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

Yamato replica 1/1 ??

Discussion in 'The War at Sea' started by Che_Guevara, Aug 15, 2005.

  1. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    well, i think that the japs consider the crew as heroes.
    it's like those minisubs that had to attack pearl on december 7th. none came close to the harbor but all the crewmen became heroes
     
  2. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
    They are hereos like everyone, who gave his life for his country. It´s the right and the best way of showing what happened in the past.

    Some other pics of the rebuild Yam´

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Regards,
    Che.
     
  3. Revere

    Revere New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,094
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Iowa, US
    via TanksinWW2
    Why waste time and money on making an old ship?
    And is it completly all steel?
     
  4. Revere

    Revere New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,094
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Iowa, US
    via TanksinWW2
    Not true they left one man out of most of the Propaganda becouse he got cought :D
     
  5. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    idd, i forgot that one. thanks for saying it :D
     
  6. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Indeed. I don't think YAMATO even managed to shoot down any of the planes that sank her. PRINCE OF WALES and REPULSE managed at least that much.
     
  7. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Great pictures Che, thanks.

    I don't think I'd like to be in those AAA positions when the turrets were firing! :eek:
     
  8. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Yeah, really. Slight design flaw there. :wink:
     
  9. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    hehehe :grin: , WHAT DO YOU SAY?????? CAN'T HEAR YOU :grin:
     
  10. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    To put it mildly! :cool:
     
  11. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
    Well, she sunks the escort carrier USS Gambier Bay and one destroyer in addition to a couple of other damaged CVE´s in the street of Samar on 25 October 1944.

    She wasn´t that waste everyone said, imagine what would have been happened if the SouDak and the Washington meet her near Savo, guess she would have sunk them. The Yamato was the ultimate construction of a battleship, so she would have been a formidable opponent for every allied BB, including the Iowas. If you say the Yamato is a waste of material you could say this for nearly every battleship, what did most of them achieve ?! Nothin they all end broken up for scrap. Imagine one of the Iowas had to fight against 386 planes on her own, do you think there would be another outcome of the battle ?

    Regards,
    Che
     
  12. Man

    Man New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    Che, the Yamamota was a waste of material for Japan because they did not have much to begin with. If all the material and manpower used for the Yamamota could have taken a heavier toll on the US if it had been used more wisely.

    :)
     
  13. Man

    Man New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    The value of such a project is surely subjective, and well worth it in the minds of the makers :wink:
     
  14. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
    hmm..hmmm, guess you´re right about this point, you can nearly build a Essex-carrier out of the material, needed for her armour (22.895 tons) and another one for the used 20.212 tons of steel out of her hull. Then we could take the 11.661 t. from the guns and build planes and and portion it to the two new build Essex´s. Cos´ of the fact that there were a same ship Musashi, they could have four brand-new aircraft carriers.

    Regards,
    Che.
     
  15. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    You're rpobably right, but a Superbattleship Vs a CVE is not a good trade...

    WWII was the end of the Battleship, for all sides, the US perhaps uniquely could afford the expense whilst practically everyone else could not.

    In any case the value of armament is more than just barrel width, the Japanese 18 inchers from what I can gather were not greatly superior to the US 16 inchers of the Iowas.
     
  16. Notmi

    Notmi New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Suomi Finland Perkele
    via TanksinWW2
    Besides this all, we have to remember that building a carrier is faster than building a battleship, mainly because it takes quite lot of time to build big guns and thick armour. And its also quite expensive.
    And to add more to bill, all that logistics, harbours, drydocks etc etc required to operate 70000 tons battleship costs huge amounts of money.

    On the other hand, IJN couldn't have enough pilots for all of those carriers if they would have built carriers instead of Y&M.
     
  17. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
    Yep, it was necessary to build a specialtransporter the Kashino (11.000 tons) 135x18,8x6,7m. with three big foldholds.

    1. For the guns
    2. For the barbettes
    3. For the turret itself

    ..it was sunk by the USS Haddock (sub-attack) on 4th September west. of Okinawa.

    There were also other acts to implement this project

    -To hide this top secret project, for example the Musahsi was hide by a curtain of sisal, all in all 2,7 km´s long and weight more then 400 tons, so was the Yamato hide.

    -The Transporter Kashino was also hide under sisal

    ...as a result the fishery had no sisal for the nets, with a perceptible stringency of food.

    - The dockyard in Kure had to deepened for 1 m. and to carry the heavy HA they developed new cranes.

    etc, etc.

    Regards,
    Che.

    ..this model suggestive, how the Kashino works
    :wink:
     
  18. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    who was sunk ?
     
  19. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    i assume it was the specialtransporter the Kashino. could find any record of it on uboat.net
     

Share This Page