Added: 4 years ago
From: YamatoTitanic
Views: 484,151
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (1,155)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • If memory serves me correctly what is important is the strength of the armor and during the 30's the Japanese reduced the amount of nickel in their armor substituting copper instead! The US Navy test fired 16 inch AP shells against armor identical to what was fitted on the Yamato. It punched right through the armor plate. Samples of the test results were on display at the Anacosta Navy Yard in Dc during the 60's, but I dont know where they are today.

  • @pickateer IIRC it's still in the Naval Yard. Here's a photo:

    h t t p : / / w w w . h m d b . o r g /Photos/32/Photo32305o.jpg

  • @iced8383 Sorry, that first comment was intended to you, bro...

  • @m4mihulja Sorry man I was trying to stop the comments before they started. It kinda got out of control.

  • @DaveTheSamurai Never mind. If you have some opinions about ships or naval warfare, just spit it out, bro.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @sol3a1 just another thing bro, sorry for be rude with you in the other video,I was thinking about and it was wrong for my part, if I hurt you I am really really sorry ( I'm serious =S is not a joke), is wrong insult people just because they think diferent =), well nothing more to say, see ya =D

  • People I leave this comments, it seems that nobody can think diferent than sol, if you do it you will recibe an answer of him telling you that he is great(and his theories are 99.9% exact, don't need to prove it) and you are wrong, if you dare to answer it, he will begin insulting you,or jump or change to another thing that works fine to him , if you don't belive me just watch the answer of him of this comentary =P

  • Why no anti Japanese comments? Didn't you have a relative among the millions they tortured and murdered in cold blood before and during WW2? Never heard of the Rape of Nanking? The Burma Railway?The Batan Death March?

  • @directorcj75 Because the war is over and hate only brings more hate. Also because people don't like TROLLS!

  • @DaveTheSamurai Then why do you call yourself 'Dave the Samurai?' The war may be over but there are a lot of people who would be living today if they hadn't been ruthlessly tortured and murdered by so-called samuaris, who were actually cowards who raped and killed innocent women and children, not to mention thousands of PoW's in their care. They were the TROLLS not me. And I see you seek to emulate them by trying to protray yourself as one. Sad. Get a life of your own making.

  • @directorcj75 Yeah whatever you hate monger. Isn't it enough the the US dropped to atomic bombs that people still feel the affects of it? It's still killing people today; and its dicks like you that can't things horrible things die because your trying to be some kind of mavrick. Btw the way I had family that fought in that. They made peace with the Japanese matter of fact they married some of them after the war and some Germans too. Go take your bullshit some where else!

  • @DaveTheSamurai I think studying Japanese swordsmanship and having three children of mixed with Japanese; or the fact belong to the Eshin-ryu school of iaido I think I true in protraying my self truthfully. I'm also a proud American with Native American back ground understanding the warrior way.

  • @DaveTheSamurai Understanding the warrior way is to worship war you hypocrite. Not only do you do this, but you criticize others who condemn the ruthless Japanese for their heinous deeds before and during WW2. What about the Korean women they forced into prostitution? Warriors? They were cowards and murderers in the main. Over 3M surrendered in China without so much as firing a shot like a bunch of big girls' blouses, only good for raping and burying people alive. Fact.

  • @DaveTheSamurai The Japanese got what they deserved for their utterly cowardly attack on Pearl Habour and for the millions of innocents they killed. They had the choice to surrender after the first bomb. Those bombs saved thousands of American lives. Your family survived, but millions didn't. If you now choose to sleep with the enemy don't expect others to. And if you hate war why take the name of samurai, men who lived only for killing others? You're such a hypocrite.

  • @directorcj75

    DaveTheSamurai is not a hypocrite. You are just lacking the knowledge.

  • @tmme1234 So much for your opinion. Frankly it carries no weight.

  • @directorcj75

    So much for you brain. Frankly I don't understand what you are talking about.

    He is the one who made a case but has not progressed an inch.

  • @tmme1234 Made a case??? Not progressed an inch? What's an 'inch'? Only Myanamar and the US use this outdated form of measurement. The rest of the world is on metric. Few would understand an 'inch'. You are becoming increasingly outdated and isolated. The 3 words that distinguish between a 3rd and 1st World country are 1.Discipline 2. Organization 3. Maintenance These are being lost in the US these days unfortunately but many there don't realise it. Like frogs being boiled in water.

  • Comment removed

  • @tmme1234 DaveTheSamurai (the self-ordainted couch potato 'warrior' who sits home with hot beer and frigid women) said to me that you are like you are because you are an uneducated homosexual. I don't know about this, but DaveTheSamurai insists he is rigth (he always does). So I leave it to you to take this matter up with him.

  • @directorcj75 Your a fucking racist bigot that will always be ruled by the past and hate. You don't understand the culture or the reasons. If your going roast Japanese people you should try roasting you own like Nazi Germans how did killed 6 million Jews. How the fuck am I a hypocrite? I know how your a idiot tho. Were all guilty of being stupid and killing people letting rich or crazy people run own lives for there own visions and power gains.

  • @DaveTheSamurai Hey bud, can I ask you something?

    What the HELL are you talking about here? You overdrive a little. This is about ships and naval warfare, not about politics, wars and ideologies in generally.

    So, talk about ships, or leave, dude.

  • @m4mihulja Yes, no one wants a violent, swearing fanatic like 'Dave the Samurai' on this site. We are all better off without these sorts of people who promote hatred and killing.

