@bweber2k Not really unless you find it impressive that if they fire a full salvo broadside it will move a 90,000ton floating chunk of steel about 20ft sideways in the water.
@SuperShinKicker I have read that the apparent movement in the water is actually shock waves from the muzzle blast making the ship look as if it moves sideways but the ship does not move at all.
@Robkat3751 From a full broadside (all 9 guns) the ship moves about 12" in the water; however, full broadsides were discontinued in WWII due the immense stress on the hull. A 3-gun salvo (1 from each turret) is now considered a "broadside". The concussion is intense, as is the heat wave. I think it's impossible to describe what it feels like to stand on the deck when the guns are fired.
What looks like a side-ways wake is just the water being broiled up by the muzzle blasts. The ship doesn't move an inch or even heel from a broadside.
The guns have a recoil slide of up to 48 inches and the shock is distributed evenly through the turret foundation and the hull structure. The mass of a 57,000 ton ship is just too great for the recoil of the guns to move it. Well, theoretically, a fraction of a millimeter.
@Robkat3751 Water disturbance is true. From a FULL broadside, it does move. Spent 3-1/2 years on the Wisconsin. When we recommissioned the ship in 1988 I had the privilege of meeting some of the WWII sailors. From their accounts, you were warned to step away from the bulkheads prior to firing a broadside due to the ship's movement. The same information was passed along from sailors from different areas of the ship. Old Snipes told us the safe areas to stand in the ER during gun shoots.
@Shaoraan moron, effectiveness is proven success, not getting sunk on your first trip, which is as ineffective as can be. Americans employ what we got the best. Nobody can battle that. Our k/d ratio in battle has always been the best, and always will be. the only force that had a better one than us in a single conflict, was the confederacy, in the civil war. Take sherman tanks for example.. .in no way shape or form the best tank in that war... but yet it did the most
@Shaoraan And as far as "most effective" battleships go the USS Texas Battleship which was a 1917 Dreadnaught was a highly more effect and useful tool then Yamato class ever was. (Flagship of European Fleet and eventually Pacific, D-Day Invasion, Iwo Jima and other battles).
@Shaoraan Thats what I said, 2 canceled 1 carrier 2 battleships. But your previous response was that these were so much more advanced then the American battleships and that just simply is not the case. They were hastily designed and had to be refitted after construction because of design flaws. A torpedo attack nearly took the Yamato out in 1943 which caused her to go back for major repairs. In the over all scheme of things they had little or no effect on the war. They were more of a symbol.
@Shaoraan 5, 2 cancelled 3 lost. 2 being battleships 1 being carrier. Carrier sunk by sub, 2 battleships sunk by carrier planes. The Airforce wanted the resources to go towards more carriers (which would have been smart) and the design was actually rushed through and many things had to be changed along the way. And as far as recruitment of better trained pilots, jap pilots would keep going out on missions until they died. US pilots got there experience and were sent back to train the next batch.
@Shaoraan Technically it wasnt because it was more advanced then the American battleships and in fact the Iowa Class Battleships were and still are the most advanced class of battleships built. However what the Japanese did was ignore the 1918 Treaty that stated no country shall build guns larger then 16inch. Yamato was just bigger plain and simple. Japanese wasted to much time, energy, and resources on 1 ship when they needed to build more planes and recruit better pilots to save the yamoto.
@Shaoraan this is my last reply, im tired of arguing, the HMS Hood was a battlecruiser, not a battleship, it had the guns of a battleship but much more weaker armor, the hood was old and in much need of a total refit especially in having heavier deck armor installed, ask anyone british, they wont disagree with me, it should have never gone up against bismarck in its condition, but it had a reputation to uphold, ive enjoyed the debate, has anyone even found the wreck of the Shinano?
@Shaoraan im not arguing about size and armor, the yamato was the biggest and most heavily armored, but by ww2 technology made it so that size diddnt always make the difference, as I stated, the us 16 inch 50 cal. had almost as much penetrating power as the japanese 18s, and our fire control radars made ours more accurate,hence the equalizer,your country has a battleship that won a great battle in 1905, and its the last one left of its kind, its admiral Togos, IJN Mikasa.
@Shaoraan you must be stupid , and dont research truthful history, im tired of arguing with someone who thinks he knows all and knows nothing, I have tried to learn you politely about battleships,, which I have researched since childhood, you have been watching the yamato movie too much, look up the videos on uss north carolina, there is an aerial film with her firing all 9 at once.and she isnt even as advanced as the Iowas.
@Shaoraan a full broadside is all main guns fired at once, which any modern battleship could do, you must be very young,read some more history and then ill discuss it with you,if you would like to see what was called a rolling broadside, not a full broadside, look on here at HMS victory and look her rolling broadside, she is over 200 years old and it is most interesting.
@Shaoraan most batlleships and all u.s. batlleships could fire a full broadside,you need to research, and as far as the okinawa mission, yamato was on a suicide mission as a decoy,im sure a u.s. battleship if it had the chance would have engaged yamato anyday,and if you want to talk about planes on ships, just what do call what your aircraft did to our fleet at anchor, by surprise i might add,and who still has battleships, we do,yamato is a fish farm now.
@Shaoraan the U.S 16 inch 50 caliber has nearly as much penetration as the japanese 18 inch, the U.S had a highly superior fire control which means much more accuracy, ill pit an Iowa or even a North Carolina or South Dakota class against a yamato class any day, bigger doesnt always mean better,and ill close with a question, what nation never lost a battleship at sea? in or out of action, and by the way, most of the other japanese battleships used used in world war 2 were British built .
@daniellashannon The Battleships, around the Country can be activated when needed. (forget the laws). The Battleships are better off as tourist attraction than sitting in a ship yard due to money issues. The Gov't would rather these awesome ships rest with civilian upkeep and funding from the public. The Navy has never intentionally sank a Battleship like they have aircraft carriers. Do not worry, these ships are the BEST and the U.S. is preserving them wisely!
Yes, Battleships are very expsnsive to operate and maintain because they were nearly 50 years old and the tactic of hurling shells at ships was out dated and missiles became the primary means of off-shore bombardment while bombers and attack planes took over the role of taking out other hardened targets.
I wonder how many marines were deaf after that :D. Video can't even show how loud it is. You can pump your volume as up as possible but it still isn't loud enough.
On Wisconsin!!!!!!!
chubsmagoo 1 month ago
It would be cool to take an Iowa Class battleship back to the 1600s erra. Bricks would be shat.
DanSVT03 2 months ago
@DanSVT03 No shit. A country with such a ship in the 17th century would be undefeatable at sea.
kattowitz4 1 month ago
God bless America and her military forces all around the world!!!
akalso2000 3 months ago
Okay....it shot several thousands of dollars of ammo,,,,I'm I suppose to impressed?
bweber2k 3 months ago
@bweber2k Not really unless you find it impressive that if they fire a full salvo broadside it will move a 90,000ton floating chunk of steel about 20ft sideways in the water.
SuperShinKicker 2 months ago
@SuperShinKicker I have read that the apparent movement in the water is actually shock waves from the muzzle blast making the ship look as if it moves sideways but the ship does not move at all.
Robkat3751 2 months ago
@Robkat3751 From a full broadside (all 9 guns) the ship moves about 12" in the water; however, full broadsides were discontinued in WWII due the immense stress on the hull. A 3-gun salvo (1 from each turret) is now considered a "broadside". The concussion is intense, as is the heat wave. I think it's impossible to describe what it feels like to stand on the deck when the guns are fired.
Awesome01Here 2 months ago
@Awesome01Here this is quoted from what I read
What looks like a side-ways wake is just the water being broiled up by the muzzle blasts. The ship doesn't move an inch or even heel from a broadside.
The guns have a recoil slide of up to 48 inches and the shock is distributed evenly through the turret foundation and the hull structure. The mass of a 57,000 ton ship is just too great for the recoil of the guns to move it. Well, theoretically, a fraction of a millimeter.
