ship I decided to included. Thank you for your important comment . Best regards
My father was on the USS MISSOURI. He was a tojo chief during Ww11. Has a card from signing of peace treaty of WW2.I am very proud of him
Holy crap! The amount of ordnance expended on Yamato is mind boggling!
Even more was put into MUSASHI; 17 bombs and 19 torpedoes!!! She took a terrible beating. They hit her from every quarter.
But the Americans learned to focus their torpedo attacks on one side of the ship, and force her to capsize. This is why Yamato took less hits than her sister. Still, it was a terrible beating.
What I find strange is the US fired over 100 torpedoes on April 7. Not all at Yamato but I'm sure she saw about 90 fired at her. Out of those 90 or so only 12 hit? I find that hard to believe.
An enemy would have to put a similar amount or more ordnance on a modern US Navy CVN to sink one. The US learned a lot from WWII and the Nimitz Class especially has a lot of survivability features in its design. Armor didn't stop WWII era bombs or torpedoes and modern warheads like BROACH (JASSM. JSOW, LRASM, Storm Shadow) would defeat the thickest armor on any battleship ever made. Compartmentation and use of void spaces are employed to minimize damage and flooding. Putting stuff around critical spaces helps too. Better to tear up office and berthing spaces to absorb damage than engineering spaces or other critical spaces.
@@YamatoForever Yes that is interesting. I also find it intresting that in the Battle of the Philippines Sea, the air element did relatively little damage, to the Japanese fleet.
It is when you think the biplane put Bismark at the mercy of the war at sea...😮
The North Carolina and South Dakota classes both had16 inch 45 caliber guns. The Iowas also had 16-inch guns, but theirs were 50 caliber.
The oft forgotten classes (NC and SD) actually had an advantage in their 45 cal main guns vs the 50 cal of the Iowa class - although their range was a little bit less when firing the 2700 pound super heavy AP shells, their slightly lower muzzle velocity means the angle of impact would be against the thinner deck armor of an opponent vs the armor belt, thus would do more damage. The end result would be that a NC or SD class ship actually stood a better chance of destroying a Yamato class ship at a max range beyond the effective range of Yamato's main guns.
@@erichammond9308 Fun fact. The Iowas suffered from various accuracy issues during WW2, which meant that North Carolina And South Dakota, in practice, had more accurate guns.
@@metaknight115 I have a soft spot for the North Carolina, since as a child I donated as a first grader for the state to buy her and make her a museum, and that thought warms my heart, but realistically, would that not be more due to the longer service times? More practice, and time to dial in the radars and equipment? Admiral "Ching" Lee (USS Washington) was well known as a "gunnery nut." (This paid off against IJN Kirishima at Guadalcanal) rather than any mechanical issue or design flaw? As an adult I heard rumours in the service that the NJ lowered a hill in Lebanon by around 100 feet with a single broadside of Hi-Cap HE shells. Making every topographic map obsolete in a few seconds is an awesome feat.
@@erichammond9308 I do really like the Washington and North Carolina. Washington is higher on my top ten battleship list than the Iowa, And is my second favorite American battleship behind the Massachusetts
@@metaknight115 I don't think I can find fault with that! It's personal affection for a ship, and I totally get that! . The MA has a great service record, and is, if I'm not mistaken isn't she the only BB that fired her guns in anger in both theaters of WWII? I'd have to look it up, but if she's not the only one there aren't more than 1 or 2 others that did.
Admiral "Ching Lee" answered that question at Guadalcanal in 1942 at night with HIS perfected RADAR gunnery. The US battleship Washington hit the Japanese battleship Kirishima NINETEEN DIRECT 16" HITS and sank her. All without suffering a scratch. The Second Night Battle of Guadalcanal.
Lee was one of few Admirals of the time who embraced radar. He studied it so thoroughly it was said he knew it better than the men who operated it. Plus, he was a rifle sharpshooter with skills that landed him a spot on the Olympic team! He knew exactly what the guns of USS WASHINGTON could do, and would have lengthy discussions about naval gunnery. Some dubbed him, "the gunslinger of the south pacific."
Take a man that understands radar and ballistics, give him a modern ship like WASHINGTON was at that time, and the outcome is no surprise.
Lee was the weapon.
USS WASHINGTON was his instrument.
J.
20 hits in 75 rounds fired in about 15 minutes, that is some serious shooting on a dark night at any range, considering Kirishima was not trying to help Washington.
Washington also severely damaged the two heavy cruisers with the Kirishima. The Atago and Takao were out of service under repair for more than a year following that engagement.
@@patrickmccrann991 Yup, Adm Lee and the crew of Washington were dealing some lead that night.
I served in the USN while the New Jersey was an active member of our Navy. Every Gunners Mate I ever knew wanted to be assigned to a BB. I never got to sail on one, as I always got an LPH or a CV. As an officer on the staff of the COMNAVCARRIB I also secretly wanted to get TDY to one. Well, I couldn't keep that desire a secret. So they "punished" me by making me the 30 day ,TDY , on-sight Naval Staff presence to St. Kitts-Nevis. Yesssir, 30 days living at the Ocean Terrace Inn. Drinking dark beer, listening to cricket games on a radio, by the pool. Oh yeah, and again later, I was given the same 30 day, TDY, presence to Antigua . No OTI there. But a fun NAVFAC. "Don't throw me into that briar patch!"
Thank you Sir for sharing your story with us… Best regards
I have met plenty of people to have served on USS Iowa during my various visits to the glorious ship. They are very lucky to have served on a battleship and not be 80-90 year old men
Terry, Thank you for your service to our country.
Funny! I just referred to Uncle Remus on another video.
I did live the dream as a gmg3 back in 1985 when I got orders to the battleship Missouri. When I checked in I found out I was assigned to turret 3. The funny part during boot our CPOwas going over ships in the navy from the Bluejacket. He said forgetabout battleship duty, you'll never get it. Then at Seaport Village with wife once when I was on LST 1189, the Jersey was moored at North Island. Told my wife that wasthe real navy and would kill to get battleship duty. I was on the Missouri for 2 years, recomm, round the world. Best duty I ever had.
The USS Wisconsin is longer than any of the other Iowa class battleships (I wouldn't know this except we visited it last week in Norfolk and watched a presentation on it. There was a collision with another ship which damaged its bow and they decided to take the bow off the USS Kentucky (which had started construction but by this time they had halted construction of battle ships to concentrate on carriers). Anyway, the USS Wisconsin with its Kentucky bow became the longest Iowa class battleship by about 11 inches.
Also why that ship has the nickname of "Whiskey"; WIS-KY, Wisconsin and Kentucky!!!
@@smc1942 Yep, they mentioned that too.
No the Wisconsin IS Not longer than before the Collision only the lower &shorter part of the bow was replaced,with the Eaton , the N.J. is still the longest by 4 inches .
