Royal BB line

[stockyy1994]

 

And when we look at areas such as the sinking of the Bismarck, the only 2 14" penetrations made at long range before Hood was sunk was below water line and in the bow, and before the Bismarck was actually sunk, most penetrations was done at close ranges to an already doomed ship.

 

All that shows is that the turrets were unreliable and not fully working at the time, they could barley fire any of the guns, the Prince of Wales had contractors on board trying to fix the problem with the turrets themselves, not the guns. 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

All that shows is that the turrets were unreliable and not fully working at the time, they could barley fire any of the guns, the Prince of Wales had contractors on board trying to fix the problem with the turrets themselves, not the guns. 

 

During the initial engagement, only 1 of PoW's turrets received a malfunction, the rangefinder later failed after the ship sustained several hits forcing the ship to retreat.

[piritskenyer]

Only 2 penetrations at long range befire Hood was sunk. 

 

Damn that made me lol. 

 

How many shots fired, how many hits and how much time into the engagement? 

[SeaMonsterUK]

Only 2 penetrations at long range befire Hood was sunk. 

 

Damn that made me lol. 

 

How many shots fired, how many hits and how much time into the engagement? 

 

How about you read the report yourself, it's available online.

[Webley_Mark]

How about you read the report yourself, it's available online.

 

  Where? We need a link. Because we are too lazy to use google.

 

 

[El2aZeR]

Trainspite earlier posted the picture based on  actual firing trials showing the shell penning a 12" vertical plate at 26000 yards, much higher penetration than the value given on navweaps (9.5" at 25000 yards).

 

To be fair it doesn't show what exactly the target was (considering the top part specified a "plate" and the bottom only a "target" word choice may be deliberate here).

Is there a third page to this and if so can someone provide it?

[piritskenyer]

 

  Where? We need a link. Because we are too lazy to use google.

 

 

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.php

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_16-45_mk1.php

 

Not sure if relevant, but there are tidbits about the 14" in the 16"/45 article

[piritskenyer]

 

To be fair it doesn't show what exactly the target was (considering the top part specified a "plate" and the bottom only a "target" word choice may be deliberate here).

Is there a third page to this and if so can someone provide it?

 

Look it up in the compiled pen tables of Nathan Okun, it will be giving you the values in relation to the target (example: complete penetration against British Face Hardened plate or qhat have you) 

[Webley_Mark]

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.php

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_16-45_mk1.php

 

Not sure if relevant, but there are tidbits about the 14" in the 16"/45 article

 

Thanks!

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.php

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_16-45_mk1.php

 

Not sure if relevant, but there are tidbits about the 14" in the 16"/45 article

 

Which doesn't go into detail about the engagements with Bismarck.

[sharpie65]

 

And when we look at areas such as the sinking of the Bismarck, the only 2 14" penetrations made at long range before Hood was sunk was below water line and in the bow, and before the Bismarck was actually sunk, most penetrations was done at close ranges to an already doomed ship.

 

Need I remind you that Hood was sunk mere minutes into the engagement because of a lucky shell penetrating the deck armour above the after magazine? It doesn't take a genius to figure that much out, on top of the fact that the fire control directors would need adjusting for misses/perceived misses..a few minutes in would only allow for perhaps one adjustment after firing with a malfunctioning gun turret in that time.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Need I remind you that Hood was sunk mere minutes into the engagement because of a lucky shell penetrating the deck armour above the after magazine? It doesn't take a genius to figure that much out, on top of the fact that the fire control directors would need adjusting for misses/perceived misses..a few minutes in would only allow for perhaps one adjustment after firing with a malfunctioning gun turret in that time.

 

Don't need reminding on that. Everyone knows Hood was sunk within 8 minutes of her opening salvos, but I wouldn't call that mere minutes.

[Exocet6951]

At a tier where a Hipper with 8" AP can deal some serious damage, a 14" gun is considered too weak.
Always fun putting things back into context.

 

Funny how the overmatch argument is used, but not the AP fuse arming distance. So you won't be able to overmatch that one cruiser, so what? As soon as he turns, he's so much wider than tier 5-6 CA/CLs that those 14" just won't overpen as much. And boom, just like that you turn a con into a pro.
Trading unreliably overmatches on cruisers that are doing their best to sail in a straight line from your position for more reliable damage when they're not facing you.

[sharpie65]

 

Don't need reminding on that. Everyone knows Hood was sunk within 8 minutes of her opening salvos, but I wouldn't call that mere minutes.

 

It's less than 10 minutes..like it or not, that is mere minutes into the engagement.

[SeaMonsterUK]

So you've now gone to comparing a Heavy Cruiser with a Battleship. You've put nothing back into any kind of context at all.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

It's less than 10 minutes..like it or not, that is mere minutes into the engagement.