Robkat3751 2 months ago in playlist Naval offensive guns
@Robkat3751 Water disturbance is true. From a FULL broadside, it does move. Spent 3-1/2 years on the Wisconsin. When we recommissioned the ship in 1988 I had the privilege of meeting some of the WWII sailors. From their accounts, you were warned to step away from the bulkheads prior to firing a broadside due to the ship's movement. The same information was passed along from sailors from different areas of the ship. Old Snipes told us the safe areas to stand in the ER during gun shoots.
Awesome01Here 2 months ago
I wish we'd use these on illegal immigrant boats!
EXTREME Prejudice, hehe.
BarryDennen12 3 months ago
these are 406mm guns
WickedrWil 4 months ago
nice
holland787 6 months ago
ah man it would be epi if the captain yelled FIRE
GAYmPOWER 6 months ago
@Shaoraan moron, effectiveness is proven success, not getting sunk on your first trip, which is as ineffective as can be. Americans employ what we got the best. Nobody can battle that. Our k/d ratio in battle has always been the best, and always will be. the only force that had a better one than us in a single conflict, was the confederacy, in the civil war. Take sherman tanks for example.. .in no way shape or form the best tank in that war... but yet it did the most
grimm61111 8 months ago
@Shaoraan And as far as "most effective" battleships go the USS Texas Battleship which was a 1917 Dreadnaught was a highly more effect and useful tool then Yamato class ever was. (Flagship of European Fleet and eventually Pacific, D-Day Invasion, Iwo Jima and other battles).
Boredout454 9 months ago
@Shaoraan Thats what I said, 2 canceled 1 carrier 2 battleships. But your previous response was that these were so much more advanced then the American battleships and that just simply is not the case. They were hastily designed and had to be refitted after construction because of design flaws. A torpedo attack nearly took the Yamato out in 1943 which caused her to go back for major repairs. In the over all scheme of things they had little or no effect on the war. They were more of a symbol.
Boredout454 9 months ago
@Shaoraan 5, 2 cancelled 3 lost. 2 being battleships 1 being carrier. Carrier sunk by sub, 2 battleships sunk by carrier planes. The Airforce wanted the resources to go towards more carriers (which would have been smart) and the design was actually rushed through and many things had to be changed along the way. And as far as recruitment of better trained pilots, jap pilots would keep going out on missions until they died. US pilots got there experience and were sent back to train the next batch.
Boredout454 9 months ago
@Shaoraan Technically it wasnt because it was more advanced then the American battleships and in fact the Iowa Class Battleships were and still are the most advanced class of battleships built. However what the Japanese did was ignore the 1918 Treaty that stated no country shall build guns larger then 16inch. Yamato was just bigger plain and simple. Japanese wasted to much time, energy, and resources on 1 ship when they needed to build more planes and recruit better pilots to save the yamoto.
Boredout454 9 months ago
@Shaoraan this is my last reply, im tired of arguing, the HMS Hood was a battlecruiser, not a battleship, it had the guns of a battleship but much more weaker armor, the hood was old and in much need of a total refit especially in having heavier deck armor installed, ask anyone british, they wont disagree with me, it should have never gone up against bismarck in its condition, but it had a reputation to uphold, ive enjoyed the debate, has anyone even found the wreck of the Shinano?
dhamrick100 10 months ago
@Shaoraan im not arguing about size and armor, the yamato was the biggest and most heavily armored, but by ww2 technology made it so that size diddnt always make the difference, as I stated, the us 16 inch 50 cal. had almost as much penetrating power as the japanese 18s, and our fire control radars made ours more accurate,hence the equalizer,your country has a battleship that won a great battle in 1905, and its the last one left of its kind, its admiral Togos, IJN Mikasa.
dhamrick100 10 months ago
@Shaoraan you must be stupid , and dont research truthful history, im tired of arguing with someone who thinks he knows all and knows nothing, I have tried to learn you politely about battleships,, which I have researched since childhood, you have been watching the yamato movie too much, look up the videos on uss north carolina, there is an aerial film with her firing all 9 at once.and she isnt even as advanced as the Iowas.