@@glennwinter2197 Go tour the USS Wisconsin and watch the presentation. They will tell you the bow from the unfinished USS Kentucky battleship was used to repair the Wisconsin. (the Eaton was a Destroyer, not sure why you say "was replaced with the Eaton" - it was not a suitable donor ship). Anyway, the museums are out there to be visited. The Wisconsin was the last ship in its class so it all all the improvements from lessons learned with the older ships too. My son is stationed nearby and we got to visit for a bit.
wrong!!!!!!! only the lower shorter part of Kentucky's bow was put on Wisconsin below the anchors to the keel , the top part of the bow is still is the longest &still is Wisconsin's original bow , they put it right back on because it wasn't undamaged &Kentucky , wasn't built to main deck to second deck only ,same length as before ,!!!!!!!!! repaired in 16 days .i have toured the Wisconsin twice ,while at Norfolk and i have all the books on the Iowa's they all say 887 ft 3 inch same as before N.J. is the longest 4 inches longer !!!!!! i've read from that museum she is 16ft ,8 ft , 2 ft ,12 inches , ,when it was cut off & welded back on to bulkheads .
They should have never decommissioned the USS Missouri they should have brought her in a rebuilder and gave her better guns even though she had enough to do anything she needed to do and I'm from Nebraska
When I was just a pre-adolescent whipper snapper, I became enamored with battleships - loved the looks, and - when I was a little older - the histories. This was before I learned that the historic battleship class gave way to what is today the modern aircraft carrier; just look at the Pearl Harbor attack scenario: the Japanese carrier planes were hoping to find and sink all the American aircraft carriers, of which there were three in the Pacific theater. Luckily, Enterprise, Yorktown and Lexington were at sea at the time of the Japanese attack. (The US also had 4 more carriers in the Atlantic). After the Battles of Leyte Gulf, Coral sea, and - most importantly - Midway, America had taken control of the Pacific and - for all intents and purposes - won the War against Japan. Today, the aircraft carrier (not to mention our nuclear submarines!) is the mainstay of our naval presence around the globe, and has probably saved many more lives in many countries just by its presence! LET THE CHINESE AND RUSSIANS TAKE NOTE!!! Meanwhile, we maintain a few battle wagons in case naval support of any conflicts that might arise anywhere in the world are needed. Here's to all three of these iconic naval vessels that have helped protect American lives and those of our allies around the world!
Yorktown and Lexington were not "Luckily" out to sea. Their orders to ferry aircraft were sent down from Washington. At Pearl Harbor trials and hearings years later War Department higher ups initially denied this and said it was a local order from Kimmel, until confronted with physical evidence and testimony. FDR, Marshall and Stimson knew of the impending IJN task force attack on Pearl and wanted the Carriers safe. The old, slow white elephant battleships were to be sacrificial lambs, but even dim wits like Marshall did not expect the carnage to be so extensive. But he and FDR knew that to make an omelette, you have to break a few eggs. [IJN Military codes broken by CAST +-October 1940]
No one had battleships that could go toe to toe with the Imperial Japanese Navy’s Yamato and Musashi and that’s just a fact.
@@mac2626 It would have been interesting. The crews of the IJN didn't do all that well against US Battleships in the few "toe-to-toe" encounters of WWII (Kirishima, Surigoa Straight, etc). Factor in mediocre Japanese radar I don't see them doing much better than a "draw" with an Iowa. Sorry.
@@mac2626 without seeing some tests done I could not fully concur with your assessment of a fact American fire control was usually more accurate, and whether a ship is hit by a 16-in gun or an 18-in gun there will be massive damage so as I see it it comes down to accuracy and it is known that the Americans had better fire control accuracy. The Iowa class ships had a significant speed advantage over the Yamato class. The side armor belts were about equal on the two classes. Obviously the Yamato class could sustain more damage if for no other reason there is much more steel that would need to be destroyed. That is a fact. In the event of a direct hit on the Yamato's magazines that is a liability. The Japanese admiralty referred to the Yamato and Musashi as floating luxury hotels as for what Little damage they did compared to their size and expense. Their fuel burn would have been incredibly high.
@@mac2626 I would have been interesting to see the New Jersey or Missouri or something in that class go up against your model the American ships had far better fire control and whether your shell is about 2600 lb or about 3,000 pounds either is going to cause hell. Luck would be a factor, look what the Bismarck did to the hood one Lucky magazine shot.
We have the Wisconsin here in Norfolk, awesome looking... Great video
Interesting..I'd put the Yamato's #1 with their size and 18" guns. Didn't expect Vanguard and was expecting the King George's to be on the list..nice to see them in the video though. All were obsolete by wars end. Crazy the Iowa's were used as long as they were.
Vanguard does not belong on this list at all. I think that this video was made by a Brit. It was not available at all for WW II. It is like calling the B-47 a WW II bomber! I was also expecting the Yamato to be #1, but also that the Italian BBS was definitely better than the French one, which was never in battle, other than getting pounded in their harbor in North Africa. Also, the Bismark and its sister ship do not belong up that high either since it had fairly weak guns, although not as weak as the British had, but it did have good armor, although not good in all the right places because a WW I bi-plane brought it to its knees!
If you are interested in seeing the real ballistics stats on these battleships, as well as the other main ones of WW II, click on my name here and then on 'About', and either send me an email of go to my website, and click on 'Miscellaneous Information' from its home page. I have a ballistics file, mainly about and for purchasing handgun and rifle ammo online in the USA, but I also list the main big WW II battleships at the end with all their relevant data. You will easily see how the Yamato was well above all others, and that the Italian Littorio class was better than the other European BBS's.
No I am Portuguese emigrated in the UK, but that’s not the reason… Best Regards
If I was fighting in a demolition derby then yeah, Yamato all the way. In any kind of a realistic scenerio the Iowa's come out on top. No so much by capabilities, but that the economy of the US can actual support their use.
The Yamato's nickname during the war was Hotel Yamato because it spent much of the war tied alongside a pier because the Japanese refused to risk it, because they couldn't replace it.
Personally I consider the Kongo's to be better battleships, at least from a use perspective.
@@frednone If that's where you're heading with this then take the Italian and French ships off too. Throw old ships like Warspite on the list If you're making usage an issue.
@@bcain3729 Not so much the Italians, they actually went to sea a time or two, the French though I agree with completely. The best they can claim is Jean Bart tied to the pier in Casablanca.
For that matter the US Fast Battleships should have been on the list.
Warspite was a bit small and slow to make the cut, though considering she basically had the same main armerment as Vanguard she should have at least got an honarable mention.
A 16-inch gun of 50 calibres (16" L/50) has a barrel length of 50 × 16 = 800 in (66 ft 8 in).
Yamato's barrel length was 69 feet 4 inches, longer than Iowa's guns
Great video, I like the intense music, kind of gets your adrenaline going, narration very good too, very cool.
It's absolutely amazing what went into these ships, The Heavy Armor plating, the huge guns, Teakwood decks, Etc only to have many of them lay on the ocean floor. And obscene waste of lives and resources.
And Yamamoto took like 14 bombs and 10 torpedo to sink not counting shell hits .....now thats a whip that can stand and slug it out ..
No HE didn't. YAMATO was the one that took so much punishment. Admiral YAMAMOTO used her as his command ship.
(And, no offense, but the fact that she took so much punishment undermines the whole concept behind ships like her. She took so much time, effort, and treasure to build that there would never be enough ships of her class to keep the enemy from dogpiling her, even leaving carrier aircraft out of it.)
Some of the photos you got for the vanguard is actually the king George class
I pointed that out and guy wrote back saying I was wrong - I pointed out 5:13 twin super firing over quad - he hasn't replied to that. 😂
@@donalddemo he obviously doesn’t know his ships well then lol
Just awesome never been on one can imagine they mustiv been fantastic
Many have been preserved as museums in the US, and i believe one in Japan
My dad was on the Missouri in the Korean War. He did not see much as he was a radarman in the bowels of the ship but he said when they shot broadside it would move the ship.
My grandfather fought in ww2 on the New Jersey
Your dad was messing with you, a broadside doesn't move the ship, it just rattles your teeth. I served on the Missouri from 1988-1992.
@@wesleyworley8982 your a desert storm veteran
Lucky
@@wesleyworley8982 He was known to, we'll call it, stretch the truth lol.
@@wesleyworley8982, You got on about the time I got of the Missouri.
USS West Virginia vs IJN Yamashiro was the last Gunfight Between two Battleships. USS West Virginia was modernized with the new Fire control system that is also equipped by the Iowa and late war battleships, during the gunfight against IJN Yamashiro, USS West Virginia made the most hits at night thanks to her fire control systems that replaced the old manned range finders. The US Battleships that are equipped with this Fire Control system are the most powerful. Also, the Yamato Class ended up in the top of the most Useless things in the world.
Actually no, the last gunfight was the Scharnhorst and the HMS Prince of Wales.
@@jimbelcher6877 Duke of York sank the Scharnhorst on 26 Dec 1943, The WeeVee, California, Tennessee and Maryland sank Yamishiro on 25 Oct 1944. Prince of Wales was sunk by the Japanese on 10 Dec 1941.
Wee Vee's final configuration looked like a South Dakota superstructure grafted onto a Colorado hull. Mean looking ship.
YAMATO is just gorgeous. Only the most legendary battleships meet their fate at the bottom of the ocean floor. Bismarck has also earnt her respect.
"legendary" eh? Throwing away ENORMOUS quantities of resources fuel and men for utterly NO result in both cases. Yeah "legendary" indeed.
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 The ships themselves were worthy of legend. They performed amazingly well given how the odds were stacked. Besides, we shouldn't be complaining that the Germans and Japanese lost what were very powerful ships. And, actually, Bismarck did yield a result. The entire Royal Navy was scrambling to find her. Had anyone been able to actually take advantage of that, Bismarck would have been a success story either way.
@@bigmonkey1254 By "the entire RN" what you mean is 15 ships that actually made contact with Bismarck plus about another 50 that received orders to join in the search... so 60 odd ships from a RN strength of approximately 330 ships. Also the number of ships involved in the hunt is, contrary to wehraboo delusion, utterly nothing to do with the "awesomeness" of Bismarck, and everything to do with searching for a kriegsmarine "needle" in a 41,000,000 sq mile North Atlantic "haystack".
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 The Bismarck did sink the Hood, so... not NO result.
@@waynevan5069 I'll edit my OP to say "next to no result". 193,000,000 reichmarks for a ship which had a 9 day operational lifespan, and completely failed in her only assigned mission. NOt a good investment for winning a war, I@m sure you'll agree. Oh certainly its enthralled generations of impressionable young schoolboys ever since, but it was NOT a major force by ANY stretch of the imagination.
With all you said about the MISSOURI, I'm very surprised you didn't mention the surrender signing aboard her in Tokyo Bay.
I worked a spill in Philadelphia and saw a HUGE ship. I knew it was a battleship, but didn't know which one. Then I saw the No. 2 turret. Oh yeah, the Iowa.
BB-61
I would suggest another topic for consideration on battleships; the most significant battleships not by size but by actual deeds. For example the USS Washington sank the IJN Kirishima. Bismarck battled HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Hood sinking Hood. Bismark was sunk at the of a battle with HMS King George V and HMS Rodney. USS Massachusetts battled an incomplete Jean Bart silencing Jean Barts single turret. and there are more. HMS Warspite record long range shot against an Italian battleship (did not sink it). (My list above is a partial and unordered list of engagments. More significant than size.)
Royal Navy didn't sunk Bismarck Bismarck scuttle on her own crew
@@cyrussalinasal7829 Pointless argument. It didn't matter who let the water into the hull, she was going to sink. Had it not been for the Royal Navy, would have the Kreigsmarine scuttled the ship? No matter how you spin it, the Bismarck is on the bottom of the Atlantic because the Royal Navy wasn't going to allow the battle to end any other way.
@@wesleyworley8982 Crying about history. grow up kid. The man is correct, you know. Read a book or something please
Oh, please. HMS King George V and HMS Rodney did not sink the Bismarck.
@@wesleyworley8982 fact is a fact it's just the British propaganda those time believing all people that they sunk the most feared battleship.
SORRY THIS IS LONG.. When I was in the US MARINE CORPS I was so lucky. I was stationed on the USS MISSOURI BB63 during end of 80s. The USA has wasted BILLIONS of dollars trying to make modern BATTLESHIPS they have FAILED EVERY TIME. The 4 BATTLESHIPS could have been updated easy. We carried over 32 tomahawks, 16 harpoons, 4 cwis , 12 5in guns, 9 16in guns. There was talk back then to use 14in shells with GPS nose & rocket after 25 miles the 16in case peal off rocket kicks in for another 60 to 80 more miles ( like 70% cities are within 50miles from oceans) hell take 2 5in guns off replace with surface to air missiles. The engines could be replaced. I was on the bridge when came from Hawaii at over 30 knots attacked the attackers with 2 other ships on our side. WE CRUSHED THE ATTACKERS. SORRY TO MY MARINE BROTHERS THAT TRIED TO TAKE HAWAII, with all of there protection ships. Honestly it was an AWESOME to feel the BB63 going in there formation swing the big 16in guns. DAM I STILL GET AN ERECTION THINKING OF THE ATTACKER. so many stupid ppl in Washington want to waste money on BS.
RIMPAC '90, I was the CIC Status Board Keeper on the Bridge when we tore through that amphib formation.
Joe Hayward, I was gmg2 turret 3 from 1985 to 1987. I was LPO ships armory for round the world cruise. You remember the Marine who fell from the second deck down to turret 3 powder flats?
I don't think they spent "Billions" on any one Battleship. Sorry. Plus: during the Falklands the Brits were being killed enmasse in their aluminum hulled frigates and enduring hundreds of casualties from Exocet missiles fired from Argentine Fighter Bombers. An Exocet missile impacting on an Iowa Class battleship would impact and, well, not bounce off but just explode. It would not make an impact on an Iowa Class Battleship's hull. Not one bit. Welcome to the later 20th Century.
Interesting fact but the US Navy tried to mount Sea Sparrow on the Iowas during their reconstruction. New Jersey mounted them briefly but every illumination radar they mounted on her was destroyed by the concussion of the main battery. Eventually the Navy gave up trying to mount anti aircraft missiles on them.
Spectacular!
Thank you
You do not mention that the battleship that saw the most wars, decorated the most,and was on active duty the most as well as seen the most combat of the 4 Iowa class battleships was BB62 the New Jersey
What? 1 world war and some piddling little local skirmishes with 3rd world countries?
Try HMS Warspite, Queen Elizabeth class battleship that served right through WW1, stood her ground at Jutland (twice circling infront of the entire Hochseeflotte battleline ALONE), and then fought from the first to the last right the way through WW2, Destroying a fistful of Kriegsmarine destroyers in the frozen confined fjords of Norway, through to the baking heat of the Indian Ocean, including 2 years in the cauldron of the Mediterranean facing off against everything the German and Italian navies and air forces had to throw against her, and they still couldn't take her down. The RN's most honoured ship in its LONG illustrious history.
The Japanese surrender was originally supposed to be signed on the New Jersey, but politics prevailed, Truman was from Missouri, so guess what.
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 and where is warspite now😂Yeah thats what I thought.The US still has tons of ships preserved now as museums.
@@jadensmit9127 So? What does that prove exactly? That the US keep huge ships that saw only half the action which Warspite did?
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 Warspite was the capital ship when it was designed, air power really didn't exist when the ship was designed, world war I was fought mostly in the trenches on land. In world war II the aircraft carrier relegated the battleship to mostly, but not all, to shore bombardment and anti-aircraft defense of carrier task forces. Take the Enterprise a capital ship and stack it up against Warspite, capital ship of its day and see which one comes out on top Enterprise shot down more planes and did massive amounts of damage. Technology, weapons and war tactics all change with time.
I LOVE battleships!
Stay put for another video about a great type of ship of ww2, the aircraft carrier
IOWAs didn’t have 16.5 inch guns. Maybe you were confused by the caliber? 16”/50
You are absolutely right… thank you for pointing that out… I always appreciate your criticism and corrections, that’s the only way for my channel to grow … I always try to provide the best and most reliable info but sometimes it’s not possible due to many contradictions in the internet…. Best regards
I have personally visited the Mighty Mo ..... I LOVE that ship !!!!!
Good to see the Italians mentioned.... Forza
New video coming soon and again Italians mentioned…” top cruisers of the ww2” best regards
It's impossible to say which battleship would win in a one on one slugout between a Yamato Class and a Missouri Class. The Yamato was more heavily armored, had a more devastating main gun and could lob it further than a Missouri. The Missouri was faster, had greater range and, most importantly, had a vastly superior radar fire control system. I honestly don't think that either battleship would outright sink the other most of the time in a duel, but there is much less doubt in my mind that the Missouri would, in most cases, come out far less scathed than the Yamato.
Iowa’s had gunnery radar and the Japanese didn’t, The Americans could bombard accurately from a distance, even on their older BB’s.
The Iowa class (as well as the NC and SD classes) had radar controlled gunnery which gave them an effective range of 21-22 miles, very close to their max range. The Yamato class had optical only which limited their effective range to 17 or 18 miles. Thus, the US ships, using the 2700 pound super heavy AP shells combined with their better speed could remain outside of the Yamato's effective range and pummel the Yamato to oblivion. Barring an admittedly immensely devastating extremely lucky hit, they'd be untouched. The evidence is there. look at the Battle of Samar - the Yamato only managed to get a single hit at a range of 18 miles on a light aircraft carrier. (a single hit that eventually sank that ship)
@@neonstratusguy Actually the NC and SD classes had an advantage. The lower muzzle velocity of the 45 cal guns means their shells would be impacting the thinner deck armor and not the main belt, and they used the same 2700 lb AP shells as the Iowa's did.
Oh, and there is no "Missouri class" - the USS Missouri was an Iowa class
@@neonstratusguy Are you saying a ww1 era battleship could sink a Yamato?
I have read that shortly Iowa was commissioned, she was sent to the North Atlantic to hunt for the Tirpitz.
Interesting piece, thanks.
New video coming soon… “ top cruisers of ww2” best regards
Pity the Italians never bothered to have any type of quality control for their shells.
that and no radar - but the ship itself (except for short range) was as pretty as the BBs got and at 30 knots a legit fast BB.
The high muzzle velocity caused disperse as well, and wore out the gun barrels very quickly. Result, considering also the mentioned quality problems of the propellant bags, Littorios could hit barely anything, not shure if they ever hit a moving enemy vessel during their couriers. Narrow misses are recorded, though.
@@Ah01 yes, but being as fleet was strictly for Mediterranean (close to home ports) replacing barrels frequently not much if any of an issue. No radar and the inconsistent powder kegs were 2 huge problems - but no fault of ship design.
Ok, so he just overlooked the most decorate ship in US History, the Battleship New Jersey?
In comparing the Iowa class to the Yamato class, you have to factor in the advanced American CIC targeting capability utilizing radar. The Yamatos had more firepower and range, but the Iowas were much more likely to deliver actual hits. Just look at the results when American and Japanese battleships met off Guadalcanal (1942) and the Philippines (1944).
Very cool. When's you're next upload?
Thank you. I haven’t decided what about the video will be, but I will definitely resume publishing next week... apologies for the long time not publishing but I am very busy with personal issues to sort out. Thank you for your interest. Best regards 🇨🇦
Such firepower!
あまり知られてはないんですけど、ミッドウェイ海戦で主力空母4隻を失ってしまった旧日本海軍は完成前の大和型戦艦三番艦の信濃(SHINANO)を空母へ改装したので大和型の船体を持つ軍艦は信濃を含め計３隻存在したことになるんですよ！
Yes, many people forget the Shinano. perhaps because she was sunk by a single spread of torpedoes from a single submarine? A lesson in poor damage control.
@@erichammond9308
大和型の船体内部は敵の攻撃によるダメージ軽減が重視されており、かなり複雑な構造をしていたとされていす。乗組員が完全に内部を把握するには2年を要したそうです。ですが、終戦間際で厳しい状況下、1隻でも戦力となる軍艦が必要だった日本海軍は「信濃」乗組員に最低限必要な訓練以外を省略しました。そして、彼女が1本の魚雷を受けた時、ダメージコントロールを行おうとした乗組員は船体の複雑な構造上、被雷現場に向かうまでに手間取ってしまい、ダメージコントロールが手遅れになってしまったのです。
そして、彼女が他の大和型と比べ知名度が低い要因は「戦後、彼女に関する資料の少なさ」そして「日本海軍による徹底された信濃の秘匿行為」主にこの2つにあると私は思います。
@@LIE-zn2uu unfortunately the "translate to English" is not available on longer comments, could you divide it up into several shorter parts so that I can read it?
@@erichammond9308
すいません、そうだったんですか！
わかりました。
@@erichammond9308
大和型の船体内部は非常に複雑だったそうです。
I was assigned to USS NEW JERSEY's Marine Detachment from 1984 to 1986.
The Navy still has one battleship still on active duty and as far as I know it is one the most famous. It's stationed in Pearl Harbor. It's sitting in the mud on the bottom. The Arizona.
Still on active duty you say? That's damned interesting. God bless her, but her only active action is leaking fuel oil, I'm afraid. Reminds me of Star Trek and how Star Fleet didn't "have the heart" to retire Captain Christopher Pike...."
Arizona is neither in commission nor on "active duty".
@@hk-wr2jt I thought that might be the case. But I could see the US Navy being sentimental about the old girl.
You're right. She is no longer commissioned, but the NAVY will be commissioning a new USS Arizona and USS Oklahoma soon as new submarines.
When discussing the battleship Bismarck the flag shown is that of the present-day German Federal Republic. However, the Bismarck was one of the ships of the NAZI Kriegsmarine which used a different flag featuring a swastika.
display of the swastika Nazi flag is illegal in many countries. The video would get banned.
