View Single Post
  #22 (permalink)  
Old June 16th, 2007, 10:15 PM
skunk works's Avatar
skunk works skunk works is offline
WW2F Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 3rd Rock
Posts: 1,946
skunk works is a jewel in the roughskunk works is a jewel in the roughskunk works is a jewel in the roughskunk works is a jewel in the rough
Default Re: BattleCruisers v Battleships which is better?

I don't believe it's so much as a design flaw, as a usage flaw, as far as battlecruisers go.
The "Alaskas" made excellent anti-aircraft platforms and had the speed to stay with fast Carriers. Especially after the VT fuse was supplied. Just saw a show on the history channel about the VT fuses. Before them it took on average 2,400 rounds to bring down a Japanese plane, and after...400. Now that's a 600% improvement !
(12 inch main battery, BTW)
Never meant to go toe-to-toe with battleships. You'll lose every time. The list is long of those who tried and died.
The U.S. designation was CB, (later on for the prevention of lumping them (Alaskas) with the much discredited label BC) for Large Cruiser, perhaps a better description of its capabilities.
__________________

Morbius, Morbius! Something is approaching from the Southwest. It is now quite close.

Reply With Quote