Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: ealgeone
same fate as HMS Price of Wales

1) At that time, the Japanese had heavy armor-piercing bombs in inventory, and very heavy air-launched, ship-killing torpedoes. Find either in anyone's current inventory. I didn't say a BB couldn't be sunk, just that no one has inventory weapons that can do it (short of nukes).

2) It was the "HMS" Prince of Wales (along with Repulse). The British have always sucked at damage control.

3) Most importantly of all - it didn't happen! The Japanese launched larger attacks against US BBs than those that took out the HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse and didn't sink any of our BBs. In fact, at Philippine Sea the US BBs were placed well in advance of the US carriers as a "Gun Line" because they were so hard to sink - even though (again) the Japanese had heavy armor-piercing bombs and air-launched heavy ship-killing torpedoes. We don't even have to guess whether your statement might be true - history shows it to be false.
42 posted on 05/20/2018 12:35:10 PM PDT by Phlyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: Phlyer
It was the "HMS" Prince of Wales (along with Repulse). The British have always sucked at damage control.

A torpedo hit aft bent a prop shaft and caused catastrophic flooding.

What was really awful about the Brit navy in the period was their AA fire control.

That and the F2A Buffaloes they had left didn't show up for air cover.

Probably the saddest part of Force Z is that they were just hours away from Singapore and thought they had survived their suicide mission when the G3M's and G4M's showed up.

43 posted on 05/20/2018 12:41:34 PM PDT by Snickering Hound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: Phlyer
3) Most importantly of all - it didn't happen! The Japanese launched larger attacks against US BBs than those that took out the HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse and didn't sink any of our BBs. In fact, at Philippine Sea the US BBs were placed well in advance of the US carriers as a "Gun Line" because they were so hard to sink - even though (again) the Japanese had heavy armor-piercing bombs and air-launched heavy ship-killing torpedoes. We don't even have to guess whether your statement might be true - history shows it to be false.

Allow me to clarify....if devoid of air cover which I presumed that was what your post was meaning. And an Iowa-class BB could go just about anywhere it wanted to with virtual impunity...

At the Battle of the Philippine Sea our BBs were not devoid of air cover.

Take away the air cover and a number of the BBs would be sunk as was HMS PoW, HMS Repulse, IJN Yamato and IJN Musashi.

My understanding of the carrier battle group would have the battleships close to the carriers to provide additional anti-air protection.

I would agree the destroyers and destroyer escorts were on picket duty....but not the battleships.

44 posted on 05/20/2018 12:55:23 PM PDT by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson