okay so the uss George hw bush plus escorts gets attacked by the british , American, german, Japanese, and Russian navy and navel aviation. Starting distance for engagement is 50 miles from ww2 what happens do they run out of ammo
>>29283571
op here I know this is a stupid situation I just want some shits and giggles
>>29283571
>what happens do they run out of ammo
The carrier group does, they will take out a shit load before being zerged. A reminder that the General Belgrano was taken out with a Mark 8 Torpedo, proof that WW2 tech can still fuck you up.
Oh boy. Another naval shitpost!
>>29283589
>OP here, I know I'm a faggot but I want to blatantly display it on a Taiwanese soap-carving forum.
>>29283698
ohhh you got me
>>29283698
wait this isn't k where am i
>>29283571
>navel aviation
Anon, if your belly button lint is taking off, flying around and trying to drop bombs on warships, you've got a serious problem.
>>29283675
>A reminder that the General Belgrano was taken out with a Mark 8 Torpedo, proof that WW2 tech can still fuck you up.
You are aware that the General Belgrano was the USS Phoenix, and was in fact a US WWII Brooklyn class light cruiser, right? Riiiiiiiight?
>>29283782
>Anon, if your belly button lint is taking off, flying around and trying to drop bombs on warships, you've got a serious problem
Went to the doc they said it fine
>>29283815
I know, and back then the ships had more armor and more defenses better suited to countering WW2 Aircraft.
thousands of destroyers surround the CSG and distract the escorts, meanwhile the Yamato has closed to 20 miles and has found the range. one by one, the burkes start going down in flames. eventually the GHWB finds itself as the lone survivor. its aircraft are out of fuel and ammo. the Hiryu and the Soryu send out their highly trained torpedo and dive bomber groups and go all bushido on the GHWB the end.
>>29283872
Stop posting.
>>29283571
Nice pic OP
Basically the carrier strike group will take it. Once they get recon on the enemy fleet, they'll instantly take out the carriers with just one harpoon each. Then they'll simply sail away, being faster than every ship from WW2. Since each ww2 ship could be sunk/rendered ineffective by just one harpoon missile, every 'dangerous' ship will be taken care of in just a couple hours. From then on out, the CSG just uses bombs, missiles, or even guns to sink everything else. The only problem I see with this is the fuckload of WW2 planes that will manage to take off before their carriers are sunk. If these thousands of aircraft get lucky, there is a chance that the CSG could lose. Not likely though, with CIWS and BVR missile defense. It would be cool to watch though
>>29283571
LOOKS LIKE WE GOT OURSELVES A CONVOY
>>29283968
>Then they'll simply sail away, being faster than every ship from WW2.
WW2 ships were up to 35 knot. How fast can a CSG move?
>>29283989
35+ knots (classified)
yamato blows them all the fuck up
>>29284089
You honestly think they can do 35+ knots?
y a m a t o
>>29283571
>Starting distance is 50 miles
>do they run out of ammo
lmao see below
>>29283968
>Not likely though, with CIWS and BVR missile defense
>BVR
Aside from a few token hits the BVR missiles wouldn't be enough to stop the 30+ aircraft sorties the WWII carriers would be sending out. Remember, this is an entire theater navy versus ONE carrier group, it's a stupid scenario (and proving the OP is, indeed, a faggot) but there just isn't enough missiles available to stop the onslaught. If I'm reading the OP correctly it's not just the one naval force either, it's quite literally every major naval power's fleets combined versus one modern US carrier group.
After figuring out which direction the missiles were coming from using the early radar sets on the American and British ships it would be a matter of telling the Japanese and Germans to make full steam and start lobbing shells at their theoretical max range while the Japanese, American, and British carriers fuel the planes and send them off.
After some shenanigans with F/A-18's desperately trying to engage more maneuverable aircraft that can fly below their stall speed while those same aircraft basically fill the sky with whatever they can in a vain attempt to hit these fast as fuck Super Hornets it would come down to the taskforce CIWS which would fucking annihilate most of the enemy aircraft but after (at most) three minutes of that, assuming the crews are standing by to immediately reload, they would be out of 20mm and there would still be planes incoming. This isn't even touching up on the fact that these 200+ ships are basically right on top of the carrier group, the Iowas alone would only need to close half of it before they could start shelling. Assuming the carriers start running as soon as the engagement starts they'll either have to split from their escorts or cripple their escorts ability to fight.
In the end the modern forces would lose. There's just too many opponents far, far too close.
Here's what I think would happen
>US navy see's the GWB and her fleet flying the stars and stripes
>US navy joins them and proceeds to rek everyone else's shit while anchors away plays through every speaker on all ships
>>29284142
It's about 30 knots for the Nimitz ships.
http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-028.htm
Essex carriers screened by fast battleships could sprint at 30ish knots long distance, but they would leave pretty much everything else behind. Task carrier strike aircraft and LAMPS choppers to take them and anything else that can gain on them over the distance out from standoff distance (which includes PGMs from directly overhead at 30,000ft against WWII AAA), the escort SSN nails any leakers and then they just run from everything else. Not hard at all. No WWII ship ever even gets in range.
>>29283827
Did he tell you to change your socks?
>>29284188
>After some shenanigans with F/A-18's desperately trying to engage more maneuverable aircraft that can fly below their stall speed
I feel this one statement is pretty representative of the massive retardation expressed in this post.
>>29284230
>but they would leave pretty much everything else behind.
You mean the cruisers and destroyers that were faster than the capital ships?
>>29283571
>Starting distance for engagement is 50 miles
you mean 1000 miles?
and did you know that these days CSG runs attack subs more often than not
so what your precious ww2 navy will do when
all capital ships just start sinking one by one?
Stupid scenario but I do like to think about temporally asymmetrical combat scenarios too
Here's one: how many fully functional, not-constantly-breaking-down King Tigers would you have to throw at a modern Abrams to kill it?
>>29284322
infinite + 1
>>29284188
Oh and I forgot to mention something else: the vast bulk of the aircraft would be coming from smaller, slower escort carriers that would definitely be overlooked by the carrier group's missile strikes, they would probably appear to be one of the hundreds and hundreds of armed merchant vessels that would be puttering along because most of them are essentially merchant vessels cut up and made into an almost-carrier. Plus all the landing ships, impressed civilian vessels, purpose-built utility ships... There's just far too many targets for the carrier group to even bother with and they're a mere FIFTY miles away.
Our carriers have a massive zone of exclusion for a reason.
>>29284249
>I feel this one statement is pretty representative of the massive retardation expressed in this post.
So are you one of those mentally retarded sea monkeys who think combat aircraft carry 50+ missiles? They would either have to turn back and land, which takes time, or close the distance to use shorter-range missiles and finally their guns. Considering both of those weapons rely on dogfighting principles the WWII aircraft would have the advantage.
You missed the second part (because you're an idiot, pic related is my reaction) in that the WWII aircraft...
- Do not have radar-guided guns
- Are slow, (their advantage is now a disadvantage)
- And most of them have a very limited amount of cannon ammunition, otherwise it's rifle-caliber or .50 BMG
It would basically be a stalemate, maybe an F/A-18 might accidentally get hit through the sheer amount of bullets flying but beyond that they would be largely untouchable.
>>29284255
No, I mean every BB the USN built before the Iowa Class (SouDak was 27 knots, NorCar was 28 knots, and it gets way worse from there), every CVE, every DE (escort destroyer), every support, refueling and auxiliary ship, and (here's the kicker) every DD, CL and CA which couldn't maintain 30+ knots for extended periods due to machinery wear and designed engine ratings, which by 1945 was well over 35% of them.
They might eventually run down the CSG escorts due to better range on maybe enough classes at those speeds (unlikely in the Tico's case - the earlier/pre-war WWII ships were optimized for 15knot transit/cruise efficiency and the mid war models weren't much better at sprint speeds), but they'll never catch the carrier.
>>29284426
They are 50 miles away. They don't have to worry about maintaining 30+ knot for days.
>>29284322
Could a Tiger's gun even reliably penetrate an Abram's armor? Or even any first world nation's modern MBT's armor for that matter.
>>29284363
>(because you're an idiot, pic related is my reaction)
Hilarious, considering you're suggesting WWII ship mounted radars would detect and identify the CSG at 50 fucking miles, when the radar horizon for those was 35mi at best. The longest range warship radar contact in WWII was made at 26 miles (45,000yds) by the Duke of York against Scharnhorst.
This means that unless the initial WWII aircraft search patterns get lucky and the weather is crystal clear, the modern CSG could be 150nmi away and doing 30+ knots before they even know they were there. The CSG would always know where the WWII ships and aircraft were, and may evade several scouting reports simply by destroying the scout planes before they know they're under attack via BVR AMRAAMs, which they'd have no way of seeing as they came in.
If they ever actually get a good contact report off, things could be scary in a massed aircraft raid, but not certain, nor is it even certain the aircraft would be able to find them. If the CSG makes it to the first night without the WWII forces getting off a good contact report, they're home free. If not, SSN harassment and sinking of as many carriers as possible from the outset in addition to long range hornet strikes against carriers with harpoons means that they get hammered early before they've even launched the bulk of their air strike force, or have any clue where the CSG is. A Nimitz could put 192 Harpoons in each strike sortie, figure only half that number of carriers per attack are hit and unable to launch, and after three sorties you've got 288 carriers fighting fires, requiring assistance, and out of the fight.
>>29284446
They cannot see them immediately. See >>29284710. The CSG could build a very large lead before they were localized, and staying localized on them could be extremely difficult with that 240mi SM-6 range + AWACS. WWII fleets only had scout aircraft for long range reconnaissance, unless you're also stipulating that all the subs are placed around the CSG and assume one of them gets a good contact report off. Even then, running a continuous track on the CSG would be impossible with WWII resources.
>>29284551
tiger cannot pen m1 Abrams consider that t72 has 400mm of effective frontal armor think of that and the Abrams is estimated to have 1000mm of effective frontal armor. Why does it feel like I have done this before
>>29284710
>A Nimitz could put 192 Harpoons in each strike sortie, figure only half that number of carriers per attack are hit and unable to launch, and after three sorties you've got 288 carriers fighting fires, requiring assistance, and out of the fight.
Add in a dozen LAMPS III choppers with 8 Hellfires or 3 Mk-54s a piece and things get even worse.
>>29283571
>navel aviation
Setting the retarded premise aside, I would ask you to please learn something from this post. The adjective used when referring to a navy is "naval", not "navel". Navel is another word for the bellybutton.
Modern CSG puts up some AWACS and a couple F-18s to get good targeting links. They then put some harpoons on the next group of aircraft and sink every single enemy vessel beyond their range to engage before ever being discovered.
They then move in to assist the survivors to safety where possible to beat the secrets of time travel out of them.
>>29284751
Doesn't ceramics degrade after the first couple hits though??
>>29283571
I think the U-boat spam alone would would fuck the CSG up, verdade gente.
>>29283571
My guess the ww2 group will go "WHAT THE EVER LOVING CUK WAS THAT!!!!?!!????"
As they get blitzed by supersonic f-16s/18s and anti air missiles blow the props out of the sky, let alone the utter havoc that will be a modern US submarine dumping its ammo into everything that moves.
And just because the modern carrier group runs out of ammo... Well the other guys don't know that. Our planes are basically science fiction tier to them, whose to say we don't have more punch we are holding back?
Plus if we disabled their communications there is a good chance they would get confused enough to just basically do nothing until the BCG leaves the area.
>>29285344
how the fuck are uboats or any WWII submarines catching a CSG in a tail chase? Seriously. Think it through.
>>29285506
>how the fuck are uboats or any WWII submarines catching a CSG in a tail chase? Seriously. Think it through.
The engagement starts at 50 nm. 1100 U-boats commissioned. There's not enough room for all of them to start ahead of the CSG.
In the time it takes the CSG and all its escorts to turn tail and run, there'll be plenty of opportunity for zerg rushing from all points of the compass.
I'm sure the SH-60 rapes at ASW, but how many contacts can it prosecute at once? How many ASW birds does the CSG actually have?
>>29285703
Anon. For the love of fuck. The fastest a WWII boat was doing submerged was ten knots. Maybe 22 at best surfaced. Not only are they never even getting a wiff of the CSG, they aren't even keeping up with their own surface forces.
In this completely bullshit engagement, the WWII submarines don't even factor in. At all.
How the fuck is anybody tracking the modern CSG? They're outside of radar range and they'll know about any WWII scouting party the second it departs. Anything that gets remotely close is blown to bits from beyond visual range. As far as the WW2 group is concerned they're fighting a ghost that can pick them off at leisure.
>>29284189
This. GWB and co. help speed up the war, and give the US a nice tech boost afterward while they're at it.
>>29285786
Doesn't matter when the CSG is rushing right at them.
>>29286022
Considering the CSG would no more about each sub's current position and heading than their captains, I think it would be a trivial exercise to focus on the biggest threats
>>29286049
Doesn't matter how much they know. It only matters how many contacts they can actually prosecute. While the others are throwing torpedoes at them.
And all the aviation of WWII is flying right up their ass.
There is a great trilogy of books called The Axis Of Time by John Birmingham about a future multinational naval force that's transported back right into the middle of the battle of Midway. We're talking about some badass ships that have an AI running the combat systems and are protected by lasers and ship sized Metalstorm. Starts with a book called Weapons of Choice if anyone's interested.
Same author also did a trilogy about every person from Gitmo to Newfoundland disappearing and the consequences to the world of not having America anymore. Pretty good stuff. Without Warning is the first book in that series.
>>29286065
How does anyone from the WW2 side know where the CSG is?
>>29286022
Oi. Dumbfuck. Why in the name of Odin's great blue balls would the CSG head for the WWII forces AT ALL when they can see them from 50mi away, but they can't be seen in return? Think it the fuck through, man. The very first thing that CSG does is show them her ass and achieve at least 250mi separation. Then plink at will, if they need to be engaged at all.
>>29286065
>Doesn't matter how much they know. It only matters how many contacts they can actually prosecute. While the others are throwing torpedoes at them.
IF THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE THE FUCK THEY ARE, THEY CANNOT CLOSE TO 1/10th WEAPONS RANGE, MUCH LESS "THROW TORPEDOES" AT THEM. See >>29284710.
Is that fucking clear enough, captain autismo?
>And all the aviation of WWII is flying right up their ass.
How are they doing that when their scout planes are dying before they ever achieve visual contact and get off a contact report? Please, do tell.
>>29283571
G HW Bush and its escorts stay outside of naval gun range using superior speed
FA-18s, cruise missiles and attack sub rape the WW2 stuff
battle is over before dinner time
>>29283771
>no pic of the Queen
8/10
>>29283929
fuck off weeb
>>29283982
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVh179oXFao
>>29284142
With a full combat load no, they could probably do 35kn for a few hours or 30kn indefinitely. Empty they're estimated of being able to do 40+ but that's classified. The escorts can all sustain 40+ for several days.
Several WW2 battleships from different nations and a couple Jap light carriers could sprint at ~37kn for a few hours, but would burn a large percentage of their fuel supply doing it. Pretty much standard cruising speed for a battle group in WW2 was around 20kn, with patrol speeds around 15kn. So yes, they could run, but wouldn't put humongous gaping distances between them fast enough.
That being said:
>start within easy guaranteed-first-round-kill range of current CSG
>Harpoon the carriers, they're under-armored and have basically no way of stopping them
>use planes to JSOM the battleships and cruisers, pretty much render the deck unusable and probably mission-kill most of the big guns
>use planes to JDAM the smaller boats, which had effectively no deck armor and that'd be a top-down attack
>meanwhile putting more and more and more range between the hostiles and the CSG
>if any enemies close, use deck guns to target superstructures specifically, should be an easy hit with modern FCS and 5" guns inside 10NM, can usually hit ships out to 13NM
>CIWS and SM6's completely shrek enemy air in first wave, remainder of planes either destroyed with the carriers or unable to take off/recover on the heavily damaged/destroyed carriers
Literally the only threats would be a complete surprise engagement from 4 militaries' combined naval aviation at once (literally impossible without scenario handwavium) and running out of ammo (highly likely). End result: CSG surrenders more or less unscathed after sinking or disabling 50%+ of opposing forces then runs the reactors critical, resulting in a tie cuz EVERYONE ded.
>>29286351
I honestly think the WW2 group would turn tail and run when they're being faced with such a deadly and unknown enemy.
>>29286373
Oh definitely.
>holy shit our carrier just fucking exploded for no reason!
>holy shit that Jap carrier did the same thing 3 seconds later!
So for the purposes of this retarded thread I'm going to assume that all the opposing navies have 100% to the last man resolve and will work in 100% harmony (which didn't even happen within the individual countries' own navies, much less minding the language barrier).
>>29284297
Wonder how long it will be before they start running SSGN's as well.
>>29286351
>With a full combat load no, they could probably do 35kn for a few hours or 30kn indefinitely. Empty they're estimated of being able to do 40+ but that's classified. The escorts can all sustain 40+ for several days.
No, anon. 30-32 knots maximum.
http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-028.htm
Also, there are no Burkes or Ticos anywhere on the planet sprinting at better than 36 knots, of that I can absolutely assure you.
>Several WW2 battleships from different nations and a couple Jap light carriers could sprint at ~37kn for a few hours
Again, no. The fastest the Iowa class was ever clocked at was just over 35 knots, and they were the fastest capital ships on the planet by several knots.
http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-003.htm
http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-029.htm
http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-104.htm
No IJN BB was faster than the Kongo class and they never reached 31 knots. Yamato didn't break 30 knots - her designed max was 27 knots.
Scharnhorst class was the closest at 32 knots, though there's no documentation that she ever actually achieved that. All other BBs were slower than 30.8 knots.
The Renown class BCs could turn 31.5, and the Courageous class could do 32. Hood could do 31 knots. The USN Alaska class could make turns for 33 knots.
Among carriers, only the Hiryu, Lexington and Shokaku classes could make 34 knots, Essex class ships did 33, everything else 31 or less.
>>29286351
>CIWS and SM6's completely shrek enemy air in first wave, remainder of planes either destroyed with the carriers or unable to take off/recover on the heavily damaged/destroyed carriers
If the WWII force gets off a fully committed mass attack with naval aircraft, and manages to actually locate and close to attack the CSG, the CSG is pretty fucked. The USN/USMC alone had 3,400 naval aviation planes in 1941 - over triple that by 1944. There aren't enough missiles and CIWS (which has to be reloaded, mind) in 3 CSGs to take all the naval aviation planes in WWII down.
>>29286351
>CSG surrenders more or less unscathed after sinking or disabling 50%+ of opposing forces
In 1945, the USN alone consisted of 6,700ish ships. Not sure a single carrier carries enough munitions to put half of just that out of action.
oh hey WW2 fleet, hows that radar working for ya?
>>29286663
at what point does /k/ give up on a thread anyways?
How many thousands of naval aircraft and tens of thousands of ships were produced during ww2. I'm not sure how this is even a question
>>29286650
that's why the Bush Group's first major action is to find all carriers and sink/put them out of action
then find battleships and do the same
then tell the WW2 fleet to surrender now
at that point they just sat and watched all their biggest most powerful ships get spanked by an enemy they can't even see
if the WW2 fleet refuses mind fuck them even more
say "ship (name and nationality) is next" then hit it with a cruise missile or torpedo
then do it again 15 min later
and again
and demand surrender again
just have to hope they surrender before the Bush Group runs out of things to throw at them
>>29285250
They aren't ceramics but composite materials, it's just not going to pen. Plus assuming terain permitting the engagement range of the Abrams is 5-7km and those are conservative numbers. Thermals and night vision capable it just can't hide.
As soon as the tiger is seen it would be destroyed. Sorry anon. WW2 tanks just can compete with modern mbt's.
>>29286636
Even if every single surface asset in the CSG is sunk the other fleet is still about to lose every major ship they have to a bunch of MK48 ADCAPs that wont see coming and can't do a damned thing about.
>>29286742
It'd be incredibly easy to zerg rush the CBG with all of them at once but you have to take aircraft carrier capacity into account.
>>29283571
The GWHB, aircraft and supporting vessels clear a path out, and then the GHWB runs because it's nuclear powered and unlike the WW2 fleet, it doesn't need to refuel. Pity about the rest of the CBG.
Also just a reminder that the CBG probably has a few nuclear weapons at it's disposal. Not a huge number, but just enough to ruin the WW2 fleet's day.
>>29284322
If they could get next to it, five - four to block it in, one to keep shooting it until something breaks.
They have boomers in the modern CSG?
Fling a ICBM at the WWII forces. Purify them in nuclear fire.
>>29284188
Yeah, except most of the WW2 fleets would be completely demoralized when all their big ships get blasted by harpoons BVR.
The F/A-18s don't have to fucking dog fight, just spam missiles, everyone except the japs will turn around when half their flight gets ass raped magically.
>>29286472
I doubt they will, Ohios are too fat to be good for ASW.
>>29283929
>meanwhile the Yamato has closed to 20 miles and has found the range
and missed every shot
>>29283571
does the CBG have SSBNs? cause if they do....theyre totally gonna win
>>29292036
No.
>>29292036
no, they might have an ssn though
>>29286782
That's why I asked open-endedly "how many would it take" rather than attatching an arbitrary number to it. Obviously a modern MBT would devastate a WWII tank, even a well operated one, but if you suppose you're throwing a steadily increasing number of King Tigers at it, up to infinity, eventually the Abrams will start to miss, or break down, or run out of ammo - lame as that would be - and the Tigers would surround and overwhelm it, maybe scoring some very lucky hits.
That's the philosophy behind these lines of thought IMO- Given great numbers but poor resources, how effective could an improvised fighting force be against a modern unit?
>>29292074
They ALWAYS have at least one screening SSN.
>>29292133
I can answer your question, or at least try to.
It all depends on the engagement distance, because the Abrams can score a guaranteed hit on a stationary tank sized target at up to 3,000 meters every time. A WW2 King Tiger simply can't compete accuracy wise.
Then it will come down to armor. The Abrams has layered ceramic, composite, NERA, steel, and DU armor, which given enough hits (especially from a high-velocity AT gun like the 88 L/71) will eventually fail, even frontally. The armor is designed to stop a powerful APFSDS round just once in one spot, and given multiple hits it just won't hold up. (It will take many hits from an old gun, however)
However, the disparity in reload times and FCS of the Abrams would mean it could kill dozens of Tiger 2's before being destroyed itself. The Abrams would run into an issue (and what would kill it) when the FCS is knocked out. The Abrams' gun sights are a big box right at the top of the turret, and the CITV on the other side, also at the top. Any round above a heavy machine gun can destroy these two critical components, and once they're gone, the Abrams can't fire accurately whatsoever. And from then on out, it would only be a matter of time before the King Tigers could get through the armor.
So, to actually answer your question, given combat on an open field, the Abrams would lose (at engagement range <2000m) with enough Tiger 2 tanks to hit the gun sights and detrack it. So probably around 10 Tiger 2s at that range, maybe a little more. This is assuming that there are no obstructions and clear lines of sight between all combatants.
>>29291996
Yamato was capable of hitting a DDE from 20 miles. What makes you think it would miss a CVN?
>>29292371
Because it would be at the bottom of the ocean before it got w/in 20 miles of a carrier group...
>>29292393
at least its familiar territory for it
>>29292371
>Yamato was capable of hitting a DDE from 20 miles. What makes you think it would miss a CVN?
This never happened in actual combat. The only time either Yamato class ships fired their primary armament in naval combat was in the Battle off Samar. The Yamato had either hits or near misses on a CVE, DD and DE. The longest range hit was on the Hoel at just over 10mi.
The fact of the matter is that Yamato and Musashi were so poorly trained and practiced in main gunnery that all reports indicate that in the very rare times they actually did practice main battery gunnery, their dispersion rate was abysmal. Yamato/Musashi simply didn't leave port often enough, didn't have any decent combat experience and were not combat tested. If you want a Japanese crew to actually hit with main armament at over 10mi, better to choose one of the BBs which saw a reasonable amount of action before being sunk.
>>29292464
>Hotel's longest confirmed hit is on Hoel
>>29292371
>>29292464
Actually, I'm sorry. That 10mi hit on Hoel was a 6.1" secondary battery hit on Hoel's bridge. As far as a main battery hit, I'm having trouble finding a source suggesting either Gambier Bay or St. Lo received a single one. IIRC, one of them received a single 18.1" AP shell in the rear port quarter before they went down, but I'll be damned if I can find it now. May have been something else.
Seems as if there may not actually be a single confirmed hit on any enemy combatant with the Yamato-class main armament. As I said, I don't think this is completely correct, but that's where it stands now. I'll keep looking.
>>29292464
>>29292527
Ah. I was thinking of Kalinin Bay:
>Though partially protected by chemical smoke, a timely rain squall, and counterattacks by the screening destroyers and destroyer escorts, she took the first of fifteen direct hits at 07:50. Fired from an enemy battleship, the large caliber shell (14 in (360 mm) or 16 in (410 mm)) struck the starboard side of the hangar deck just aft of the forward elevator.
I've double checked this in other sources (I use Wiki for shorthand searches) and it appears true that Kalinin Bay was struck with what was probably a 14" AP shell. That was the only main armament hit on a CVE during the Battle off Samar - Gambier Bay was sunk by cruiser gunfire (one of the Yamato's floatplanes called a single 18.1" hit on her but this is uncorroborated by any of the nearly 800 survivors from her) and St. Lo was the first USN loss to a kamikaze, having been fired on by destroyers and cruisers before that.
So, the only probable main battery hit by the Yamato on any ships at Samar was the rather remote possibility of hits on the Samuel B. Roberts or the Heerman. Johnson's action is well accounted for, as is Hoels, but there may have possibly been a hit on Roberts or Heerman. It is deemed unlikely in most sources, though.d
It should be noted that several USN ships closed to within 4mi of the Yamato during this battle.
>>29292484
>sample
>>29292411
underrated post
>>29283953
He's not wrong.
Ships in WW2 were much better-armored than their contemporary counterparts.
>>29292319
1. Abrams still has a significant steel component to it's armor, enough to be immune to the Tiger 2's gun from that alone. The ceramics on Abrams are primarily for stopping HEAT rounds, the DU inserts provide protection against KE and those things have decent multi-hit capability.
2. You VASTLY overestimate the effectiveness of a Tiger 2's fire control. Post war studies on British Centurions, which have vastly superior fire control to Tiger 2's, show that the engagement time for a Centurion going from combat speed (30 KPH) to being able to shoot an aimed round is between 12-30 seconds depending on crew training and whether the commander has a good idea of the targets location before the "driver stop" command is given.
I would wager against any modern MBT, the amount of Tiger 2's needed is the amount of ammo the MBT carries +1.
The disparity is just that big.
>>29295078
They are also stupendously vulnerable to laser guided bombs, since they have no effective way of defending against high flying jets plinking them with Paveways.
The deck armor of WW2 battleships were designed to defend against 500KG bombs being dropped from 2-3000 meters up. 1000kg bunker buster's dropped from 10,000 meters up would punch clean though any battleship deck armor.
