Comments by "John Fisher" (@johnfisher9692) on "Plan Z - Practical, Effective, or High Seas Fleet Mk2?" video.

Great video The biggest flaw of the Z plan was it required the British and French to do absolutely nothing about expanding and modernizing their Navies. It bears frightening similarity to Tirpitz's Risk-flotte theory which ultimately proved a failure and a disaster for Germany. Strangely teh H-39's had even thinner belt armour than Bismarck and the inclusion of underwater torpedo tubes is strange considering all the problems encountered with them in WW1. It also weakens the hull and reduces watertight integrity. The 'fantasy' H-44 design was to have 20 inch guns and considering all the problems Yamato had with blast effect from her guns, I shudder to think what the effects of these monsters would have. Not to mention the very slow firing rate. With your redesigned German ships Drach, another thing to get rid of is the German obsession with the Triple screw propulsion system. It has been proved that either a twin or quad screw is better as the quad allows steering with the engines in case of rudder damage cough Bismarck cough Navies prefer a quad for larger ships as it provides redundency, which the military loves.
121
@1Korlash Sorry for not being clearer but the blast problem I was thinking about is the effect it would have on the crew. All the light AA guns on Yamato were shielded as the blast effect would have a very high chance of concussing any exposed personal. I can't recall the figures I read but the difference between even 16 inch guns and 18.1 inch is massive. While some say AA guns would not be manned during a surface action, the Japanese developed main gun ammo for the long range AA role. Yamato firing her big guns would cripple the light AA crews just as an air attack was incoming. So I can only imagine the pressure wave from 20 inch guns on any exposed crew.
4
@1Korlash It's something I readmany years ago and, of course, now i go looking I can't find it :( One excellent book I have is "Conway's All the world's Battleships 1906 to present. Edited by Ian Sturton. This states the Blast effects from Yamato's main guns was so severe that all light AA had to be shielded and the ships boats stored below deck. Another lesser evidence is one of the reasons the British did not go for superfiring turrets in their first dreadnoughts was the guns would concuss the crew of the lower turret due to the sighting hoods when fired on certain bearings. The turrets were later redesigned to correct this. Considering these were 12inch guns, the effect of the Yamato's 18.1 inch guns on unprotected crew would be devastating, perhaps even fatal. And the Germans were thinking of 20inch for their fantasy H-44 class.
3
@michaelkovacic2608 Ridiculous statement At point blank range (and what do you mean by that?) NO amount of armour will stop a BB's shell from going straight through except for a lucky angled hit. Rodney's shells punched right through Bismarck's turrets and out the other side. The idea that the relatively thin belt and deck armour of Bismarck would resist the 1,460k shells of Yamaot's 460mm guns traveling at 780 mps is laughable. Clearly German propaganda which has made excuses for Bismarck failings ever since it was sunk by the RN. Of course there is luck involved, it might, repeat Might work once but I certainly wouldn't rely on that. And did I say hitting the same spot ALL the time?? No, that's impossible but at point blank range a BB's shells would go right through any amount of armour you could put on a ship. Since the KGV's had the thickest armour of any ship before Yamato came along, I guess their protection was even better.
2
@michaelkovacic2608 Sloped belt armour is less effective at close range which is what Germans ships seem to be designed for when raiding convoys. So thinning it there seem counter productive if they were caught by an opposing BB. While the sloped armour deck helps here but is less effective at longer ranges. The German practice in WW2 of having it low in the ships leaves more of the ship vulnerable to incoming fire and that deck was thinner than most other Navy's new designs. No armour is truly impenetrable if hit often enough, hard enough and at the right angle
1