Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
The Japanese had 18.1 inch guns on two of their battleships: the Yamamoto and the Musashi.

Range was about the same as USN, but I'm not sure if their fire control was equal to USN.

3 posted on 11/10/2025 11:33:22 PM PST by Governor Dinwiddie ( O give thanks unto the Lord, for He is gracious, and his mercy endures forever. — Psalm 106)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Governor Dinwiddie

US fire control was overwhelmingly superior in 1943.


4 posted on 11/10/2025 11:55:15 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Governor Dinwiddie

No. Japanese fire control was weak at longer ranges. Yet as accounts of the night combat engagements off Guadalcanal reveal, the Japanese were tough opponents in surface warfare, especially in the early years of WW II.


10 posted on 11/11/2025 12:49:01 AM PST by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Governor Dinwiddie

Based on optical sighting, Japanese fire control was relatively weak at long range. Yet, as accounts of the night combat engagements off Guadalcanal reveal, the Japanese were tough opponents in surface warfare, especially in the early years of WW II.


11 posted on 11/11/2025 2:00:21 AM PST by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Governor Dinwiddie

Getting hit by a 16 inch shell will do the damage you need.


18 posted on 11/11/2025 3:19:54 AM PST by for-q-clinton (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Governor Dinwiddie

That was the main difference, American radar was integrated into fire control systems, Japanese were not.

Japanese still relied on visual targeting, therefore range of guns were a non factor.
A thousand B-17s can be replaced by one F-15 with smart weapons.

A battleship can be taken out by a much smaller ship with guided anti-ship missiles at a far greater range than any sized gun


25 posted on 11/11/2025 4:27:55 AM PST by blitz128
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Governor Dinwiddie

Yamato, not Yamamoto. One was a ship, the other an admiral.


33 posted on 11/11/2025 5:58:14 AM PST by Coronal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Governor Dinwiddie

It wasn’t. They still relied on optics. That’s why they had the “pagoda” style masts was for fire control.


42 posted on 11/11/2025 7:08:25 AM PST by meatloaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Governor Dinwiddie
Range was about the same as USN, but I'm not sure if their fire control was equal to USN.

Japanese optical rangefinders and fire control systems were superior to American. Their rangefinders had a much wider baseline than ours.

American RADAR rangefinders and fire control systems were the best in the world, bar none, and far exceeded the effectiveness of the Japanese optical systems. We put RADAR fire control on any ship that could support it ... which, by 1944, meant every warship in the fleet.

54 posted on 11/11/2025 8:13:42 AM PST by NorthMountain (... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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