dhamrick100 10 months ago
@Shaoraan a full broadside is all main guns fired at once, which any modern battleship could do, you must be very young,read some more history and then ill discuss it with you,if you would like to see what was called a rolling broadside, not a full broadside, look on here at HMS victory and look her rolling broadside, she is over 200 years old and it is most interesting.
dhamrick100 10 months ago
@Shaoraan most batlleships and all u.s. batlleships could fire a full broadside,you need to research, and as far as the okinawa mission, yamato was on a suicide mission as a decoy,im sure a u.s. battleship if it had the chance would have engaged yamato anyday,and if you want to talk about planes on ships, just what do call what your aircraft did to our fleet at anchor, by surprise i might add,and who still has battleships, we do,yamato is a fish farm now.
dhamrick100 10 months ago
@Shaoraan most batlleships and all u.s. batlleships could fire a full broadside,you need to research.
dhamrick100 10 months ago
ftw
power1banane1 10 months ago
@Shaoraan the U.S 16 inch 50 caliber has nearly as much penetration as the japanese 18 inch, the U.S had a highly superior fire control which means much more accuracy, ill pit an Iowa or even a North Carolina or South Dakota class against a yamato class any day, bigger doesnt always mean better,and ill close with a question, what nation never lost a battleship at sea? in or out of action, and by the way, most of the other japanese battleships used used in world war 2 were British built .
dhamrick100 10 months ago
Jack Sparrow would scream like a girl !
justlivemyway 10 months ago
A cannon is a muzzleloading smooth bore gun.
yiblon 1 year ago
HOW MUCH SHOTS PER BARREL:/
ruizhi567 1 year ago
USA aint nothing to fuck with.
gab1105 1 year ago
Peace through superior fire power.
MrThunderMetal 1 year ago
Oh man! holy crap!
BatangBato55 1 year ago
I love battleships. who doesn't love them. if u don't. then go jump off a cliff.
USSWISCONSIN64 1 year ago
i fart stronger than that
marin697 1 year ago
Wow was it loud.
Why2bless 1 year ago
im from WI yea Buddy
lilnicejess 1 year ago
@daniellashannon The Battleships, around the Country can be activated when needed. (forget the laws). The Battleships are better off as tourist attraction than sitting in a ship yard due to money issues. The Gov't would rather these awesome ships rest with civilian upkeep and funding from the public. The Navy has never intentionally sank a Battleship like they have aircraft carriers. Do not worry, these ships are the BEST and the U.S. is preserving them wisely!
pettyofficer30 1 year ago
sweet! i love big guns
chriscxd 1 year ago
fiery. metal. death.
super133t 1 year ago
thats a lot of smoke!
edgarthemangomez123 2 years ago
Could someone let me know why no one really uses battle ships anymore, well not like they did.
Was it a cost issue maybe ?
irishbeliever 2 years ago
Put simply becuase they are outdated.
Thats the simple reason for it.
Its a shame.
Nopityforacoward08 2 years ago
Yes, Battleships are very expsnsive to operate and maintain because they were nearly 50 years old and the tactic of hurling shells at ships was out dated and missiles became the primary means of off-shore bombardment while bombers and attack planes took over the role of taking out other hardened targets.
airplanenut89 2 years ago
lol the projectile is probably the size of a car lol
Bamchucknorris 2 years ago
Sorry, I just gotta ask, what is a connon
cardiffnightowl 2 years ago
Comment removed
AntarcticaMan81186 2 years ago
This is why you don't wana be a pirate kiddies! :D
eggymean123 2 years ago
hells yea lol
CliffordBHS 2 years ago
I wonder how many marines were deaf after that :D. Video can't even show how loud it is. You can pump your volume as up as possible but it still isn't loud enough.
jpogfani 2 years ago
Yeah I've hard estimates that these are right around 200 db, pretty badass since a rifle is like 160, and even that's pretty loud.
darkling9109 2 years ago
They estimate Krakatoa was 310 dB, that's really really really really really really really really loud.
Krakatoa was when Zeus needed to set his alarm clock, hehe.
Piklethedoodad 2 years ago
Yeah holy crap!
LabRat314 3 years ago 10
i'ed hate to be on the other ship
riflelord2 3 years ago 22