Yamato versus the Royal Navy

[cbovill]

10 Yamato's vs. 1 Space Battleship Yamato and its wave motion gun!

[Eric Harvey]

Mark,

Yes, that's correct (precisely the point I was trying to [succinctly] make a few posts ago when I stated that each British BB sunk by the Yamato would not merely increase the Yamato's survivability linearly, i.e., not merely by a factor of -1). What we're talking about is "diminishing marginal returns", to use the old economics expression of the concept, and this is precisely the origin of the original question (6 British BBs are not six times more effective than 1 British BB, for various and numerous reasons).

It's like the old ratio of probabilities quiz; if the Yamato is 80% likely to sink the Exeter, how likely are the Yamato and the Musashi to sink the Exeter (it's not 160% likely).

But ultimately, in the end, the only reliable certification is to base your results on as many historic 'controls' as possible. Sometimes there's a lot of such data available (like BB vs BB engagements), sometimes there's not (like submarine vs submarine engagements).

Eric

[Eric Harvey]

[quote="cbovill"]10 Yamato's vs. 1 Space Battleship Yamato and its wave motion gun![/quote]

You're showing your age there, Chris.

Japanimation at its finest!

[Scott Washburn]

One thing to consider is that Yamato probably doesn't have anywhere near enough ammunition aboard to sink ten enemy battleships A long range engagement where conditions most favor Yamato also mean that very few shells would be hitting their targets. How many rounds would it take to kill one BB? How many rounds does the Yamato carry?

[av8rmongo]

One thing to consider is that Yamato probably doesn't have anywhere near enough ammunition aboard to sink ten enemy battleships A long range engagement where conditions most favor Yamato also mean that very few shells would be hitting their targets. How many rounds would it take to kill one BB? How many rounds does the Yamato carry?

An interesting point. My reading over the past two days seems to indicate that battleships were expected to absorb up to 18-20 major caliber rounds before sinking. Obviously, that doesn't account for magazine detonations or other catastrophic events. An Iowa class battleship carried 1,188 AP/HC rounds (I don't know the exact distribution)so I guess the question is 'what is the hit percentage of shots fired at long range?'

Assuming Iowa to be representative and if you assume a 50-50 split between AP and HE rounds then Yamato would have 594 rounds of AP which gives about 59 rounds per enemy BB. If it takes 18 rounds to sink each ship then the Yamato would have to hit with one out of every three rounds fired in order to have enough ammunition. Anyone think that can happen?

What is a reasonable hit percentage at long or extreme range? If its 5%, 1 out of every 20 shots hitting, then it will take 360 rounds fired to sink a BB. If that's the case then the available ammo would permit something like 1.65 such engagements.

Of course this is all sort of 'back of a bar napkin' kind of math and there are huge margins of error but I think it does show that with more than 2-3 opponents Yamato would be hard pressed to win the day. Even with 1-3 opponents so much would depend on initial conditions to determine who would win.

Paul

[Schwerepunkt]

Although my collection is 1/1200, I have gamed the following Japanese vs Royal Navy contest: Force Z augmented by Exeter, Houston, Perth, DeRuyter, Java, Dutch, British and American four pipers versus: Two Kongos and 1s, Yamato, Nagato, and Mutsu, seven heavy cruisers, two light cruisers and 25 DD.
Yamato is assumed to have been committed to action due to the threat of Force Z and the Kido Butai is returning from the PH Attack. The Air Flotilla based on Formosa is assumed to be unable to fly missions due to bad weather.
Almost invariably, POW and Repulse are sunk and for the Japanese, Kongo is sunk and five CA damaged.
I then regamed it without the Kongo class and with only Nagato and Mutsu versus force Z. The larger guns of the latter win out but Mutsu is sunk while POW is badly damaged and Repulse sunk.
Interesting gaming idea.

[tstockton]

Just to add to the discussion...

According to the "IJN YAMATO: Tabular Record of Movement" at Combined Fleet's website:

29 March 1945:
At Kure. Awaits sailing orders. YAMATO takes aboard a full supply of ammunition: 1,170 rounds for her 18.1-inch guns, 1,620 rounds for her secondary guns, 13,500 anti-aircraft rounds and 11.5 million for smaller caliber guns.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm

Regards,
Tom Stockton

[Jmrino]

So, had a bit of free time last evening and booted up this scenario on Fighting Steel w/ the NWP v9.52 mods. (Didn't have enough time, or inclination, to break out the minis and Seekrieg). The first thing readily apparent is the fact stated above that the Yamato can't carry enough ammo to sink or sufficiently impair a large number of her adversaries without the help of some critical mag hits. Added to that problem is the issue of fire control, while the RN's older BB/BCs circa 1943 had average FC radar to assist in targeting, the IJN had none.

