Comments by "Bk Jeong" (@bkjeong4302) on "The Drydock - Episode 115" video.

On a serious note I doubt Yamato would initially be treated as a battleship in WWI, since at 27-28kts she's actually faster than all the RN battlecruisers besides Tiger, and even Tiger was only theoretically faster and then only by a couple knots. Beatty would assume she's a very large British-style battlecruiser based on her speed, and then be horrified to find out that she's far more durable and better-protected than anything afloat in WWI (hell Yamato was quite well-protected even by WWII standards, despite the steel quality handicap).
8
That would probably be the last straw for poor Rozhestvensky. After that utter shitshow he now has to fight a battleship from the future that can easily sink every one of his predreadnoughts on her own with little to no damage.... Kamchatka would probably report her as a torpedo boat sighting.
5
He's probably use her to sink the entire Royal Navy and maybe shell London? I mean what can the 1700s RN even do against a WWII-era battleship?
4
Spruance using the Iowas at Truk out of pride (even deliberately preventing the carriers from sinking everything there) was a boneheaded move that actually lowered Japanese losses due to Nowaki's escape. Even without the carriers it's extremely wasteful to use two battleships against a couple of destroyers and a DAMAGED TRAINING SHIP.
4
If we really want to make things hilarious, send the entire WWII-era IJN to Admiral Yi. He'd get incensed at the fact the Japanese came back strong in the naval department (and managed to occupy his nation, with a treaty of dubious legality no less), then he'd probably still find some way to defeat the uptime Japanese fleet (maybe get them stuck on mud flats with the falling tide, or trapped between islands in a narrow channel, etc) Even better: send the IJN fleet to Yi....as a gift. Imagine what one of the best naval officers in history could do with a fleet centuries ahead of his time.
4
@captainobvious9233 WAY overkill for dealing with the Armada. Hell, even Dreadnought would be incredible overkill for the Armada. I think HMS Warrior could solo that on her own.....
3
Kaiju Director Do you know what would be even more hilarious? Rozhestvensky’s reaction when he finds out Togo just received a 65,000 ton (standard displacement) battleship from the future. After the utter trainwreck that his voyage was, seeing Yamato on the Japanese side at Tsushima would probably be the last straw for him.
2
Came up with an even more hilarious version of this: instead of Yamato, send Kitakami back in time to Tsushima. In her “Macross torpedo massacre” configuration with 40 torpedo tubes for a pair of torpedo salvoes with 20 Long Lances per salvo. The ultimate Japanese torpedo boat.
2
@EthanMKim The German ones were crappy and incapable of extended operations like those from most other navies, as well as hilariously unstable.
2
How would WWI admirals react if they were told that carriers would render battleships obsolete by WWII?
2
@CthulhuInc First, I doubt the U-Boats would defect, since unlike the surface fleet the U-boat arm was noticeably Nazified (note that the recorded Kriegsmarine war crimes are all from the U-Boat arm). Second, if the U-boat arm stays but the surface fleet leaves, that probably actually benefits Nazi Germany in the long run.
2
@Norbert_Sattler No fleet carriers. The escort carrier Gambier Bay was sunk by Japanese cruisers (and possibly also by Yamato) at the Battle off Samar, but again, that was an escort carrier, a fleet carrier would be fast enough to just stay out of range if competent (which is why Glorious's loss was a farce; a carrier sunk by the very type of ship the carrier rendered obsolete by that point in time, entirely due to human incompetence).
2
The Japanese did that at Tsushima and the USN did it at Surigao Strait (both sides also deployed destroyers for the same attacks; the USN found the destroyers did a better job at torpedoing enemy battleships, as they sank Fuso; not sure about the performance of the Japanese ones though the night attack at Tsushima did have some effect)
2
@wolfsoldner9029 This one is stupid even without carriers, actually.
2
As someone else mentioned, carrier aircraft eventually ended up doing that in a much better way than torpedo boats ever could.
1
Except that she would be lucky even to fire at one ship at a time, given that carriers had rendered battleships obsolete by increasing battle ranges to hundreds of miles.
1
@TraditionalAnglican Doesn't change the issue of the BB not being able to shoot at a carrier (unless we're talking about CVEs) provided both sides are decently commanded.
1
@Battleground Gamer Any H-class design that was seriously considered is toast, they are still badly armoured compared to the opposition. The H-44 would probably win, though. An A-150 is durable, but having only six guns seriously lowers its effective firepower. I think Yamato would have significantly better chances against an Iowa or a Lion than an A-150 (Yamato would probably be evenly matched as long as visibility was good enough, while an A-150 is going to do badly).
1
@lolfunacount Yamato wasn't unsinkable by gunfire-just really hard to sink that way (really, not easy to sink any way even by the point fo her sinking, but air attacks ensure that you’re too far away to be subject to counterattack, so it’s one-sided. You don’t get that in a gunfight). Granted, every single ship that would actually have even the remotest chance at sinking Yamato in a gunfight was built after torpedoes were invented, so if you go back that far in time there isn't anything that can sink her with guns either. If we're talking practically as opposed to literally unsinkable? Then Yamato's practically unsinkable until the 1930s.
1
Paul Goyne No there really wasn’t. It was a case of people thinking they could hit at such ranges (especially with radar or spotter planes) and finding out they couldn’t. Of course, by that point in time you also run into the whole issue of people thinking battleships were useful and worthwhile investments in WWII when they weren’t (or, in a few cases, knowing they weren’t but building them anyways).
1
@HMSFord After the war was over.
1
@nevalniq No.
1
@tommeakin1732 There's also the cost of the platform. A battleship costs a lot more than a missile destroyer.
1
@redtob2119 How the hell would the Armada even get in range, let alone withstand the secondary and AA battery fire? Even HMS Dreadnought would easily be able to attack with total impunity, any WWII-generation battleship would erase the Armada off the face of the earth, first by shooting them and then by simply running them over.
1
@hughfisher9820 Re; your point on fighters strafing AA gunners, see the Hellcats strafing Yamato with cannons and rockets at Ten-Go. The bad light AA on the Japanese (the 25mm) didn't help but it would still have had more of an impact if they weren't disabled.
1
lolfunacount She’s not really that meme-worthy, given that her pointlessness wasn’t actually unusual and was in fact a common feature of contemporary battleship designs (due to the whole battleship concept being outdated around that time).
1
How would Jellicoe or Scheer react?
1