  • @DaveTheSamurai What an articulate and erudite man you are. Your language shows your true identity - a violent and enraged individual. Who said I am a white man? I didn't. Typical of your low intelligence, you assume this. I live in Vietnam. In 1945 the Japanese were directly responsible for the deaths of 2 million, yes 2 million, Vietnamese by way of a huge famine. The Japanese intentially prevented the people from planting their havest. Revenge for Vn fighting for indendence

  • @directorcj75 And further, the Nazis didn't kill 6M Jews. You're just ignorant enough to think so. I have been to camps like Auschwitz in Poland. I have thoroughly and objectively investigated the claims made for the numbers killed at this particular camp. Many were killed, and even one was one too many. But no way were 6M Jews killed in WW2. The Zionists promote this to illicit sympathy from ill educated buffoons like you so they can grab Palestinian land on US dollar handouts.

  • @DaveTheSamurai "Isn't it enough the the US dropped to atomic bombs that people still feel the affects of it? It's still killing people today; and its dicks like you that can't things horrible things die because your trying to be some kind of mavrick" back that up. Too bad for you that you're so wrong on that

    "Go take your bullshit some where else!" you first. As for "effects" there are still Comfort Women and their families dealing with the effects of their repeated rapes

  • @sol3a1

    What do you know about the Comfort Women and how do you support your argumet?

  • @tmme1234: This is not the place for that discussion. Go to the Vids that talk on Comfort Women and ask there. There are Chinese, Korean, Filipino and more vids on the subject

    This vid is on the Yamato and her contemporaries

  • @sol3a1

    So why mentioned it in the first place?

    You are just pretending to know thing by reading some comic book or something, when you don't really have any proper knowledge.

  • @tmme1234 "So why mentioned it in the first place?" it was in response to DaveTheSamurai. Why don't you speak to him about his off the subject comments

    "You are just pretending to know thing" that's your line of BS. Go to any Comfort Women vid and say that. The IJA of the Showa period were animals, not human

    Go to watch?v=V-UwU1-RVWs with me and let's have that out there prick

  • @sol3a1

    Which picture, number or comment convinced you?

    You don't know anything. You just saw a couple of videos and that's it.

  • @tmme1234 "Which picture, number or comment convinced you?" I will say nothing about it here

    My answer to you is here: watch?v=V-UwU1-RVWs

  • @sol3a1

    That's right. This is enough for your brain to convince yourself.

    You don't know background, history, political purposes, legal status, no nothing. You don't even realize that these are important issues. You just mumble things based on some video that someone made for some purpose. That's it. Just being happy with some knowledge that someone want you to think as facts.

  • @tmme1234: I noted that you won't go to another video to discuss it

    Coward, gutless coward

  • @sol3a1

    You mentioned it first. You made a statement.

    Stop pretending. Admit that you are talking about something you don't know as if you are an expert.

  • @tmme1234 "You don't know background" your answers are here:

    /watch?v=V-UwU1-RVWs

    Enjoy

  • @sol3a1

    Oh, it took some time that I thought you were coming up with some more solid, academic, convincing, or whatever evidences ....

    Same video?

    That case I give you the same reply again. Read back.

  • @tmme1234: From San Francisco State University, a good place to start off on your education on how you've been lied to about what you're ancestors did

    online-sfsu-edu/~soh/cw-links.­htm

    UCLA Women's Law Journal from 1994: "Recent Development, 'Comfort Women' of World War II" by Janet L. Tongsuthi

    From the Aussies:

    w w w-academon-com-au/Research-Pap­er-The-Comfort-Women-of-World-­War-II/45496

    Enjoy your reading, and crow

  • @sol3a1

    So what part of it convinced you? You cannot give because you have not read them.

    Anybody can give references, I can give you some, too.

    You made a statement. Based on what?

  • @sol3a1 DavetheSamurai sees himself as a 'warrior'. He's a violent fantatic who promotes and supports what happened in the past. However, so far all he's personally done as a so-called 'warrior' is sit home with the girls and talk big. He should be banned from this site.

  • @directorcj75 So should you for starting shit with people and bringing racist slurs,hate toward Japanese people. In what way have I supported what happened in the past? You seem to still live there. If anyone should be banned it should you. Hey whats wrong sitting at home with a bunch of hot girls and a beer in my hand? Hey that's fine if you swing the other way man that's your business. I see your a Anti-Semite too. Nazi TROLL!

  • @DaveTheSamurai I didn't start shit, you did by impersonating a warrior, swearing and wanting to kill everyone. Couch potatoes like you sit at home with hot beer and fat women. And I'm not a man. Who said I was? Yet another inane supposition by you.Japanese are the most racist in the world. If you'd ever spent time in Japan as I have you'd know that first hand. But they don't stop at slurs. They've tortured, starved, burned and buried alive countless innocent people. Fact.

  • @sol3a1 Hey pal first of all there hockey nutt I wasn't taking to your ass. Second I know about what Japan did to Asia I'm not saying it's good. Do everyone a favor and fuck off fucking shit starter! What were you fucked in the ass by a Japanese solider or something?

  • @sol3a1 Iowa's M1 AP shell could penetrate about 200mm at the farthest distance of her guns (35km). Yamato's main deck was 230mm, and the tower decks were 250mm.

    The Iowa could penetrate even deck of the Yamato at her farthest range.

    So, how can she be sank, only if her deck even isn't penetrated but just hit?

