KGV in POW's place on 10th December 1941

[dunmunro]

Do you think KGV would have survived on 10th December 1941 if she had been in POW's place?

I suspect that she would have survived. KGV had some advantages over PoW. She was not damaged during fitting out, and there is a much higher possibility that all her compartments were properly air pressure tested for watertightness. Her crew was better trained, and there is the chance factor. Only one of the 5 to 7 torpedoes that hit PoW actually did damage that caused a significant loss of buoyancy. The circumstances surrounding this hit are such that it was unlikely to be repeated - even an identical hit in the same location was unlikely to cause the same degree of flooding on KGV. If KGV took PoW's place, there is a high probability that she would have survived until aircover showed up, and after that maybe a 60/40 chance that she can make it to Singapore.

[RF]

How would KGV have fared with the same hit on the stern that crippled POW's steering, as this looks to me to be the critical point at which POW was doomed.

[lwd]

That may well have depended on crew actions. My understanding is that the shaft of bent and opened up her hull space to the ocean. Perhaps a quicker reaction on the part of her crew could have meant lesser damage. I'm not going to make a case for the quality of one crew vs another though particularly as this might come down to individuals.

[dunmunro]

That may well have depended on crew actions. My understanding is that the shaft of bent and opened up her hull space to the ocean. Perhaps a quicker reaction on the part of her crew could have meant lesser damage. I'm not going to make a case for the quality of one crew vs another though particularly as this might come down to individuals.

PoW suffered shaft hits on both sides of the ship. The first, port side, hit caused the fatal flooding, but apparently only after the shaft was stopped, and then restarted. A 2nd shaft hit on the starboard side, caused the shaft to stop instantly, but did not result in any degree of flooding. So even on PoW, flooding through the shaft was a 50/50 proposition.

I have looked at as many reports of torpedo damage to RN ships, as I can find, but PoW appears to be the only RN ship that suffered severe flooding through a prop shaft. Several USN ships suffered flooding through prop shafts, but after after the shaft was physically displaced, which did not occur on PoW.

[David89]

That may well have depended on crew actions. My understanding is that the shaft of bent and opened up her hull space to the ocean. Perhaps a quicker reaction on the part of her crew could have meant lesser damage. I'm not going to make a case for the quality of one crew vs another though particularly as this might come down to individuals.

The crew of the Prince of Wales stopped the shaft in time to prevent flooding. Not knowing the extent of the damage they went and restarted the shaft and the bent shaft chewed up the shaft wall and let in water via the shaft seal, dooming the ship. I'm guessing the KGV's more experienced crew would not have restarted the shaft and the KGV would thus have survived. None of the other damage would be enough to sink the KGV or PoW and since the power faliure that resulted from the engine room flooding would not have happened, any other flooding could have been countered more easily.

On another topic, the Renown could probably have survived the hits that sunk the Repulse, since she had a updated system of torpedo bulges which the Repulse lacked. These bulges would have slowed down the flooding enough for the damage control to come into effect and either save the ship or slow down the sinking, allowing more men to get off.

So, if the King George V and Renown had been substituted for the Prince of Wales and Repulse, then most likely Force Z would not have been sunk.

[RF]

Per the last paragraph above, it throws up another intriguing question - what would have happened when Philips found the Japanese landing ships and their covering force? They would already be damaged from air attack, would they be able to handle surface forces as well?

[Karl Heidenreich]

So, if the King George V and Renown had been substituted for the Prince of Wales and Repulse, then most likely Force Z would not have been sunk

Amazing! How can we be so certain about this? Renown? KGV? That I don´t swalow...

[David89]

So, if the King George V and Renown had been substituted for the Prince of Wales and Repulse, then most likely Force Z would not have been sunk

Amazing! How can we be so certain about this? Renown? KGV? That I don´t swalow...

Well, in the Prince of Wales case, the ship was sunk due to the prop shaft damaged by the first torpedo being restarted. The shaft was stopped in time to prevent flooding, and if the shaft had not been restarted then the massive flooding along the shaft tunnel would not have happened. None of the other hits did enough damage to sink the POW and without the loss of power due to the engine room being flooded, it seems likely that the POW could have survived the attacks. Had the KGV been in place of her sister-ship, the more experienced crew might not have restarted the shaft.

The Renown had a modernised system of torpedo bulges which the Repulse lacked, and this might have been enough to enable her to survive the 4 torpedo hits which sunk the Repulse, or at least slow down the sinking and allow more men to get away.

Whether or not this would have allowed either ship to escape back to Singapore is another matter, but it is possible.

[Karl Heidenreich]

At December 10th action the Japanese forces had quite a tactical and logistic superiotriy and were determined to destroy Force Z. Not two capital ships of the RN inventory would have survived because the attack only ended when the Japanese were sure they had accomplish what they intended. The damage occured was circunstancial. If the KGV or Renown survived the damage that sent PoW or Repulse to the bottom of the sea then the Japanese would have taken care to produce new and more lethal injuries. Put there Rodney, KGV, Warspite, whatever, they would have been sunk.

Kind regards...

