How Many Super Battleship Plans?

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:46 pm

I am curious about how many nations had actual plans for commisioning Super BB's during the course of the war? I know of the USN's Montana projects and how they almost came to be before the aircraft carriers took the job. What are the other nations' super BB's

Karl Heidenreich · Post by **Karl Heidenreich** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:21 pm

Hi, Ramius,

If we are talking about battleships somewhat bigger and powerfull than those already in action during WWII then:

1. Japan was considering the so called super Yamato with 18" guns.
2. USN had the Montanas with 16" (not so much a super-somewhat).
3. England had the Saint Andrew Class with 18" (I believe...

)
4. The Soviet Union was considering a 16" gunned BB.
5. I would never consider the German H Class a super BB with guns of the 16" calibre. The H one that could have been a super BB was the 20" one that, we know for sure, they could never built until the turn of the century.

Maybe the IJN or British ones could be the ones that really were Super Battleships.

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:28 pm

Wasn't there supposed to be a KGV with four quads, or something like that

Karl Heidenreich · Post by **Karl Heidenreich** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:37 pm

Yeah, 14" ones as far as I can remember, hardly super something...

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:01 pm

Yeah, but I wouldn't mind having 16 guns. What would the broadside weight have been compared to the Iowa?

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:03 pm

Does anyone have a link on this beast?

Karl Heidenreich · Post by **Karl Heidenreich** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 12:45 am

Well, there is this one:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/super_battles ... jected.htm

Which is from Chuck Hawks. For those acolites of the Holy Iowa Class Gospel Chuck Hawks is anatema but please read it.

And this one is quite intersting:

http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/academic/his ... to_bat.txt

And also:

http://battleshipyamato.info/history.html

And

http://www.geocities.com/cypher_zzz/sha ... part13.htm

Best regards.

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:42 am

Hey, this one is REAL informative, interesting though

http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/furamain.htm#ijn

There are links to other navies of the world and their cheesy ships at the bottom of the page

Tiornu · Post by **Tiornu** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:36 am

If we want to focus on non-fiction, we can point to only a few super-battleships planned in WWII, but more that dated from earlier periods.
During the war, the British never got far past their Lion design, which was certainly powerful but not on a par with Yamato, Montana, etc. However, they previously had the N3 battleship design with 18in guns and of course the Incomparable proposal for a ship wit 20 in guns.
The French never dabbled in anything humungous, nor did the Italians. They both topped out at around 45,000 tons or so. I do remember an Italian WWI-era proposal with five-gun turrets.
The SoSo design represented a lot of displacement for the capability, especially given the poor quality of the armor.
The Super-Yamato was, in my opinion, inferior to Yamato herself.There had been some impressive proposals in their 8-8 Program, like pumped-up Nagatos. In addition to a 46cm gun, there was a 48cm gun that actually existed as a prototype before the Washington Treaty.
Long before the Montanas, the US had the Tillman battleships, which were not serious proposals but feasability studies representing basically the largest monstrosities that could fit through the Panama Canal. They were even sillier than H-44.
Ah, but I almost forgot! A Japanese designer once sketched a 500,000-ton ship carrying something like a hundred 41cm guns. Time to ration the sake....

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 11:02 pm

Yeah, but the what ifs are always cool to drool over

This is my ship in any game or scenario I get it

http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/yokozu_f.htm

Ha Ha Ha, I think any ship would have a hard time trying to Tango with this freak.

Karl Heidenreich · Post by **Karl Heidenreich** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:21 am

Ramius:

This isn´t fair

That´s my favorite never built ship... Of course it could have kick butt a lot: no Montana could have ever get close...

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:33 am

Ha Ha Ha

I do think though, if it ever came to that, US optics and radar trump Japanese sets. I see you more of a HMS Magnificent type of guy. Magnificent has a broadside weight of 25,440 lbs, and a lb per minute of 50,880 lbs. Atleast, that is what Wiki says for the BL 14in mk VII.

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:48 am

I just did some number crunching for some our little ships:

(Broadside in lbs, RoF x Broadside)

USS Montana:
32,400; 64,800

HMS Magnificent:
25,440; 50,880

Yokozuna:
38,628; 77,256

No surprises there. Now that I think about it, 75,000lbs per minute would be nice, but the accuracy causes me to pick the Montana as my girl

Plus Montana would probably have superior AA in it's 5in DPs.

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:53 am

http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/fuhrer_f.htm

???What would the broadside weight and RoF be on this beast???

Karl Heidenreich · Post by **Karl Heidenreich** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:49 pm

Little Boy?