Who wins?
>>18661017If you mean USS Iowa vs. IJN Yamato, in a one-on-one battleship duel, I'd give the edge to Iowa—but only slightly, and it depends heavily on the scenario.My verdict: Iowa ~55 / Yamato ~45Firepower: Yamato. Its nine 18.1-inch guns fired ~3,200-lb shells, versus Iowa's nine 16-inch guns firing 2,700-lb AP shells. Yamato had the heavier punch. Armor: Yamato. Its main belt reached about 16.1 inches, versus Iowa's 12.1 inches, although Iowa's belt was heavily sloped and its protection scheme was very efficient. Speed: Iowa. Iowa could make roughly 33 knots, substantially faster than Yamato. That gives Iowa more control over range and the ability to disengage.Rate of fire: Iowa. The U.S. 16-inch guns could fire faster; one Naval Institute analysis notes roughly 3 rounds in the time Yamato's guns fired 2. Fire control: Iowa. This is probably the biggest reason I'd favor Iowa. With its superior radar-assisted fire control, Iowa could potentially obtain and maintain a firing solution before Yamato could do so effectively. At long range, this becomes especially important. Raw survivability: Yamato. If both ships are already slugging it out at closer range, Yamato's enormous armor protection and displacement make it a terrifying opponent.
>>18661019you forgot training. By late 1943 Japanese gunners, bridge officers and fire control crew were godawful compared to the US and even the Royal Navy. They could barely hit the broad side of a barn. Judging by what we saw at Samar, if the IJN's sailors were even half competent instead of being almost entirely incompetent as we saw in our timeline, the US would have lost all 6 escort carriers in the first couple hours. If you were to ask me whether or not a few teeny USN destroyer escorts in the later stages of the war were to fare against the Yamato, i'd put my money on the DEs being able to fire off a salvo of torpedoes that would kill it (because Jap damage control crews were also terrible)
>>18661054
>>18661017Is it Ya-MAH-to or Ya-MAY-to?
>>18661017Does the Yamato get to use the wave motion gun?
>>18661170Ya-MAH-to if you're an english speaker. In Japanese it's pronounced more like Yamah-To
>>18661027>because Jap damage control crews were also terrible)I don't know if Taiho or Shinano is a more humiliating damage control failure
>>18661786Taiho for sure. Shinano got hit by a full salvo of Mk. 14s out of nowhere when the crew weren't on standby. Getting four torpedo hits in quick succession below the waterline was potentially fatal damage to any ship afloat at the time. Even a Yamato-class might have sunk from that, even if damage control was the best it possibly could be, Taiho only got hit by one in a non-fatal area with its damage control on full alert and it shouldn't have been a fatal hit at all, if not for the moronic crew literally doing everything possible to maximize the damage (like sealing off all the below-deck compartments so they'd fill up with gas vapors.)the Gato class subs were just overpowered as fuck desu. Once the USN had enough of them with working torps in the water by late 1943, there was no way the IJN could have had any sort of success in a large surface engagement again.
>>18661814My argument for Shinano is that they didn't even try until it was way too late>we got hit by 4 torpedoes? Whatever, full speed ahead
>>18661017Depends entirely on the weather/time of day.
