Even if you don’t like the concept of considering the “people” component, the “Training” component is a specification that can be physically observed. In my OPINION I believe the British had better training, it was longer, more in depth, and they learned from masters of the sea, who had generational knowledge and legitimate combat experience.
It is not part of the OB original comparison. He is comparing ship with ship in terms of effectiveness based on the SHIPS capabilities. It lames no sence to say “hey what if they didn’t bring enough fuel to power the ship to it’s maximum capabilities allowing the other ship at 5 knots slower to win”
Remove the crews or rate them all equal. If you want your own comparison that INCLUDES THEM, than make your own thread.
He is comparing ship with ship based on specs.
When GD power, or whoever, goes about reviewing a car, or truck, or watch, they do so for the benefit of the person BUYING OR USING the item.
And they manage to compare the car with car based on specs, like MPG or performance. NOT HOW THE FREAKING DRIVER USES THE CAR. They compare based on all things being equal, which is the basic way of comparing two machines…
HOWEVER, when someone quantifies/reviews or compares any RESTAURANT, HOTEL, SERVICE, or ORGANIZATION. They are graded on not only their physical products and specifications, but also their management, organization, customer service skills, and trade qualities.
LOL. These are service oriented businesses and they include how well the staff performs. This analogy is clearly flawed and not part of any comparison along the same lines as two different Battleships. LOL
AGAIN for example. If you were to compare German Waffen SS Infantry vs Polish civil militia in 1939, And there were 2000 Germans vs 5000 Polish, if you can only quantify the clothing and the equipment, and not the training, discipline, or leadership, you’re going to skew your example horribly.
And thats why nobody would attempt to make a analogy between battleships, tanks, and aircraft and the quality of human soldiers because many other factors are in play.
But comparing two fighters or tanks just includes the attributes of each plane irrespective of pilot quality.
The Question should be really, Would the Duke of York, with her crew per the era, defeat the Missouri and her crew per the era?
No actually that is not part of the OB position. He is just comparing unit with unit. Not part of the era nonsense, or who ate more hamburgers the night before, or who was sink. He is just comparing two freaking ships so what is do hard for you to understand that?
Even if you don’t like the concept of considering the “people” component, the “Training” component is a specification that can be physically observed. In my OPINION I believe the British had better training, it was longer, more in depth, and they learned from masters of the sea, who had generational knowledge and legitimate combat experience.
Thats fine except that he is comparing two ships, NOT TWO DIFFERENTLY TRAINED CREWS.
From now on assume every ship for purposes of comparison is in a post war harbor and you got some small crew taking out each ship on trials to test how fast it is and how well it fires the guns. They plot out all the results on paper and statistically rate the differences.
The original says 1940’s I guess that would include 1949 right U.S.A. all the way
Clyde, Red, thank you for your fair comments and support in this on-going debate!
Hey, leave me out of the other fight. My “support” is limited to including things for discussion. We are on opposite ends on much of the debate.
If your doing all time Battleship, the Mighty MO beats anything hands down because it was more advanced after retrofit and served till 1991.
If your just comparing pre 1945 ships… it probably results in one of the many 1944-45 US Battle wagons, with Yamato/ Musashi and perhaps HMS Vanguard close behind.
All the German and Italian and most of the British units were too antiquated by 1943+
@Imperious:
If your just comparing pre 1945 ships… it probably results in one of the many 1944-45 US Battle wagons, with Yamato/ Musashi and perhaps HMS Vanguard close behind.
All the German and Italian and most of the British units were too antiquated by 1943+
Yes. I assume the reason the Vanguard wasn’t included is because it wasn’t commissioned until 1946. She was launched in late '44, but still wasn’t ready by Japan’s surrender, so there wasn’t a rush after that.
Pairing the U.S. radar aiming system with the Yamato/Musashi would have been a very difficult nut to crack…assuming fighter cover.
Another strike against the Duke of York vs. any U.S. BB. According to an article I was reading tonight, the U.S. had the best large caliber armour penetrating round in the world, while the U.K.'s was more of a Treaty design (inferior pre-WWII limitation.) During post WWII testing ours could punch right through thick turret facing at high obliquity, while theirs could not, even at moderate angles. So at range, they’ve got trouble.
Another problem is secondary armament. If they close into this range the Missouri will be crashing in twice as many pounds/minute as the Duke in secondary guns alone. (The Yamato get’s interesting here as it has actual light cruiser turrets forming half of its secondary armament…ouch!)
Here is Warshams comments regarding Battleship March Madness.
If the countries of the 1940’s decided to solved WWII by a Battleship Duel, who would win. Here are the rules, nations get to pick the best ship in the fleet to match up. Consider this a “March Madness” with Battleships. After each duel the winner is dry docked for repairs and the losser is sunk. I gave strongest Navies the higher seats in the contest. Let’s say for contest infomation, the showdown will take play in Caribbean. Ships will start 35 miles apart and can use all technologly at hand, for example Radar.
Why don’t you look up the definition of DUEL.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/duel
1. a prearranged combat between two persons, fought with deadly weapons according to an accepted code of procedure, especially to settle a private quarrel.
2. any contest between two persons or parties.
For your benefit, I’ve bolded the words that matter. This is a DUEL, between two PARTIES, via their SHIPS. The question is WHO will be the winner. NOT what will be the winner.
Yes the ship matters, but just because you have two fighters in the ring, it doesn’t mean the guy who weighs more, and has an inch more reach is going to come out on top everytime.
He is comparing ship with ship based on specs.
What gave you this impression? I think the game you’re playing here is actually called “Jump to conclusions”.
Quote
If the countries of the 1940’s decided to solved WWII by a Battleship Duel, who would win. Here are the rules, nations get to pick the best ship in the fleet to match up. Consider this a “March Madness” with Battleships. After each duel the winner is dry docked for repairs and the losser is sunk. I gave strongest Navies the higher seats in the contest. Let’s say for contest infomation, the showdown will take play in Caribbean. Ships will start 35 miles apart and can use all technologly at hand, for example Radar.Why don’t you look up the definition of DUEL.
And he said nothing of crews, of only 1941 ships, or of having any demerit for not having sunk any ship. I suspect basic reasoning is lost on any argument that attempts to infer sophomoric notions of what the OB had never spoke of and of which you “added” to any comparison. Nobody but you has these issues. They understand the basic argument made for this comparison.
Quote
1. a prearranged combat between two persons, fought with deadly weapons according to an accepted code of procedure, especially to settle a private quarrel.2. any contest between two persons or parties.
Off topic and having nothing to do with anything….
For your benefit, I’ve bolded the words that matter. This is a DUEL, between two PARTIES, via their SHIPS. The question is WHO will be the winner. NOT what will be the winner.
Yes the ship matters, but just because you have two fighters in the ring, it doesn’t mean the guy who weighs more, and has an inch more reach is going to come out on top everytime.
What matters is what the OB had posted, not your own references for comparison. If you want to compare crews, make another thread.
Quote
He is comparing ship with ship based on specs.What gave you this impression? I think the game you’re playing here is actually called “Jump to conclusions”.
Read what he said and let others have their say.
I read what he said, and quoted it. Â He’s asking about a DUEL between the two ships.
and my ON TOPIC definition of DUEL clearly states that it is between 2 parties.
You can talk about tonnage, guns, armarment, and speed, but seamanship should be included.
Specifically the abilities of atleast these 2 candidates should be discussed for this match-up, again I doubt this is debatable. Â Worsham would you care to comment?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_M._Callaghan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Fraser,_1st_Baron_Fraser_of_North_Cape
DUEL between the two ships
Yes ships, not crews, not 1941 only, not only ships that sunk another ship.
You finally got it!
Compare speed, armor, fire control technology, radar or not, gun caliber, range of guns, secondary armaments, anti- torpedo belts, ect.
Ships come with a crew. I’m glad you agree aswell!
I’ve asked Worsham to comment.
Class and type:
Iowa-class battleship
Displacement:
45,000 tons
Length:
887.2 ft (270.4 m)
Beam:
108.2 ft (33.0 m)
Draft:
28.9 ft (8.8 m)
Speed:
33 kn (38 mph; 61 km/h)
**Complement:
2,700 officers and men**
Armament:
9 × 16 in (410 mm)/50 cal Mark 7 guns
20 × 5 in (130 mm)/38 cal Mark 12 guns
80 × 40 mm/56 cal anti-aircraft guns
49 × 20 mm/70 cal anti-aircraft cannonsArmor:
Belt: 12.1 in (310 mm)
Bulkheads: 11.3 in (290 mm)
Barbettes: 11.6 to 17.3 in (290 to 440 mm)
Turrets: 19.7 in (500 mm)
Decks: 7.5 in (190 mm)
Ships come with a crew and to compare ships has nothing to do with crews and also has nothing to so with comparing SHIPS. I’m glad you agree as well!
http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm
And this site has done something similar, (which obviously does not compare crews because this is a comparison of ships) concluded rightfully that Iowa class BB is the best ship all around based on all basic stats.