  • @m4mihulja: Iowa's range was 42km, not 35km. But as the Bismarck showed, you don't need your armor belt to be penetrated to be killed. I'd like to know where you get that 35km figure

    A great description of the various armors by Nathan Okun is here: w w w-combinedfleet-com/okun_biz.h­tm

    "So, how can she be sank, only if her deck even isn't penetrated but just hit?" same way Bismarck sank

  • @sol3a1 Iowa's range of guns was most accurately 39km. Her guns cannot have so far range, because her caliber is too small for 42km.

    Yamato's guns had range of 42km (45km, if you circle), because her guns are larger caliber.

    I also got that from my book ''Ships'', 6 authors (UK, US), page 387, quote:

    ''Iowa had the same main armament (405mm) as the S. Dakota and N. Carolina, but with barrels lengthened by 5 calibers. This increased her max. range for 5km (39km).''

    Your proof for 42km?

  • @m4mihulja "Iowa's range of guns was most accurately 39km. Her guns cannot have so far range, because her caliber is too small for 42km" My bad

    410cm/45, Nagato's: Max range 38.7km @ 43deg max turret elevation (it most likely went further)

    Mark 7 406/50 Iowa's: Max range 38.7km @ 45deg elevation

    Type 94 460/45 Yamato's: Max Range 42.1km @46deg elevation

    Yamato had 3.4km range at max advantage. Problem is with Iowa's radar, she'd see Yamato and her shell splashes

    Cont

  • @m4mihulja Part 2: So Iowa can and will hurt Yamato at range, 32.5km+, but so can Yamato hurt Iowa even closer at around 29km+

    That is where Iowa's radar comes in. Iowa's radar had true blind fire capability. On the screens, the Radar techs could see where the shell splashes (within 50yrds) were relative to the target and that information was fed directly into Iowa's FCS automatically

    A good source for USN vs IJN Radar and FCS is here:

    w w w-navweaps-com/index_tech/tech­-086.htm

  • @m4mihulja Part 3: So what makes Iowa, as designed in '43 to '45 on top of Yamato is her FCS which Yamato couldn't match. Take away Iowa's FCS to the level of Yamato's, Yamato will be the beast. Put Iowa's Radar on Yamato, Yamato would still be the beast

    So Iowa's Radar could see over the horizon, OTH, and ghad blindfire (radar would see shells splash relative to target) Yamato's Type 22 Radar could spot a ship out to 24km. Her spotters could theoretically see Iowa out to

    Cont 4

  • @m4mihulja Part 4: From the spotting deck of the Yamato to see enough of the Iowa to recognize it as a ship, and not something else, would be about 35km. Yes, if the ocean was completely still, no clouds nor waves, from the very top of Yamato's mast to see the very top of Iowa's mast is about 45km, but that's spotting a 25cm wide target. To see Iowa's deck would have to be about 30km

    Iowa's radar can see out to 40km (further than it can shoot) all at night, low light, bad weather

  • @sol3a1 Yes all great dude, but I'm just trying to say is that radar is worthless, if you opponent has stronger guns, armor, shells, and range.

    What is Iowa going to do with her 405mm guns and armor of 500mm max., if both of that are weaker than Yamato's guns of 460mm, and armor of 690mm max.?

    Iowa could see, aim and hit the Yamato, but worthless, her guns and shells are too weak to even lightly damage the Yamato.

    You're too much looking on radars, and too little on main performances.

  • @m4mihulja Hey loser, i notice you have not replied to my last comment. I know you normally spit some B.S. out but at this point but to actually just quit replying? You are slipping mate, horribly slipping.

  • @MadMilitiaMen You know what, wretch?

    I have only two words for you - get lost.

    I won't discuss and argue with you anymore, because only thing that you know is insulting and spewing horseshit.

    You just can't talk normally, so I'll leave you to live in your fictional little life.

    I've burned you once, and I'm satisfied with that.

  • @MadMilitiaMen - Let's try to keep this above board. I think we'll make far more headway then

    Do you have anything on the accuracy of Yamato's guns? Or how well she used her Radar? I think that's are best option, calm, cool and just the facts

  • @sol3a1 Also, Yamato could penetrate Iowa's barbette and blow-up her magazine very easily, if she would be lucky enough to hit her there.

    While Iowa couldn't penetrate the Yamato's barbette even in dreams, so all that she can do is worthlessly hit her 100 times and achieve nothing.

  • @sol3a1 I know that Yamato suffered from poor accuracy over 20,000yds. When engaging the Gambier Bay, Yamato fired some 200 rounds and only hit twice AFTER having to move in closer. Yamato's radar was also limited in that it only could spot warships. Iowa's could pick up a Warship and even control gun elevation and traverse to achieve a solution. One of the Iowa class was able to straddle a Jap destroyer at 37,000yds on first salvo.

  • @MadMilitiaMen Yamato's guns were the strongest, and also the most inaccurate at long distances, due to the huge caliber.

    What caliber is smaller, range is smaller too, but the guns are more accurate. The most accurate BB caliber was German 280mm SK/C-34. She was very accurate, but she was too weak, and also she had too small range.

    In Samar, Yamato fired 102 shells at Gambier bay, at 41km, and sank her.

  • @m4mihulja "Yes all great dude, but I'm just trying to say is that radar is worthless, if you opponent has stronger guns, armor, shells, and range" not if they can't see you and you can see them, your shells fall on the thinner deck which you can penetrate

    I said Yamato'd be sunk like Bismarck, she'd be scuttled by her own crew. Iowa's guns didn't have to penetrate the hull, just turn the topside into trash

    I'll take radar and hitting at range over firing wildly everytime

  • @sol3a1 Yamato could see Iowa while she couldn't see him, not opposite as you think, because Yamato's guns had range 5km longer than Iowa's.

    Iowa couldn't scratch Yamato at any range, she could hit her 100 times, she won't achieve anything.

    You can't sink an enemy ship with gunfire, and less indeed if your shells don't even penetrate. Only if you blow her magazine.

    Pure and simple, Iowa can't sink the Yamato, even if she has SSR and GD systems, because her guns are way too weak for that.

  • @m4mihulja "Yamato could see Iowa while she couldn't see him, not opposite as you think, because Yamato's guns had range 5km longer than Iowa's" how does gun range translate into being better able to see? Yamato's guns exceeded her ability to see. Also, how'd you go to Yamato having 5km greater range when I just showed it was 3.4km?

    What range do you have on Yamato's radar and where did you get it? I ask as right now that is the crux of this. What was Yamato's radar type and specs?

  • @sol3a1 Okay, 4km, but it still makes no difference. Yamato could fire at Iowa, while she couldn't return fire, just because smaller range.

    Even if the Yamato's radar couldn't see to that distance, she could just send an E13A Jake seaplane to help track and fire at target.

    Iowa wouldn't have no chance. She couldn't destroy, and less indeed sink the Yamato. Again, even if the Iowa had IFC system in time of WWII, that wouldn't help even a little.

    Guns, armor, shells, range - Yamato wins.

  • @m4mihulja "Okay, 4km, but it still makes no difference. Yamato could fire at Iowa, while she couldn't return fire, just because smaller range" 3.4km/2.2mile fact that Yamato's guns have a longer range than Iowa is not in dispute from me, just how useful that for Yamato as Iowa can see further than she could shoot

    Best radar means you see first and that give you huge advantage, even if there's going to be a fight

    Overview USN vs IJN radar: w w w-navweaps-com/index_tech/tech­-086.htm

  • @sol3a1 So, the Iowa could see further than she can shoot, which means her radar is completely useless.

    Yamato's range of guns was 43km, which means that she could start shooting at Iowa 4km before she could start shooting at her.

    Approximately, Iowa needs 15min. to cross 4km at her top speed of 30 knots. In the meantime, she could be hit with about 20 of 40 shells fired at her.

    You still didn't answer me what would the Yamato's shells do to Iowa?

  • @m4mihulja Yamato's range of guns was 43km, which means that she could start shooting at Iowa 4km before she could start shooting at her" how does Yamato spot Iowa?

    Is Yamato taking evasive action? To see how a ship responds, we know that off Samar, Yamato showed she could move or shoot, not both at the same time. USS N Carolina in '45 showed US Fast BBs could move in figure 8s, do circles and still maintain lock and fire

    "what would the Yamato's shells do to Iowa?" What range?

  • @sol3a1 She could spot her with her radar. For what does the Yamato need maneuvering while firing, when every shell that hits her, is like hit a wall with a tennis ball?

    Also, what range? The farthest, of course (40km), if the...

    Type-91 AP - 510mm, 10km

    Type-1 APS - 560mm, 10km

    Then, what would the Iowa's Mk-7 do to the Yamato, if the...

    Mk-5 AP - 450mm, 10km

  • @m4mihulja "She could spot her with her radar" Yamato could only spot Iowa with radar at less than 24km, well inside Iowa's gun range for 15km

    You still haven't showed where you got your info on Yamato's Type 22 Radar. I gave several refs and you've not. You stated Yamato could see out to 45km. That's only for aircraft

    As far as Yamato's guns vs Iowa's armor, Iowa would get hurt by Yamato's guns. But I've shown Iowa will penetrate Yamato's deck armor before Yamato knows she's there

  • @sol3a1 Wouldn't be completely non-sense that radar which was designed for heavy guns and their 40km range, that it couldn't spot that far?

    As far as I know, the Yamato's Type-22 radar could see to 30km. But, it was upgraded in 1943, when it was improved and fitted with two heavy antennas, which allowed her to spot to 40km away.

    If I'm wrong maybe, it doesn't matter. The Yamato had ''ace in sleeve'', and that was seaplane tracking. She could fire beyond the horizon that way, Iowa couldn't.

  • @m4mihulja "Wouldn't be completely non-sense that radar which was designed for heavy guns and their 40km range, that it couldn't spot that far?" no as radar technology was new and the idea was not to engage 1-on-1. They sailed with fleets, including screening destroyers, etc. While that's more accurate scenario, it doesn't answer the singular Yamato-vs-Iowa

    "As far as I know" I'm far more interested in your sources. 40km range was for groups of aircraft not a BB. Please use your refs

  • @sol3a1 Iowa didn't have SS and AS radars, and.GDS in time of WWII. All of that was installed during her first refit in the 1960. Her radar could spot to 40km, but that didn't mean nothing.

    Her guns had range of only 35km, compared to the range of her radar, that's worthless. Also, her guns weren't so accurate at that distance, and their max. AP was only 200mm.

    Guns do firing, not radar. Radar is practically useless, if guns haven't that far range. I think you are aware of that, bro.

  • @m4mihulja "But, it was upgraded in 1943" Nope.  Yamato received radar in 43, she did not get an upgrade.

  • @iced8383 True, sorry. Yamato received radar in 1943. Before that, she only had rangefinders and optics, as usual BB.