The scenario set up:

IJN - Div.1 = Yamato, Musashi

RN - Div.1 = Hood, Renown, Repulse; Div.2 = the 5 QEs; Div.3 = the 5 RSs

Meeting Engagement; Initial range 36,500; All crews Veteran status; Captain AI level

Game 1 - Playing as the RN. Both IJN ships were sunk with the loss of the Renown to fires subsequent to the battle, moderate damage to the Hood and Repulse, and light damage to the Royal Oak. In this engagement the AI was intent to close the range, and I was happy to oblige.
Game 2 - Playing as the IJN. After seeing both ships sunk previously, I intended to keep the range above 20k. This worked, but ammo was exhausted and 100% of the structure points of both vessels were destroyed by the weight of the RN shells. Floatation points were largely intact, while the RN suffered medium damage to the 3 BCs.
Game 3 - Playing as the IJN. More of the same, but I tried to be more judicious with the ammo. I drew off the BCs to go 2 on 3 at around 21k and let the 2 RN battlelines fire long range, 30k+, if they wanted. The game ended with no sinkings and the IJN edging out the RN by a few VPs.
Game 4 - Playing as the IJN. As I was trying a variation of the tactic in Game 3, the Musashi took a long range hit, 27k, that slowed her to 22 knots. As I could no longer outrun the majority of the RN, I closed the range quickly to 18k and proceded to pummel the Hood and Renown (Repulse had collided with the Warspite and both were lagging far behind the battle). The Musashi ended up sunk, as well as the Hood, while the Renown held on with 2 floatation boxes and the Royal Sovereign picked up some light damage.

After just glancing at the gunnery logs, it was apparent the FC played a major role. The probabilities for the hits scored at comparable ranges were higher across the board for the RN. An interesting scenario to be sure, all in all a fun couple hours. Thanks for the kick start!

[suisse6]

I find this very interesting, especially some of the mathematical approaches. The problem is, however many times you run probabilities and simulations with the Prinz Eugen and Bismark v. Hood and POW, you won't often get the actual result. I've also seen the comments about the Graf Spee, which did in fact demolish the three cruisers chasing it, I've seen the pictures Exeter was barely afloat. Anyway my point is, assuming a purely surface action, the Japanese would have annihilated a good portion of the British Royal Navy. It has nothing and everything to do with range and speed. If you assume all the ships begin at the "starters line" then yes pure weight of fire may well doom the Japanese. However, assuming that the BC's are utilized as a scout force they would be most likely to locate the Yamato first, would they engage or try to draw Yamato closer to the main force a la Jutland? If they do, does Yamato give chase, it would seem foolhardy. If they attempt to slow Yamato while the remaining ships attempt to catch up, it would be one on three, and you must remember that even after the reworking of the BC after WWI, much of their armor was of a much more brittle steel and unable to deal with plunging fire which is the only fire you get at range. They in turn would have to get a luckky shot that would affect steering or speed. Assuming Yamato did not spread her fire over the three targets, I don't think this would even be a close fight. My point in all of this is simply that apart from on the duck pond there would never be a situtation where a commander allowed his vessel, one of the most important in the Japanese fleet to get surrounded by 12 RN BBs and pounded into submission. That is the truth, could they theoritically sink Yamato, clearly. So could a bunch of PT boats given enough time and a large enough number. However, it would never have gotten to that point. Those that would point to the Bismark will have to look elsewhere for an appropriate example as by the time Rodney and KGV were involved Bismark had little to no manuevering capability, most of which was caused by aircraft, not RN BBs. That's my two cents, but I'm not a wargamer, just a history buff who likes little ships God help me.

[Eric Harvey]

[quote]but I'm not a wargamer, just a history buff[/quote]

Come and join the DARK side!

[av8rmongo]

My point in all of this is simply that apart from on the duck pond there would never be a situtation where a commander allowed his vessel, one of the most important in the Japanese fleet to get surrounded by 12 RN BBs and pounded into submission.

Really? I don't think this statement is supportable by historic facts. The Imperial Japanese Navy was one of the most steadfast adherents to Mahanian theory vis a vi fleet on fleet actions. Most of the major operations they undertook had the engagement (and destruction) of the US Fleet as a central goal. Given the embarrassment of their treatment at the Washington Convention and the second class status given them by Britain immediately after WWI I don't think the strategy would have changed had the RN been the dominant Allied force in the Pacific and not the US. The Japanese were convinced of their technical and tactical superiority, reinforced by a chip on their shoulder over the failure of the Western Powers to acknowledge that 'fact'. Personally, I think a commander of one of IJN's super battleships engages the enemy every time, if he can see them. But the differences in Allied vs. Japanese fire control systems is the most telling weakness of the super battleships.

Okay, for historic reference lets look at the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Southern Group under Nishimura had a Pair of older BBs, a heavy cruiser and something like four destroyers. Arrayed against them was a force of six older US BBs (most victims at Pearl Harbor) 8 Cruisers, 28 destroyers and 39 PT Boats. Oh yes, they were in the confines of the Surigao strait chokepoint. And still they came. The PT Boats attacked - without effect - and still they came. The destroyers attacked with torpedoes hitting both BBs and actually sinking one. Three of the four DDs were hit, sinking two. And still they came. For more than 20 minutes 16in and 14in shells (more than 200) rained down on the reduced force ultimately destroying Yamashiro. Only after the loss of Yamashiro did the remaining cruiser and destroyer retire. Granted the engagement happened at night and they probably never knew the full size of the American force blocking their exit. But in spite of an almost 50% reduction in their force after the DD attack they continued. Even when large caliber shells from at least three ships starting falling around them they continued - in fact the first volley of 16in fire from Weast Virginia found its mark. In the face of all of this they continued on... to their ultimate distruction.

