![]() Yamato doesn't have that level of fire control accuracy. Any but the smallest ship's movement is eliminated. The US system includes a stable vertical that ensures when the guns are fired that they are on a true horizontal and vertical plane to increase accuracy. This has to be included in any discussion of ship mounted weapons as the ship itself is moving. The second is the fire control system itself. That is a purely mechanical problem involving details like the shell, barrel vibration, and whatnot, that determine the physical dispersion of the rounds. ![]() There's two gross parts to this equation: ( and damaged its hull)Īt 7:30 am hit Johnston while its wiggle wiggle wiggling at 20km with its main gun. In addition, Battle of Samar,, 06:59am, Yamato's first Ap volley( third if u count the type 3 AA round) straddled USS white plains, a 150m ship. While on another hand, Yamato's dispersion was at about It could be done, but is it really that effective? I would say this would be a better sweet spot.Īnd wiggling?It would take at least 1 min for Iowa to begin responding to a rudder if, dodging like that was not really a. In addition, Iowa's immune zone against 460s were about 23000m~27000m. ![]() What will happen at 36km? I would put my conclusion but it would not be good. While only 3 shot patterns are in the 200 yard( remember Yamato is only 250+m longish and moving), not mentioning of movement of the ship on sea, the movement of target In Binkov's Battlegrounds' ( very nice video btw) mentioning 36km being a "sweetspot" for Iowa engagement, but however.ģ6 thousand yard's (32km) maximum dispersion were already at almost 900 yards apart, thats 800m In topic of Iowa vs Yamato, many has claimed that Iowa could have hit Yamato with superior fire control, while the Yamato would have trouble doing that.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |