Comments by "" (@TheArklyte) on "IJN A-150 / Super Yamato - Guide 391 (NB)" video.

It's funny how despite all the claims about carriers killing battleships, we live in an era where simple destroyer(though size of modern destroyers makes that classification questionable) have complete firepower superiority even over those paper only battleships in all regards. Range, firepower, precision, amount of simultaneously sent to stone age targets. Though I'd have to give those old timers one thing, VLS full of Tomahawks doesn't look or sound as cool😅
8
Drach, I know that 1st of April is past, but have you considered what could have been the final dead end of the "size race"? For example let's consider unlimited budget and political backing that would be right in place for vanity project of planetary governor in 40k universe. The guy wants his big boat. What would it be like?😅
6
@brendonbewersdorf986 wanna hear a joke? IJA captured many examples of european autocannons in use by chinese army in 1938. IJA had many examples of 3,7cm Flak 18/36 in their inventory and told IJN nothing about it. Not to mention swiss 20mm autocannons.
4
@JohnSmith-of2gu idk about ships, but on tanks rule of thumb is 20% less efficient and it's better to have a thinner plate that you can space away from thicker plate. However tanks don't deal with plunging fire... most of the time. So an option with two plates half the thickness is a definite no and option with best you can make plus extra needs said extra to be thicker then you initially expect. Plus said outer plate won't hold for long.
1
@kemarisite yes, but that yielded results in 1942(plus time to develop it). Flak 18/36(both of 8,8cm and 3,7cm variety) were available to copy in 1937-1938. IJA produced almost a thousand 8,8cm ones for their own use from 1938 onwards so there were free engineers capable of doing reverse engineering available. And I'd say that while Bofors is a better gun, having Flak 18/36 from 1938+ onwards is better then having 40/60 in 1942+ onwards.
1
@bkjeong4302 so you're saying that cruiser submarines made carriers obsolete?
1