 

Mere minutes is the first 5 minutes of an engagement.

[Exocet6951]

So you've now gone to comparing a Heavy Cruiser with a Battleship. You've put nothing back into any kind of context at all.

 

Actually, I have.

You claim the only reason that it can't be tier8 is because the guns are too weak.

 

I postulate that guns that work on tier8 to tier10 with at best half the penetration of a 14" gun actually manage to deal damage to both BBs and CAs, then that 14" gun isn't as weak as you make it out to be.

And that's evidenced by the fact that a Fuso or New Mexico in a tier8 match can still deal some massive damage. And that's on 20-24 knot ships with lower accuracy and lower armor.

 

 

And lo and behold, you haven't at all adressed the point on how smaller guns could mean less overpens.

How shocking.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Actually, I have.

You claim the only reason that it can't be tier8 is because the guns are too weak.

 

I postulate that guns that work on tier8 to tier10 with at best half the penetration of a 14" gun actually manage to deal damage to both BBs and CAs, then that 14" gun isn't as weak as you make it out to be.

And that's evidenced by the fact that a Fuso or New Mexico in a tier8 match can still deal some massive damage. And that's on 20-24 knot ships with lower accuracy and lower armor.

 

 

And lo and behold, you haven't at all adressed the point on how smaller guns could mean less overpens.

How shocking.

 

What's shocking is the fact you are desperate, A tier 8 Heavy Cruiser can not be compared to with a Battleship.

 

 

And an 8" gun is a different beast to a 14" gun.

[Exocet6951]

 

What's shocking is the fact you are desperate, A tier 8 Heavy Cruiser can not be compared to with a Battleship.

 

 

And an 8" gun is a different beast to a 14" gun.

 

Still not comparing the ships, only the guns.

 

And you STILL haven't adressed the fact that an 14" gun would overpen tier8-10 ships less than an 16" one.

 

 

As far as basically everyone can see, you're still the one waving off every single argument with the same catch-phrase "but 14" too weak!!!" 

Because apparently, having 700mm of penetration at 0m is now considered weak.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Still not comparing the ships, only the guns.

 

And you STILL haven't adressed the fact that an 14" gun would overpen tier8-10 ships less than an 16" one.

 

 

As far as basically everyone can see, you're still the one waving off every single argument with the same catch-phrase "but 14" too weak!!!" 

Because apparently, having 700mm of penetration at 0m is now considered weak.

 

I'm not wavering at all, you are comparing a gun, an 8" gun that will have a higher trajectory than a 14" gun. You are the one who is wavering.

 

And the 14" Mk VII has penetration of 668mm at 0 meters not 700mm. And it's the 14" Mk VII that is too weak for tier 8, and I will continue to say that, whether I've said it before or not, till you get that through your thick skulls. But hey, I'm the one who actually gives a f*ck about the British Tech tree, the one doesn't want to make the KGV a laughing stock of the Battleships at that tier.

[piritskenyer]

Also, come to think of it... 

 

26ky, angle of fall is 32, angle of attack is 58, which is pretty far from ideal,  and tests show 12" of side armour penetration, which would mean about 1.3x the distance travelled, or about 15-16" of material travel. 14" weak he said. Won't be able to pen he said. 

[SeaMonsterUK]

And the 14" guns used on the Tennessee and Pennsylvania class after modernisation, has better penetration than the 14" Mk VII, and that still is not a Tier 8 capable gun.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Also, come to think of it... 

 

26ky, angle of fall is 32, angle of attack is 58, which is pretty far from ideal,  and tests show 12" of side armour penetration, which would mean about 1.3x the distance travelled, or about 15-16" of material travel. 14" weak he said. Won't be able to pen he said. 

 

I never said it was weak, I said it's not as good as you want it to be.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Also, after reading the document, there are a few things that stand out, such as the 1¼ inch APC shell vs 12-inch armour plate, sounds to me that this is not a 14" APC shell. And I doubt the gun itself could do such penetration at range with the shell itself during combat and weather conditions. As it should be known, coastal defence guns of the same caliber has superior penetration due to heavier shells being used.

[stockyy1994]

 

Look it up in the compiled pen tables of Nathan Okun, it will be giving you the values in relation to the target (example: complete penetration against British Face Hardened plate or qhat have you) 

 

I looked up the pen tables by Nathan Okun, and decided to make a graph of various guns for a complete pen vs British Face Hardened Plate. The first graph shows the current tier 8 battleships and the KGV. The x-axis is range in yards, and the y-axis if penetration inches, I couldn't work out how to properly convert into metric without doing each value individually, and I could be bothered to do that.

 

 

The second graph shows the 14 inch guns of the New Mexico, KGV and Fuso.