Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To me the sinkings of the world's two largest battleships (Musashi and Yamoto) by attack from carrier aircraft symbolize the essential obsolescence of battleships brought about by the development of aircraft carriers during World War II. The extra size, larger main guns, and thicker armor of those two giants meant little in the end.
Shore bombardment remained the only significant role for battleships. Sure, they continued to sail as part of the screens for aircraft carriers, but cruisers and destroyers in adequate numbers could fulfill that role just fine.
They were sunk because the Japanese did not wish for them to be captured. They had design flaws but still would have been better off in a naval group. I believe both were sunk alone.
By the time they entered the war they were obsolete to the Japanese.
To me the sinkings of the world's two largest battleships (Musashi and Yamoto) by attack from carrier aircraft symbolize the essential obsolescence of battleships brought about by the development of aircraft carriers during World War II. The extra size, larger main guns, and thicker armor of those two giants meant little in the end.
Shore bombardment remained the only significant role for battleships. Sure, they continued to sail as part of the screens for aircraft carriers, but cruisers and destroyers in adequate numbers could fulfill that role just fine.
I agree with what you are saying but I want to point out any ship without proper air cover is vulnerable to being sunk including aircraft carriers themselves.
The Mushasi, the Yamato and other battleships like the Prince of Wales were sunk because they had little or no air coverage and the enemy was able to attack them for hours with heavy air attack. In fact, I think its interesting how much punishment the WW2 era battleships were able to take before sinking.
For instance, Musashi - first attacked at 10:27 and finally sank at 19:36 after being attacked by at least 6 different American aircraft carriers. Took nine hours and at least 19 torpedo and 17 bomb hits before sinking! Compare that to some of the British and French battleships in the WW1 era. Some of them were sunk by a single German torpedo or like the dreadnaught HMS Audacious because she hit a single mine.
What is your source for that claim? My understanding is that both ships were heavily damaged and capsized of their own accord.
I believe both were sent on suicide missions though I may be wrong about the Musashi. In the case of the Yamato I believe it's orders were to beach itself on Okinawa and fight on with its gun turrets until completely destroyed. I do not have a reference now but I believe that I had read that the Japanese would not suffer its capture of the Yamato because of the name. It has been so long ago I am not even sure of the meaning of the name.
I believe both were sent on suicide missions though I may be wrong about the Musashi. In the case of the Yamato I believe it's orders were to beach itself on Okinawa and fight on with its gun turrets until completely destroyed. I do not have a reference now but I believe that I had read that the Japanese would not suffer its capture of the Yamato because of the name. It has been so long ago I am not even sure of the meaning of the name.
Yamato is the ancient name of Japan and name of the Imperial Dynasty from which the Emperor of Japan hails.
Musashi was named for the greatest samurai warrior of all time and national hero Miyamoto Musashi who lived in the 1600s.
There was actually a third Yamato class battleship named Shinano but it was finished as an aircraft carrier and is also on the bottom of the pacific, courtesy of the US Navy.
...Very big names for that country, to match very big ships.
To me the sinkings of the world's two largest battleships (Musashi and Yamoto) by attack from carrier aircraft symbolize the essential obsolescence of battleships brought about by the development of aircraft carriers during World War II. The extra size, larger main guns, and thicker armor of those two giants meant little in the end.
Shore bombardment remained the only significant role for battleships. Sure, they continued to sail as part of the screens for aircraft carriers, but cruisers and destroyers in adequate numbers could fulfill that role just fine.
True but, they were in transition then. The USS Arizona for example, was laid out in 1914 and completed in 1916 I think when 500lb bombs from above were not the norm. However, once you had these capital assets, you couldn't exactly s-can them just because of newer technology. WWI technology, sunk in WWII. Of course, a sitting duck is hard to defend especially when the defenders were asleep at the wheel.
Explains why the Hood was gone in 10 minutes...it was an older ship with 3" wooden decks....fast for a ship her size BUT, can't take a beating from a battleship, or plane, 20 years later....
Battleships have their place. They are basically floating artillery and missile batteries now. While we can certainly criticize them, say that to the third world nation that can't defeat them. After all, a 16" shell is still a pretty good poor man's cruise missile and get this, the garbage truck battleship can carry hundreds of them if need be along with missiles. So, for the shoreline and back to about 10-20 miles inland, they can rule and deliver some long and sustained punishment capable of knocking significant buildings down, they could have a place in the mobile artillery marine units from time to time.
And just a plug for the American commander Adm Spruance who helped to plan and carry out the strategy against Kurita's force and bring about a decisive victory. His timing of getting American planes sorted for attack was a difficult decision since the fleet was a bit away from the Japanese force. He made the decision to attack even though he knew pilots would be coming back in the dark and some would be lost.
In the 'Imperial Jaoanese Navy' it's noted that the instituting of the American 'battle line', which offered great firepower, helped to draw Japanese air attacks away from the carriers. It was noted the Japanese pilots' inexperience fighting the 'line' was one of the reasons the US air attack was so powerful.
And just a plug for the American commander Adm Spruance who helped to plan and carry out the strategy against Kurita's force and bring about a decisive victory. His timing of getting American planes sorted for attack was a difficult decision since the fleet was a bit away from the Japanese force. He made the decision to attack even though he knew pilots would be coming back in the dark and some would be lost.
I believe you are referring to the Battle of the Philippine Sea, which took place in June 1944. The Musashi was sunk during the Battle of Leyte Gulf (specifically, the Battle of the Sibuyan Sea) in October of that year.
That said, I most certainly agree with your assessment of Admiral Spruance.
They lost almost as many as we did when they sank the Arizona.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
