Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Richeliu vs Bismarck vs KGV vs Vittorio Veneto

Discussion in 'The War at Sea' started by Blaster, Jan 18, 2007.

  1. Blaster

    Blaster New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    via TanksinWW2
    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.
     
  2. Tiornu

    Tiornu Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    21
    via TanksinWW2
    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.
     
  3. Blaster

    Blaster New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    via TanksinWW2
    Yeah, Tiornu. If a KGV can't best a Renown then something's weird.
     
  4. CometFan

    CometFan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    3
    via TanksinWW2
    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
     
  5. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    An inferior ship can theoretically best a superior one if the circumstances are right.
     
  6. Tiornu

    Tiornu Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    21
    via TanksinWW2
    And if the newer, larger ship CAN'T best the older, smaller ship?
     
  7. Blaster

    Blaster New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    via TanksinWW2
    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.
     
  8. Ome_Joop

    Ome_Joop New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    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...)
    [​IMG]
     
  9. Tiornu

    Tiornu Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    21
    via TanksinWW2
    That web site is mistaken. The visible damage was not caused by shells but by bombs carrying more than ten times as much explosive.
     
  10. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    When was JEAN BART scrapped?
     
  11. Tiornu

    Tiornu Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    21
    via TanksinWW2
    Jean Bart, 1970. Richelieu, 1968.
     
  12. Ome_Joop

    Ome_Joop New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    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).
     
  13. Tiornu

    Tiornu Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    21
    via TanksinWW2
    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.
     
  14. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    So are you saying that MASSACHUSETTS didn't hit JEAN BART at all?
     
  15. Tiornu

    Tiornu Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    21
    via TanksinWW2
    There were two types of shell hits on JB.
    They both came from Massachusetts.
     
  16. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Ok, Tiornu, thanks for clearing that up. :wink:
     
  17. Miller phpbb3

    Miller phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    California
    via TanksinWW2
    that ship was huge
     
  18. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Battleships tend to be pretty big.
     
  19. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    imagine the yamato!!!!( JB 35,000 vs 62,000)
     
  20. Ome_Joop

    Ome_Joop New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Max. Displacement of JB was 49.850 t!
    Maybe you are confusing the JB with a Dunkerque class Bb (JB was a Richelieu class!)?
     

Share This Page