  • @m4mihulja: So before we continue on armor, I am asking you to show what your sources say about Iowa's Mark 8 Main Battery Radar, Mark 13 Fire Director and Mark 38 FCS integrated system vs Yamato's Type 22 Radar

    Yes, Iowa's armor in thinner than Yamato's but again Bismark's armor was never penetrated yet she was scuttled as everything above her armor, like guns but not the turrets, was scrap iron

    You're under the misconception a ship has to be hulled. Know what "mission kill" means?

  • @sol3a1 Where did you get that info that Bismarck armor was never penetrated? I never heard of it. If Bismarck armor was never penetrated, she would continue to operate. But, she was disabled, with all main and secondary guns out of action, plus radar and optics destroyed.

    But she didn't sink, because shellfire can't sink a ship, unless if the magazine blows-up.

  • @m4mihulja: One other thing, the Iowas, indeed all US fast BBs, BB56 to BB64, all used SK and SK-2 Search Radar. It was more than capable of spotting the Yamato at 55km

    pwencycl-kgbudge-com/S/k/SK2_a­ir_search_radar.htm

    This was'nt FC Radar as the 40km range Mark 8 for the main guns of the US fast BBs. It was used to spot as that was almost all what Yamato's radar was good for

    OBTW, here's website from Japan on radars of WW2

    sky-geocities-jp/enokiec/enoki­episode/E-Radar.htm

  • @m4mihulja: Hopefully you'll see why I think US fast BB from '42 on were more than a match for Yamato. Yamato only had Search Radar while Fast BBs had several types:

    Search Radar. Yamato's Type 22 Radar was Search Radar. SK was a far more advanced radar than the Type 22: pwencycl-kgbudge-com SK Radar /S/k/SK2_air_search_radar.htm vs Type 22 /T/y/Type_22_general_purpose_r­adar.htm

    Iowa had Mark 13 Fire Control Radar w w w-navweaps-com/Weapons/WNUS_Ra­dar_WWII.htm Yamato had no FC Radar

  • @m4mihulja: One thing though, if Iowa landed 100 shells on Yamato's deck, Yamato would be dead. Bismarck's hull and magazines were never penetrated as was only her upper, not lower decks

    What happened to Bismark is the 14" and 15" guns of the RN turned everthing ubove bismarck's armor into useless scrap

    20 hits from Iowa on Yamato's superstructure and turrets don't have to penetrate to mission kill Yamato. Wrecking Yamato's main barrels while leaving the turret intact does the same

  • @sol3a1 If the Iowa would finally came into effective range, she would be already lightly damaged. She could start firing at the Yamato, but useless, her guns are too weak to even scratch her.

    How possibly she could sink the Yamato, without penetrating her? Bismarck was hit with 100 shells and penetrated on almost every part, and she still didn't sink, because the ship can't sink from gunfire.

    Iowa couldn't penetrate even the Yamato's deck at her furthest range.

  • @sol3a1 Also, the Yamato's radar could see to 45km, because that's the farthest range of her guns. Her radar was designed exactly for that.

    She could see an enemy ship to 45km, aim and fire at her. Yes, the 460mm guns aren't so accurate at that distance, but they could hit.

    Again, if you ask me, Iowa's radar can see to 100km, but range of her Mk-7 guns is 39km. Range of Type-94 is 43km.

    So, the Yamato could fire at Iowa while she couldn't return fire, due to the smaller range of guns.

  • @m4mihulja "Also, the Yamato's radar could see to 45km" nope. Please show your refs, here's mine:

    pwencycl-kgbudge-com/T/y/Type_­22_general_purpose_radar.htm Range: 13 nautical miles (24 km) battleship

    "range of her Mk-7 guns is 39km. Range of Type-94 is 43km" not quite. You make it seem s there was a 4km diff but from navweaps-com:

    IJN Type 94 max range @ 48deg elevation 42.11km and the USN Mark 7 was 38.72km, 3.4km difference

    IJN Type 22 had only 4% the power of the Iowa's radar

  • @sol3a1 You're thinking that Yamato is some kind of a unarmed target practice vessel, which won't return fire.

    You said that Iowa don't have to penetrate the Yamato to sink her, so that would take hell of a lot of time, and counting her size and armor, makes her difficult to sink.

    In the meantime while Iowa shells Yamato, Yamato closes in, and returns fire. That makes Iowa doomed, because Yamato's shells are 5 times stronger, and her armor 20 times stronger.

  • @sol3a1 Bismarck wasn't sank by gunfire at all. She was sank by few torpedoes from CA HMS Dorsetshire.

    In fact, you can't sink a BB with gunfire. Only if you manage to hit her in magazine. You can destroy a BB with shells, but not sink it, if you know what I mean.

    Bismarck and Kirishima are prime example of that.

    Yamato could be hit with 100 405mm shells from Iowa, she wouldn't sink even if the Iowa's shells penetrate her. And they could penetrate vital parts of her even at medium range.

  • @directorcj75: This is not the venue for that line of questioning

  • (con3)as WWII and someone wins or lose or whatever it happens that can be take as a real answer, but just some "facts" and ideas don't make a RULE, if that is, why to make a Large Hadron Collider?why play games if you already know the end of the game?remember that in life, little things bring big surprise so please, stop bulling, at least respect the opinion of the owner, is his video, if you want fight enter in a debate forum or make your own video please =)

  • (con2sorry I put wrong the label of cont XD)stop fighting, and i repeat, I love the yamato, but it will be fool of my part think that just because I think that is great it will be unsinkable, and in a battle between iowa and yamato are to close of mighty to say: yeah yamato can win and sink 100 iowas, maybe other come and say: iowa can sink 100 yamatos, but we CAN'T REALLY KNOW, because there was/is/willbe a battle to PROVE it,if you build a yamato and put in battle with an iowa with all as(con3

  • (con1)first shoot or I remember that, why bismarck don't sink other ships, the facts said that he can sunk anyship in the first shoot because hood, the "facts" are "facts" in diferents situations, if we take the fact of bismarck sinking hood is one shot, but with other ships was not, so stop, sorry but is bulling, have "facts" don't bring you the real answer,so you have make an excelent debate here, but no ona has the answer, just facts and everybody need to make their OWN OPINION and stop(con1)

  • (con)is like titanic, people say:if the captain don't make turn the ship and hit the iceberg in front it will float and nobody die, well,guest what? we can't know because nobody will make a titanic and sink it for fun, for example, something that I see that many take as a rule si that the BB are extremely accuracy, so hard that the can't fail a single shot(to end with your radar vs distance) if they were so extremely exact, why the bismark didn't sink another ship?he sink hood with the(con1)

  • as usually sol contest with his tipical: I don't care nothing I come with the "TRUE" so you must think as I, bro if you really hate the yamato so much make your video, why are you in all videos of yamato telling your "facts" I read all what you said but it don't make me change of mind, you can't go in life trying to make all people think like you, you and m4m can fight all your life bringing "facts" and never will change of mind because are just things that CAN'T PROVE ANITHING in real life(con)

  • @MaxFockerSchvals "I don't care nothing I come with the "TRUE" so you must think as I" I did? Oh, you mean the evidence I brought to the table

    "hate the yamato so much" I don't hate the Yamato. I take, based on evidence especially the superior US Radar and FCS that Iowa and possibly the N Carolina and SoDak class BBs are more than a match for Yamato

    "it don't make me change of mind" that's okay, some people still think the buy-bull is the word of some god

  • @sol3a1 Fuck you, Fuck you & Re-Fuck you

    My Book sources are the following:

    Aircraft of the Aces Imperial Japanese Navy Aces of WW2

    A Battle History of the Imperial Japanese Navy

    Submarines Of The Imperial Japanese Navy 1904 - 1945 D-Days in the Pacific Goodbye, Darkness: A Memoir of the Pacific War

    As For WebSites, I Use Several

    where Are YOUR Backups bitch? Prove the SoDak took 2 14" shells and Explain how She was Getting whipped you asswipe, You have'n proved nothing, 50 year old drunk

  • @sol3a1 yeah everyone lets just believe the 50 year old drunk fuck that the Kirisihma, a Whole Battleship Sunk from a Leak that Lasted a Whole Day

    Aircraft of the Imperial Japanese Navy Taught me about How Did The IJN Navy Aircraft Dominated your Entire airforce earning a 12:1 kill/loss Ratio. yeah, Swallow It Hard, They did

  • @dividednations44 i Also Suggest you Watch a Movie Called "Letters from Iow Jima"

  • @dividednations44 "where Are YOUR Backups bitch?" for which statement? I'll be happy to provide as many as I can for each one you care to name

    "You have'n proved nothing" as I've said in my video, "Science Terminology 101", "proofs" are in law, math and alcohol

    "50 year old drunk" again, I'm neither. I'm not 50, yet, nor do I like to be drunk. It sucks the next morning. I do enjoy fine beers, Stouts, Brown Ales, Porters, but drink for pleasure, not intoxication

  • @sol3a1 so you take the radar, i take the armor, guns, and significant importance to japanese people, so to me I like more yamato, if you like more iowa MAKE A VIDEO, but stop bulling others,bro you are an old man, don't act as a kid that want to make his will, you put your "evidences"(I apreciated and read them all) but that will not make all people think like you so please, stop bulling people in their videos and RESPECT others opinions, would you do that?

  • @MaxFockerSchvals "just things that CAN'T PROVE ANITHING in real life" actually that's not true. People used to (some still do) believe the world was flat or you can "fall off the edge". Facts and evidence changed that for 99.9% of the world

    "we can't know" that's correct. We can't know everything but we can go on probability based on real data. I won't say Iowa would win every. The odds favor Iowa strongly over Yamato based on ship capabilities

  • @sol3a1 So, generally speaking, you want to say is that you admit that you were wrong about INS Kirishima being sank from USS Washington's gunfire? I'm glad, pal.

  • @m4mihulja "So, generally speaking" my goal was to see if you actually read any of what I gave for refs. Had you, you'd seen where the USN stated the Kirishima was scuttled

    I tested you

  • @sol3a1 Yes. that's way I said ''generally speaking'', because I realized that you posted many unnecessary evidences, but you said that you admit you were wrong, in other words.

  • @m4mihulja "Yes. that's way I said ''generally speaking'', because I realized that you posted many unnecessary evidences" then why didn't you come out and show me where the USN stated the Kirishima was scuttled?

    Here's the real issue, you won't go and look at what other people post and give you to check out

    What's happening here is you're agreeing with the USN that the Kirishima was scuttled. I'm going by the IJN Officers who stated that they had been told abandon, not scuttle her

  • @m4mihulja "I'm glad, pal" I'm glad too but it was the USN that concluded, without direct evidence, that Kirishima was scuttled. IJN Officers on her reported something a little different

  • @sol3a1 Well, I gave you my evidence and a conclude based on logistics, that appears to be more reliable and objective than your evidences, so far.

    So, it's proven - Kirishima was scuttled.

  • @m4mihulja: To get back to this topic, Iowa's Radar had 10 times the resolution and 25 times the power of Yamato's Type 22

    The resolution of Iowas radar meant she could see where her shells hit in the water relative to the target and adjust accordingly meaning she had true "Blind Fire", ie firing at something where she could visually see the target nor where the shells landed

    25x power meant range was greater and truly "Over The Horizon" 25miles. Yamato was limited to 13miles/24km

  • @sol3a1 for me is yamato even with the radar to iowa, and you can keep telling me why the radar is the best advantage but for me I don't belive it (sorry) =S I prefer armor, guns =) because i have a rifle, and i have great eyes, my rifle have a range of 75m but that give in the target is other thing, and I don't take it as you take that iowa has more, one shoot and any of them can be sunk =) so is just the luck of who hit first(first shoot is not a rule of hit target)so we can keep this 4ever =(

  • @MaxFockerSchvals "radar is the best advantage but for me I don't belive it" C'est la vie. As I stated, there are people who claim Bast is alive and well

    "because i have a rifle, and i have great eyes, my rifle have a range of 75m but that give in the target is other thing" poor analogy. better would you being in/on a car that's moving and you're with a rifle. Still, your "great eyes" are wonderful, but I'd go with the guy with the scope over your eyeball

  • @sol3a1 read about "Simo Häyhä", he didn't like to use scope and kill almost 540 even enemy snipers with scope =) so, have scope didn't bring all the chances for win, almost for him that kill snipers without it XD

  • @sol3a1 hahaha first I use an easy example of have the things and do the things is not the same, but as always you jump to use scope, now that I tell you about somebody don't using it and kill some with it, you jump to another thing XD

  • @MaxFockerSchvals "first I use an easy example" no Max you used a poor, at best, analogy that doesn't hold up

    The Ocean is an almost featureless place where there are few places to hide. The trick is to see the enemy first. Japan's optics were great, one of if not the best in the world, better than what the US had

    But the USN Radar was far better and could spot ships faster. I didn't change, I left you in the dust as you can't grasp what was said

  • @MaxFockerSchvals He's Too Drunk To put His hands on a Book, Poor Bastard

  • @sol3a1 ok, I try to don't be rude, but you show again that you are just a bully as I told you before, I come here trying to change what happen in the other page where we insult and fight, if you see I never tell you drunk, or something insulting you, now here you show your "knowledge" insulting others for think diferent than you, thanks for showing us who are you really =)

  • @MaxFockerSchvals "ok, I try to don't be rude" you try to be while attempting to hide. Your attempt at diplomacy's hollow and worthless as you're a hypocrite

    "you are just a bully as I told you before" no, I'm a person who goes for the facts and evidences, not to mention using correct analogies to make a point

    "show your "knowledge" insulting others for think diferent" not at all, my scorn's for people who think their opinions mean squat when destroyed by facts and evidence

  • @sol3a1 Hm, where were we, dude?

    Yamato, Iowa, Kirishima, Washington, Midway, Pearl Harbor or something tenth now?

  • @m4mihulja I can't remember.

  • @m4mihulja @Iced8383: I'm going to end my participation here. Had the Iowa NOT had her advanced Radar, Yamato would be the beast

    Or If Yamato had equal radar to Iowa's, Yamato would STILL be the beast. I'd say she'd take Iowa at least 6 times out of 10 in a fight if their Radar/FCS were equal, a solid 7+ out of 10 IF they had no Radar

    Iowa's ability was to be able to see, fire and hit first

  • @sol3a1 But, you're looking too much on radars and FCS, and too little on armor, armament, shells, and range, dude.

    Radar on WWII BB's was practically worthless if the opponent had stronger guns, armor, shells and better range.

    What could the Iowa do with her IFCS, if her guns couldn't penetrate the Yamato, if her armor was too weak to withstand the Yamato's shells, and if her radar was worthless because she had range of guns?

  • @sol3a1

    "I'm a person who goes for the facts and evidences,"

    I don't think so, Mr YouTube. You just see some YouTube video and that's it.

    You don't respect the truth. To find the truth, you don't even make an effort to listen to the other side of arguments. It never occurs to you that in anything, one has to look at things from different angles to find approach the truth. For you, facts and evidences are just a means of proving your hypocritical view.

  • @tmme1234 "I don't think so, Mr YouTube. You just see some YouTube video and that's it" well as you're a guy/gal (both?) who doesn't seem to care or know what facts and evidence is, what you say isn't important to me

    I knew about Comfort Women over 35 years ago. As I learned more, I realized just how prevalent it was and how Japan's shame hasn't stopped

    "For you, facts and evidences are just a means of proving your hypocritical view" If I have facts and evidence it's not hypocritical

  • @sol3a1 back it up you lying bitch

  • @dividednations44 We decided not to insult each other anymore, due to the fact that, if we do, the debate is worthless pile of angry idiots.

    We cannot prove anything and we won't listen anyone if we just hate and insult each other.

  • @sol3a1 Yamato could fire at Iowa, while she couldn't return, just due to the smaller range of guns.

    Even if she manages to enter the effective range for her guns, her guns are still too weak to penetrate the armor of Yamato, bro.

    So, I want to say is that even if she had the, SSR and GDS IFC system in time of WWII, her armor and guns are way too weak to even scratch the Yamato.

  • @iced8383 Yamato could detect ships at that far range, due to the fact that her radar could detect at range of her guns. If not, radar her would be worthless.

    Her radar could detect to 40km, which is her guns range. Iowa's radar could detect to 100km, if you ask me, her guns had range 5km less than Yamato's.

    So, Yamato could fire at Iowa, while she couldn't return fire, not opposite.

  • @m4mihulja "Yamato could detect ships at that far range" No, she couldn't. Her radar could not see BTH while Iowa's could. "Her radar could detect to 40km, which is her guns range. Iowa's radar could detect to 100km" Air radar maybe. Surface no. Iowa could detect ships around 40000 yards with her radar. Yamato could only fire accurately upon a ship with radar out to around 27000 yards.

  • @sol3a1 Ah fuck, I'm kinda sleepy today, I meant COULDN'T at my last sentence in that comment sent to you...

  • Comment removed

  • @MaxFockerSchvals Yes friend, I agree with your opinion about everything. I think we should acknowledge that, and start debating normally.

    I also think, that sol3a1 should read that.

  • @MaxFockerSchvals "many take as a rule si that the BB are extremely accuracy" they aren't. Optics are good but Radar, especially radar that ties into the FCS and gunnery control make it far better

    At night BB56 fired 117 16" shells with Radar and hit Kirishima 9 times or 7.7% Kirishima however hit SoDak twice with 14" (but many more from her secondaries) after firing over 60 at her for 3.4%

    That's Iowa's advantage over Yamato. She can see, hit and run before Yamato see her

  • @sol3a1 Just on little question about radars and FCS, bro.

    Why do you think that if a WWII BB had a radar and IFC system, was the best and she could easily outclass any other?

  • @sol3a1 Secondly, my proof is from a book called ''Battleships'' author Peter Hore an UK naval expert, served in the RN from 1960-2000, page 161, quote:

    ''The INS Kirishima was heavily damaged by USS Washington, reducing her speed to 20 knots. When her crew realized that they couldn't escape the USN force, they scuttled her on November 15, 1942.''

    So, you satisfied now? If you still don't believe in this, by some miracle, Google: ''Peter Hore Battleships'', and at least see the front page.

  • @m4mihulja "First, there's a one simple fact based on logistics" that's speculation, not a fact. However I will say that while the Kirishima was being towed, Adm Kondo ordered the ship abandoned, which is why she only lost 260 men. The small problem of her scuttling vs poor damage control was that she capsized to Port (although she was hit on the starboard side) DURING the abandon ship. Not the time for scuttling

    I never said she sank during the battle, just that poor DC doomed her

  • @sol3a1 Now listen please, - In contrast to mine, your sources are web pages. I don't say that web pages are completely unreliable info, but in at least 80% of cases they are.

    I don't acknowledge your sources, just due to that.

    I understand that people always support their country. You're an example. Everywhere works like that. But, I'm one of rare who are against that, because that's subjective and that's also present in my country, but somewhat different.

  • @sol3a1 I'm dead serious, bro.

    A fight isn't leading nowhere. It's just a boredom consisted of a few idiots who won't insult each other. If you want, we can all start talking normally and listen to each other, with giving our evidences.

    If not, this won't end for 1000 of years.

  • @m4mihulja "A fight isn't leading nowhere" I agree but evidence does. I've listed my sources, multiple times. you and everyone else can see them. I think you should do the same. Below you call out admiraldma for his book yet when I ask you to give page and quote you've given for your books, I get silence

    Acceptable to you or not, I gave my refs. Time for you to do the same, with page and revision numbers if you're using books

  • @m4mihulja: In the spirit of not fighting, just providing evidence, what evidence do you have SoDak's damage was the result of her battle with Kirishima? The evidence I provided shows that while SoDak was damaged by Kirishima the worst, her electrical system was done by her ow crew

    Also, Kirishima was not scuttled but the victim of poor DC practices. I gave that evidence too. Do you have evidence that shows she was scuttled?

    As for the "US never saying we're wrong", we do that

  • @sol3a1 Okay, If you and your friends aren't going to insult us anymore, we'll do the same, dude.

    I listed my sources several times, but obviously, you don't care about it. My sources are coming from two books. One books is about ships in WWI and WWII, and the other one is about BB's in WWI and WWII. Both are written by experienced naval experts, and I trust them very much.

  • @m4mihulja "I listed my sources several times, but obviously, you don't care about it" I care about it, that is why I asked you to say the name, authors, and revision of the book, along with the relevant page numbers. Otherwise it's impossible to verify

    "In contrast to mine, your sources are web pages" those sources everyone can see. They've their own refs

    "I understand that people always support their country" support's one thing, blind allegiance is another, I don't do the latter

  • @sol3a1 So, I see that you want my proof for Kirishima being scuttled.

    First, there's a one simple fact based on logistics. Ship was already heavily damaged by USS Washington, but it temporary managed to escape. So, if she was sank by gunfire from the USN BB, she would sank immediately. But, she sank after the battle, not during it.

    Admiral Kondo realized that they couldn't escape the USN chasing them, with 20 knots reduced speed, so he ordered crew to scuttle her.

  • @m4mihulja "Admiral Kondo realized that they couldn't escape the USN chasing them" actually he order Abandon Ship due to her being un-steerable and that she was barely doing 5 knts

    What is not known by the USN, where Mr. Hore got his info - go ahead, check his sources) was how fast and when Kirishima sank. The idea was probably to