And as long as no one on the KGV goofs, like some guy did on SoDak at Guadalcanal, a KGV shouldn't be pounded into a pulp by a Twin. I think 29 knots are already pretty good.
If KGV can't best a Renown...! Scharnhorst had thicker belt and barbette armor than Bismarck, but she did not have "more" armor. Bismarck was not well armored, but Scharnhorst was pathetic.
Edited : Sorry I forgot AND. Yes I really think the Scharnhorst og Gneisenau were TOO weakly armed. Even the planned but never implemented upgrade to 6 15 inch guns was really a major improvement in a fight against a modern BB
Then either the newer ship is having technical difficulties, or conditions just happened to be right for the older ship, or pure luck. Or maybe something else.
It can always be a crappy design.... Nothing to do with crappy design but what all or nothing armor layout will mean... http://polyticks.com/bbma/jeanbart.htm Just a nice shot of the Jean Bart (refurbished but i think the end is near for her...)
That web site is mistaken. The visible damage was not caused by shells but by bombs carrying more than ten times as much explosive.
Tiornu could you explain why it is bomb damage and not shell damage? I found a lot of (web)sources saying it was shell damage (USS Massachusetts).
There were two types of shell hits on JB--those that exploded within the armored structure and those that didn't explode. In either case, the only outward signs would be the relatively small points of impact and exit.
Max. Displacement of JB was 49.850 t! Maybe you are confusing the JB with a Dunkerque class Bb (JB was a Richelieu class!)?