Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

From the Washington Naval Treaty to the end of the Second World War.
Steve Crandell
Senior Member
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Steve Crandell » Sat Feb 07, 2015 3:31 am

Mostlyharmless wrote:
Garyt wrote:...snip...
But with Command at Sea and a one Japanese Aerial torpedo, you will get some damage points and a bit of flooding that should be easy to correct, and if really unlucky another critical (maybe an 18% chance), that has about a 3% chance of jamming the rudder,...snip...

I think that there were far more hits damaging rudders and screws in WW2 than you would calculate. I suspect that captains always steered to avoid torpedoes and sometimes nearly avoided torpedoes.


Yes, I agree. A ship maneuvering to avoid a torpedo will often get hit in the bow or stern if they don't quite succeed.

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Garyt » Sat Feb 07, 2015 3:49 am

I think that there were far more hits damaging rudders and screws in WW2 than you would calculate.


I think you missed something. I said in the game Command at Sea those were the percentages. And my problem with the game is that the chances of something like that happening are too low.

Command at Sea has about a 0.5% chance of a torpedo damaging a rudder. With Seas of War, the other game I mentioned, it's about a 6% chance. Bear in mind these are not the chances a torpedo hits in the stern or rudder area - it is the chance that the rudder is actually damaged.

But it seems to me that the results of Seas of War "feel" more accurate in this regard.

As far as Seekrieg goes, it would take more time for me to review the charts and come up with a number that is accurate.

Yes, I agree. A ship maneuvering to avoid a torpedo will often get hit in the bow or stern if they don't quite succeed.


The Bow OR the stern I'd agree. And being hit in the bow precludes any chance of a stern hit. A bow hit is not great, as it could blow the bow off or at least cause extensive damage, but it's better than a rudder hit. I think almost all vessels could survive a flooded bow, and many could survive as long as the citadel was not breached. A badly damaged bow however does seriously effect but speed and sea worthiness, and could result in the vessel sinking trying to make it home, and/or make it more vulnerable to being finished off by a sub due to it's slow speed.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 2882
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Dave Saxton » Sat Feb 07, 2015 4:13 pm

Goes to show that the fate of the Bismarck really boiled down to bad luck.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Garyt » Sat Feb 07, 2015 4:27 pm

Goes to show that the fate of the Bismarck really boiled down to bad luck.


Definitely. The fact that it was not able to be repaired was also bad luck. It seems rudder damage was more often a temporary issue that could be repaired at sea, though there were examples of both temporary damage and permanent damage.

EDIT - by "permanent" I mean not able to be repaired at sea.

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 3990
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby alecsandros » Sat Feb 07, 2015 7:10 pm

... Well bad luck was having Luetjens on board.
On May 26th, with or eithout the 3rd torp hit ( in the rudder ) BismRck was doomed. She was well observed by Swordfish patrols, Sheffield and Vian's destroyers. She still required ~30 hours to get to Brest, and some 20 hours to get witjin effective Luftwaffe attack radius.

With Ark Royal and Repulse , Norfolk, Suffolk, and numerous destroyers so close to her (Ark Royal was at 150km) , Bismarck would sustain continous attacks for at least 20 hours. The attacks eould be catried out bby Swordfishes, destroyers, cruisers, and it is highly unlikely she would escape without suffering several more torp hits. That would decrease her speed more and make her an excellent taeget for KGV and Rodney.

She may have defended herself better withoit that jamed rudder, but the end result would be the same: Bob Ballard taking photos of the wreck...

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 2882
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Dave Saxton » Sat Feb 07, 2015 8:20 pm

alecsandros wrote:... Well bad luck was having Luetjens on board.
On May 26th, with or eithout the 3rd torp hit ( in the rudder ) BismRck was doomed. She was well observed by Swordfish patrols, Sheffield and Vian's destroyers. She still required ~30 hours to get to Brest, and some 20 hours to get witjin effective Luftwaffe attack radius.

With Ark Royal and Repulse , Norfolk, Suffolk, and numerous destroyers so close to her (Ark Royal was at 150km) , Bismarck would sustain continous attacks for at least 20 hours. The attacks eould be catried out bby Swordfishes, destroyers, cruisers, and it is highly unlikely she would escape without suffering several more torp hits. That would decrease her speed more and make her an excellent taeget for KGV and Rodney.

She may have defended herself better withoit that jamed rudder, but the end result would be the same: Bob Ballard taking photos of the wreck...

Completely disagree with you on this one Alex...
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 2882
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Dave Saxton » Sat Feb 07, 2015 8:24 pm

Garyt wrote:
Goes to show that the fate of the Bismarck really boiled down to bad luck.


Definitely. The fact that it was not able to be repaired was also bad luck. It seems rudder damage was more often a temporary issue that could be repaired at sea, though there were examples of both temporary damage and permanent damage.

EDIT - by "permanent" I mean not able to be repaired at sea.

Another factor was the storm. This was a very stormy night. The heavy seas and winds took away options the Bismarck would have had under more placid conditions.
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 3990
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby alecsandros » Sat Feb 07, 2015 9:00 pm

:angel:

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Garyt » Tue Feb 10, 2015 5:11 am

Well, I'd like to make this a poll but I'm too late :D

I'd like to know how many think the US technical mission estimate that the Musahi took 12-14 torpedoes is accurate, or the other total that is in the 19-20 torpedo range.

