USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

Topics that do not fit anywhere else. Absolutely NO discussions of religion, race, or immigration!

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply
User avatar

Topic author
puma guy
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 7631
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:23 pm
Location: Near San Jacinto

USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#1

Post by puma guy »

Found this while surfing the net. Thought it was interesting. BTW What is MOA extrapolated to 25,0000 yards or how about 36,0000 yards on a 200 X 200 yard target?

If the USS Iowa went toe-to-toe with the Yamato, who would have the advantage and why?

This is the front turret face of the Yamato class battleship. The armor is 26″ thick:
Image
You will notice a nice, even, 16″ hole in it.

Here is the back side:
Image
So, Yamato’s thickest armor cannot defend against the 16″ 2700# armor piecing shell fired by the North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa battleship classes. Yamato’s belt armor = 16″ and deck armor = 8–9″

This is the dispersion table of USS Iowa. Target is 200 x 200 yards:
Image
At 25,000 yards, due to the curvature of the Earth, Iowa would be hull-down on the horizon to Yamato. At 36,000 yards, Yamato wouldn’t even see Iowa’s gun flashes.
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!

Ruark
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1792
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#2

Post by Ruark »

I think you've been watching those videos by "Battleship New Jersey." I love that guy's YouTubes, they're absolutely fascinating.
-Ruark

srothstein
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5274
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
Location: Luling, TX

Re: USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#3

Post by srothstein »

Just for grins, it appears that the guns on the Iowa were accurate to about 2 secs of angle. MOA is one inch per 100 yards. That works out to about 250 inches at 25,000 yards. I used a rough estimate from the graph of about 700 yards spread at 25,000 yards range. That is about 25,200 inches. Since one MOA is 250 inches, that works out to about 100 MOA or just shy of 2 seconds.

And given the potential for an attack on the Pentagon by the Iowa (the Navy does hate those guys in charge), 2 seconds seems from the graph as being close enough.
Steve Rothstein

glazer1972
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 9:31 pm
Location: East TX

Re: USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#4

Post by glazer1972 »

Nothing beats the fire control system on the Iowa Class.

powerboatr
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2273
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:53 pm
Location: North East Texas

Re: USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#5

Post by powerboatr »

puma guy wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:10 pm Found this while surfing the net. Thought it was interesting. BTW What is MOA extrapolated to 25,0000 yards or how about 36,0000 yards on a 200 X 200 yard target?

If the USS Iowa went toe-to-toe with the Yamato, who would have the advantage and why?

This is the front turret face of the Yamato class battleship. The armor is 26″ thick:
Image
You will notice a nice, even, 16″ hole in it.

Here is the back side:
Image
So, Yamato’s thickest armor cannot defend against the 16″ 2700# armor piecing shell fired by the North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa battleship classes. Yamato’s belt armor = 16″ and deck armor = 8–9″

This is the dispersion table of USS Iowa. Target is 200 x 200 yards:
Image
At 25,000 yards, due to the curvature of the Earth, Iowa would be hull-down on the horizon to Yamato. At 36,000 yards, Yamato wouldn’t even see Iowa’s gun flashes.
thanks
that is impressive hole in the 26" armor.
Proud to have served for over 22 Years in the U.S. Navy Certificated FAA A&P technician since 1996
User avatar

der Teufel
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: In the vicinity of Austin

Re: USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#6

Post by der Teufel »

An interesting book: The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_ ... an_Sailors

It describes a naval battle off the Philippines in which the Japanese attacked a US group of escort carriers (Taffy 3) defended only by a few DDs and DEs. One interesting part is the description of the fire control on the American ships. By that time, even the little DDs and DEs had fire control radar, and were able to close and score hits on Japanese cruisers & other ships. Eventually the US ships got pretty much blown away, but they managed to stall the Japanese until most of the CVEs were able to flee.

If I recall correctly, the fire control radar was built by Ford. It was all analog (no digital stuff back then) and even compensated for the curvature of the earth between shooter and target.

SO, I'd say the Iowa class battleships would have a very distinct advantage…
--
A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition. — Rudyard Kipling
NRA Endowment Member
TSRA Life Member

wil
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:37 pm

Re: USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#7

Post by wil »

puma guy wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:10 pm Found this while surfing the net. Thought it was interesting. BTW What is MOA extrapolated to 25,0000 yards or how about 36,0000 yards on a 200 X 200 yard target?

If the USS Iowa went toe-to-toe with the Yamato, who would have the advantage and why?

This is the front turret face of the Yamato class battleship. The armor is 26″ thick:
Image
You will notice a nice, even, 16″ hole in it.

Here is the back side:
Image
So, Yamato’s thickest armor cannot defend against the 16″ 2700# armor piecing shell fired by the North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa battleship classes. Yamato’s belt armor = 16″ and deck armor = 8–9″

This is the dispersion table of USS Iowa. Target is 200 x 200 yards:
Image
At 25,000 yards, due to the curvature of the Earth, Iowa would be hull-down on the horizon to Yamato. At 36,000 yards, Yamato wouldn’t even see Iowa’s gun flashes.
first thing. Those two pictures are the results of firing at that armor from essentially point blank range. When they backed the range up 16" rounds didn't penetrate.

At the distance which would probably be the range of engagement, Iowa class would not be able to penetrate the yamato class boats.

Yamato vrs Iowa class? Yamato was built to win that fight as that was the dominant thinking during that era. Everyone though it would be battleship vrs battleship, owing to the 1920's naval treaty Japan was limited to far less capital ships than the US & Britain. Hence the Japanese figured they'd build something bigger than everything else which could out range and out penetrate everything in sight. Hence the Yamato class boats.

At the time nobody understood what an aircraft carrier could to do a battleship despite Billy Mitchells tests of the 1920's.
Japan built aircraft carriers as a way around the restrictions of the 1920's treaty and unknowingly built themselves a combat advantage, then understood what they had after the results of the taranto air raid.
User avatar

oohrah
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1366
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: McLennan County

Re: USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#8

Post by oohrah »

der Teufel wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 8:17 am An interesting book: The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_ ... an_Sailors

It describes a naval battle off the Philippines in which the Japanese attacked a US group of escort carriers (Taffy 3) defended only by a few DDs and DEs. One interesting part is the description of the fire control on the American ships. By that time, even the little DDs and DEs had fire control radar, and were able to close and score hits on Japanese cruisers & other ships. Eventually the US ships got pretty much blown away, but they managed to stall the Japanese until most of the CVEs were able to flee.

If I recall correctly, the fire control radar was built by Ford. It was all analog (no digital stuff back then) and even compensated for the curvature of the earth between shooter and target.

SO, I'd say the Iowa class battleships would have a very distinct advantage…
--
An interesting footnote to that battle regarding the USS Johnston, commanded by LCdr Ernest Evans, who got the fight diverted from the carriers. "Not waiting for orders, Commander Evans broke formation and went on the offensive by ordering Johnston to speed directly toward the enemy". Evans was the first Native American to attend the Naval Academy, Class of '31, and the first Native American to command a ship. He was awarded the MOH posthumously, and there was a destroyer named after him.
USMC, Retired
Treating one variety of person as better or worse than others by accident of birth is morally indefensible.

wil
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:37 pm

Re: USS IOWA VS Japan's Yamato battleship

#9

Post by wil »

der Teufel wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 8:17 am An interesting book: The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_ ... an_Sailors

It describes a naval battle off the Philippines in which the Japanese attacked a US group of escort carriers (Taffy 3) defended only by a few DDs and DEs. One interesting part is the description of the fire control on the American ships. By that time, even the little DDs and DEs had fire control radar, and were able to close and score hits on Japanese cruisers & other ships. Eventually the US ships got pretty much blown away, but they managed to stall the Japanese until most of the CVEs were able to flee.

If I recall correctly, the fire control radar was built by Ford. It was all analog (no digital stuff back then) and even compensated for the curvature of the earth between shooter and target.

SO, I'd say the Iowa class battleships would have a very distinct advantage…
--
those boats didn't make that fight owing to fire control, moreso they used their speed advantage to run underneath the main guns on the battleships they were facing.
Secondly the Japanese initially used AP rounds which went right through the tin cans owing to those boats not being armored enough to detonate the AP rounds. The same for the CVE's, they took AP hits from the Japanese BB's and the AP rounds went right through them without going bang, hulls and flight decks were too thin to detonate the rounds.

Japanese switched to HE rounds and those tin cans got tore apart. The Japanese cruisers were the boats that really did the tin cans in with HE rounds as they could adjust fast enough to target the tin cans and depress low enough to score hits.

Until that, the tin cans used the Japanese dye marker rounds to know where the fire was aimed and basically played dodge-ball with the incoming fire from the big boats.

Also I think it was admiral Kurita who was in command and screwed up his battle formation from the get-go, which really helped the tin cans survive as long as they did.

Also air attacks from the CVE's made Kurita think he was actually facing task force 58 carriers and he knew what air attacks could do, time for him to leave.
Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”