Naval History Forums

Not only that, but the battle of Tsushima meant the end of the Russo-Japanese war. It was one of the few naval battles where the looser was forced to surrender in the short time after. Jutland was inconclusive and German could've still strangle the British if they had played their cards right, while...

That, and bombs that could be reliably dropped onto them XD

Oh, and time traveling JMSDF DDs, cuz why not XD

Dave Saxton wrote: "Hood was a fast battleship as built." Hi Dave, she was, but only according to standards of WWI, to which Hood was anyway not ready in time to contribute. Unfortunately for Hood, by WWII, the fast battleships were far better protected, with much more powerful guns..... ...

One telling observation made in a British post-Jutland report was very telling to me. It pointed out that German armored warships Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Blucher, and Lutzow were all literally riddled by major caliber overmatching gun hits, yet no magazine explosion was suffered by any of them; Sey...

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but perhaps the RN would have been better advised to build three fast 15" battleships (28 -30 knots) instead of Hood, Renown and Repulse. Well, technology wasn't up to the job. There wasn't much then that could've produced a BB with 28 knots and good armour, as ...

One question I have: is why those three? Was the ammunition and the handling fundamentally different from the other British capital ships at the time? ..... I do not believe that there was any difference in the nature of the cordite aboard the various ships. Nor do I believe that there was any fund...

Thank you all for your opinions. I myself do not see the battlecruiser as a flawed ship. It was how the "british" used their battlecruisers that has led to the matter. British BCs were not meant to engage big gun warships, so when they were exposed to heavy gun fire, they got beat. Not hel...

This topic has been discussed on many naval forums I've seen, or at least mentioned, so I wanted to get your opinions on the matter. The battlecruiser was a type of ship created by the British Admiral Jacky Fisher. He was the same guy that gave us HMS Dreadnought, which would define the modern battl...

Okay then, that's one more to how US Early torps suck.

As for the best, in terms of killing ships like cruisers and DDs, would I be wrong to count the Japanese Type 93 as a good canadate for one of the strongest torps?

So basically, until the US Navy got around adressing the problem, their torps were the worst. They could go off course, go off before they reach the target and those that do hit usually dont explode.

Simply put: which was

The best ship launched torp

The best sub launched torp

The best aerial torp



The worst ship launched torp

The worst sub launched torp

The worst aerial torp



Plz comment down below.

I decided to make a list on what I consider the "Worst" Battlecruisers ever built. This list will include ships of both world wars. I will be taking into consideration the design, limitations and operation of the ships, as well as how well they suit the role of battlecruiser. First, I few ...

Though the PE was a powerful WW2, I'm not so sure about the "Best WW2 Heavy Cruiser". I would imgaine the Baltimore class were the more powerful type, with powerful guns and decent protection. Then again she was built a while after PE was built, so she had time to learn from prior lessons ...

Though seriously. As a BC, what good does the Courageous class have for it that other BCs dont?

yoyoyoyo wrote:Why is Yi Sun Sin not on there.

Maybe because it would be a "sin" to include him XD