[Bgile]

If five torpedoes hadn't sunk the KGV, it would have been the first battleship in the history of warfare to survive that many hits. That story would have been worth reading about! Likewise Renown. The Japanese super battleships might have if the US had gone home after a few hits. You are taking the actual events and putting different ships in place and assuming that the Japanese would have just gone "Oh, our torpedoes didn't sink them like they did in the alternate universe! Lets go home.". They would certainly have been slowed tremendously if not stopped, and the Japanese would not send any more planes? How about their surface fleet?

With regard to air cover it usually wasn't very effective without early warning via coast watchers, picket ships, etc. It was more useful at attriting the enemy after they attacked and were headed away from the target. It's even more problematic when the air cover has to travel a significant distance to get to the ships it's supposed to protect.

Why would KGV have a better crew on Dec 10? I don't understand that. As far as I know, there is nothing at all to show PoW didn't have a better crew than KGV by then.

Finally, there were problems with PoW's watertight integrity which were discovered as a result of her loss which were present in KGV as well. I think she would probably have eventually sunk due to progressive flooding even if the shaft hadn't been restarted. It just would have taken an hour or two.

With regard to Renown vs Repulse, the latter sank very quickly. Maybe Renown would have taken longer, but I don't think there was a single case where more than two torpedoes hit a ship on the same side and it survived, unless there were other hits on the opposite side. Can anyone come up with one that did? I could be mistaken, but I can't recall any. In any case, didn't Renown have greatly inferior torpedo protection compared to modern battleships, even with the bulges?

Wasn't AA pretty bad then? How many aircraft did the British shoot down? I don't think it was much of a deterrent to the Japanese.

[Karl Heidenreich]

Bgile:

I agree completely with your statements!

You are taking the actual events and putting different ships in place and assuming that the Japanese would have just gone "Oh, our torpedoes didn't sink them like they did in the alternate universe! Lets go home.". They would certainly have been slowed tremendously if not stopped, and the Japanese would not send any more planes? How about their surface fleet?

Why would KGV have a better crew on Dec 10? I don't understand that. As far as I know, there is nothing at all to show PoW didn't have a better crew than KGV by then.

Finally, there were problems with PoW's watertight integrity which were discovered as a result of her loss which were present in KGV as well. I think she would probably have eventually sunk due to progressive flooding even if the shaft hadn't been restarted. It just would have taken an hour or two.

With regard to Renown vs Repulse, the latter sank very quickly. Maybe Renown would have taken longer, but I don't think there was a single case where more than two torpedoes hit a ship on the same side and it survived, unless there were other hits on the opposite side. Can anyone come up with one that did? I could be mistaken, but I can't recall any. In any case, didn't Renown have greatly inferior torpedo protection compared to modern battleships, even with the bulges?

Wasn't AA pretty bad then? How many aircraft did the British shoot down? I don't think it was much of a deterrent to the Japanese.

[lwd]

If five torpedoes hadn't sunk the KGV, it would have been the first battleship in the history of warfare to survive that many hits.....

How many battleships were hit with 5 torpedos? The sample size has got to be pretty small. Then look at how many were battle ready when it and the sample size goes down a bit more. Now how many of those were hit by early war aircraft torpedos or equivalant. I'm pretty sure the sample size will be small enough that no statistician would be willing to draw much from it.

[Karl Heidenreich]

lwd:

I believe that Bgile point is clear enough: it´s very unlikely that the Japanese would had let the British Squadron just walk away with some damages; they would have done everything in order to destroy them. And that they could do. Four torpedoes, five, six? That´s is not important. The Japanese would have hit the KGV and Renown as needed to sink them as Tovey did with Bismarck or the USN with Yamato. It´s, as I stated before, circunstancial.

Best regards.

[lwd]

He said

If five torpedoes hadn't sunk the KGV, it would have been the first battleship in the history of warfare to survive that many hits.

The implication is 5 would have been enough. I am not convinced of that.

Now I agree even if she survives those her odds on making it home are pretty low. Didn't someone up thread for instance mention that at least 2 of the safts were out of commission due to the torpedo hits? That means even if she manages to get a way from the planes subs are a serioud threat. The BC isn't going to be moving anywhere near full speed either.

[Bgile]

How many battleships were hit with 5 torpedos? The sample size has got to be pretty small. Then look at how many were battle ready when it and the sample size goes down a bit more. Now how many of those were hit by early war aircraft torpedos or equivalant. I'm pretty sure the sample size will be small enough that no statistician would be willing to draw much from it.

There were several battleships hit by one torpedo that were severely damaged. What is your sample to show that more torpedoes than that is survivable? Generally speaking, one torpedo hitting a battleship at it's proper running depth usually caused very serious damage requiring months to repair it, and often leaving it stopped at least temporarily.

It doesn't have to be a battleship, either. A number of CVs had torpedo defenses as good or better than battleships.

I do realize airborne torpedoes were less powerful than shipborne, so that might make some difference in this case. That is admittedly one problem with my argument, but I don't think it's decisive because of the large number of torpedoes involved here.

In the event one or both battleships survived the attack with several torpedo hits, what then? Where do they go for repairs and how fast, and what do the Japanese do about it?