@@erichammond9308 True. A German black and white cross would have sufficed.
Bismarck was a ship of the german Kriegsmarine I really don`t know why some people were obsessed by using the prefix Nazi.
@@michaelpielorz9283 Because the Bismarck was part of the German navy between 1933 and 1945, i.e. Nazi Germany. The ship was not part of the Imperial Navy of 1871 -- 1918 nor the Federal navy of post-1955.
@@michaelpielorz9283 because some of us prefer to remember WWII and why we fought against the ultra nationalist, fascists, and Nazis. Hiding the name hides their EVIL.
The Iowa class was a marvel in its design. It was the backbone of the US and Allies drive at sea during the WW2 Pacific War. Missouri one of their class was were Gen MacArthur signed as the Supreme Commander of the Allied force for cessure of hostilities bringing the end of WW2.
It was not HMS Furious but HMS Victorious that along with HMS Ark Royal torpedoed the Bismarck
Correct it was HMS Victorious. My Uncle was in the fleet air arm and was one of the pilots that attacked the Bismarck. All he would was that it was huge.
I'm sorry, but that music is almost overbearing. Can you turn the volume down a notch, or two? Otherwise, it's a very good video.
Hi there ! I just realised that when already published… after is published I can’t change it… I will take your critics into consideration next video…. Thank you and best regards
The helmsman of the New Jersey told me that the Iowa Class could make 35 Knots.
Drach had the captain of the Iowa when iit went to Lebanon in the 80's and he said it got up to 36-37 knots!
@@vincentlavallee2779 Why do so many warship veterans claim that their ship could go a lot faster than it actually could go. I know that Japanese sailors claimed that Yamato reached 30 knots in trials.
@@metaknight115 Guinness Book of World Records has the USS New Jersey as the record for a battleship top sustained speed. The New Jersey did 35+ Knots for 6 hours on her shakedown for Vietnam.
The New Jersey Big J most decorated and accomplished more than any Battleship ever.
You can visit her in Camden NJ
Be Blessed !
Maybe US battleships, but I suspect the HMS Warspite was more decorated.
The Cardinal Richelieu would have been honored in their naming a battleship after him😀
Except he'd been dead for 300 yrs!
My father was a gunner on HMS Bellona. ...anyone know any of their Daring endeavours....not a big ship but made its mark in history
at 5.13 under the heading "Vanguard class", you showed a ship of the King George V class!
The Yamato and Musashi arguably belongs to number 1
Always liked Bartleships! Leviathans of the ocean.
It turns out that statistics don't translate into performance. The Queen Elizabeth class battleships were small, slow, old, didn't have the biggest guns, didn't have the best tech (some don't even have radar), but they outperformed every single ship on this list in actual naval engagements that happened. King George V class won 3 out of 9 battleship vs battleship battles in WW2, but statistically they're not going to make any list.
MIghty Moe is the most famous battleships of the US Navy.
I believe that she is the 3rd most famous battleship world wide, behind Yamato and Bismarck
How do you gauge "Famous"? She was a "Johnny-come-lately". USS Washington was the "Ass-Kicker".
@@SpartacusMinimus Don’t forget the USS Massachusetts
@@SpartacusMinimus SHe served everywhere and took the surrender of Japan.
@@metaknight115 Aye Aye, Capitein. She earned it.
Tbh I like all battleships on this list even if some had more success and better history than others
Tirpitz was indeed more armed than Bismarck, had torpedoes, & Bismarck did not. She scattered a convoy & used up British resources spent trying to sink it.
Of the Iowa class battleships the Big J the New Jersey was the most decorated in WWII.
Fortunately all 4 Iowa battle ships have been preserved Missouri is at pearl harbor Wisconsin is in Norfolk new Jersey is in her home state and Iowa is in long beach if you want to sleep on one contact the Wisconsin in Norfolk va its better than staying in a hotel
The most decorated? Of the Iowa class, yes, but you get extra credit if you can name the most decorated US battleship of WWII without the aid of Google!
I’ll take two guesses either the Big E the Enterprise or the Cruiser SanFrancisco didn’t look it up
@@chazbo0715 It's a trick question, the most decorated WWII battleship is in fact USS New Jersey with 19 battle stars total, but the most decorated battleship of WWII (counting only awards for service during WWII) was the USS North Carolina with 15 battle stars earned during WWII. The New Jersey earned 9 battle stars during WWII, and the rest after WWII. Just depends on how the question was phrased.
@@erichammond9308 Come on: you can decorate a Christmas tree if you want. But who sank an enemy Battleship? Shot for shot broadside? Hmmm? Yeah I'm talking USS Washington. I don't want to minimize shore bombardment duty but... what the hell. Except for Normandy they never shot back in any regard. Points for Nevada for trying to sortie Pearl and for getting so close to the Normandy coast they received return fire. The oldsters at Surigao deserve more credit for their service than a couple of battles stars collected by the Iowas for... shore bombardment.
The two Yamatos were garbage. If you ships cannot be used because they burn too much fuel (and the Yamatos were inefficient for their size) then they were a bad investment. Gun size matters little when your armed services call you Hotel Yamato.
Their Cruisers were the backbone of the IJN.⚓️⚓️
Should have just mentioned the Iowa class battleship that had the most awards. BB62 the " New Jersey ". Now sitting in fresh water Delaware river at getto Camden NJ. Right across from Philadelphia where she was built.
And right across from the Olympia, Dewey's flagship at Manila Bay. Both worth a visit.
@@timclaus8313 And another great place to visit is the Viet Nam Memorial a few hundred feet to the West of the Olympia. Then a halve block away is the Korean War Memorial. A student from my grade school is on the Nam memorial wall. Philly had the most young men killed from not only any public high school ( Edison high school = 58 students ) & Catholic high school.( Father Judge = 27 students ) in the country.
The six most powerful battleships of WWII were the Yamato and Musashi, and the Missouri, Iowa, New Jersey, and Wisconsin. No question. Just based on speed, armament, and general power, they were the top of the class. None of the rest are really contenders.
ummm. when ranking battleships you dont include members of the same class.. with classes, Iowa, Yamato, Vanguard, South Dakota, KGV. Also bear in mind that Vanguard could give Iowa a run for her money, and in joint trials, proved much more seaworthy and much more accurate.
@@thetorturepenguin I have to disagree. There are so few battleships built that each ship should count. So you do it your way, and I will do it my way.
Drawing of VANGUARD is actually a LION.
Yamato & Musashi is still the Largest...of them All....
Battleships were yesterday's news in WW2. Big ships waiting to get sunk.
Iowa's definately at the top, engines and propulsion, speed and manuverability, firepower and firing systems, armor and radar systems. The main reasons is the quality and effectivness of these systems vs the other ships that were not American.
Glad the Royal Navy Battleship's got in there at some point ;-)
If I am not incorrect I seem to recall a huge 21 foot odd model of the scharnhorst in a room at H.M.S. Vernon when I was a young anti submarine controller. I seem to remember something about twenty one inch guns on some of these capital ships. Could any one with a younger mind than mine enlighten me if I am correct on this matter or not.
Regards Nick Viner.
Vanguard wasn't commissioned until after WW2. And where is HMS Warspite, the most decorated ship of the war?
Very informative...thank you. Annoying "voice", with its mispronouncements reduces this to "tolerable". Why include Vanguard? It wasn't launched and commissioned til the mid-50s! This rationale should then include the Convair B-36 among WW2 bombers, right?
Sorry about the voice… I am not confident about using my own voice but I will use it on my next videos… thank you for your reply… your opinion is very important for my channel improvement…. Best regards
I think Vanguard counts as a WW2 battleship. It was actually commissioned in 1946 for various reasons. A terrible shame she wasn’t preserved.
@@jaybee9269 Probably should have been preserved as a museum ship, Jay. Even if she was commissioned years before her actual launch(rather unusual?), that still would not have been WW2, yes?
@@Diversusmilitary There's nothing wrong with your voice. It worked in well and it was very informative as Jkdm said. I thoroughly enjoyed it and I was also pleased to see my favorite Battleship of all time, Yamato.
The voice doesn't bother me, it's that damn drum beating that's annoying.
Bismarck was the most famous battleship that shook the seven seas!
The Iowa class shouldn’t be considered because they saw little action during WWII. The North Carolina class saw more action during WWII!
When are we going to ear your own voice on your videos... nice video! 👍
Lol my voice is not ideal for videos... but I will try one day... thank you
What class was the USS New Jersey BB62?
Classe Iowa
Iowa Class
Iowa may have been the best overall, the Colorado class will have my heart-felt love, especially the West Virginia!
Wee Vee was a great ship that earned her stars in battle. But she was obsolete by the wars end. Still my favorite US Battleship.
watching 83 yrs to the day. the german ship went down on may 27th. 1941.
I'm a native North Carolinian so I have a huge soft spot The North Carolina (the old show boat )
I have very little respect for France or it's military but I have to admit the Richelieu was a damn good looking battleship.
Even the Free French forces?
Jean Bart was also a pretty good looking ship
'Cept for the frogs...
@@Braindamagedpotato ;
She was sistership to Richelieu. Same class.
@@smc1942 but different superstructure and AA layout
Why is HMS Vanguard on this list when it was actually completed after WW2?
Jesus Christ!! With the back ground music so loud I’m struggling to hear what he’s saying.
So how did these Italian warships fare ..work out..???
Man ... the problems I have with this video.... Nobody abided by the Treaty because they choose not to sign on to it. This tends to make people not bound to it. Holy fuck what a problem this moderator has with that concept. All the pictures of the "Tirpitz" are actually the Bismarck. And if you are going to talk about a ship class you should probably use existing pic and images of the ships themselves instead of stock footage, an example would be when you are talking about the Yamato class where you used virtually no pics of the class. Also, the Vanguard is hardly one of the best battleships built. Her guns were of pre-WWI origin, had a short range and could not penetrate any of the other battleships on this list. She may have had a good hull, which is debatable since she was never tested in combat, but this doesn't overcome other deficiencies.
I agree with most of your opinions. Not the best video, and Vanguard probably
shouldn't have been in it. As to the ship herself, she incorporated numerous
improvements based on experience with older ships. As you said, she had a
good hull (watertight integrity) and was a couple knots faster than the KG5
class with longer range. She also had good armour and A/A armament, and
the most modern fire control radar. It was too bad that in the rush to complete
her they had to give her those old guns, and that is where I must disagree with
you. While they were old, the British twin 15" turret was one of the best ever
made. Right from the get go the design had very few teething troubles and
those had long been worked out. They were very efficient and dependable.
Between the wars the three Queen Elizabeth class ships that were reconstructed
had their turrets max elevation increased from 20 degrees to 30 degrees
allowing greater range. This was shown to good effect when Warspite hit an
Italian Battleship at over 26.000 yards, a record I believe still stands. I don't
know if Vanguard had these improved turrets. As to penetration, that's more a
factor of the shell than the gun. Early on in the war the British did have some
problems with their armour piercing shells exploding too soon, before
penetrating the armour, but they quickly fixed this and afterwards their A/P
shells were as good as any ones. I think Vanguard would have given a pretty
good account of herself in any ship to ship action.
Your thoughts? Agree or disagree?
Vanguard wasn't commissioned until after the end of WW2..
Hi, you are absolutely right my friend. But only because the ww2 ended earlier but she was being built for that purpose. I just thought that she deserved a little tribute. Best regards
Vanguard was a cruiser. Used to take RF around after ww2
No! HMS Vanguard was the last Royal Navy battleship.
艦載機を見ると，日本のは異次元のカッコ良さだよな。洗練されまくっている。
Bismarck is the best... dope video brother.
Thank you
You obviously need to do better research
Bismarck is only the best in the fanboy’s head. Did not, could not stand up to any of the modern American designs. Notice even this video says Tirpitz was best battleship in Europe at the time of launch. Not better than North Carolina’s, South Dakotas, or Iowas.
@@TheBruceGday And Certainly not better than Yamato and Vanguard
Yes, the Bismarck, got a lucky shot on the Hood (very likely right in the trough of the bow wave, letting it bypass most of the armor, which was equivalent to the QE class), was mission killed by the PoW, disabled by a string bag biplane, that along with all of it's buddies, flew home, failed to do any major damage to the oncoming Rodney, who in return, destroyed Bismarck's B turret, disabled A turret, and took out the bridge and conning tower all in the matter of a few minutes.
To be fair to Bismarck, of all the final classes of battleship built by each nation (funny enough, the classes seen in this video), Bismarck is the only one to get a kill on another capitol ship, and one of the 2 that saw other capitol ships in combat (as advisaries), with the Richelieu class Jean Bart being the other. The Littorio class almost saw some British battleships a few times, Vanguard was launched post war, and the Iowas, and Yamatos never saw combat against other battleships (or at least battlecruisers).
The best Battleship is the Grand Ol' Lady of Jutland, HMS Warspite, a ship that managed to sail into the teeth of the entire High Seas Fleet, for the second time that day, all alone this time, with a jammed rudder, and survived. Then she made it through the end of WWI, the treaties, rebuilt in time for the start of WWII, delete a number of German DDs and a sub (with the use of the same kind of sting bag the disabled the Bismarck) in Norway, deleted some Itallian CAs at Mattapan, got the longest range hit between two fighting battleships, survived a direct hit and two near misses from the same bombs that took out the Roma, not long after that, opened up the bombardment of Normandie, albeit with X turret out of action from the bomb hits, emptied her magazines three times and wore out her gun barrels that day, was the first RN BB to pass through the Dover Strait since the fall of France, survived the war, and when it finally came time for them to try and scrap her, she broke free and grounded herself, giving the scrappers all hell to the very end. I also left out a few of Warspite's other adventures during the wars.
HMS Vanguard should NOT be considered to be a WW2 battleship as she was commisioned AFTER WW2 ended. While the Vanguard was completed before the Jean Bart, the Jean Bart was laid down BEFORE the Vanguard.
I agree with you… it was a mistake that I was hoping to not be noticed… 😄regards
Vanguard was under construction during ww2. Its the same reason why Hood and Nagato are called ww1 era battleships, despite both being commissioned in 1920
Oh please. Utter nonsense…. Most powerful? The French and Italian were not superior to any of the US Navy’s World War 2 ships.
I can agree, and if you want to make the argument that Iowa was the most effective, Yamato still had the bigger guns and more powerful armor, making her more powerful, even if Iowa was technically a better ship
18 inch guns, poor radar, poor fire control, less effective shells. The 16/50 guns on Iowa class used ammunition that was more effective than Yamato’s 18” ammo. So shall we judge power based on paper or reality?
@@TheBruceGday The 50 cal 16 inch gun could only rival Yamato’s guns from long range, and was completely inferior from short and mid ranges. While Iowa had a better fire control, the idea that Iowa could aim better is pure fantasy. She had a better fire control, but it simply told the guns where to aim, and if the guns themselves had aiming issues, it would not matter too much. Iowa had numerous problems with accuracy during ww2 due to poor gunpowder charges. The idea that Yamato could not aim is also fantasy, and she displayed excellent gunnery during the battle off Samar. On paper, Iowa could stand a chance, but in practice, she would have been blown to bits by a ship with better guns, armor, maneuverability, and accuracy. Iowa’s only real advantage was her much higher speed, which she could use to show her tail and run away from a vastly superior opponent.
@@TheBruceGday the iowas had better secondary guns
@@metaknight115 The 16"/50s were tested against armor pulled from Shinano in her carrier conversion after the war, while the one remaining 18.1" test gun was fired against US armor plating used in the construction of the Iowa Class. They were comparable at all ranges - meaning it would come down to accuracy. The Iowas had a greater maximum effective range, and the speed advantage to control the range. Not sure how you can use the Battle of Samar as an "excellent display of gunnery" as they only hit one ship, allowed American destroyers and destroyer-escorts to close within 5"/38 gun range and maul their upper works, and then send them running for home with their tails between their legs. In practice the Yamatos were the ultimate paper tiger, but beautiful coffins for thousands of Japanese sailors.
How in the world do you put Tirpitz ahead of Vanguard?
Why is Vanguard on this list at all?
Because it was a much better ship?
@@jimbelcher6877 Tirpitz was not better than Vanguard. Vanguard was bigger, better protected, far better fire control, and more powerful main guns. For the secondary and AA defense, Vanguard no contest.
@@timclaus8313 How was Vanguard bigger and better protected? It had the same protection as a KGV.
@@13stalag13 Vanguard was about 2000 tons heavier than Tirpitz for standard displacement. Most analysis shows the Bismarck and Tirpitz were, heavy and well compartmented, but the overall utilization of tonnage for armor, speed and armament was not terribly efficient. Plus the triple screw design lead directly to Bismarck's demise and inability to fight the RN.
Of all WWII era ships, arguably none utilized their armor protection better than the KGVs and SoDaks. Extremely well protected ships, especially considering the tonnage of the ships. Vanguard was an extension of the KGV scheme, with even more tonnage allocated to protection, as it was a considerably bigger ship.
The RN 15" gun was more accurate and fired better, and heavier shells than the German equivalents. Utilizing Okun's data, the 15" RN shell had more penetration at pretty much every distance and armor thickness. As demonstrated during the final stands of both Bismarck and Scharnhorst, the RN had long corrected the shell problems that plagued their ships at Jutland. The shells fired in WWII worked very well.
Warspite demonstrated the British 15" guns were very accurate at long ranges. These are the same guns installed on Vanguard. While Vanguard was completed too late to fight, all the Tirpitz did was absorb bombs and capsize. The Germans wouldn't even risk it during combat operations.
Why image of KGV when talking about Vanguard? Sloppy editing.
Hi there! I think you are wrong, there is no image of KGV when talking about vanguard… that was a sloppy judgment from you!!!
Regards my friend
@@Diversusmilitary 5:19. Artist rendering on right. That’s a twin turret super firing over a quad.
@@Diversusmilitary Who is the sloppy one?
I dont know why you are complaining.
This ship dont belong to this list.
She was commissioned after the war,in 1946. You should be happy for this mistake,mate .At least showed up.
Bismarck was not finished off by torpedoes.
It wasn’t. It was disabled by torpedoes. Best regards
@@Diversusmilitary Nope, 2nd wall prevented penetration, best regards. cameras showed it.
@@Diversusmilitary 4,23 in, torpedo wall not dented, not creased, perforated etc, th-cam.com/video/0ySlOQI91lk/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=HeidiKlaffen
The North Carolina class and the South Dakota class being ranked beneath ships with 8 15 inch guns? The Italian ships were pretty but they lacked radar fire control and a host of other modern features. This list is....silly without the rest of the American heavies.
Top 10, simple enough, four Iowas, four south dakotas and two north carolinas, by a very long mile ahead of the rest. If someone tries to say yamato, just study the battle of Samar. And Bismarck, obsolete WW1 - influenced design basicly from the day one. Us navys radar fire control was so much more effective than any other navy's. WV hittin a first salvo in pitch black night, Washington trashing Kirishima etc.
Had Tirpitz confronted one of Iowas in 1943, it would have been too weak to survive, too slow to run.
I took a look at the battle of Samar, and apparently, Yamato recorded some of the longest ranged shots ever fired when she hit the US support carrier White Planes, and US destroyer Johnston, and sunk the US support carrier Gambier bay , all from 20 miles. I guess the Yamato is missing it's rightful place at number one. And yea, Bizmarck is pretty overrated.
@@metaknight115 Samar was a miserable failure to the imperial navy, and Yamato. They could not intercept nor destroy the virtually undefended troop ships, but were scared away by a bunch of escort carrier planes and destroyers. That is a golden opportunity lost, if there ever was one. Yamato was not able to make her presence matter, just as was case in the Midway two years earlier.
@@Ah01 Yamato’s performance was actually pretty good. As I said before, she hit multiple ships, and sunk the carrier Gambier Bay from a distance of 20 miles(an extremely long range). However, she was, forced to turn away due to torpedos, leaving the battlecruiser Kongo as the only ship in the center force that could actually aim. Later, she finished of the destroyer Johnston.
@@metaknight115 Regardless of that, the mission was to intercept the invasion fleet, which the japanese failed to do, despite the overwhelming odds in their favor. The japanese doctrine was not to build worlds biggest battleship and use it to sink two cheap escort carriers converted from freight ships and a couple of destroyers. That`s a terrible trade from their point of view, and they knew that too after the battle.
@@Ah01 fair enough
These battleships were manufactured and commissioned. All of them were modern and large in size. But their usefulness and effectiveness were not so noticeable. But the points concerning the German battleship were completely different. This is a Bismarck-class battleship.
Only the battleship Bismarck itself has shown that its theoretical advantages do not contradict its practical capabilities in a real combat situation, that is, in the classic method of naval battle, when a battleship fights against a battleship and where submarines, especially aircraft carriers, almost do not participate as the main unit.
Speaking on the basis of facts, the armament, armor and survivability of the battleship "Bismarck" turned out to be the best of all battleships. Although the rest of the newest battleships of their time simply could not show their capabilities in the battle of the battleship against the battleship, probably finally due to historical circumstances.
😂 bismarck have the best armament and armour among other battleship not really most of them have thicker and better armour then bismarck like yamato or vanguard having thicker and better armour then yamato also armament iowa yamato and vanguard have better armament since the guns were already upgraded having better ranges and technology but in the battle bismarck knock out its radar because of his own shot and you say bismarck is great at armament😂
@Caughtin4klol-nj4zi
There is a tradition of saying and proving in words and demonstrating on paper something outstanding in the product being produced, that everything will be fine with its quality and benefits. But the reality is often different. Because it's business and greed, as well as fame and pride. But for this, true facts are needed so that words do not contradict reality. Undoubtedly, the Yamato, Iowa and Vanguard were well armed. But historically, they have not shown anything noticeable in the fight against warships with similar parameters. They actually became warships, designed mainly to escort aircraft carriers and bombard the coast. And so that with the help of their weapons they could sink an enemy battleship in this war, and indeed in the history of dreadnoughts there was no other fact when one battleship sank another enemy battleship. Thus, the battleship Bismarck is the undisputed leader in this matter and the only one of its kind who was able to do this.
@justman77.21 not really if you are talking battleship that have fought against other battleship well ijn kirishima fight uss washington in a one v one and also bismarck have design flaw from his own shot destroyer her own radar also when bismarck fought king george v his armour were easily penetrated by kgv and also vanguard and king george v both have thicker and stronger armour then bismarck
@Caughtin4klol-nj4zi This is the first time I've heard about the battle between the battleships Kirishima and Washington. I Googled the history of this battle. Without a doubt, this is a great victory for the US Navy. But? What is this "but"? But this battle was part of a larger naval battle. The Kirishima had a weaker armament. And it was one of the secondary, in terms of power, in the list of Japanese battleships. But, nevertheless, a victory is a victory.
As for the size, that is, the mass, as well as armor and weapons. Later, battleships with almost similar characteristics and even more were launched. But, unfortunately, we cannot say with certainty what would have happened if Bismarck had fought with Avangard, Iowa and Yamato.
But one thing is clear, the Bismarck won the battle. And only after the attack of the aircraft carrier did he receive critical and fatal damage and actually lost the ability to move and, accordingly, fight effectively. After a prolonged artillery barrage, the ship was still afloat. Despite the fact that it was finally finished off by torpedoes, experts believe that the ship was sunk by its own team. The armor penetration of large-caliber shells of the ship's hull from all direct hits was very low. And most importantly, the ship did not explode. Underwater research has shown that the ship is in fairly good condition after so many hits from shells and torpedoes.
@justman77.21 yes indeed it doesnt sink but just in 30 minutes bismarck have been silence it is still afloat but all the turrets were knocked down or destroyed command tower destroyed killing admiral lutjens and other commanding officer also bismarck is still afloat but inside the bismarck is dead 2200 men in the ship only 114 survived it was destroyed by the crew that means during the battle only 114 manage to escape because the others were already dead hms prince of wales 14 inch manage to make a hole in the early battle making a oil leak in the final battle hms king george v and hms rodney manage to destory all of its turret
I would like to see more histury on Heavy crusesr like The USS NEWPORT NEWS CA148 i WAS ABORD HER In the Cuban Missles crises In B div and that ship holdes 777397 gales of fual I refuled her many times Im Thomas B Kernan Sr FN
evidence now shows that thie Bismark was scutled and sank from that damage. Please also get rid of the robotic voice that cannot pronounce anything correctly. PS its thats your own voice you need to learn to prounce things.
Pointless argument. It didn't matter who let the water into the hull, she was going to sink. Had it not been for the Royal Navy, would have the Kreigsmarine scuttled the ship? No matter how you spin it, the Bismarck is on the bottom of the Atlantic because the Royal Navy wasn't going to allow the battle to end any other way.
Some expert`s consider the picture shown Adm Nelson on board H MS Victory sinking Bismarck with first broadside could be photoshopped .
No it doesn't.
Was the USS Arizona a Iowa Class Battleship?
Found its Wikipedia Listing:
It was a Pennsylvania Class Super Dreadnaught.
American radar and fire control was vastly superior in World War II. North Carolina class and South Dakota class should be 2 and 3. They would engage a Yamato or Bismarck at night and by daylight they would be annihilated. Vanguard 4. Bismarck 5 Richleau 6 Yamato 7. Roma 8. Nelson 9 ww1 Queen Elizabeth class 10. Colorado 11 King George V 12. Any other order not supported by reality. Roma would move up two notches if their powder chargers were more consistent. They had great fire control but terrible disbursement because of inconsistency in manufacture of powder kegs. Then again they had really short range built specifically for the Mediterranean. Nelson and Colorado I would move up if they weren’t so slow. Yamato with low-grade steel Bismarck from obsolete WW1 Bayern designs two most overrated ships of all time
Okey, I do not see how the North Carolinas and South Dakotas could beat the Yamato. Both ships had a lower maximum range, inferior guns, inferior armor, and about the same speed, and Yamato's fire control wasn't as bad as some people make them out to be. The Kirishima shown that IJN capital ships could do well in night battles, and Yamato fired some of the longest shots ever fired when she hit multiple ships, and sunk an escort carrier from 20 miles., and how in the hell could Vangard, Richleau, and Bizmarck beat Yamato. King George V should be higher, as she had the best armor at the start of WW2, and was only barely beat out by Yamato by the end of it. Finally, Vangaurd could probably beat South Dakota and North Carolina with her superb armor.
@@metaknight115 4, 5, 6 7: Vangurard Richleau Yamato, Bismark. The 1st 2 were most modern at end of WW2 and Vanguard wasn't active till it was over anyway so shouldn't be on list. After Richleau's US modernization it was likely as good as Iowa class. Thicker armour on Yamato but far worse steel and relied on optical range finding almost exclusively - many admirals didn't trust their radar - some believed it would give away position so didn't even use. US Radar advantage was like advantage of an F22 over F15. The cost of 2 Yamatos likely near same as 4 Iowas or 5 KGVs. They were so not worth it!!!!! They should have built 4 Shinano class carriers instead. If not for radar and range finding advantage - shipwise - Yamato of course is #1.
@@donalddemo Fair enough.
@@donalddemo A little known fact is that the King George V and Vangard would have had a superior belt armor to Yamato if not for inferior armor schemes. As you know, Yamato's armor thickness was not actually 16 inches, because of a lower quality armor, and it's effective thickness is estimated to be around 14 inches. However, Yamato's armor just barley surpasses the British ships because of it's superior armor scheme(though I haven't heard it been explained why it has a superior armor scheme, just that it does)
@@metaknight115 I can't imagine the Yamato would have stuck around to engage any battleship unless they were cornered. This is the same vessel that was chased out of Leyte Gulf by American destroyers.
The Iowas' main battery was NOT "16.5 inches" The guns were 15 inch 50 CALIBER guns, meaning the bore diameter was 16 inches and the length was 50 times 16 inches or 800 inches or 66.66 feet long.
While it might not have been the among the most powerful the USS Pennsylvania should get a honorable mention. It logged the most miles, was the flagship of it's fleet, took part in every battle in the Pacific and fired the most ammunition during the war. After being in dry dock at Pearl Harbor.
HMS Vanguard shouldn't be on this list, as she didn't enter service until after World War II.
Littorio class. The under side is dark green!!!!! No red
Vanguard didn’t even go into service until after WW2. Shouldn’t be on this list due to this.
You are absolutely right about that but as a tribute to the magnificent ship I decided to included. Thank you for your important comment . Best regards