Yamato and Musashi were present, in the Center Force, during these series of battles. Now we get into the 'What Ifs'... What if they were in the Southern Force do you think they would have turned around? Do you think the outcome would have been any different? Personally, I doubt it. But that goes back to my original statements about it all depends on the initial geometry. Constrained waters, under operational orders as the Southern Force was I think the two IJN super battleships fight and go down just like Fuso and Yamashiro. Open water engagement, no operational orders restricting their actions then there is more doubt about the outcome.

The other great "What If' of Leyte is what if Lee's fast battleships were actually guarding San Bernadino Strait? Six modern US Fast Battleships, eight cruisers and 30-40 destroyers (if US maximized this force) against five IJN battleships (including both Yamato and Musashi), twelve cruisers and fifteen destroyers. What would have happened? Strip off the cruisers/destroyers on both sides - does that change your view of the outcome? Strip off the older IJN BBs leaving only the super battleships what do you think then? Now after all of that substitute the RN battleships for the US force what do you think the odds are now?

Obviously, 'what if' scenarios aren't definitive. There is a lot of personal opinion involved and conjecture. I think I know what happens but other opinions are just as valid. So lets try to actually prove it out. The wife and kids are going to be out of town weekend after next. I haven't been able to play a game in a dog's age so here's the pitch. If any of you are in No. Va. and want to play I'll be at the Game Parlor in Chatilly about 3:00PM Saturday April 12th (assuming I can get a table). If you can make it lets play out a scenario 1 v Many, Yamato vs RN or USN battleships. I'll bring my ships, you bring yours, we'll play Command at Sea rules if I'm the moderator or whatever rules the majority wants if someone else is the moderator and lets see how well Yamato does. If anyone else knows of a good gaming sopt in No. Va. that works for a majority of the folks interested then we can go there instead, it doesn't matter to me. If there's a better time for people lets talk about it. I have an opinion on how this will end up now I'm curious to try it out.

We'll report back here to the forum how it all ended. Actually, I think other area gaming groups out there should do the same sort of thing. Play out a couple of different scenarios with whatever rules and lets see what the overall results are. What do you all think?

Paul
[edited to remove my second 'signature'. I like myself but even that was too much for me ]

[ww2navyguy]

Paul,

Hey would you consider coming down to HMGS-South's Recon convention and running a game in the first weekend of May? This isn't a challenge by the way, but I'd really like to play one of those "what if" games you mentioned using various rules. I would have a tough time trying to get up to your area. My wife hates me traveling to gaming conventions outside of Florida (I'm so whipped).

The Recon 2008 convention is held in Orlando, FL from May 2-4, 2008...here is the link for information:

http://hmgs-south.com/recon08.htm

I wish we had more naval gamers at our bi-annual conventions. We have a large contingent of Seekreig players (actually the authors of those rules run the convention games and tournaments at Recon each year), but I'd love to play other naval game rules including the newest GHQ Micronauts rules for comparison purposes. Seekreig can sometimes get quite detailed (but I do like the rule sets too).

If you couldn't come to Recon in May, maybe you could try to come down for Hurricon, which is also in Orlando, FL in September (I think the 26th-28th). HMGS-South chapter puts on a great convention and has awesome dealers that attend.

If you ever think of coming, please let me know. I'd very much like to play in one of your naval games.

Thanks!

Scott

[av8rmongo]

Scott,

I would love to come to both of those events but for two facts. I'm leaving in June for Japan so most of my activity is focused on preparing for that move and second my wife and kids command my free time when they're here. With them out of town next weekend I have a limited target of opportunity to get a game in.

Paul

[hussar62]

We will give this a try in this Sat in our Clarksville TN game group. Scenario will be 1942 version of Yamato vs RN consisting of:
Hood
Renown
Repule
Rodney
Nelson
Resoution

I have the new GHQ rules and Command at sea, I think we'll be able to run the scenario twice, (once using GHQ, once using command at sea) Will assume clear skies and set leadships just with in vis range. Will also assume RN ships to have FCR typical of the year 1942 for capital ships.

[cbovill]

I only have the Royal Navy and the Kriegsmarine, but I am very tempted to go and buy the Yamato and Musashi (and maybe a second Musashi for a Shinano what-if) and try this out. Of course, then I'm going to want to get all the Iowa's and next thing you know I will be deeply embroiled in building the Pacific campaign way ahead of schedule!

Next fleet is supposed to be the Italian, but I may have to get the Yamato's first and then go back to the plan.

Chris