Steve Crandell
Senior Member
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Steve Crandell » Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:56 am

Garyt wrote:Well, I'd like to make this a poll but I'm too late :D

I'd like to know how many think the US technical mission estimate that the Musahi took 12-14 torpedoes is accurate, or the other total that is in the 19-20 torpedo range.


I don't know, but I do know that they said they felt that a Yamato class battleship would probably sink if it was hit by six torpedoes on the same side.

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Garyt » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:28 pm

I don't know, but I do know that they said they felt that a Yamato class battleship would probably sink if it was hit by six torpedoes on the same side.


I'm not sure how accurate they were on that issue, as the Yamato took 12 torpedoes, mostly to the port side in her last sortie.

Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Paul L » Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:02 am

I can understand how a torpedo hit on a rudder could be 1/2 % but not 6%? Looking at the diagrams of the Bismarck event it seems like a 10 meter section of hull was hit . If this is what was required to jam the rudder into the screw, then that's 10m out of a 250m hull length or 1/25th of the hulls length.

http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO_Bismarck_p2.htm

But the hit seems very close indeed to the Rudder. So the area needed to be hit may have been only 4-5 m or 1/50th of the hull length. Then their is the depth setting of the torpedo to consider, which may cut the chance of such a hit in 1/2 again to 1/100.

How would such games rate the unlikely shell hit on HMS Hood?

I've read that to generate the 4 swordfish torpedo hits against the Bismarck followed about 100 sortie to scout and attack this ship suggesting the chance of any torpedo hit on Bismarck with any given sortie was 1 in 25. If this is the case then 20-30 hours of such air attacks would be unlikely to generate much more than another 100 sortie or another 4 torpedo hits. With 8 torpedo hits its more likely that sooner or later a rudder hit might occurred -but not guaranteed.
"Eine mal is kein mal"

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 3990
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby alecsandros » Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:57 am

Paul L wrote:.

How would such games rate the unlikely shell hit on HMS Hood?

.

... According to various calculations, at 15-18km range and with the geometry as in the battle of Denmark Strait (Hood already turning and with aft turrets available to bear on Bismarck), a 380mm/L52 gun FULLY PERFORATING HULL HIT would have a 25-33% chance of hitting a magazine (main OR secondary) , based on the large volume occupied by the powder and shell magazines on HMS Hood.

Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Paul L » Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:55 pm

alecsandros wrote:
Paul L wrote:.

How would such games rate the unlikely shell hit on HMS Hood?

.

... According to various calculations, at 15-18km range and with the geometry as in the battle of Denmark Strait (Hood already turning and with aft turrets available to bear on Bismarck), a 380mm/L52 gun FULLY PERFORATING HULL HIT would have a 25-33% chance of hitting a magazine (main OR secondary) , based on the large volume occupied by the powder and shell magazines on HMS Hood.



Are these games computerized?
"Eine mal is kein mal"

Garyt
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Yamato + Musahi - Damage taken

Postby Garyt » Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:53 pm

I can understand how a torpedo hit on a rudder could be 1/2 % but not 6%? Looking at the diagrams of the Bismarck event it seems like a 10 meter section of hull was hit . If this is what was required to jam the rudder into the screw, then that's 10m out of a 250m hull length or 1/25th of the hulls length.


You have to realize that rudder damage often means merely temporary damage. Both games have methods to determine when and if the rudder can be repaired or "unstuck". I'd also mention that temporary jams are a lot more common than permanent issues.

Comand at Sea uses a slightly different as opposed to straight line damage. One torpedo has that .5% chance of a rudder jam, but 4 torpedoes striking in rapid sucession could easily increase the chances many fold, though flooding/fires are more common than rudder damage.

The purpose of Command at Sea is to reflect that vessels taking a lot of damage at one time are more likely to sustain critical damage than those taking the same amount of damage over time due to damage control being overwhelmed, which is a pretty realistic approach for floods and fires, less so for rudder strikes IMO.

And that strike that damaged Bismarck's rudder may have been 4-5 meters away, but maybe a torpedo striking within 10 meters may well still cause the rudder to "stick" for a while.

How would such games rate the unlikely shell hit on HMS Hood?


With Command at Sea, about 1%, unless the vessel is taking a pounding from many hits, which the Hood was not.

With Seas of War, you have a 20% chance pf a magazine hit, 10% for a turret top which gives a very similar result. Of these, it's about 60% likely it was a main magazine, 40% for a secondary magazine. This is based on a vertical hit, which is far more likely than a horizontal hit from that range. Now, as long as the ship has not sustained a fair amount of damage, the magazine may be flooded, though this may or may not be in time to prevent the magazine from exploding.

I'd also add that while a secondary magazine explosion is not as bad as a primary one, there will be resulting fires and other damage that may trigger the main magazine to blow at some point.

And these effects are not automatic, they are based on the size and bursting charge of the projectile, but a battleship shell is about 80-100% likely to cause these effects.

a 380mm/L52 gun FULLY PERFORATING HULL HIT would have a 25-33% chance of hitting a magazine (main OR secondary)


Interesting, Alecsandros. Seas of war has about a 30% probability of this occurring, which seems right in line with the numbers from above.

Are these games computerized?


NO, I actually like them better not being computerized, makes it easier to understand the nuts and bolts behind the system. The numbers I am quoting are from two different games - I think Alecsandros in his 25-33% numbers is using real life percentages.


Return to “Naval History (1922-1945)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest